The 2013 and 2016 Wimbledon champs might beg to differ
I think Murray already won Canada twice in 2010The 2012 and 2016 Olympic champs too.
This is ridiculous. A week ago TTW was going on and on about Tsitsi's clay court prowess... now Zverev. A lot of top 10 players can play good tennis for one tournament but that means nothing in the long run. Zverev is not a future ATG and he is not winning 3-4 Slams. I can see him losing a few early round matches in the near future. Get Real!!
Did you see him choke that AO quarterfinal and the USO final? He can't last 7 matches. Unless he gets a brain transplant.He will definitely win slams.
This is ridiculous. A week ago TTW was going on and on about Tsitsi's clay court prowess... now Zverev. A lot of top 10 players can play good tennis for one tournament but that means nothing in the long run. Zverev is not a future ATG and he is not winning 3-4 Slams. I can see him losing a few early round matches in the near future. Get Real!!
He already did in Canada in 2010 but if you want technicalities then 2011 Cincy .
I believe OP talks about players doing it for the first time in their career.After Novak?
Federer at the AO in 2017-2018?
The 2012 and 2016 Olympic champs too.
We all know who is the real winner (a moral champion, if you prefer) of those events. No kidding.He said "big title".
I kid, I kid.
No. It’s about how it’s been 10 years since anyone ax good as Zverev has come along.Umm I didn't get this, is it about winning a big title twice for the first time?
a.k.a. a loser(a moral champion, if you prefer)
If he is not winning 3-4 slams? Who among his fellow under-30 peers will collect most of the next 20 slams over the next 5 years? (I know. Scary thought)This is ridiculous. A week ago TTW was going on and on about Tsitsi's clay court prowess... now Zverev. A lot of top 10 players can play good tennis for one tournament but that means nothing in the long run. Zverev is not a future ATG and he is not winning 3-4 Slams. I can see him losing a few early round matches in the near future. Get Real!!
Loser in real life, but winner on a moral scoreboard.a.k.a. a loser
It's not that. It's about being the first player to win the same big title a second time. Thiem has 1 USO and 1 masters1000, but hasn't repeated any of those. Wawrinka has 3 slams, none of them repeated. Medvedev has 3 masters1000, but all of them in different events.I don't get this stat or why it's important. Is it saying Zverev is the first player since Djokovic to win a big title since 2011? As in Murray, Nadal etc did it before 2011? Ok, then. I kind of see what it is saying. Hmmm. That is a worrying stat. So not even Cilic, Nishikori did it? Pah. Thiem?
It's not that. It's about being the first player to win the same big title a second time. Thiem has 1 USO and 1 masters1000, but hasn't repeated any of those. Wawrinka has 3 slams, none of them repeated. Medvedev has 3 masters1000, but all of them in different events.
So the op is saying that since the big4 Zverev is the first one that won a given big title for the second time. Whether one gives relevance to this stat or not is another thing.
This is ridiculous. A week ago TTW was going on and on about Tsitsi's clay court prowess... now Zverev. A lot of top 10 players can play good tennis for one tournament but that means nothing in the long run. Zverev is not a future ATG and he is not winning 3-4 Slams. I can see him losing a few early round matches in the near future. Get Real!!
That's a possibility...He will win way more than just 3 or 4.
The first time Murray doubled a title was at Canada 2010.The 2013 and 2016 Wimbledon champs might beg to differ
He said "big title".
I kid, I kid.
Wake me up when someone wins 2 of the same slam other than the usual suspects.