Are the Big 3 much better than journeymen?

[UnderratedSlam]

This is a response to the thread "IS CILIC A JOURNEYMAN?" which I feel didn't take a harsh enough stand against overrated amateurs.

Yes, the Big 3 travel a lot, go on distant journeys as they chase their pitiful, meaningless all-time records - but does the average cricket fan in India know them well?

Maybe a few, vaguely.

What do wrestling fans in Oklahoma know about them?

Hardly anything.

Are they household names on Mars?

Probably not.

What have they achieved aside from vulturing slams against rank amateurs barely able to tie their own shoes, much less able to play tennis?

Nothing.

All they do is beat a bunch of clumsy losers who struggle just to avoid tripping over their own rackets.

Their careers are so much smaller than hypothetical careers of Greek gods and Roman Emperors - who could have easily won 1000 slams if they chose to. (By bending/inventing rules, but that's a technicality.)

1000 > > > > > > > 21 (key point here, I believe)

Logically, if we take into account the FACTS above, until The Big 3 win 150 slams, they are forever doomed to be journeymen.

I mean 150 slams each.

Definition of journeyman: "A loser player who fails to win every match, rarely wins slams without dropping a set, and fails to become GOAT for at least longer than 57 years".

It is hence safe to say that the Big 3 will struggle greatly to fulfill even these fairly modest expectations.

 

[ojo rojo]

It's all meaningless.
Just look at Boris Becker now..

 

[spottishwood]

You realized it rn? Big 3 were the actual journeymen who vultured their way to glory. But that doesn't elevate their status. They'll forever be remembered for being the only journeymen in the swarms of nobodys.

 

[spottishwood]

but does the average cricket fan in India know them well?

You tryin to invite @Sunny014 or @Adam Copeland?

 

[UnderratedSlam]

You realized it rn? Big 3 were the actual journeymen who vultured their way to glory. But that doesn't elevate their status. They'll forever be remembered for being the only journeymen in the swarms of nobodys.

The ATP is like a post-apocalyptic deserted landscape: just vultures, rodents, and scroungers. None of them achieved anything, and it's all because they are men who go on journeys.

Perhaps less journeying is needed to save the tour from amateurism and mediocrity?

 

[spottishwood]

The ATP is like a post=apocalyptic deserted landscape: just vultures, rodents, and scroungers. None of them achieved anything, and it's all because they are men who go on journeys.

Perhaps less journeying is needed to save the tour from amateurism and mediocrity?

Exactly. These folks just spend their life traveling around, exploring the cities, chilling at the beaches and partying. They just show up at the tourneys just to collect their paychecks.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

It's all meaningless.
Just look at Boris Becker now..

A sorry state of affairs. And all this after stealing the German ''male player'' funding.

 

[DSH]

It's all meaningless.
Just look at Boris Becker now..

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Exactly. These folks just spend their life traveling around, exploring the cities, chilling at the beaches and partying. They just show up at the tourneys just to collect their paychecks.

Association of Tourist Professionals.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Big 3

Journeyman














Pancho

 

[aldeayeah]

The ATP is like a post=apocalyptic deserted landscape: just vultures, rodents, and scroungers. None of them achieved anything, and it's all because they are men who go on journeys.

Perhaps less journeying is needed to save the tour from amateurism and mediocrity?

Karatsev spent a year cooped up in Florida, and emerged as a tennis demigod. Now after a year back on the tour, it's all gone. Such are the dangers of journeying.

 

[Fabresque]

Big 3 were always journeyman who vultured their way to success due to amateur players polluting the ranks and depleting the field. Stiffest competition for them the past 5 years besides themselves has been mid-level 4.5 Zverev and fringe 5.0 Tsitsipas.

 

[TimHenmanATG]

The Big 4 have won 64 Grand Slam titles between them in under 20 years.

But it's a bit of a "chicken and egg" situation:

Did they dominate because they were worthy to be seated in the pantheon of the GOATs, or did they achieve these eye-watering records due to facile achievements amongst a poor field?