How would you rank Little 4's Slam titles?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 748597
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
How would you rank Little 4's (Sir Murray, Wawrinka, Cilic, Del Potro) Slam titles in terms of competition from the strongest to the weakest? Which Slams were the strongest or most difficult to win? Which Slams were the weakest or very easy to win?
 

ojo rojo

Legend
Really. Little 4 II? already?

70eaea1ed773885dbaa83ef7e232bf873c84b09f_hq.gif


1ZeIlCt.gif
 

clout

Hall of Fame
1. Wawrinka: for each of his slams he had to beat an exceptional version of Nole, whether it was in the finals or the rounds prior. Practically all of his most impressive slam performances he was either stopped by djokovic in an epic match or he won it by beating him. He also took out nadal in the other final and even though nadal was ailing quite badly, Rafa was still number one at that time and from what I remember I don't think Stan had yet to beat him at that point so Stan still had to bring his A game.
2. Del Potro: I mean he beat fed and Rafa in back to back rounds when they were both in their primes and del po was like 20 at that time too. Very impressive.
3. Murray: Although he beat Djokovic in 2 of his wins, just like Stan, I think Stan played a better version of Nole. Also, Murray could never beat nadal and/or fed, like del po did, to win his majors. In addition, beating raonic in a major finals isn't exactly a special feat. I will however give Murray credit for fulfilling the expectations and pressure of winning a slam(s) that was given to him by the British media.
4: Cilic: he played out of skin in this tourney to his credit but he beat a 30 something fed and nishikori to win, which is not the worst, but compared to the others on this list, this one stands out the least.
 
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
1. Wawrinka: for each of his slams he had to beat an exceptional version of Nole, whether it was in the finals or the rounds prior. Practically all of his most impressive slam performances he was either stopped by djokovic in an epic match or he won it by beating him. He also took out nadal in the other final and even though nadal was ailing quite badly, Rafa was still number one at that time and from what I remember I don't think Stan had yet to beat him at that point so Stan still had to bring his A game.
2. Del Potro: I mean he beat fed and Rafa in back to back rounds when they were both in their primes and del po was like 20 at that time too. Very impressive.
3. Murray: Although he beat Djokovic in 2 of his wins, just like Stan, I think Stan played a better version of Nole. Also, Murray could never beat nadal and/or fed, like del po did, to win his majors. In addition, beating raonic in a major finals isn't exactly a special feat. I will however give Murray credit for fulfilling the expectations and pressure of winning a slam(s) that was given to him by the British media.
4: Cilic: he played out of skin in this tourney to his credit but he beat a 30 something fed and nishikori to win, which is not the worst, but compared to the others on this list, this one stands out the least.
I like your order. It makes me wonder even more if Sir Murray and Cilic deserve to be grouped with Wawrinka and Del Potro. Maybe we should remove Sir Murray and Cilic from Little 4, and add them to another group with Dimitrov, Berdych and Tsonga.
 

clout

Hall of Fame
I like your order. It makes me wonder even more if Sir Murray and Cilic deserve to be grouped with Wawrinka and Del Potro. Maybe we should remove Sir Murray and Cilic from Little 4, and add them to another group with Dimitrov, Berdych and Tsonga.
I think your "little four" concept is fair and valid since these four players are the only ones other than federer, nadal and nole to win a major in the last like 10 years plus. That itself seperates these four from everyone else in the league, although they're clearly light years upon light years behind the big 3 of fed, raf and nole
 

clout

Hall of Fame
I like your order. It makes me wonder even more if Sir Murray and Cilic deserve to be grouped with Wawrinka and Del Potro. Maybe we should remove Sir Murray and Cilic from Little 4, and add them to another group with Dimitrov, Berdych and Tsonga.
I think your "little four" concept is fair and valid since these four players are the only ones other than federer, nadal and nole to win a major in the last like 10 years plus. That itself seperates these four from everyone else in the league, although they're clearly light years upon light years behind the big 3 of fed, raf and nole
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
1. Wawrinka: for each of his slams he had to beat an exceptional version of Nole, whether it was in the finals or the rounds prior. Practically all of his most impressive slam performances he was either stopped by djokovic in an epic match or he won it by beating him. He also took out nadal in the other final and even though nadal was ailing quite badly, Rafa was still number one at that time and from what I remember I don't think Stan had yet to beat him at that point so Stan still had to bring his A game.
2. Del Potro: I mean he beat fed and Rafa in back to back rounds when they were both in their primes and del po was like 20 at that time too. Very impressive.
3. Murray: Although he beat Djokovic in 2 of his wins, just like Stan, I think Stan played a better version of Nole. Also, Murray could never beat nadal and/or fed, like del po did, to win his majors. In addition, beating raonic in a major finals isn't exactly a special feat. I will however give Murray credit for fulfilling the expectations and pressure of winning a slam(s) that was given to him by the British media.
4: Cilic: he played out of skin in this tourney to his credit but he beat a 30 something fed and nishikori to win, which is not the worst, but compared to the others on this list, this one stands out the least.
Wawrinka didn't beat an exceptional version of Nole for each of his slam wins. 2016 Nole was quite poor and only reached the final thanks to the joke draw of the century. Actually, in each slam loss to Stan, Nole played progressively worse.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
My ranking would be, from best to worst.

1. Delpo USO 2009
2. Stan FO 2015
3. Stan AO 2014
4. Murray USO 2012
5. Murray Wimb 2013
6. Murray Wimb 2016
7. Stan USO 2016
8. Cilic USO 2014.

Cilic had by far the easiest road to a slam title among these guys.
 

MeatTornado

Talk Tennis Guru
Delpo's USO isn't just the most impressive on this list, it's arguably the most impressive in the history of the sport.

This is a fight for 2nd place.
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Wawrinka didn't beat an exceptional version of Nole for each of his slam wins. 2016 Nole was quite poor and only reached the final thanks to the joke draw of the century. Actually, in each slam loss to Stan, Nole played progressively worse.
Yea you got a point. I think it's safe to say both 2014 nadal and 2016 Nole were the beginning of the end of their era of domination. But nonetheless, it's always difficult to go up against ATGs like nole and Rafa especially in major finals. I have Stan edging out del po here since he beat several great players in his two of his majors whereas del po only did it once.
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
1. USO 2009
2. RG 2015
3. AO 2014
4. USO 2012
5. WIM 2013
6. USO 2016
7. USO 2014
8. WIM 2016

AO 2014 would be higher if Stan had beaten an anywhere close to decent Rafa. WIM 2013 was an easy draw and Nole played his worst slam final to date but I have to agree that there was a ridiculous amount of pressure on Murray, so maybe I should have ranked it higher
 
Top