Most useless players against big three

Most useless player against the big three

  • David Ferrer

    Votes: 15 20.5%

  • Gael Monfils

    Votes: 7 9.6%

  • Richard Gasquet

    Votes: 38 52.1%

  • Gilles Simon

    Votes: 2 2.7%

  • Marin Cilic

    Votes: 4 5.5%

  • Grigor Dimitrov

    Votes: 3 4.1%

  • I'm being harsh, eventually they'll beat them.

    Votes: 4 5.5%
  • Total voters
    73
George Turner

George Turner

Hall of Fame
Players like Del Potro and Wawrinka are capable on their day of upsetting the big three and are not inhibited by fear when playing them. Despite the fact they lose plenty of matches against the Goffins of this world.

On the other hand which player has underachieved against them the most, given their talent?

David Ferrer; Career high of no.3 and 27 titles, you'd think someone like that would be a danger. In reality lacks the weapons to do so and his consistency isn't enough. Never beaten Federer.

Gael Monfils; Quite obvious he is unable to handle the extra pressure of playing them. Particularly evident against a weakened Nole in USO 2016, when Monfils *dealt* with the pressure by tanking.

Richard Gasquet; laughably bad record against them, 3-43. For all the love of his backhand you know exactly what the result will be when he plays them.

Gilles Simon; despite having a game that troubles Federer, 2008 was the last time he recorded a win vs the big three. Famously lost to Nole in 2016 AO despite Nole committing 100 unforced errors.

Marin Cilic; has a big game, like Del Potro. Should be a danger to the big three but doesn't get any results against them. USO 2014 being the only exception. Career record 3-26.

Grigor Dimitrov; Has shown promise against them and pushed them close, but has no actual results. 2-22 so far.

Their combined record again the big three in majors is 3-53, with Ferrer having two wins over Nadal on hard court and Cilic beating Federer on the way to the USO 2014.

Which of these guys is most useless against the big three?
 
Last edited:
Tempted to say Monfils. He has so much ability but is a total fruitcake in any serious match. Has zero chance against Big 3
 
George Turner said:
Players like Del Potro and Wawrinka are capable on their day of upsetting the big three and are not inhibited by fear when playing them. Despite the fact they lose plenty of matches against the Goffins of this world.

On the other hand which player has underachieved against them the most, given their talent?

David Ferrer; Career high of no.3 and 27 titles, you'd think someone like that would be a danger. In reality lacks the weapons to do so and his consistency isn't enough. Never beaten Federer.

Gael Monfils; Quite obvious he is unable to handle the extra pressure of playing them. Particularly evident against a weakened Nole in USO 2016, when Monfils *dealt* with the pressure by tanking.

Richard Gasquet; laughably bad record against them, 3-43. For all the love of his backhand you know exactly what the result will be when he plays them.

Gilles Simon; despite having a game that troubles Federer, 2008 was the last time he recorded a win vs the big three. Famously lost to Nole in 2016 AO despite Nole committing 100 unforced errors.

Marin Cilic; has a big game, like Del Potro. Should be a danger to the big three but doesn't get any results against them. USO 2014 being the only exception. Career record 3-26.

Grigor Dimitrov; Has shown promise against them and pushed them close, but has no actual results. 2-25 so far.

Their combined record again the big three in majors is 3-53, with Ferrer having two wins over Nadal on hard court and Cilic beating Federer on the way to the USO 2014.

Which of these guys is most useless against the big three?
Click to expand...
Grigor is 10 years from his prime. Be fair.
 
Of these players? Grigor.
Ferrer has beaten Nadal plenty of times. Monfils and Gasquet have beaten Fed. Simon beat Fedal in the same tournament iirc.
Dimitrov I think has only beaten Djokovic once but has thrown away leads against Djokoray plenty of times due to obvious choking. Furthermore Dimi is better than all or most of the guys names above.
 
George Turner said:
Players like Del Potro and Wawrinka are capable on their day of upsetting the big three and are not inhibited by fear when playing them. Despite the fact they lose plenty of matches against the Goffins of this world.

On the other hand which player has underachieved against them the most, given their talent?

David Ferrer; Career high of no.3 and 27 titles, you'd think someone like that would be a danger. In reality lacks the weapons to do so and his consistency isn't enough. Never beaten Federer.

Gael Monfils; Quite obvious he is unable to handle the extra pressure of playing them. Particularly evident against a weakened Nole in USO 2016, when Monfils *dealt* with the pressure by tanking.

Richard Gasquet; laughably bad record against them, 3-43. For all the love of his backhand you know exactly what the result will be when he plays them.

Gilles Simon; despite having a game that troubles Federer, 2008 was the last time he recorded a win vs the big three. Famously lost to Nole in 2016 AO despite Nole committing 100 unforced errors.

Marin Cilic; has a big game, like Del Potro. Should be a danger to the big three but doesn't get any results against them. USO 2014 being the only exception. Career record 3-26.

Grigor Dimitrov; Has shown promise against them and pushed them close, but has no actual results. 2-25 so far.

Their combined record again the big three in majors is 3-53, with Ferrer having two wins over Nadal on hard court and Cilic beating Federer on the way to the USO 2014.

Which of these guys is most useless against the big three?
Click to expand...

How refreshing to see the words Useless and Berdych not being used together for a change.
 
Have to say Gasquet. He’s had a lot of chances (43 total matches), has three total wins, with two of those (against Federer) in which he didn’t even win more points. He has never won a best of 5 match against any of them and his “best”dominance ratio is .73 against Djoko. Then I would say Simon and Dimitrov who have never won a best of 5 against the big three but haven’t had as many chances as others. Cilic is close but his win over Federer at the USO saves him. Without that win, he might be next worst after Gasquet.

Gasquet

2-16 against Federer, .71 dominance ratio, actually won fewer points than Federer in both the Frenchman’s wins

0-14, against Nadal, .72 dominance ratio

1-13 against Djokovic, .73 dominance ratio

Simon

1-8 against Nadal, .78 dominance ratio (won fewer points than Nadal in his one win)

2-6 against Federer, .78 dominance ratio

1-11 against Djokovic, .87 dominance ratio

Dimitrov

0-6 against Federer, .67 dominance ratio

1-6 against Djokovic, .78 dominance ratio, overall points tied in one win

1-10 against Nadal, .86 dominance ratio

Cilic

1-14 against Djokovic, .72 dominance ratio

1-5 against Nadal, .79 dominance ratio

1-7 against Federer, .80 dominance ratio, 1 win in best of 5

Monfils

2-13 against Nadal, .71 dominance ratio

4-9 against Federer, .81, 1 win in best of 5 (won fewer points in one of his wins, won best of 5 match against Backerer)

0-14 against Djokovic, .82 dominance ratio

Ferrer

0-17 against Federer, .72 dominance ratio

5-16 against Djokovic, .80 dominance ratio, 1 win in best of 5

6-24 against Nadal, .85 dominance ratio, 2 wins in best of 5
 
Last edited:
Monfils can’t even beat a very weak Djokovic at the 2016 US Open semis and lost pretty easily in the Eastbourne final, lol.

But I’ll pick Ferrer, mainly because he hasn’t beaten Federer and has a tough time against the others. Youzhny would be here but he used to be Nadal’s problem back in the day
 
George Turner said:
Does he actually smoke?
Click to expand...

Like a chimney.

George Turner said:
I don't see how someone can maintain elite level fitness while smoking.
Click to expand...

Sometimes does it while playing (but only when feeling a bit stressed)! ;)

ngt3td.jpg
 
Ferrer takes the cake here. For someone that at his best beat nearly everyone else on tour with ease, he is laughable against the big 3.

Gasquet is worse results-wise but Ferrer is much better player overall so the bar is set higher for him.
 
Outside of Del Potro, Wawrinka(occasionally) and Kyrgios or Zverev, I'd say pretty much all of them.

You also left Murray out of the discussion. Obviously, he's a strong competitor vs the Big Three.
 
I wouldn't say Simon is useless against them, he generally gives them a good battle, despite the lopsided head to heads. Though it's usually acknowledged from most people that Gilles would probably give them a good battle pre match, the outcome is not as unpredictable as it is when they face a player with serve/forehand weapons, etc.

Like Djokovic for instance, I anticipate a hard fought match, though the outcome isn't exactly surprising anyone. Djokovic owns the H2H, yet only about three of their matches were relatively straight forward IIRC.

Simon peaked rather early (where he racked up his wins over the big 4), though he's struggled with a few injury issues over the years, halting a bit of momentum made. Not as dramatic as say a Delpo though obviously....
 
I find Gasquet to be the most puzzling of all these players. He has a stunning backhand but a semi-garbage forehand that needs a little bit of work. If he did the work, he'd be a lot more threatening. Putaway balls in the middle of the court, Gasquet will run around and hit his backhand which is borderline ridiculous Vs top 10. Some of those balls will come back and a OHBH follow-through makes it tough to be ready for a volley. He looks short but he's actually not short at all, so his serve is a bit crap considering his height.

Then there's the rallies. He was a teen prodigy IIRC, beating Nadal as a junior. In juniors, not as many balls come back and he looks a bit surprised when some of his balls come back against the big 3 (!?). He has had long enough to understand this and learn but he hasn't. There's also a lack of effort in tough rallies. He just sorta half gives up when he can see that he's behind in a point. He doesn't give up running in an obvious way - he'll slow down on the second last ball to make it easier to give up on the last one.

Ferrer seems like he's playing to his full potential a lot of the time and I have to say I kind of admire him and don't mind watching a match of his every now and then. Simon plays too many passive-aggressive mind games for his own good and gets himself confused sometimes but still, I like watching his matches against the big 3 because, like Kyrgios, he confuses them a bit. Monfils is just a Harlem Globetrotter tennis player and not really worth posting about. He's not that interested in winning or the tennis but loves the big shots, athleticism and entertainment.
 
Ferrer is a workhorse so you cna be somewhat tolerant to him.

Gasquet is, considering his talent, contender No.1 to the title "Choker King"
 
duaneeo said:
Ferrer has wins against Nadal at the US Open, Australian Open, and WTFs, and has beaten Djokovic twice at the WTFs (once in 2011). That's way more than what the others have done against the Big-3.
Click to expand...
Ferrer also beat Djokovic in a 2009 Davis cup match on clay in straight sets.

On topic, Ferrer shouldn't even be on the list. He's scored at least five victories against each of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray (not a Big 3 member, but still a crazy consistent player), he's also beaten Murray and Nadal (twice) in Majors and Djokovic in BO5 match. With such stats, he's light years far from being "useless".
He has a poor record against Roger, but that's it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say Monfils. Remember him eating Fed, closing in on a straight set victory, choked the second set, then tanked the third. But... the guy loves life... so what you gonna do?
 
Normally, it's Gasquet, but he never had the weapons to win a GS anyway.

Cilic is a curious one. Given that he is quite similar to Delpo in terms of playing style, with a big serve, big FH and a better BH than Delpo for the last 4 years, his record against the big 3 is atrocious. You'd think he should have a better record than Gasquet against them,but he is just as terrible as the Frenchman. So given his pedigree (GS and masters champion), I choose Cilic.
 
My choice would be Cilic, but I'm far from impartial. I've made no effort to hide the fact that I thoroughly dislike the guy and think he had no business getting anywhere near a grand slam title. I really don't see how his game is any different to Berdych. Flat from both sides, clean hitting but lacking any sense of imagination. Even playing slap happy he should have taken more than three matches against those three players, and likely would have if he wasn't an enormous choker.
 
I KNOW the big 3 love facing Berdych, Ferrer, & Gasquet in the last couple of rounds. Ferrer is an over-achiever. Doesn't have a ton of game, but he's tenacious. There's no excuse for the other two. If there's ever a Master Choker category in the Tennis Hall of Fame...
 
Stats say Gasquet but Ferrer has p*ssed me off more times over the years.

All the times he beat guys that had the weapons to cause an upset (or give the big 3/4 a decent match) and then immediately roll over on his back the next round and lose has been frustrating. Seeing him in the draw was like a bye into the next round. A true gatekeeper player and faithful lapdog to the top guys.
 
Last edited:
Guys, you need to pick someone with a strong pedigree. Gasquet just doesn't have the weapons anyway so him doing terrible vs the big 3 is expected. Cilic on the other hand does have weapons and is also a slam champion, so he is the right choice given his pedigree. He has as many wins as Gasquet, which is embarrassing given his weaponry and success.
 
What about Berdych? H2H are:
Fed 6-19
Djok 3-25
Nadal 4-19

Total: 13-63, that's a 20% success rate

Ferrer stats are:
Fed 0-17
Djok 5-16
Nadal 6-24

Total: 11-57, 20% success rate. So about the same.
 
r2473 said:
Kyrgios
Click to expand...
Are you serious.
Kyrgios has an awesome h2h against the big 3, he steps up and pushes the top players better than anyone in the ATP, when his on and his mind is focused and doesn't have a mental melt down.

K vs Roger 1-1, and pushed him hard in the 2017 Miami semi.
K vs Novak 2-0
K vs Rafa 2-3

Clearly Nick has the best % record vs the big 3 than any other player on tour.
So 5 from 9 is a positive 55%.
 
Last edited:
every7 said:
Monfils very rarely beats the big 4 but it is to be expected given that he coaches them. He wants them to succeed and is conflicted whenever he plays them.
Click to expand...

Agree, it's all about giving them the motivation and inspiration to dominate the tour. He singled them out quite early on in their careers as the ones to beat and has pushed them with all his extended lessons.
 
tegg96 said:
Are you serious.
Kyrgios has an awesome h2h against the big 3, he steps up and pushes the top players better than anyone in the ATP, when his on and his mind is focused and doesn't have a mental melt down.

K vs Roger 1-1, and pushed him hard in the 2017 Miami semi.
K vs Novak 2-0
K vs Rafa 2-3

Clearly Nick has the best % record vs the big 3 than any other player on tour.
So 5 from 9 is a positive 55%.
Click to expand...


Kyrgios has the opposite problem. He has no problem beating the top 3 but struggles with basic journeyman Millman type guys.

If he went on court imagining these guys were world #1 he might have a slam to his name.
 
Surfie said:
What about Berdych? H2H are:
Fed 6-19
Djok 3-25
Nadal 4-19

Total: 13-63, that's a 20% success rate

Ferrer stats are:
Fed 0-17
Djok 5-16
Nadal 6-24

Total: 11-57, 20% success rate. So about the same.
Click to expand...

Berdych has beaten each Big 4 member in a Slam, Federer twise + the Olympics were he was 19 years old against 2004 Federer
 
Shaolin said:
Kyrgios has the opposite problem. He has no problem beating the top 3 but struggles with basic journeyman Millman type guys.

If he went on court imagining these guys were world #1 he might have a slam to his name.
Click to expand...

This is a better problem to have, because although the journeymen are much more prevalent as far as numbers go on the tour, this problem is easier to solve, he has the game to beat the journeyman, he just needs the mindset. He needs to beat Nishikori as well, who is above journeyman level. But those "nothing to gain, everything to lose" matches against a determined opponent I understand can be more testing in one sense psychologically, especially when as the match unfolds it becomes obvious you're a real chance of losing it...
 
HuusHould said:
This is a better problem to have, because although the journeymen are much more prevalent as far as numbers go on the tour, this problem is easier to solve, he has the game to beat the journeyman, he just needs the mindset. He needs to beat Nishikori as well, who is above journeyman level. But those "nothing to gain, everything to lose" matches against a determined opponent I understand can be more testing in one sense psychologically, especially when as the match unfolds it becomes obvious you're a real chance of losing it...
Click to expand...

Yeah for NK its kind of a matter of just ''deciding'' to beat these journeymen and actually concentrating. Guys like Ferrer can try and try but just don't have the big game to do it.

Time will tell.
 
Krish872007 said:
Agree, it's all about giving them the motivation and inspiration to dominate the tour. He singled them out quite early on in their careers as the ones to beat and has pushed them with all his extended lessons.
Click to expand...
Which exaplains why we haven't seen much of his this year. He feels that his job is done and his wisdom is no longer needed.
 
Surfie said:
What about Berdych? H2H are:
Fed 6-19
Djok 3-25
Nadal 4-19

Total: 13-63, that's a 20% success rate

Ferrer stats are:
Fed 0-17
Djok 5-16
Nadal 6-24

Total: 11-57, 20% success rate. So about the same.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? He has 13 wins. That's quite good.
 
Shaolin said:
Yeah for NK its kind of a matter of just ''deciding'' to beat these journeymen and actually concentrating. Guys like Ferrer can try and try but just don't have the big game to do it.

Time will tell.
Click to expand...

Yeah, very occasionally he'll give 100% and still lose to a journeyman whose playing off their nut, which is what he fears.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sudacafan
Favorable H2H against all or most of the Big Four?
Replies
17
Views
2K
ghostofMecir
ghostofMecir
Hitman
Djokovic v Medvedev v Zverev - The big three way rivalry of 2022
2
Replies
82
Views
3K
NAS
NAS
tennis_hack
Predict the 2014 Slam upsets* of the Big Three**
Replies
9
Views
1K
Backspin1183
Backspin1183
Better_Call_Raul
Grigor's U.S. Open Run Against New Gen Has Affirmed The Greatness Of The Big Three!
Replies
2
Views
183
inflation_era
inflation_era
Lew II
Winning percentage against younger/older players
Replies
1
Views
289
vive le beau jeu !
vive le beau jeu !
Back
Top