Since 2007, reaching grand slam F's was easier than winning M1000 titles for non big-4 players

[enlightenment]

Since (and including) 2007, there have been 91 masters tournaments, with 79/91 titles (86.8%) won by the big 4. The 12 exceptions were:

• David Nalbandian (Madrid 2007, Paris 2007)
• Nikolay Davydenko (Miami 2008, Shanghai 2009)
• Jo-Wilfred Tsonga (Paris 2008, Toronto 2014)
• Ivan Ljubicic (IW 2010)
• Andy Roddick (Miami 2010)
• Robin Soderling (Paris 2010)
• David Ferrer (Paris 2012)
• Stanislas Wawrinka (Monte Carlo 2014)
• Marin Cilic (Cincinatti 2016)

In grand slam finals since 2007, there have been 41 grand slams played, thus 82 finals positions. 68/82 positions (82.9%) were filled by the big 4. The exceptions were:

Australian Open (3): Gonzalez (2007), Tsonga (2008), Wawrinka (2014)
French Open (4): Soderling (2009, 2010), Ferrer (2013), Wawrinka (2015)
Wimbledon (3): Roddick (2009), Berdych (2010), Raonic (2016)
US Open (4) : Del Potro (2009), Cilic (2014), Nishikori (2014), Wawrinka (2016)

Not just percentage, but numerically wise. There have been 15 distinct grand slam finalists since 2007, (from a potential 82) but only 13 distinct Masters winners. (from a potential 91)

This statistic is remarkable in many ways. On one hand, you'd think winning M1000's would be easier due to the more upset-prone nature of BO3, and the fact that the Big 4 would be less likely to give consistent effort there. However it might actually be easier to reach a GS F since you'd have on average 2 of the big 4 on each side of the draw, so with 1 upset you might be able to reach the final beating just 1 member. This has proven to be the case with players from the 'lost generation' such as Nishikori, Raonic, who have reached GS F's and M1000 finals but always fall at the last hurdle.

Discuss.

 

[Steve0904]

Very enlightening. Thank you. Have a nice day.

 

[MasturB]

Fed gonna be pissed Tsonga actually won Cinncy 2014

 

[mike danny]

Since (and including) 2007, there have been 91 masters tournaments, with 79/91 titles (86.8%) won by the big 4. The 12 exceptions were:

• David Nalbandian (Madrid 2007, Paris 2007)
• Nikolay Davydenko (Miami 2008, Shanghai 2009)
• Jo-Wilfred Tsonga (Paris 2008, Cincinatti 2014)
• Ivan Ljubicic (IW 2010)
• Andy Roddick (Miami 2010)
• Robin Soderling (Paris 2010)
• David Ferrer (Paris 2012)
• Stanislas Wawrinka (Monte Carlo 2014)
• Marin Cilic (Cincinatti 2016)

In grand slam finals since 2007, there have been 41 grand slams played, thus 82 finals positions. 67/82 positions (81.7%) were filled by the big 4. The exceptions were:

Australian Open (3): Gonzalez (2007), Tsonga (2008), Wawrinka (2014)
French Open (4): Soderling (2009, 2010), Ferrer (2013), Wawrinka (2015)
Wimbledon (4): Roddick (2009), Berdych (2010), Raonic (2016)
US Open (4) : Del Potro (2009), Cilic (2014), Nishikori (2014), Wawrinka (2016)

Not just percentage, but numerically wise. There have been 15 distinct grand slam finalists since 2007, (from a potential 82) but only 13 distinct Masters winners. (from a potential 91)

This statistic is remarkable in many ways. On one hand, you'd think winning M1000's would be easier due to the more upset-prone nature of BO3, and the fact that the Big 4 would be less likely to give consistent effort there. However it might actually be easier to reach a GS F since you'd have on average 2 of the big 4 on each side of the draw, so with 1 upset you might be able to reach the final beating just 1 member. This has proven to be the case with players from the 'lost generation' such as Nishikori, Raonic, who have reached GS F's and M1000 finals but always fall at the last hurdle.

Discuss.

It was Toronto 2014 for Tsonga, not Cincy.

 

[Joseph L. Barrow]

Since (and including) 2007, there have been 91 masters tournaments, with 79/91 titles (86.8%) won by the big 4. The 12 exceptions were:

• David Nalbandian (Madrid 2007, Paris 2007)
• Nikolay Davydenko (Miami 2008, Shanghai 2009)
• Jo-Wilfred Tsonga (Paris 2008, Cincinatti 2014)
• Ivan Ljubicic (IW 2010)
• Andy Roddick (Miami 2010)
• Robin Soderling (Paris 2010)
• David Ferrer (Paris 2012)
• Stanislas Wawrinka (Monte Carlo 2014)
• Marin Cilic (Cincinatti 2016)

In grand slam finals since 2007, there have been 41 grand slams played, thus 82 finals positions. 67/82 positions (81.7%) were filled by the big 4. The exceptions were:

Australian Open (3): Gonzalez (2007), Tsonga (2008), Wawrinka (2014)
French Open (4): Soderling (2009, 2010), Ferrer (2013), Wawrinka (2015)
Wimbledon (4): Roddick (2009), Berdych (2010), Raonic (2016)
US Open (4) : Del Potro (2009), Cilic (2014), Nishikori (2014), Wawrinka (2016)

Not just percentage, but numerically wise. There have been 15 distinct grand slam finalists since 2007, (from a potential 82) but only 13 distinct Masters winners. (from a potential 91)

This statistic is remarkable in many ways. On one hand, you'd think winning M1000's would be easier due to the more upset-prone nature of BO3, and the fact that the Big 4 would be less likely to give consistent effort there. However it might actually be easier to reach a GS F since you'd have on average 2 of the big 4 on each side of the draw, so with 1 upset you might be able to reach the final beating just 1 member. This has proven to be the case with players from the 'lost generation' such as Nishikori, Raonic, who have reached GS F's and M1000 finals but always fall at the last hurdle.

Discuss.

You say "Wimbledon (4)," but only list three (2009, 2010, 2016)-- and indeed, there were only three.

 

[enlightenment]

It was Toronto 2014 for Tsonga, not Cincy.

Yep, my bad.

 

[enlightenment]

You say "Wimbledon (4)," but only list three (2009, 2010, 2016)-- and indeed, there were only three.

Thanks, this is what happens after you do late night study.

 

[SinjinCooper]

With most of the top players present in all of these mandatory tournaments, wouldn't you pretty much expect, "reaching a final," to happen more often than, "winning a final?"

IOW, if you dig deeper, would you expect to find that more first timers reached the quarters in slams, than reached the semis in 1000's? (Of course you would.)

 

[6-3 6-0]

Fed gonna be pissed Tsonga actually won Cinncy 2014

Tsonga won Toronto but Fed did win Cincy that year

 

[timnz]

This is why I have difficulty with the 'slams are everything' position. The fact is it is incredibly hard to win masters 1000's. The fact that Djokovic has won 30 is mind boggling (and I am a Federer fan saying this). There are a significant NUmber of people on these board who compare players achievements eg Sampras vs Nadal and completely dismiss the fact that yes they have the same number of slams but that Nadal has 28 masters 1000's and Sampras has 11. That is simply an enormous difference. Even if we add the early 90s achievements of Sampras of tournaments at the same level eg Indianapolis and Philadelphia - Sampras is still on 15 - still a long was to 28. (Sampras had 5 wtf that Nadal doesn't have but that doesn't bridge the masters 1000 gap.

My point is, these are significant titles ( to as much as slams but sill significant - and winning them should be a large part of a players CV