USO: Why is it the only Slam currently producing winners outside the Big 3?


Bionic Poster
Last players other than Federer, Nadal or Djokovic (the Big 3) to win these Slams:

Australian Open: Marat Safin in 2005.

French Open: Gaston Gaudio in 2004.

Wimbledon: Lleyton Hewitt in 2002.

US Open : Juan Martin Del Potro in 2009, Andy Murray in 2012.

Compared to the other 3 Slams, the USO has shown itself to be more open to recent winners not named Federer, Nadal or Djokovic.

Why is this? Thoughts?


Murray has been knocking on the door of grand slam success for several years and should hardley be considered a long shot winner. Everyone knows Del Potro has the game: he just put it all together in 09'.

Tennis is a game of attrician and often comes down to who has more gas in the tank at the crucial stages of the final. One player has the confidence at the right moment and is able to take advantage of the moment when it counts the most, often one player is not. In Murray's case: he was simply ready to go one step further and was also prepared physically to do so (you saw Nole cramping, getting upset, ETC.)

It's true that probability is on the side of certain players making the final rounds of these tournaments because they have the most talent, are in the best shape, have the most experience in big matches, aren't afraid to win, ETC. So, we can with probability expect to see other players putting in the correct preparation and finding themselves in the position of Murray. At the moment Murray may have the highest degree of probability to continue winning these things given the fact that he has all the key components in place. Others may be lurking on the door step: time will tell.


Bionic Poster
Only other thing apart from randomness, is that the top 2 - 4 are generally more tired by the U.S Open.
I expected this to be given as a reason but is it quite true? Federer dominated the USO from 2004 to 2008 and he didn't look particularly tired when he lost to Del Potro in 2009. Indeed he always seems irritated that he lost that final. Nadal stormed his way to the 2010 title and lost the stamina battle with Djokovic in 2011. I think Djokovic did run out of gas in the 5th set of the 2012 final but he was getting outplayed by Murray anyway.
Last edited:
^ the idea that the top 2 - 4 are more tired by the USO makes no sense whatsoever to me. If anything, the OTHER players would be expected to be more tired as they have to actually play a bunch of tournaments to make a living, while the top few are usually more selective and plan their schedules around the major events.


Murray entered the top 3 the instant he took championship point, so whilst he started the fortnight outside the triumvirate he had to win to be inside it. Maybe the top 3 rule was upheld in this case...


Poor scheduling, no roof, rubbish weather. It is true, part of Murray's slam was the wind and the nonsense schedule.


Bionic Poster
Poor scheduling, no roof, rubbish weather. It is true, part of Murray's slam was the wind and the nonsense schedule. the other Slams never suffer from rubbish weather eg. Roland Garros and Wimbledon! :)

And why exactly does a bit of wind and a dodgy schedule affect experienced Slam winners like Federer, Nadal and Djokovic more than the likes of Murray? :confused:


Bionic Poster
Sorry to say but the OP isnt that supportable. It has happened just twice and the 2 times had been really late.
But it has happened 'just twice' at the USO and nowhere else. I daresay it's merely coincidence but I couldn't help wondering if the conditions and/or atmosphere at the USO are a factor in some way and I just don't mean freaky weather conditions which are common to other Slams as well.


Bionic Poster
What does your signture mean?
It was my own paraphrase of Vitas Gerulaitis's famous comment about nobody beating him 17 times in a row. I adapted it to Verdasco when he finally beat Nadal in Madrid this year after losing to him 13 times in a row. Maybe it's getting a bit stale now. :)