When 3 or more of "the big four" make Semifinals of a Grand Slam - Result

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
When 3 or more of "the big four" make the the semifinals of a Grand Slam

2007 French Open - Nadal, Federer, Djokovic - Nadal won
2007 Wimbledon - Federer, Nadal, Djokovic - Federer won
2008 Australian Open - Djokovic, Federer, Nadal - Djokovic won
2008 French Open - Nadal, Federer, Djokovic - Nadal won
2008 US Open - Federer, Murray, Djokovic, Nadal - Federer won
2009 US Open - Federer, Djokovic, Nadal - Del Potro won
2010 Wimbledon - Nadal, Djokovic, Murray - Nadal won
2010 US Open - Nadal, Djokovic, Federer - Nadal won
2011 Australian Open - Djokovic, Murray, Federer - Djokovic won
2011 French Open - Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray - Nadal won
2011 Wimbledon - Djokovic, Nadal, Murray - Djokovic won
2011 US Open - Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Murray - Djokovic won
2012 Australian Open - Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Murray - Djokovic won
2012 French Open - Nadal, Djokovic, Federer - Nadal won
2012 Wimbledon - Federer, Murray, Djokovic - Federer won
2013 Australian Open - Djokovic, Murray, Federer - Djokovic won
2014 French Open - Nadal, Djokovic, Murray - Nadal won
2015 Wimbledon - Djokovic, Federer, Murray - Djokovic won
2016 Australian Open - Djokovic, Murray, Federer - ??????

Djokovic - 7, Nadal - 7, Federer - 3, Del Potro - 1
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Amazing that Murray hasn't won once when three of the big four were in the semis, but Del Potro has.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
^^ logical fallacy. One can't say he did better in his peak years because then you're defining peak years by how he did. It's a tautology and makes no sense.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
^^ logical fallacy. One can't say he did better in his peak years because then you're defining peak years by how he did. It's a tautology and makes no sense.
One can't say Nole wasn't playing his absolute peak tennis when he met Roddick 9 times and Nadal met Davy 9 times.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
^^ yes, I think this whole business of "peak years" is a black hole because it's based mostly on results, thus a tautology. Your point that Fed's "peak years are not included from the OPs list" makes no sense to me because the OPs list begins when Fed was 25 or 26 years old, not exactly an old man.
 
Top