Who will break the Big 4's stranglehold on Wimbledon?

[Deleted member 688153]

Since Federer first won Wimbledon in 2003, only the Big Four have won there.
Federer eight times, Djokovic three times, Nadal two times, and Murray two times.

The other three slams have also been claimed by others since the start of the Big Four's reign. Stan, Delpo, Roddick, Safin, Gaudio, and Cilic have also got in on the action at the Australian Open, French Open, and US Open since Federer won Wimbledon 2003.

But for fifteen years and counting, nobody else has managed to take the Wimbledon title.

So who will be the first to break the Big Four's total hold on the biggest prize in tennis?
And when?

 

[Checkmate]

Djokovic probably.

 

[NEW_BORN]

The year after Federer retires, Dimitrov will grab his 1 and only slam crown on the haloed turf of SW19.

 

[Gmidkiff]

The Big 4 will continue to dominate Wimbledon for at least the next 3 years .After the 2020 post Olympics retirement drain , someone else will win Wmbledon .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TennisaGoGo]

Andy Murray is so lucky to be included in these conversations. He's won twice in fifteen years and is considered to be in a group that has a stranglehold on the tournament.

Anyway, Bautista Agut will win it next year. He's too good not to win one.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

 

[Jackuar]

Probably someone in 2021.

 

[mike danny]

Andy Murray is so lucky to be included in these conversations. He's won twice in fifteen years and is considered to be in a group that has a stranglehold on the tournament.

Anyway, Bautista Agut will win it next year. He's too good not to win one.

Nadal also won twice and Djokovic only 3 times. Murray belongs here because he has done virtually as well as the other 2.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Elias Ymer.

 

[SinjinCooper]

Elias Ymer.

The fact that he's terrible doesn't put you off at all?

 

[fmadej]

I'd say some servebot out of nowhere, but it won't be soon.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Nadal also won twice and Djokovic only 3 times. Murray belongs here because he has done virtually as well as the other 2.

"Only"?!

 

[NatF]

"Only"?!

Hilarious accidental slight

 

[mike danny]

"Only"?!

Just following his logic. Since Djokovic won only 3 timesc in 15 years, he shouldn't belong, which would be a faulty logic.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

It's an odd effect because the fourth wheel on a car is typically so key to its functioning at a high level. So key.

Fourth wheel.

 

[FedHeadComposer]

Andy Murray is so lucky to be included in these conversations. He's won twice in fifteen years and is considered to be in a group that has a stranglehold on the tournament.

Anyway, Bautista Agut will win it next year. He's too good not to win one.

Agree. There is no Big 4, only Big 3. Stan Wawrinka is closer to the career slam than Murray is. If all of them stopped playing right now, Fed, Nadal, Djokovic would be top 5 players of all time. Murray wouldn't be in the top 20.

 

[NatF]

Just following his logic. Since Djokovic won only 3 timesc in 15 years, he shouldn't belong, which would be a faulty logic.

You ruined it. It was much funnier when I thought it was accidental.

 

[Paul Harman]

Andy Murray is so lucky to be included in these conversations. He's won twice in fifteen years and is considered to be in a group that has a stranglehold on the tournament.

Anyway, Bautista Agut will win it next year. He's too good not to win one.

Agree. There is no Big 4, only Big 3. Stan Wawrinka is closer to the career slam than Murray is. If all of them stopped playing right now, Fed, Nadal, Djokovic would be top 5 players of all time. Murray wouldn't be in the top 20.

Agree! Goddamn Andy "lucky fckr" Murray didn't even try to win it in 2003. What a jerk.

 

[Vanilla Slice]

Leo Federer Wimbledon champ 2030

 

[duaneeo]

Cilic, Wawrinka, or Raonic.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Nick in 2020.

 

[ibbi]

Kyrgios strikes me as the sort of guy that likes grass...

 

[Qubax]

I think it's Federer vs the field.

Gone are the days Nadal is going deep at SW19 and I think the same can be said for Djoko. Perhaps Murray has another few deep runs in him. The trouble is Murray may not beat Fed in the next 2 years and Wimbledon.

So we might see more years like we did this one where Fed is the only Big 4 member in the Semi's or beyond.

So really you need to fast forward 3 years to 2020 to be the first year Fed probably won't be the favourite to win. Then again Fed may go deep since he'll be ramping up for his last Olympic bid.

I think you could see a gap where a weak slam winner like Raonic or Cilic (again) snag Wimbledon. I still hold out hope that by 2021 Zverev will be a well rounded beast and able to win titles on Grass.

 

[Mainad]

Andy Murray is so lucky to be included in these conversations. He's won twice in fifteen years and is considered to be in a group that has a stranglehold on the tournament.

Well, I guess Nadal must have been pretty lucky too as he's also won twice in 15 years. Djokovic was probably lucky to scrape a third!

Anyway, Bautista Agut will win it next year. He's too good not to win one.

I will look forward to bumping this post when that happens.

 

[Mainad]

"Only"?!

The OP apparently thinks you must have been lucky if your Wimbledon tally is less than 8!

 

[Mainad]

Agree. There is no Big 4, only Big 3. Stan Wawrinka is closer to the career slam than Murray is. If all of them stopped playing right now, Fed, Nadal, Djokovic would be top 5 players of all time. Murray wouldn't be in the top 20.

There is certainly a Big 4 at Wimbledon as no other active players have won the title there unlike at the other 3 Slams.

So forget about trying to derail this thread by dissing Murray and get back on topic. Who do you think will break the Wimbledon Big 4's stranglehold on Wimbledon?

 

[tennisaddict]

Felix AA.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Hopefully Kyrgios.

Felix in about 4 years time

 

[Mainad]

Other than the Big 4, the only active players to make the final at Wimbledon in the last 15 years, are Berdych, Raonic and Cilic. I suspect time has now passed Berdych by so I feel that the likeliest ones to break through are probably Raonic or Cilic.

 

[Zetty]

No one, Cyborg Fed will reign supreme

 

[FedHeadComposer]

There is certainly a Big 4 at Wimbledon as no other active players have won the title there unlike at the other 3 Slams.

So forget about trying to derail this thread by dissing Murray and get back on topic. Who do you think will break the Wimbledon Big 4's stranglehold on Wimbledon?

That makes no sense. The same logic could be applied to the French Open but substituting Wawrinka for Murray. Who is going to break the stranglehold that Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, and Wawrinka have on the FO the past 13 years? Who is going to break the stranglehold that those same four have on Australia? No active player other than those four have won it. Then you realize that it's really only about Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal when you step back. 46 of the last 57 Majors have been won by those three. They have the stranglehold on everything.

 

[Phoenix1983]

"Only"?!

Novak Djokovic is certainly the worst 3-time Wimbledon champion.

Guys like Becker, McEnroe, Newcombe and Tilden were far greater grass courters than he.

OTOH, Novak Djokovic should be a triple US champ (at least).

 

[Mainad]

That makes no sense. The same logic could be applied to the French Open but substituting Wawrinka for Murray. Who is going to break the stranglehold that Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, and Wawrinka have on the FO the past 13 years? Who is going to break the stranglehold that those same four have on Australia? No active player other than those four have won it. Then you realize that it's really only about Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal when you step back. 46 of the last 57 Majors have been won by those three. They have the stranglehold on everything.

I guess you could say the same for the other Slams except I would point out that Murray has won multiple titles at Wimbledon just like the other 3 so his presence there is more firmly established than is Wawrinka's at the other Slams. In addition, Murray is the one most likely to break any stranglehold the other 4 active players have at the other Slams as Murray is the only one other than them to have made finals there, multiple in the case of the AO and USO, whereas Wawrinka has not even come close to making a final at Wimbledon.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Federer to win every remaining edition of Wimbledon until the end of time.

Serious side question:
Will Wimbledon ever end? Will it ever lose popularity and they wind it up? Or will it continue for as long as humanity exists?

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Novak Djokovic is certainly the worst 3-time Wimbledon champion.

Guys like Becker, McEnroe, Newcombe and Tilden were far greater grass courters than he.

OTOH, Novak Djokovic should be a triple US champ (at least).

Phrasing it like that sounds disrespectful, sure, but if you think about it it could easily be true.

McEnroe and Becker were definitely better there.

Djokovic has overperformed at Wimbledon and underperformed at the US Open for sure.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Phrasing it like that sounds disrespectful, sure, but if you think about it it could easily be true.

McEnroe and Becker were definitely better there.

Djokovic has overperformed at Wimbledon and underperformed at the US Open for sure.

Becker I can accept due to reaching three more finals but I don't see how McEnroe was so much better when his and Djokovic's record at Wimbledon are pretty similar.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Becker I can accept due to reaching three more finals but I don't see how McEnroe was so much better when his and Djokovic's record at Wimbledon are pretty similar.

He was unlucky with prime Borg. Like how Federer has been unlucky at RG with prime Nadal.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

But I would be content to say there are close there.

 

[Mazz Retic]

That makes no sense. The same logic could be applied to the French Open but substituting Wawrinka for Murray. Who is going to break the stranglehold that Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, and Wawrinka have on the FO the past 13 years? Who is going to break the stranglehold that those same four have on Australia? No active player other than those four have won it. Then you realize that it's really only about Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal when you step back. 46 of the last 57 Majors have been won by those three. They have the stranglehold on everything.

The thread is about Wimbledon not other slams. Murray is one of 4 guys to win wimbledon in the last 14 years, fact. He is also along with the other 3 (and arguably moreso than nadal) the most consistent player at wimbledon in the past 14 years, fact.

 

[Djokovic2011]

He was unlucky with prime Borg. Like how Federer has been unlucky at RG with prime Nadal.

I thought he only lost to Borg once there? Anyway I was only going off their respective results, not looking at who had the tougher competition which is often very subjective anyway.

 

[FedHeadComposer]

The thread is about Wimbledon not other slams. Murray is one of 4 guys to win wimbledon in the last 14 years, fact. He is also along with the other 3 (and arguably moreso than nadal) the most consistent player at wimbledon in the past 14 years, fact.

I don't disagree with the Wimbledon point. The question is exaggerated. It boils down to "Who will win their first Wimbledon title?" I contest the "Big Four" categorization, and I don't think that Wimbledon is really unique in having domination by a group of players. Which is why I say it's three players dominating, not four.

 

[SLD76]

Since Federer first won Wimbledon in 2003, only the Big Four have won there.
Federer eight times, Djokovic three times, Nadal two times, and Murray two times.

The other three slams have also been claimed by others since the start of the Big Four's reign. Stan, Delpo, Roddick, Safin, Gaudio, and Cilic have also got in on the action at the Australian Open, French Open, and US Open since Federer won Wimbledon 2003.

But for fifteen years and counting, nobody else has managed to take the Wimbledon title.

So who will be the first to break the Big Four's total hold on the biggest prize in tennis?
And when?

Cillic

 

[Mazz Retic]

I don't disagree with the Wimbledon point. The question is exaggerated. It boils down to "Who will win their first Wimbledon title?" I contest the "Big Four" categorization, and I don't think that Wimbledon is really unique in having domination by a group of players. Which is why I say it's three players dominating, not four.

I see. So you don't agree with the big 4 concept at all? Is that the main contention?

 

[FedHeadComposer]

I see. So you don't agree with the big 4 concept at all? Is that the main contention?

Correct.

 

[Qubax]

I think it's Federer vs the field.

Gone are the days Nadal is going deep at SW19 and I think the same can be said for Djoko. Perhaps Murray has another few deep runs in him. The trouble is Murray may not beat Fed in the next 2 years and Wimbledon.

So we might see more years like we did this one where Fed is the only Big 4 member in the Semi's or beyond.

So really you need to fast forward 3 years to 2020 to be the first year Fed probably won't be the favourite to win. Then again Fed may go deep since he'll be ramping up for his last Olympic bid.

I think you could see a gap where a weak slam winner like Raonic or Cilic (again) snag Wimbledon. I still hold out hope that by 2021 Zverev will be a well rounded beast and able to win titles on Grass.

Yah, I amend what I say here to add FAA to Baby Zverev