Why has Wimbledon been the stronghold of the Big 4 ?

D

Deleted member 766172

Guest
I thought USO was the only one non big4 have won recently.

edit: Forgot about Stan
 

clout

Hall of Fame
The next gen stink on grass

Stan also isn’t that great on grass, Del Potro is always hurt and Cilic is a massive choker

The second tier players who did play well on grass like Tsonga, Berdych and Raonic had their runs/moments but always ended up losing to one of the big 3/4
 
Last edited:

Hitman

Bionic Poster
Well, everyone plays from the back of the court nowadays, can you be more specific?

Yes, sure.

Remember how we use to say it was just impossible for anyone to win big titles with the big four around, because chance are you would have to beat two or even three of them to win a title?

Take a look at Berdych for example in 2010. He beats Federer, he beats Djokovic...now normally if you beat two such players it should mean a big title is in your hands, but he still had to play Nadal....

Next year, Tsonga GOATs against Federer coming back to win in five, but then has to face Djokovic 2011, and if he got past that, he had Nadal waiting in the final....

Del Potro 2013 plays an absolute epic with Djokovic in the semis, had he gotten through that, a fresh in form Murray would have finished him off easily in the final

Dimitrov playing the best season of his career and some of his best on grass at that point in 2014 dethrones Murray, only to run into Djokovic next round with Federer waiting in the final...


See a pattern? The non-big four players have to seriously GOAT like nothing before them, to get through such a gauntlet. It is bad enough trying to upset these guys in a best of three in a master, but try it in a best of five and you will see just how hard it is. And as grass is not a surface they play on as much, it makes the challenge that much more harder than on other surfaces.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 768841

Guest
Well, everyone plays from the back of the court nowadays, can you be more specific?
Dustin Brown looks good on grass, though I’ve never played on grass so I wouldn’t know.
 

Otacon

Hall of Fame
Yes, sure.

Remember how we use to say it was just impossible for anyone to win big titles with the big four around, because chance are you would have to beat two or even three of them to win a title?

Take a look at Berdych for example in 2010. He beats Federer, he beats Djokovic...now normally if you beat two such players it should mean a big title is in your hands, but he still had to play Nadal....

Next year, Tsonga GOATs against Federer coming back to win in five, but then has to face Djokovic 2011, and if he got past that, he had Nadal waiting in the final....

Del Potro 2013 plays an absolute epic with Djokovic in the semis, had he gotten through that, a fresh in form Murray would have finished him off easily in the final

Dimitrov playing the best season of his career and some of his best on grass at that point in 2014 dethrones Murray, only to run into Djokovic next round with Federer waiting in the final...


See a pattern? The non-big four players have to seriously GOAT like nothing before them, to get through such a gauntlet. It is bad enough trying to upset these guys in a best of three in a master, but try it in a best of five and you will just how hard it is. And as grass is not a surface they play on as much, it makes the challenge that much more harder than on other surfaces.
Has anyone ever beaten the Big 3 in a Slam ? I doubt it.
 
Most important is the low bounce and the ability to deal with it which takes talent and discipline which the Big 4 have or had (Murray MIA) more of over the field. Lack of grass courts is another factor. Attention deficit with younger generation is another. It's a big cocktail of things. I'd even add height as a factor as most of the more talented next genners are tall which imo doesn't help their cause when combined with the other factors I've mentioned above.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
It is the ultimate prize in tennis. I don’t think Fed’s record there is under threat any time soon.
You just want to believe that because it is Federer's best slam. You would write the same thing about RG if Federer had 8 titles there. (leave alone 12)
 

Jonesy

Legend
We really need a masters on grass.... Why the hell atp didn't make one yet? Just make one of the clay masters be grass instead. If not, i don't see a reason to link some MM tournaments with this great slam.
 

van_Loederen

Professional
(Feder's fault that he didn't win RG 2004 and AO 2005.)
if we start counting from Nadal's first Slam, the differences become very small.
so Wawa won the AO and RG while Murray won Wimbly, no biggy.

only the USO and more so the YEC have become famous for upsets ...and it's because tennis has become more gruelling and the season too long/tough.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
You just want to believe that because it is Federer's best slam. You would write the same thing about RG if Federer had 8 titles there. (leave alone 12)
If we start mentioning RG, we may as well count Monte Carlo and Barcelona.

Wimbledon is the holy grail of tennis, son.
 
D

Deleted member 766172

Guest
I dont know about that. If Djoker stays at his level, who will beat him the next three years? Or four?
I fear the same. It’s definitely no guarantee as Djokovic’s level wavers quite often these days, but he could do it if he gets a bit lucky with his form being intact for that tournament over the next few years. I say he won’t be able to do it, but I worry about it.
 

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
I fear the same. It’s definitely no guarantee as Djokovic’s level wavers quite often these days, but he could do it if he gets a bit lucky with his form being intact for that tournament over the next few years. I say he won’t be able to do it, but I worry about it.
I just try and think who could beat him even if he waivers. He took an entire set and a half off against Fed and still won.
 
D

Deleted member 766172

Guest
I just try and think who could beat him even if he waivers. He took an entire set and a half off against Fed and still won.
I was about to write up on how a next gen will breakthrough on grass and become as good as Medvedev on hardcourt or Thiem on Clay, but I just looked at last years Wimbledon draw and seems like the only 2 young players to make it into the round of 16 were Berrettini and Humbert. Looks like next gen will need to seriously step up on grass. I think Federer will be there for the next couple at least, and then Nadal will probably be competitive for even longer though. Those two will try and put up a fight.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
I dont know about that. If Djoker stays at his level, who will beat him the next three years? Or four?
Lets see what the future brings. He has to stay healthy as well. Too much to predict four years ahead. heck, I cant even predict whats going to happen this year. Players health vary a lot. And Novak has been beaten by all the younger players as well.
 

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
Lets see what the future brings. He has to stay healthy as well. Too much to predict four years ahead. heck, I cant even predict whats going to happen this year. Players health vary a lot. And Novak has been beaten by all the younger players as well.
But not in slams, and not on grass. On hard? Maybe, but not on grass, Big Berr might be his biggest threat on grass going forward. Big Berr...
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
But not in slams, and not on grass. On hard? Maybe, but not on grass, Big Berr might be his biggest threat on grass going forward. Big Berr...
RG is right before and Novak has had problems and been injured. His Wimbledon win made him literally not win anything significant rest of the season (besides Paris?). It ruined his USO, even w a month break. If he ends up playing long spring w a tough RG run he might not be in the best shape for Wimbledon 4 years in a row. His body is more fragile than it was before.
 

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
RG is right before and Novak has had problems and been injured. His Wimbledon win made him literally not win anything significant rest of the season (besides Paris?). It ruined his USO, even w a month break. If he ends up playing long spring w a tough RG run he might not be in the best shape for Wimbledon 4 years in a row. His body is more fragile than it was before.
Agree, but as of now, assuming he is healthy, I see at least 3 more, as I cant see anyone beating him except maybe a Rafa or Fed if they catch him off a bit.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Agree, but as of now, assuming he is healthy, I see at least 3 more, as I cant see anyone beating him except maybe a Rafa or Fed if they catch him off a bit.
@StrongRule thinks Novak going to win the next 4 RG :-D
Novak fans thinks Novak is the best HC player of all times and he is better than Fed in NY.
Then we have AO, where he is def best.
So, I guess Novak has a chance for CYGS 4 years in a row :p Realistically lol

A lot can happen! even to predict next year for these fragile tennis players is too much imo. Probably as a Rafa fan, I never take health for granted and well aware of what can happen. I also dont want to be arrogant and say no younger players will step up, cause I hope and I think they will.
 

augustobt

Legend
The next gen stink on grass

Stan also isn’t that great on grass, Del Potro is always hurt and Cilic is a massive choker

The second tier players who did play well on grass like Tsonga, Berdych and Raonic had their runs/moments but always ended up losing to one of the big 3/4
I think this post sums it up.

Take for example Tsonga in 2011. He beat Federer, and would've had to beat Djokovic and Nadal later. He pulled a very good match against Djokovic and I wouldn't have ruled him out in the final against Nadal - he won against Rafa earlier that tournament in Queen's. Unlucky for Tsonga who faced Nadal in the grass only 8 years later, where he's just a distant shadow of himself.
 
Hasn't been a big 4 for a while but I do know that all of the slams have been a Fedalovic stronghold 15 / 16 years:

AO: 14 out of 16 times since Fed first won it in 2004
RG: 14 out of 15 times since Rafa first won it in 2005
WIM: 15 out of 17 times since Fed first won it in 2003
USO: 12 out of 16 times since Fed first won it in 2004 (the only one that gives a slight amount of breathing room to the field but is still a formidable record)

If one single player managed to win every single slam that Fedalovic didn't win since 2003 (68 slams) they would still only be fifth on the slam list with 13, that is insane!
 
Last edited:

clout

Hall of Fame
I think this post sums it up.

Take for example Tsonga in 2011. He beat Federer, and would've had to beat Djokovic and Nadal later. He pulled a very good match against Djokovic and I wouldn't have ruled him out in the final against Nadal - he won against Rafa earlier that tournament in Queen's. Unlucky for Tsonga who faced Nadal in the grass only 8 years later, where he's just a distant shadow of himself.
Well beating Rafa or any of the big 3 for that matter is much and I mean MUCH tougher at a slam than in a 500 tournament like Queens. But other than that yeah, the big 3/4 have given very little leverage for any second tier breakouts as the mortals need to beat at least 2/4 just to make it to the finals, let alone win the title. Some notable occurrences include:

Roddick beats Murray in the '09 semis, but lost to Federer in a gut-wrencher (old habits die hard)

Berdych in 2010 beats Fed in 4 sets and Djoko in straights just to be totally outmatched by Rafa in the finals

Tsonga makes an incredible comeback against Fed in 2011 and continues this form into the semis but the greatest version of Novak was there to greet him (would've had to play Rafa in the eventual finals as well)

Del Potro crushed Ferrer and took Novak the distance but ended up losing in 2013 (he would've played an inspired Murray in the finals)

Dimitrov smoked Murray but got totally outclassed by Novak in the very next round (even if he got by Nole, he would've drew Fedr in the finals)

Raonic, same story, beats Fed (albiet an injured one) and gets to the finals only to lose easily to Murray

Del Potro again in 2018 loses a classic to Rafa in the quarters but even if he got by, he'd have to go up against Novak in the next round while also being gassed (and a gassed Delpo can result in so many bad things both short and long term)

Cilic has just flat out melted down in too many times to recall in detail (talent-wise, he might be the best grass courter in the last decade or so outside the big 4)
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Hasn't been a big 4 for a while but I do know that all of the slams have been a Fedalovic stronghold 15 / 16 years:

AO: 14 out of 16 times since Fed first won it in 2004
RG: 14 out of 15 times since Rafa first won it in 2005
WIM: 15 out of 17 times since Fed first won it in 2003
USO: 12 out of 16 times since Fed first won it in 2004 (the only one that gives a slight amount of breathing room to the field but is still a formidable record)

If one single player managed to win every single slam that Fedalovic didn't win since 2003 (68 slams) they would still only be fifth on the slam list with 13, that is insane!
The AO has also been dominated by the "older" gen as well. No one born after 1988 has ever played in a finals down under (and Cilic in 2018 was the only finals appearance in a Melbourne from someone born after 1987). At the other three slams, the youngest player to play in a final are:

RG: Thiem (2x) - born 1993
WI: Raonic - born 1990
US: Med - born 1996
 

PMChambers

Hall of Fame
Call it big 3 which is realistically what it is and it's no different to AO or FO.

It's big 4 because Murray is / was compeditive, not because he was same level. Call it Big 5 and it's same except US.
 

Elektra

Professional
Grass is not played often and it is foreign surface to a lot of players who mostly play on hard courts. Grass requires good footwork and lateral movement. Playing on grass has to be a certain way and very often every young player believes a baseline game matters on grass when having good touch and feel matters as well as an effective serve.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Call it big 3 which is realistically what it is and it's no different to AO or FO.

Don't recall any non-Big 3 player winning multiple titles at any other Slam.

It's big 4 because Murray is / was compeditive, not because he was same level. Call it Big 5 and it's same except US.

Don't recall any Big 5 player winning Wimbledon (or even making a final) other than Murray.
 

PMChambers

Hall of Fame
Don't recall any non-Big 3 player winning multiple titles at any other Slam.



Don't recall any Big 5 player winning Wimbledon (or even making a final) other than Murray.
20, 19, 16, 3 & 3 & {1}
Its either a Big 3 or Big 5.
IF Big 3 then since 2008 when all Big 3 won a major though in reality Big 3 was 2011 onwards. Wim was been won by non Big 3 2x. If big 5 then 2002.
AO Big 3 only 1 non Big 3
US Big 3 only 3 non Big 3
FO Big 3 only 1 non Big 3
The FO & AO have been the real strongholds. Considering Big 5 then FO, AO & Wim are all the same. Wim has not been any more a stronghold than AO or FO, and in reality less so as Big 3 has daylight back to Big 5.

You can play it any way you like but it's just rediculous to say Big 4 when there are other players with same Majors or the gap between 3rd greatest Major winner 4th/5th is daylight or factors of, 5x.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
20, 19, 16, 3 & 3 & {1}
Its either a Big 3 or Big 5.
IF Big 3 then since 2008 when all Big 3 won a major though in reality Big 3 was 2011 onwards. Wim was been won by non Big 3 2x. If big 5 then 2002.
AO Big 3 only 1 non Big 3
US Big 3 only 3 non Big 3
FO Big 3 only 1 non Big 3
The FO & AO have been the real strongholds. Considering Big 5 then FO, AO & Wim are all the same. Wim has not been any more a stronghold than AO or FO, and in reality less so as Big 3 has daylight back to Big 5.

You can play it any way you like but it's just rediculous to say Big 4 when there are other players with same Majors or the gap between 3rd greatest Major winner 4th/5th is daylight or factors of, 5x.

I repeat, no player other than the Big 4 won multiple titles at any Slam except Wimbledon. That makes Wimbledon special, whether you choose to accept that or not.
 
Top