Are the Big Four Back? (Or is it too soon to say?)

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,424
Reactions
6,247
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
calitennis127 said:
britbox said:
calitennis127 said:
Busted said:
El Dude said:
I feel like poor Novak is cursed with his greatness from the US Open of 2010 to the AO of 2012. He played at such an incredible level, yet has been quite good since - just not quite as good. We can't expect him to ever get back to that level, just like we can't expect Roger to ever get back to his ultimate peak of 2006, or Rafa in 2010 (although 2013 was close). In other words, we might have to accept the fact that THIS is Novak, and he's a pretty good player!

The inability to sustain that "greatness" is the difference between guys like Fed and Sampras (and Nadal) and guys like Nole - especially in the GOAT conversation. You have to be able to bring it year in and year out for 5, 6, 7 years in a row. So far Nole hasn't been able to do that. He's an excellent player but I wouldn't use the world "great" to describe him. And I'm not shading Nole. I like Nole. I just don't think he's ever going to make it to double-digits in Slam wins.

Well I think the two most obvious inexcusable losses on Djokovic's resume are the US Open finals against Nadal. He blew what should have been two straightforward wins there against an inferior hardcourt player, and that would have his Slam count at 8, with Nadal's only being 11 and completely weighted toward clay. Not to mention - Djokovic should have one or two French Opens by now and has underachieved at that event.

When you look at it like that, Djokovic has underachieved to this point in his career at the Slams. He should be at at least 8 or 9 Slams right now (at least).

Maybe they shouldn't bother playing the matches...and just ask Uncle Cali to award the trophy.

I guess you didn't watch the 2010 US Open from start to finish because Nadal was far and away the dominant player during the entire tournament and played a great final. That tournament was Nadal's pinnacle (outside of clay) as far as I'm concerned. I'm not a Nadal fan by any means, but was left scratching my head after it finished on how Nole was going to beat him going forward. 2011 changed things of course, but how you can regard that loss as inexcusable is in itself inexcusable.

I guess it was you who didn't watch that US Open start to finish and has very little recollection of it.

Nadal looked pitiful in his first two matches. He struggled to hit more than 10 winners against two no-names. After that, he played fairly well against Simon, before going through arguably the weakest draw he has ever faced at a Slam. He played an exhausted Verdasco in the quarters (who came down from 2 sets to 0 against Ferrer) and an exhausted Youzhny in the semis (who won in 5 long sets against Wawrinka). That run was one of the most overrated runs in any sport that I have seen get so hyped up.

Oh, and what Djokovic did to Nadal in 2011 came as absolutely no surprise to me. He just played very poorly in that 2010 US Open final.

Djokovic was redlining in the set in he won in the 2010 final, he was going for broke with little to lose. It wasn't the blueprint for how he dominated Nadal in 2011 - almost the reverse.

If you want to believe Nadal was pitiful in that campaign and just eeked by exhausted opponents then it says more about how you read matches than anything else.
 

huntingyou

Masters Champion
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
695
Reactions
0
Points
0
Nadal UO form was the highest level outside of clay by his standards. Olympics 2008 comes close as well as Canada last year and SW19 2008 of course.

I have to say his level at Miami this year it's starting to creep up there, not sure if it's because the competition has been lack luster so far but Rafa's footwork and forehand so far has made me turn my head in disbelieve in many occasions so far.

On a side note, I will be there tonight!!!!!! I wish I had a good camara but galaxy s3 it's not good for pictures from a distance. I tried last Sunday but they were fugly. I will be closer tonight though......box 310!!!!
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,039
Reactions
7,329
Points
113
huntingyou said:
Nadal UO form was the highest level outside of clay by his standards. Olympics 2008 comes close as well as Canada last year and SW19 2008 of course.

I have to say his level at Miami this year it's starting to creep up there, not sure if it's because the competition has been lack luster so far but Rafa's footwork and forehand so far has made me turn my head in disbelieve in many occasions so far.

On a side note, I will be there tonight!!!!!! I wish I had a good camara but galaxy s3 it's not good for pictures from a distance. I tried last Sunday but they were fugly. I will be closer tonight though......box 310!!!!

Enjoy! I hope it's vintage Rafa. So far, from what I'm hearing, it is...
 

huntingyou

Masters Champion
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
695
Reactions
0
Points
0
Kieran said:
huntingyou said:
Nadal UO form was the highest level outside of clay by his standards. Olympics 2008 comes close as well as Canada last year and SW19 2008 of course.

I have to say his level at Miami this year it's starting to creep up there, not sure if it's because the competition has been lack luster so far but Rafa's footwork and forehand so far has made me turn my head in disbelieve in many occasions so far.

On a side note, I will be there tonight!!!!!! I wish I had a good camara but galaxy s3 it's not good for pictures from a distance. I tried last Sunday but they were fugly. I will be closer tonight though......box 310!!!!

Enjoy! I hope it's vintage Rafa. So far, from what I'm hearing, it is...

In three matches, Rafa has hit so many incredible shots.......worth a 10 min video. Go to youtube and watch for yourself!
 

Riotbeard

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,810
Reactions
12
Points
38
Rafa won the UFO '10 final. It was not a case of Novak losing it. Novak played well, but Rafa was better that day.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
calitennis127 said:
Oh yeah, and how can I forget about your objections to the forehand down-the-line strategy for Federer? "He doesn't do it, therefore it wouldn't work". Total brilliance. I just love talking tennis with someone who gets the details as well as you do.

I said that he did it and it didn't work, and provided examples.

Still reckon it's a better advice than "crush every forehand."
 

rafanoy1992

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
4,573
Reactions
3,216
Points
113
Kieran said:
Rafa zoned in on that 2010 US Open title. He lost serve how many times, in the whole event? Dropped only one set throughout. He was awesome, buddy, invincible. Even better than last year, although last years Novak was a tougher more seasoned fellow in the final...

Kieran, actually what's funny is in 2010 US Open Nadal lost serve five times in the whole tournament and lost one set. However, last year, Nadal lost serve four times in the whole tournament and lost two sets (he should have won the first set against Kohlschreiber but he could not capitalize three set points). All in all, it is tough to say in which US Open did Nadal played better tennis. Because in 2010, he served incredible (best serving performance of career) but his other parts of his game were only "good." He played three tiebreaks in his first two matches. Meanwhile, last year, his serve was not as great as 2010, but his other parts of his game were magnificent. It's like he could not miss at all and his groundstrokes were fast and deep inside the baseline. His forehand was just monstrous, even Djokovic was like, "What the hell can I do to neutralize that forehand!."
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
22,992
Reactions
3,923
Points
113
^ Till set 2 and a good deal of set 3 where Nadal was thinking what the hell can I do to defend against this inside out forehand assault :p
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,039
Reactions
7,329
Points
113
Front242 said:
^ Till set 2 and a good deal of set 3 where Nadal was thinking what the hell can I do to defend against this inside out forehand assault :p

Make him play one more. It was straight forward in the end, really... ;)
 

Mile

Masters Champion
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
639
Reactions
96
Points
28
paradox, the so called "Big four" are expaneded over all over top 10. Not even close first four.
 

herios

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
8,984
Reactions
1,659
Points
113
Mile said:
paradox, the so called "Big four" are expaneded over all over top 10. Not even close first four.

That is my point as well.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Rankings are just semantics in this case. If you honestly think that David Ferrer is more of a factor than Murray or Federer then I feel bad for your optimism.
 

JesuslookslikeBorg

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,323
Reactions
1,074
Points
113
isabelle said:
Will Birdie be N°4 soon ???

I think Skeletor will be no 4 rank if he wins the Title..he will have to defeat He-Man first though.
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
22,992
Reactions
3,923
Points
113
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
^ Till set 2 and a good deal of set 3 where Nadal was thinking what the hell can I do to defend against this inside out forehand assault :p

Make him play one more. It was straight forward in the end, really... ;)

Only 'cos of Novak's severely dodgy mental strength the last few years. He definitely should've won set 3 and made an awful dog's dinner of that 4-4 0-40 game on Nadal's serve.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
^ Till set 2 and a good deal of set 3 where Nadal was thinking what the hell can I do to defend against this inside out forehand assault :p

Make him play one more. It was straight forward in the end, really... ;)

Only 'cos of Novak's severely dodgy mental strength the last few years. He definitely should've won set 3 and made an awful dog's dinner of that 4-4 0-40 game on Nadal's serve.

2 of those points at 0-40 were saved with Nadal winners (an ace and a 2 punch serve-forehand combo). One was a long rally that resulted in a Novak UE. Interestingly though, Novak got to that point with help from a Nadal slip. So we'll call it even.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,039
Reactions
7,329
Points
113
Yeah, he didn't have a chance on any of them three points. Well, maybe the rally one, but they were points won, rather than points lost...
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
You know what's funny? I never hear anyone bring up Nadal being up 0-40 on Wawrinka's serve to break back in the first set and then proceeding to...miss 3 consecutive 2nd serve returns. Instead, we're led to believe Wawrinka was just unplayable, Nadal's back didn't change anything, and there was nothing he could have done either way.

But whenever someone misses an opportunity against Nadal we hear about it till eternity.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,039
Reactions
7,329
Points
113
Bingo. :clap

No matter what Rafa does, people still underestimate him and insist the points were on the other guys racket...
 

jhar26

Pro Tour Champion
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Messages
435
Reactions
1
Points
16
Kieran said:
Bingo. :clap

No matter what Rafa does, people still underestimate him and insist the points were on the other guys racket...
I find the "the match was on his/her racquet" argument just about the lamest argument in tennis, no matter in relation to what players it's used. If I were a tennis player and I would play Rafa (or any other player for that matter) and I go for broke on each shot, but make errors three times out of four as a result I suppose I also could also say that "the match was on my racquet." But the simple fact of the matter is that I didn't manage to execute my shots properly and that therefore my opponent was better because he managed to execute his. It's as simple as that. It's a bit like if in football (the soccer version) team A goes wildly and without much judgement on the attack and team B keeps on scoring goals time after time after time on the counter. It would be just as lame for team A to argue that the match was on their feet.