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

[Front242]

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.

Actually, I very much admit Stan got lucky there that Rafa returned those 3 2nd serves so poorly. He did that against Raonic too though a few days ago so it's not like it's the first time. Fed is pretty awful returning a lot of 2nd serves too.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

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.

skeletor was locked in the toilet all day with 'problems'.

 

[calitennis127]

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.

Uhhhh, I did acknowledge that Nadal missed those straightforward returns. But it doesn't take away from the thrashing that Wawrinka delivered otherwise in that first set.

And there is not even the slightest comparison between Nadal missing second serve returns (something he does fairly often because he doesn't react on the return as well as a Djokovic or Nalbandian) and the shots Dimitrov missed against him at the end of the third set. There is no comparison. Dimitrov missed a wide-open, gimme put-away shot.

 

[calitennis127]

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.

LOL.....provided examples. You have to be kidding me. You provided nothing. Absolutely nothing.

When we discussed both the Cincinnati quarterfinal as well as the World Tour Finals match, you did not present a single valid objection to any specific point I made on this issue. Way to congratulate yourself for something you never did.

 

[calitennis127]

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.

I said that Nadal often looked pitiful in the first two matches (Gabashvili and Istomin) of the 2010 US Open - which he did.

After that, I still am puzzled at how his form in that tournament was considered legendary when he played Verdasco coming off of a 5-set, 4+-hour match against Ferrer and then Youzhny coming off the same kind of match against Wawrinka. Not to mention that the match against Verdasco was played in windy 50-degree weather, conditions that obviously favor Nadal to the utmost. If this was almost anyone but Nadal, people would be pointing out the weakness of the draw.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

You're probably right, Broken. But understand where us Fed fans are coming from: there's a long way to fall.

Anyhow, I realize that I over-reacted. I'm not giving up on him yet this year and expect him to be better than last year - he has been by quite a bit already. It is clear, though, that he's a step behind the Big Two and would need a real lucky break and hot streak to win a Masters or Slam.

I'm curious to see how he matches up against Andy Murray.

didn't you see how he matches up against Andy in AO?

 

[Kieran]

Is the Big 2 back?

That seems more true. The Swiss bandwagons wheels have fallen off, and Andy is still a ways off the pace...

 

[Front242]

Outside the AO showing the older Swiss dude is still doing better even counting the Nishikori fiasco.

 

[shawnbm]

Even though Roger won against Nole and lost a tiebreak to him in the IW final (and lost to Nadal in Melbourne), I still think it is too soon to say he is back as a definitive contender in any event he enters. Nole and Rafa? Yes, but if Roger gets a few more top ten wins and bags another event, then maybe he is back in. Andy needs some big victories and a masters event win as well.

 

[Front242]

Andy played practically nothing on clay last year so he has a huge potential next few months to make a statement.

 

[herios]

Andy played practically nothing on clay last year so he has a huge potential next few months to make a statement.

Potential is one thing, results are a totally different beast. Until it will happen, I will be circumspect. I would better trust others to make a move on clay than him.

 

[herios]

Outside the AO showing the older Swiss dude is still doing better even counting the Nishikori fiasco.

And how quickly you forgot he went down to Hewitt this year as well? I know you will try to sugar coat that one, but what Rusty did ever since?? Absolutely zippo.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Andy played practically nothing on clay last year so he has a huge potential next few months to make a statement.

Potential is one thing, results are a totally different beast. Until it will happen, I will be circumspect. I would better trust others to make a move on clay than him.

Like who? Other than the usual suspects...because everyone else you name, will also be based on potential and not results.

 

[Front242]

Outside the AO showing the older Swiss dude is still doing better even counting the Nishikori fiasco.

And how quickly you forgot he went down to Hewitt this year as well? I know you will try to sugar coat that one, but what Rusty did ever since?? Absolutely zippo.

No need to sugar coat it as I said outside the AO, meaning after it, maybe that wasn't clear. That Brisbane fiasco happened before the AO not after.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Outside the AO showing the older Swiss dude is still doing better even counting the Nishikori fiasco.

And how quickly you forgot he went down to Hewitt this year as well? I know you will try to sugar coat that one, but what Rusty did ever since?? Absolutely zippo.

You do realize Federer's results, Hewitt and Nishikori loss included, are still better than any of your "underdogs" that you keep assuring us will finally make a statement year after year? I find it odd how quick you are to pop up every time someone talks about Murray and Federer being a factor in today's game, and quickly shoot down their results. That's all well and good, but then, by your criteria, only Nadal and Djokovic matter I guess. Oh, and Wawrinka, who will dominate tennis for years to come because players are peaking later now. Got you.

 

[Mog]

Even though Roger won against Nole and lost a tiebreak to him in the IW final (and lost to Nadal in Melbourne), I still think it is too soon to say he is back as a definitive contender in any event he enters. Nole and Rafa? Yes, but if Roger gets a few more top ten wins and bags another event, then maybe he is back in. Andy needs some big victories and a masters event win as well.

Very much agree with you Shawnbm.
Roger is playing in general lot better than his 2013 performances.
He is not there with Nole and Rafa. He is far from "back"yet. Hope he gets atleast one major.
As of now it is only Nole and Rafa in the big four equation.
Hope to see Murray becomes a factor soon.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

murray has a 100% win record on clay in 2014..wow, that geezer is unstoppable..

 

[herios]

Andy played practically nothing on clay last year so he has a huge potential next few months to make a statement.

Potential is one thing, results are a totally different beast. Until it will happen, I will be circumspect. I would better trust others to make a move on clay than him.

Like who? Other than the usual suspects...because everyone else you name, will also be based on potential and not results.

Like any of the players who have been able to win titles on clay before, unlike Andy Murray.
There are quite a few, who are still improving: Fognini, Cilic, Wawrinka.
I am expecting all of the above to improve on their results in this clay season.

 

[El Dude]

How about Big Two + Two?

Rafa and Novak are in a league their own, but assuming Andy gradually works his way back, he and Roger are right there behind them and a step ahead of everyone else.

That, to me, is what Roger has shown so far: while he is no longer in the same league as Rafa and Novak, he's still better than just about everyone else (with the possible exception of Andy Murray).

 

[brokenshoelace]

Andy played practically nothing on clay last year so he has a huge potential next few months to make a statement.

Potential is one thing, results are a totally different beast. Until it will happen, I will be circumspect. I would better trust others to make a move on clay than him.

Like who? Other than the usual suspects...because everyone else you name, will also be based on potential and not results.

Like any of the players who have been able to win titles on clay before, unlike Andy Murray.
There are quite a few, who are still improving: Fognini, Cilic, Wawrinka.
I am expecting all of the above to improve on their results in this clay season.

So Fognini and Cilic should be expected to be bigger factors than Murray on clay?