ATP Final final: Thiem v. Tsitsipas

[brokenshoelace]

What Nalbandian did, IIRC, was beat Roger and Rafa in the same tournament, which had never been done before and then did it twice in a row. Madrid and Paris. (Yes, and that's why we can't stop hearing from Cali.) At that time, there was no talk about Djokovic. In 2009, del Potro was the first player to beat both Roger and Rafa in a Major, and then go on to win the tournament, (though it was still an accomplishment, even if he hadn't won the title.) I'm pretty sure that Djokovic was the next to do it, USO '11. At the time, the accomplishment was beating Roger and Rafa. Inserting Djokovic is a bit retroactive. What del Potro did certainly does "count." But, to date, I'm pretty sure no one has beaten all of the Big 3 in one tournament. Or even how many times someone has beaten two of them in the same tournament. Something to look into.

Yes there was. He beat Novak in Madrid after he beat Rafa and before he beat Roger in the final and the talk was he beat the top 3 players in the world. Obviously Novak wasn’t as big of a deal yet but he was coming off the US Open final loss to Fed and everyone predicted he’d be the next big thing.

 

[Moxie]

yes there was. He beat Novak in Madrid after he beat Rafa and before he beat Roger in the final and the talk was he beat the top 3 players in the world. Obviously Novak wasn’t as big of a deal yet but he was coming off the US Open final loss to Fed and everyone predicted he’d be the next big thing.

Funny, I didn't remember that, but it was the days before Tennis Channel, and there was a lot of tennis that only got read about. So I looked it up, and it turns out I was also wrong that Nalbandian was the first to beat Roger and Rafa in the same tournament...it was Novak the summer before in Canada.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

yes there was. He beat Novak in Madrid after he beat Rafa and before he beat Roger in the final and the talk was he beat the top 3 players in the world. Obviously Novak wasn’t as big of a deal yet but he was coming off the US Open final loss to Fed and everyone predicted he’d be the next big thing.

Actually, in the Canadian Master's that year Novak beat the #1, #2 and #3 ranked players in the last three rounds (in some order) to win the title. They were Roger, Rafa and Roddick.

 

[Moxie]

Actually, in the Canadian Master's that year Novak beat the #1, #2 and #3 ranked players in the last three rounds (in some order) to win the title. They were Roger, Rafa and Roddick.

I looked it up earlier, and Novak was seeded 3, Roddick 5, so I think he was already #3, right? Here is a link to the draw:

http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2007/421/MDS.pdf

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I looked it up earlier, and Novak was seeded 3, Roddick 5, so I think he was already #3, right? Here is a link to the draw:

http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2007/421/MDS.pdf

You are right. I was talking from my memory. Novak beat #4 seed (but actually ranked #5) , #2 and #1 in succession in QF,SF and F.

Actually when Roddick reached the QF, all he had to do to win was to beat Novak, Rafa and Federer in succession to win the tourney, but he fell in the first hurdle. Roddick might have made a sarcastic remark about in the presser before his QF match.

 

[Moxie]

You are right. I was talking from my memory. Novak beat #4 seed (but actually ranked #5) , #2 and #1 in succession in QF,SF and F.

Actually when Roddick reached the QF, all he had to do to win was to beat Novak, Rafa and Federer in succession to win the tourney, but he fell in the first hurdle. Roddick might have made a sarcastic remark about in the presser before his QF match.

Yeah, I was talking from memory about the Nalbandian achievement. It happens.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Actually, in the Canadian Master's that year Novak beat the #1, #2 and #3 ranked players in the last three rounds (in some order) to win the title. They were Roger, Rafa and Roddick.

The question wasn't if someone beat the top 3 players in one tournament, it's if someone beat the big 3, as in Fed, Nadal and Novak so that's why I limited it to that.