I'm kinda sick of the Big Four

[atttomole]

I will miss Federer because of the quality of his tennis. I have enjoyed tennis more than ever before in the last ten years because of this guy. I don't think we will see another player who is remotely as good as Federer. To me Roger is almost as big as the game itself.

 

[crystalfire]

everyone wants to see new blood but lets just say we have completely new finalists at a slam this year...what are the odds that youll set your alarm and try to catch that final? i for one would care less, until they start continuously making finals and establish themselves. if not its just another tennis match that ill catch in the news later. obviously if any of the big 4 are involved theres a much better chance we will all catch that final. so i guess big 4 bring in the viewers which is good for tennis. we need a new group of players who people can support and consistently reach the final stages otherwise for now well keep rooting for the current big 4. until that happens which i dont see happening any time soon tbh

 

[nehmeth]

everyone wants to see new blood but lets just say we have completely new finalists at a slam this year...what are the odds that youll set your alarm and try to catch that final? i for one would care less, until they start continuously making finals and establish themselves. if not its just another tennis match that ill catch in the news later. obviously if any of the big 4 are involved theres a much better chance we will all catch that final. so tbh idk what i wanted to say haha

There's a good point in there somewhere. People can gripe all they want to about the big four, but very few watched the U.S. Open final last year... and you're right, it would be the same anywhere else.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-open-2014-mens-final-tv-ratings-cilic-nishikori-struggle-draw-viewers-cbs-bows-out-1683116

 

[Fiero425]

everyone wants to see new blood but lets just say we have completely new finalists at a slam this year...what are the odds that youll set your alarm and try to catch that final? i for one would care less, until they start continuously making finals and establish themselves. if not its just another tennis match that ill catch in the news later. obviously if any of the big 4 are involved theres a much better chance we will all catch that final. so tbh idk what i wanted to say haha

There's a good point in there somewhere. People can gripe all they want to about the big four, but very few watched the U.S. Open final last year... and you're right, it would be the same anywhere else.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-open-2014-mens-final-tv-ratings-cilic-nishikori-struggle-draw-viewers-cbs-bows-out-1683116

We've been so spoiled! What happened to Johansson, Safin, Gomez, and Korda-type winners of odd majors? :cover uzzled :nono :angel::dodgy: :exclamation:

 

[nehmeth]

everyone wants to see new blood but lets just say we have completely new finalists at a slam this year...what are the odds that youll set your alarm and try to catch that final? i for one would care less, until they start continuously making finals and establish themselves. if not its just another tennis match that ill catch in the news later. obviously if any of the big 4 are involved theres a much better chance we will all catch that final. so tbh idk what i wanted to say haha

There's a good point in there somewhere. People can gripe all they want to about the big four, but very few watched the U.S. Open final last year... and you're right, it would be the same anywhere else.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-open-2014-mens-final-tv-ratings-cilic-nishikori-struggle-draw-viewers-cbs-bows-out-1683116

We've been so spoiled! What happened to Johansson, Safin, Gomez, and Korda-type winners of odd majors? :cover uzzled :nono :angel::dodgy: :exclamation:

Some might begin chanting the mantra of the surfaces being too much alike. Others might point to the sacrifice, commitment and resultant consistency of those who remain ensconced at the top.

 

[crystalfire]

everyone wants to see new blood but lets just say we have completely new finalists at a slam this year...what are the odds that youll set your alarm and try to catch that final? i for one would care less, until they start continuously making finals and establish themselves. if not its just another tennis match that ill catch in the news later. obviously if any of the big 4 are involved theres a much better chance we will all catch that final. so tbh idk what i wanted to say haha

There's a good point in there somewhere. People can gripe all they want to about the big four, but very few watched the U.S. Open final last year... and you're right, it would be the same anywhere else.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-open-2014-mens-final-tv-ratings-cilic-nishikori-struggle-draw-viewers-cbs-bows-out-1683116

We've been so spoiled! What happened to Johansson, Safin, Gomez, and Korda-type winners of odd majors? :cover uzzled :nono :angel::dodgy: :exclamation:

i edited my post above..but anyway without the big 4 tennis becomes just another "sport" if we have random people winning. im pretty sure most of us will still keep track but theres no way well be keeping track of each match like we do now (which we basically do to see how it affects the big 4 in the draw and who can possibly win). im not even gonna lie when i say other than slams i wont even bother with any of the other tourneys. what draws me are these dominant players carving their name in history.

 

[Denis]

If only I had so much power...

Very true. I am certainly enjoying Novak dominating the sport again. I am enjoying Murray playing the type of offensive tennis he is capable of, even if I may not like him. I am enjoying watching other players (besides Novak) finally beating Rafa on clay. :exclamation:

This sums it up for me too.

 

[El Dude]

everyone wants to see new blood but lets just say we have completely new finalists at a slam this year...what are the odds that youll set your alarm and try to catch that final? i for one would care less, until they start continuously making finals and establish themselves. if not its just another tennis match that ill catch in the news later. obviously if any of the big 4 are involved theres a much better chance we will all catch that final. so i guess big 4 bring in the viewers which is good for tennis. we need a new group of players who people can support and consistently reach the final stages otherwise for now well keep rooting for the current big 4. until that happens which i dont see happening any time soon tbh

This is a good point. People love superstars. What I'd love to see is some brash young pup start head-hunting the top players. Not just a bunch of Johanssons and Gaudios (and Cilics) eeking out Slams in a weak field, but a new young superstar or three supplanting the reigning regime.

As I've argued before, we're probably not going to see it. Or rather, we'll see it as a combination of Novak and Andy getting older and remaining dominant longer because of a skipped generation of mediocrity (Nishikori, Raonic, Dimitrov etc), and then the rise of the next generation (Kyrgios, Coric, Zverev, Kokk, etc). But what we won't see is a new young generation supplanting a peak or even late peak Novak and Andy. Those young guys are 18-20; by the time they are 22-24, Novak and Andy will be 32 and probably no longer in prime form.

So the next few years will see a gradual tidal shift. 2014 was a bit of a shock, with Wawrinka and Cilic. 2015-17 will see the fazing out of Fedal, with continued dominance from Novak, and Andy playing wingman, and one or two others sneaking in big titles. 2018-19 will see the regime change, with the new order established by 2020 or so.

Or something like that.

Anyhow, my hope is that we see some of these young guys emerge as actual superstars, and not just another generation of second tier players like Nishiraotrov. I have no doubt that my hope is at least partially fueled by the fact that my favorite player turns 34 this year. But it also has to do with wanting a bit of new spice to the mix. If we say that Novak became an elite player in 2007 and Andy in 2008, it has been a full seven years since we saw a player break through to the true elite of the game. That gap is probably unprecedented in Open Era history. Another research project to work on.

 

[El Dude]

OK, here's a quick list of the emergence of all multi-Slam winners by the year in which they first finished in the top 10 (absent is Johan Kriek, who never finished in the top 10 despite winning the AO twice) - going back to 1973, the first year of ATP rankings. The players in bold are true all-time greats, having won 6+ Slams.

2008 Andy Murray
2007 Novak Djokovic
2005 Rafael Nadal
2002 Roger Federer
2000 Gustavo Kuerten, Marat Safin, Lleyton Hewitt
1997 Patrick Rafter
1995 Yevgeny Kafelnikov
1993 Sergi Bruguera
1991 Jim Courier
1990 Pete Sampras
1988 Andre Agassi
1985 Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker
1982 Mats Wilander
1980 Ivan Lendl
1978 John McEnroe
1974 Bjorn Borg, Gullermo Vilas
1973 Jimmy Connors

From 1973 to 1990, there was never more than a four year gap in which an all-time great emerged in the top 10. But then from 1991 to 2001 we have a span of 11 years in which no all-time great emerged between Sampras to Federer - although with quite a few "lesser greats" sprinkled in.

 

[tented]

The Djokovic fans are hilarious. First they work like crazy to make sure Novak is included in everything -- and no longer the red-headed stepchild of elite tennis -- and now they're backtracking, trying to break him away from the Big Four. Now it's all Fedal who have hit and passed their prime, but not Novak, who's just now hitting his prime. It's Fedal people are sick of, but not Novak (even though he's been in a clear majority of GS finals for the last five years). Too much. :laydownlaughing

 

[Riotbeard]

The Djokovic fans are hilarious. First they work like crazy to make sure Novak is included in everything -- and no longer the red-headed stepchild of elite tennis -- and now they're backtracking, trying to break him away from the Big Four. Now it's all Fedal who have hit and passed their prime, but not Novak, who's just now hitting his prime. It's Fedal people are sick of, but not Novak (even though he's been in a clear majority of GS finals for the last five years). Too much. :laydownlaughing

Sounds like sour grapes :angel:. Nobody is saying Novak is just hitting his peak. I think people think he has put together his best tennis over the last 12 months since 2011 (which is a level he has not ever regained on a consistent basis). He hasn't had any major physical issues in his career yet, so he could coast for a few more years, maybe losing some speed but nothing dramatic.

I imagine some Nadal fans might be tired of the big four, but not their favorite player, that just seems natural.

Also Roger is 34, so it would not be weird at all for him to be past his prime and novak/andy not. Rafa has had 6 years of off and on physical issues, so it's hardly surprising he is breaking down earlier (not to mention he is a couple year older in terms of years on the tour and a year older in actual age). Stating that Novak since wimbledon has been in a class of his own compared to Andy, Rafa, and Roger, is just stating the obvious, like Rafa was in 2013.

 

[tented]

Nobody is saying Novak is just hitting his peak.

Nehmeth did:

... Nole is entering his prime.

 

[Riotbeard]

nehmeth, Novak isn't "entering his prime." He's been in his prime since late 2010 or early 2011. The only difference is that Roger has slipped a bit more and Rafa taken a nose-dive this year, so his dominance is unchallenged.

Anyhow, I think one can be sick of Big Four dominance and it not be a Fedal sour grapes thing. I simply want to see more new blood, more variation in who is in finals. It is all so predictable.

I will concede your nitpicking point... he's been in his prime for some time. At the same time, it is you guys sniping about being sick of the big four. I am happy for a variation... watching Fed drop gracefully and Rafa, not so gracefully will provide that transition. Why do Novak and Murray have to suffer? Let them win the titles they've labored to earn. Many of us have been tired of Fedal for a long time... you guys can suffer a little.

Tented. See where Nehmeth concedes Novak has been in his prime for some time. To be fair, El Dude's point was not at all nitpicky.

 

[tented]

nehmeth, Novak isn't "entering his prime." He's been in his prime since late 2010 or early 2011. The only difference is that Roger has slipped a bit more and Rafa taken a nose-dive this year, so his dominance is unchallenged.

Anyhow, I think one can be sick of Big Four dominance and it not be a Fedal sour grapes thing. I simply want to see more new blood, more variation in who is in finals. It is all so predictable.

I will concede your nitpicking point... he's been in his prime for some time. At the same time, it is you guys sniping about being sick of the big four. I am happy for a variation... watching Fed drop gracefully and Rafa, not so gracefully will provide that transition. Why do Novak and Murray have to suffer? Let them win the titles they've labored to earn. Many of us have been tired of Fedal for a long time... you guys can suffer a little.

Tented. See where Nehmeth concedes Novak has been in his prime for some time. To be fair, El Dude's point was not at all nitpicky.

Fair point, but notice this part:

"Why do Novak and Murray have to suffer? Let them win the titles they've labored to earn. Many of us have been tired of Fedal for a long time... you guys can suffer a little."

A clear example of trying to separate Novak (and Murray?!) from the Big Four -- in a thread about the Big Four, mind you.

 

[Riotbeard]

I will concede your nitpicking point... he's been in his prime for some time. At the same time, it is you guys sniping about being sick of the big four. I am happy for a variation... watching Fed drop gracefully and Rafa, not so gracefully will provide that transition. Why do Novak and Murray have to suffer? Let them win the titles they've labored to earn. Many of us have been tired of Fedal for a long time... you guys can suffer a little.

Tented. See where Nehmeth concedes Novak has been in his prime for some time. To be fair, El Dude's point was not at all nitpicky.

Fair point, but notice this part:

"Why do Novak and Murray have to suffer? Let them win the titles they've labored to earn. Many of us have been tired of Fedal for a long time... you guys can suffer a little."

A clear example of trying to separate Novak (and Murray?!) from the Big Four -- in a thread about the Big Four, mind you.

Sure, but they are in some ways of a different generation. Just like Fedal had their earlier albums before joining the big 4, it seems likely Novak and Andy will have a few years as #1 and#2 post big 4. I am not as willing to write off Fed yet and anoint Andy. I think people have overemphasized Fed's mediocre results so far, when this is his least successful half of the year. Rafa, I am not sure if he will ever hit something resembling consistent top form again... This is also the time of year he should racking up points for winter.

 

[tented]

Tented. See where Nehmeth concedes Novak has been in his prime for some time. To be fair, El Dude's point was not at all nitpicky.

Fair point, but notice this part:

"Why do Novak and Murray have to suffer? Let them win the titles they've labored to earn. Many of us have been tired of Fedal for a long time... you guys can suffer a little."

A clear example of trying to separate Novak (and Murray?!) from the Big Four -- in a thread about the Big Four, mind you.

Sure, but they are in some ways of a different generation. Just like Fedal had their earlier albums before joining the big 4, it seems likely Novak and Andy will have a few years as #1 and#2 post big 4. I am not as willing to write off Fed yet and anoint Andy. I think people have overemphasized Fed's mediocre results so far, when this is his least successful half of the year. Rafa, I am not sure if he will ever hit something resembling consistent top form again... This is also the time of year he should racking up points for winter.

Fedal -- a duopoly showing up more and more -- didn't "join" the Big Four. They were there at its conception, as were Novak and Andy. Hence, the Big Four. No one ever referred to the Big Two, before others joined the band.

 

[Kieran]

That's right. It only became a "concept" when people were gleeful that Nole had stepped up and surprised everybody. I'm not saying this to knock anybody, but the feeling was that he wasn't up to the task. So when Fedal had to pay attention to Nole, it became a Big 3.

Not too sure who the Big 4 are though...

 

[El Dude]

Sure, but they are in some ways of a different generation. Just like Fedal had their earlier albums before joining the big 4, it seems likely Novak and Andy will have a few years as #1 and#2 post big 4. I am not as willing to write off Fed yet and anoint Andy. I think people have overemphasized Fed's mediocre results so far, when this is his least successful half of the year. Rafa, I am not sure if he will ever hit something resembling consistent top form again... This is also the time of year he should racking up points for winter.

It is interesting how many associate Rafa with Roger and his generation, as being in a way the youngest of that generation - when in technical terms he's almost five years younger than Roger and only a year older than Novak and Andy. Rafa reached a high level at a young age, reminiscent of prior eras, while Novak broke through to a new level at age 24 and Andy didn't win his first Slam until he was 25 - fully seven years after Rafa won his first.

I hope you are right about Roger. He sure looked good against Berd yesterday. I think overall he's playing at a similar level as last year, much better than 2013, and not showing any significant signs of decline. He really looks like he could remain a top 10 player into his late 30s...if he wants to.

Anyhow, I'm not sure we're going to see that many years with Novak and Andy at #1 and 2, although I could see 2015 and 2016, maybe 2017 - but hopefully by then we'll see some strong showings from younger players.

 

[nehmeth]

Sure, but they are in some ways of a different generation. Just like Fedal had their earlier albums before joining the big 4, it seems likely Novak and Andy will have a few years as #1 and#2 post big 4. I am not as willing to write off Fed yet and anoint Andy. I think people have overemphasized Fed's mediocre results so far, when this is his least successful half of the year.

I hope you are right about Roger. He sure looked good against Berd yesterday. I think overall he's playing at a similar level as last year, much better than 2013, and not showing any significant signs of decline. He really looks like he could remain a top 10 player into his late 30s...if he wants to.

I credit Roger with his willingness to transition to a new stick. I also credit Edberg with somehow getting team Fed on board with implementing changes that will help Roger continue to stay viable for some time to come. And he's been rather consistently brilliant this week - I think he wants the Rome Masters trophy in his collection.

 

[tented]

I think it's Fedal we really miss to be honest. Nole and Andy simply don't have the same pizazz. It's just the way it is.

This. When is Novak most interesting? When he plays Roger. When is Andy most interesting? When he plays Rafa. But we've all seen what happens when Novak and Andy are across the net from each other.