They broke up the band...the Fab Four are history

[herios]

I wonder if anybody has a statistic to hand regarding when was the last major without at least three of the "Big 4" in the top four seedings?

I think Wimbledon 2007

 

[TennisFanatic7]

I wonder if anybody has a statistic to hand regarding when was the last major without at least three of the "Big 4" in the top four seedings?

I think Wimbledon 2007

Apparently not, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Wimbledon_Championships_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_Singles) the top 4 seeds were Fed, Rafa, A-Rod, Nole.

I might look it up tomorrow, I expect it may have been before Djokovic cracked the top four, unless there was a tournament which Rafa missed through injury after Nole hit the top four but before Andy caught up with him.

 

[herios]

I wonder if anybody has a statistic to hand regarding when was the last major without at least three of the "Big 4" in the top four seedings?

I think Wimbledon 2007

Apparently not, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Wimbledon_Championships_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_Singles) the top 4 seeds were Fed, Rafa, A-Rod, Nole.

I might look it up tomorrow, I expect it may have been before Djokovic cracked the top four, unless there was a tournament which Rafa missed through injury after Nole hit the top four but before Andy caught up with him.

Nole was ranked 5th before that Wimbledon (last time he was ranked that low). So if he was seeded 4, either the player ranked 4 did not play or Nole was seeded higher, but that makes not much sense, because before 2007 he hardly had anything significant on his resume on grass.

 

[TennisFanatic7]

I wonder if anybody has a statistic to hand regarding when was the last major without at least three of the "Big 4" in the top four seedings?

I think Wimbledon 2007

Apparently not, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Wimbledon_Championships_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_Singles) the top 4 seeds were Fed, Rafa, A-Rod, Nole.

I might look it up tomorrow, I expect it may have been before Djokovic cracked the top four, unless there was a tournament which Rafa missed through injury after Nole hit the top four but before Andy caught up with him.

Nole was ranked 5th before that Wimbledon (last time he was ranked that low). So if he was seeded 4, either the player ranked 4 did not play or Nole was seeded higher, but that makes not much sense, because before 2007 he hardly had anything significant on his resume on grass.

The rankings were 4 Davydenko, 5 Djokovic, 6 Gonzalez (very close on points). The seedings were 4 Djokovic, 5 Gonzalez, 6 Davydenko.

At Queens and Wimbledon 2006 Davydenko failed to win a match and he had one win in Halle 2007. Djokovic reached R4 in Wimbledon 2006 and was only 30 points behind Davydenko in the rankings so that would have been enough, I believe, to move him up into the top 4 seeds.

 

[the AntiPusher]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-not-the-end-of-an-era-for-mens-tennis/

 

[herios]

I wonder if anybody has a statistic to hand regarding when was the last major without at least three of the "Big 4" in the top four seedings?

I think Wimbledon 2007

Apparently not, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Wimbledon_Championships_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_Singles) the top 4 seeds were Fed, Rafa, A-Rod, Nole.

I might look it up tomorrow, I expect it may have been before Djokovic cracked the top four, unless there was a tournament which Rafa missed through injury after Nole hit the top four but before Andy caught up with him.

Nole was ranked 5th before that Wimbledon (last time he was ranked that low). So if he was seeded 4, either the player ranked 4 did not play or Nole was seeded higher, but that makes not much sense, because before 2007 he hardly had anything significant on his resume on grass.

The rankings were 4 Davydenko, 5 Djokovic, 6 Gonzalez (very close on points). The seedings were 4 Djokovic, 5 Gonzalez, 6 Davydenko.

At Queens and Wimbledon 2006 Davydenko failed to win a match and he had one win in Halle 2007. Djokovic reached R4 in Wimbledon 2006 and was only 30 points behind Davydenko in the rankings so that would have been enough, I believe, to move him up into the top 4 seeds.

Thanks for looking this up. I had no idea he was this close to the 4th ranked player. Novak was not even 20. and his breakthrough was in 2007, I didn't think he outplayed on grass at that date a top player. But, of course, Davydenko was always a non factor on grass.

 

[herios]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-not-the-end-of-an-era-for-mens-tennis/

Thanks AP for this article, a lot of good analysis included there. El Dude does not need to spend so much time now to do similar graphs

Yea, the Big 4 were on peak in 2011 and most of 2012, the cracks started to show up when Ferrer managed to win Paris and make the F in RG. Then, the slump became more evident with the acceleration of how many opportunities the other guys converted. I am very curious who will carry the last 2 masters this year, I think Paris will be wide opened, even more than before.

 

[TsarMatt]

Got a question:

Del Potro and Cilic have both won a GS, but not a Masters 1000, which is a bit odd. Who is most likely to win a M1000 first?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Got a question:

Del Potro and Cilic have both won a GS, but not a Masters 1000, which is a bit odd. Who is most likely to win a M1000 first?

Cilic, he may even do it in 2014 itself. He has always been good at indoors and Bercy is
usually won by strangers.

 

[the AntiPusher]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-not-the-end-of-an-era-for-mens-tennis/

Thanks AP for this article, a lot of good analysis included there. El Dude does not need to spend so much time now to do similar graphs AP reply : Righteous

Yea, the Big 4 were on peak in 2011 and most of 2012, the cracks started to show up when Ferrer managed to win Paris and make the F in RG. Then, the slump became more evident with the acceleration of how many opportunities the other guys converted. I am very curious who will carry the last 2 masters this year, I think Paris will be wide opened, even more than before.

AP reply : Righteous

 

[herios]

Got a question:

Del Potro and Cilic have both won a GS, but not a Masters 1000, which is a bit odd. Who is most likely to win a M1000 first?

Cilic, he may even do it in 2014 itself. He has always been good at indoors and Bercy is
usually won by strangers.

I think so to. I was thinking of launching such a poll, I may do it, with a twist in it

 

[jhar26]

I think the situation is now a bit similar to that on the womens side where you also have sorta kinda a big four with Williams, Sharapova, Azarenka and Kvitova. But they are a big four who are not invincible. The big four on the mens side are no longer invincible either. I don't think that the ATP side has been turned upside down though. Djokovic and Rafa are still the best players by a considerable margin and Federer is still clearly the number three guy.

But Murray starts to worry me because he really can't seem to get going again. While Nadal is still clearly top two material whenever he's playing he's starting to struggle more and more with all kinds of injuries. Federer is still doing fab, but he's 33. It would be unrealistic to expect that he's gonna be even better when he's 34 or 35. Meanwhile guys like Dimitrov, Nishikori and Raonic keep getting better all the time. Stan has given others the hope that they are not just there to make up the numbers or at best to win some 250's. Partly as a result of that Tsonga has been able to win another masters 1000 and Cilic now a slam. The big four are still a major factor and will continue to be so for some time. But the players just below them now know that they can be greater than they thought was possible less than a year ago. It will make for compelling viewing to see them battle it out.

 

[Fiero425]

I think the situation is now a bit similar to that on the womens side where you also have sorta kinda a big four with Williams, Sharapova, Azarenka and Kvitova. But they are a big four who are not invincible. The big four on the mens side are no longer invincible either. I don't think that the ATP side has been turned upside down though. Djokovic and Rafa are still the best players by a considerable margin and Federer is still clearly the number three guy.

But Murray starts to worry me because he really can't seem to get going again. While Nadal is still clearly top two material whenever he's playing he's starting to struggle more and more with all kinds of injuries. Federer is still doing fab, but he's 33. It would be unrealistic to expect that he's gonna be even better when he's 34 or 35. Meanwhile guys like Dimitrov, Nishikori and Raonic keep getting better all the time. Stan has given others the hope that they are not just there to make up the numbers or at best to win some 250's. Partly as a result of that Tsonga has been able to win another masters 1000 and Cilic now a slam. The big four are still a major factor and will continue to be so for some time. But the players just below them now know that they can be greater than they thought was possible less than a year ago. It will make for compelling viewing to see them battle it out.

ITA; this could be a sea change for both tours! The top echelon are getting old and the younger players are coming into their own! I've been very disappointed by both due to their inability to finish an upset just points away! The leaders definitely aren't as invincible as they once were as evidenced by multiple major winners this season; thank GAWD! It's about time! :clap :angel:

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

we talk about a big 4 still..but andy is 11th in the rank charts.

he needs to eat his greens and start winning stuff, andy wants to guzzle down some hot birdseye garden peas.

 

[Federberg]

we talk about a big 4 still..but andy is 11th in the rank charts.

he needs to eat his greens and start winning stuff, andy wants to guzzle down some hot birdseye garden peas.

has any other member of the big 4 ever had a season (since their ascendancy) where they haven't even won a tournament? Has he even been in a final this year? It's quite shocking really

 

[GameSetAndMath]

we talk about a big 4 still..but andy is 11th in the rank charts.

he needs to eat his greens and start winning stuff, andy wants to guzzle down some hot birdseye garden peas.

has any other member of the big 4 ever had a season (since their ascendancy) where they haven't even won a tournament? Has he even been in a final this year? It's quite shocking really

No, he has not been in a final yet. But, the season is not over yet and people can always hope.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Cilic is a much, MUCH more problematic match-up for Nadal than Stan.

Cilic is similar to Tsonga.
And Nadal has won his last 5 outdoor hardcourt matches vs. Tsonga.
We should be careful not to overrate Cilic.
Let us realize that beating Federer is a lot different to beating Djokovic/Nadal.
Even Monfils had matchpoints to beat Federer in the 4th set!
Cilic didn't beat Djokovic/Nadal at this US Open.
So what has he proven?

Nadal has won his last 2 meetings vs Cilic:
2011 Rome: 6-1 6-3
2011 AO: 6-2 6-4 6-3

Cilic's only win was back in 2009 when Nadal lost SIX MATCHES in straight sets after US Open:
Nadal lost to Cilic at Beijing 6-1 6-3
Daydenko at Shanghai 7-6 6-3
Djokovic at Paris 6-2 6-3
and lost all 3 matches at World Tour Finals:
to Djokovic 7-6 6-3
to Davydenko 6-1 7-6
to Soderling 6-4 6-4

 

[Front242]

Cilic wasn't on the hot sauce back then Whole different kettle of fish now.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Cilic is a much, MUCH more problematic match-up for Nadal than Stan.

Cilic is similar to Tsonga.
And Nadal has won his last 5 outdoor hardcourt matches vs. Tsonga.
We should be careful not to overrate Cilic.
Let us realize that beating Federer is a lot different to beating Djokovic/Nadal.
Even Monfils had matchpoints to beat Federer in the 4th set!
Cilic didn't beat Djokovic/Nadal at this US Open.
So what has he proven?

Nadal has won his last 2 meetings vs Cilic:
2011 Rome: 6-1 6-3
2011 AO: 6-2 6-4 6-3

Cilic's only win was back in 2009 when Nadal lost SIX MATCHES in straight sets after US Open:
Nadal lost to Cilic at Beijing 6-1 6-3
Daydenko at Shanghai 7-6 6-3
Djokovic at Paris 6-2 6-3
and lost all 3 matches at World Tour Finals:
to Djokovic 7-6 6-3
to Davydenko 6-1 7-6
to Soderling 6-4 6-4

OK, to start off: Cilic is NOT similar to Tsonga. He's taller, and has a much, MUCH better backhand. Tsonga's backhand is far more streaky and erratic. This is particularly important against Nadal because that's where the bulk of Rafa's shots are directed. Conversely, Tsonga has a better forehand on average, but what interests me about this version of Cilic (if he can sustain his level) is the fact that he tidied up his forehand.

As far as their H2H goes, well yeah, I expect Nadal to have a winning H2H with everyone (he almost does). I never said Cilic will be beating Nadal regularly. I said it's a problematic match-up. Hell, Djokovic is Nadal's most difficult match-up and yet Rafa leads the H2H.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Cilic is a much, MUCH more problematic match-up for Nadal than Stan.

Cilic is similar to Tsonga.
And Nadal has won his last 5 outdoor hardcourt matches vs. Tsonga.
We should be careful not to overrate Cilic.
Let us realize that beating Federer is a lot different to beating Djokovic/Nadal.
Even Monfils had matchpoints to beat Federer in the 4th set!
Cilic didn't beat Djokovic/Nadal at this US Open.
So what has he proven?

Nadal has won his last 2 meetings vs Cilic:
2011 Rome: 6-1 6-3
2011 AO: 6-2 6-4 6-3

Cilic's only win was back in 2009 when Nadal lost SIX MATCHES in straight sets after US Open:
Nadal lost to Cilic at Beijing 6-1 6-3
Daydenko at Shanghai 7-6 6-3
Djokovic at Paris 6-2 6-3
and lost all 3 matches at World Tour Finals:
to Djokovic 7-6 6-3
to Davydenko 6-1 7-6
to Soderling 6-4 6-4

OK, to start off: Cilic is NOT similar to Tsonga. He's taller, and has a much, MUCH better backhand. Tsonga's backhand is far more streaky and erratic. This is particularly important against Nadal because that's where the bulk of Rafa's shots are directed. Conversely, Tsonga has a better forehand on average, but what interests me about this version of Cilic (if he can sustain his level) is the fact that he tidied up his forehand.

As far as their H2H goes, well yeah, I expect Nadal to have a winning H2H with everyone (he almost does). I never said Cilic will be beating Nadal regularly. I said it's a problematic match-up. Hell, Djokovic is Nadal's most difficult match-up and yet Rafa leads the H2H.

BS

Rafael USO 2013 vs Cilic USO 2014,.who wins BS?