Who is the likely "bridge player" (between the elite and everyone else?)

[El Dude]

One of the things that is of interest to me right now is that it feels like there's a kind of re-ordering of the top 10 after the Dynamic Duo. I'm trying to avoid the term "second tier," because A) I'd rather be more general than definitive, and B) I mean something a bit different.

By "bridge player" I mean guys who aren't quite true elites, but are the best of second tier. Andy Murray is a classic bridge player, and arguably the greatest such player in Open Era history: Aside from 2016, he was never the best player on tour (and there's an argument he still wasn't the best in 2016, just having a great late season and taking advantage a flailing Novak, Rafa seemingly in decline (but resurging the following year) and Roger injured for much of the year. For most of his prime, from 2008-16, Andy was better than everyone but the Big Three; there were moments that guys like Del Potro and Wawrinka challenged him, even surpassed him for brief flashes, but he was the bridge player.

Historically speaking, I think some bridge players include John Newcombe, Stan Smith, Guillermo Vilas, maybe Vitas Gerulaitis for a bit, possibly Michael Chang. The late 90s gets dicey, because it was a rotating cast of characters filling the gap after Sampras and Agassi: Rios, Rafter, Kuerten, etc. Hewitt and Roddick were more bridge types in terms of talent, but reigned for a time between the Sampras/Agassi era and the Fedal era.

But from 2008 to 2016, or early 2017, it was clearly Andy, with sprinklings of Del Potro, Wawrinka, and maybe Ferrer. I'd say that Dominic Thiem took that role for a few years, then Medvedev and Zverev, with hints of Tsitsipas. All of these guys, while lesser players than Murray, were still better than garden variety second tier types like Tsonga, Berdych, Rublev, Fritz, etc. Thiem and Medvedev won Slams, and Medvedev a bunch of big titles; Zverev "should have" won a Slam and did win a bunch of big titles; Tsitsipas is his own case, but also an under-achiever who was more talented than typical second tier types.

For the last year and a half, we've had a clear Dynamic Duo. Sinner broke out in late 2023, but really proved his meddle in 2024. Alcaraz broke out in 2022, but even after finishing #1 due to the weird covid rules, he was overshadowed a bit by Rafa and Novak that year, then just Novak in 2023. So 2024 was the first year of the "new order" - and 2025 a solidification of it.

But the rest is in motion. Medvedev and Zverev are both slipping, and the rest of "Next Gen" are either starting to decline or have seen their best years. Late Next Gen or early "Millenial" players like Ruud and De Minaur seem to be in their primes, but it is highly unlikely they get any better.

A the new second tier is beginning to form, with names like De Minaur, Draper, Shelton, Fils, Musetti, and Rune. Mensik, Fonseca, and Tien, etc, are all TBD.

The inspiration for this consideration is Ben Shelton, who seems to have jumped a notch into bonafide 2nd tier. After rising quickly in 2023 to #17, he stalled out a bit i 2024, finishing #20. But this year he's jumped a notch: he's reached a Slam 4R, QF, and SF, and won his first Masters. He's #6 in the world and #4 in the race ranking. Whereas a few months ago it looked like Jack Draper could be "the guy" to fill the gap, now it looks like it might be Shelton. Before this year, Arthur Fils was looking like a good candidate, but he's struggled with injury. It has felt that it is only a matter of time before Holger Rune finds his Mjolnir-wielding strength, but it is starting to look rather doubtful and that he's more of a second tier guy, albeit an interesting one. Musetti has come on strong this year, but I think his ceiling is a bit lower than the other mentioned players.

Anyhow, what do you think? Who among the "new second tier" will be the guy that bridges Sincaraz and the field? Again, I'm talking about the next 1-2 years, not if and when Fonseca and his cohort rise. It doesn't have to be one guy; maybe it is a game of musical chairs, or perhaps hot potato is a more apt analogy.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Historically speaking, I think some bridge players include John Newcombe, Stan Smith, Guillermo Vilas, maybe Vitas Gerulaitis for a bit, possibly Michael Chang. The late 90s gets dicey, because it was a rotating cast of characters filling the gap after Sampras and Agassi: Rios, Rafter, Kuerten, etc. Hewitt and Roddick were more bridge types in terms of talent, but reigned for a time between the Sampras/Agassi era and the Fedal era.

I'd definitely add Jim Courier, Sergi Bruguera, Thomas Muster, Richard Krajicek, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Goran Ivanisevic, Carlos Moya, JCF, and Marat Safin as bridge players. They all won slams, and were all relevant for a considerable stretch of time.

But yeah, Andy Murray and JMDP are the definition of bridge players. That tier is missing from today's game. Dmitrov probably is the closest thing to one in the post-Murray/JMDP era (he may not have had as high a peak, but he's been relevant for so long, since 2013 - and he even has more career match wins than JMDP), but if Ben Shelton can continue to cement himself as the 3rd best player behind Sinner and Alcaraz (especially while Dmitrov is out), he could easily inherit the throne as the bridge player of this era.

 

[El Dude]

I'd definitely add Jim Courier, Sergi Bruguera, Thomas Muster, Richard Krajicek, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Goran Ivanisevic, Carlos Moya, JCF, and Marat Safin as bridge players. They all won slams, and were all relevant for a considerable stretch of time.

But yeah, Andy Murray and JMDP are the definition of bridge players. That tier is missing from today's game. Dmitrov probably is the closest thing to one in the post-Murray/JMDP era (he may not have had as high a peak, but he's been relevant for so long, since 2013 - and he even has more career match wins than JMDP), but if Ben Shelton can continue to cement himself as the 3rd best player behind Sinner and Alcaraz (especially while Dmitrov is out), he could easily inherit the throne as the bridge player of this era.

I thought of Courier, but think he is in a bit different category, because for a few years he was right there with the best. Bruguera, Moya and Ferrero were part of a more differentiated tour in terms of clay specialists - I don't see them as the overall next best guy from the elite, but more among the better clay courters. Muster too. Kafelnikov and Ivanisevic are possibly there, comparable to Chang (though I think a hair less).

Safin probably qualifies, though is a bit unusual in that he had true elite talent, but was erratic.

 

[atttomole]

I'd definitely add Jim Courier, Sergi Bruguera, Thomas Muster, Richard Krajicek, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Goran Ivanisevic, Carlos Moya, JCF, and Marat Safin as bridge players. They all won slams, and were all relevant for a considerable stretch of time.

But yeah, Andy Murray and JMDP are the definition of bridge players. That tier is missing from today's game. Dmitrov probably is the closest thing to one in the post-Murray/JMDP era (he may not have had as high a peak, but he's been relevant for so long, since 2013 - and he even has more career match wins than JMDP), but if Ben Shelton can continue to cement himself as the 3rd best player behind Sinner and Alcaraz (especially while Dmitrov is out), he could easily inherit the throne as the bridge player of this era.

I think Del Potro could have won more without injuries, raising his rank to higher than just a bridge player.

 

[Kieran]

I think that Holger might fit that role for this generation. At the moment he’ll be lucky he wins a slam - he’s trending more Felix than Stan - but he’s possibly a player of that bridge calibre, which is not to be sniffed at…

 

[Fiero425]

One of the things that is of interest to me right now is that it feels like there's a kind of re-ordering of the top 10 after the Dynamic Duo. I'm trying to avoid the term "second tier," because A) I'd rather be more general than definitive, and B) I mean something a bit different.

By "bridge player" I mean guys who aren't quite true elites, but are the best of second tier. Andy Murray is a classic bridge player, and arguably the greatest such player in Open Era history: Aside from 2016, he was never the best player on tour (and there's an argument he still wasn't the best in 2016, just having a great late season and taking advantage a flailing Novak, Rafa seemingly in decline (but resurging the following year) and Roger injured for much of the year. For most of his prime, from 2008-16, Andy was better than everyone but the Big Three; there were moments that guys like Del Potro and Wawrinka challenged him, even surpassed him for brief flashes, but he was the bridge player.

Historically speaking, I think some bridge players include John Newcombe, Stan Smith, Guillermo Vilas, maybe Vitas Gerulaitis for a bit, possibly Michael Chang. The late 90s gets dicey, because it was a rotating cast of characters filling the gap after Sampras and Agassi: Rios, Rafter, Kuerten, etc. Hewitt and Roddick were more bridge types in terms of talent, but reigned for a time between the Sampras/Agassi era and the Fedal era.

But from 2008 to 2016, or early 2017, it was clearly Andy, with sprinklings of Del Potro, Wawrinka, and maybe Ferrer. I'd say that Dominic Thiem took that role for a few years, then Medvedev and Zverev, with hints of Tsitsipas. All of these guys, while lesser players than Murray, were still better than garden variety second tier types like Tsonga, Berdych, Rublev, Fritz, etc. Thiem and Medvedev won Slams, and Medvedev a bunch of big titles; Zverev "should have" won a Slam and did win a bunch of big titles; Tsitsipas is his own case, but also an under-achiever who was more talented than typical second tier types.

For the last year and a half, we've had a clear Dynamic Duo. Sinner broke out in late 2023, but really proved his meddle in 2024. Alcaraz broke out in 2022, but even after finishing #1 due to the weird covid rules, he was overshadowed a bit by Rafa and Novak that year, then just Novak in 2023. So 2024 was the first year of the "new order" - and 2025 a solidification of it.

But the rest is in motion. Medvedev and Zverev are both slipping, and the rest of "Next Gen" are either starting to decline or have seen their best years. Late Next Gen or early "Millenial" players like Ruud and De Minaur seem to be in their primes, but it is highly unlikely they get any better.

A the new second tier is beginning to form, with names like De Minaur, Draper, Shelton, Fils, Musetti, and Rune. Mensik, Fonseca, and Tien, etc, are all TBD.

The inspiration for this consideration is Ben Shelton, who seems to have jumped a notch into bonafide 2nd tier. After rising quickly in 2023 to #17, he stalled out a bit i 2024, finishing #20. But this year he's jumped a notch: he's reached a Slam 4R, QF, and SF, and won his first Masters. He's #6 in the world and #4 in the race ranking. Whereas a few months ago it looked like Jack Draper could be "the guy" to fill the gap, now it looks like it might be Shelton. Before this year, Arthur Fils was looking like a good candidate, but he's struggled with injury. It has felt that it is only a matter of time before Holger Rune finds his Mjolnir-wielding strength, but it is starting to look rather doubtful and that he's more of a second tier guy, albeit an interesting one. Musetti has come on strong this year, but I think his ceiling is a bit lower than the other mentioned players.

Anyhow, what do you think? Who among the "new second tier" will be the guy that bridges Sincaraz and the field? Again, I'm talking about the next 1-2 years, not if and when Fonseca and his cohort rise. It doesn't have to be one guy; maybe it is a game of musical chairs, or perhaps hot potato is a more apt analogy.

What a complete essay; well thought out! Giving me a headache taking me so far back! As for Novak in 2016, "flailing" is so out of line! The man had won just about everything for well over a yr. & 1/2, completed his Nole-Slam at the FO, & he relaxed a little! He still won 2 Majors, 4 Masters, was in the finals of the USO & YEC, set the ATP #1 ranking rec. @ 16,950, & the #1 ranking came down to that last match in Nov. vs Murray! The Sampras/Agassi era is a little exaggerated! Sampras owned him in important spots; esp. those USO's late in his career! This is a lot! I'll have to come back!

 

[El Dude]

I think that Holger might fit that role for this generation. At the moment he’ll be lucky he wins a slam - he’s trending more Felix than Stan - but he’s possibly a player of that bridge calibre, which is not to be sniffed at…

Well, that's the problem: "Might." It has been almost three years since he won the Paris Masters, and he's been treading water. For a hot moment it looks like he's about to surge forward, then nothing happens. He still only 22, but his resume is underwhelming, relative to early promise: 1 Masters, 1 ATP 500, 3 ATP 250s, still not gone beyond a Slam QF, and not in over two years. I think the fork has been stuck on his potential greatness. Whether or not he can be consistent enough to be a "bridge player" remains to be seen. Right now I'd put him behind Draper and Shelton, though.

 

[El Dude]

What a complete essay; well thought out! Giving me a headache taking me so far back! As for Novak in 2016, "flailing" is so out of line! The man had won just about everything for well over a yr. & 1/2, completed his Nole-Slam at the FO, & he relaxed a little! He still won 3 Majors, 4 Masters, was in the finals of the USO & YEC, set the ATP #1 ranking rec. @ 16,950, & the #1 ranking came down to that last match in Nov. vs Murray! The Sampras/Agassi era is a little exaggerated! Sampras owned him in important spots; esp. those USO's late in his career! This is a lot! I'll have to come back!

Novak won two Slams in 2016, not three. It was a great year and I'm not bad-mouthing him, but he was struggling in the second half - perhaps due to a kind of "dominance exhaustion," as he had been so crazy good for the previous year and a half.

And yes - career-wise, Sampras was a solid "greatness tier" above Agassi, who is really closer to Becker/Edberg than Lendl/Connors/McEnroe/Borg/Sampras. But if you look at the period as a whole, after Becker's last good year in 1996, Sampras and Agassi were the top two guys for a few years, and Sampras dropped a big step in 1998 while Agassi surged and surpassed him in 1999. Agassi was the better player in 1999-2002, Sampras' last four years.

 

[Kieran]

Novak won two Slams in 2016, not three. It was a great year and I'm not bad-mouthing him, but he was struggling in the second half - perhaps due to a kind of "dominance exhaustion," as he had been so crazy good for the previous year and a half.

And yes - career-wise, Sampras was a solid "greatness tier" above Agassi, who is really closer to Becker/Edberg than Lendl/Connors/McEnroe/Borg/Sampras. But if you look at the period as a whole, after Becker's last good year in 1996, Sampras and Agassi were the top two guys for a few years, and Sampras dropped a big step in 1998 while Agassi surged and surpassed him in 1999. Agassi was the better player in 1999-2002, Sampras' last four years.

In Pete’s declining years a lot of players were beating him and he had patient struggles to make an impact, so Agassi benefited, but not hugely. Dre was never an alpha, he was, as you say, a floor below many other great players of the time, but he certainly benefited hugely from the tour looking the other way on his drug bust…

 

[Fiero425]

Novak won two Slams in 2016, not three. It was a great year and I'm not bad-mouthing him, but he was struggling in the second half - perhaps due to a kind of "dominance exhaustion," as he had been so crazy good for the previous year and a half.

And yes - career-wise, Sampras was a solid "greatness tier" above Agassi, who is really closer to Becker/Edberg than Lendl/Connors/McEnroe/Borg/Sampras. But if you look at the period as a whole, after Becker's last good year in 1996, Sampras and Agassi were the top two guys for a few years, and Sampras dropped a big step in 1998 while Agassi surged and surpassed him in 1999. Agassi was the better player in 1999-2002, Sampras' last four years.

Thanks! My bad; it was 2 not 3! 2015 was haunting my thoughts at the time! I should know better! Sampras truly was pulling a "Federer" in the late 90's who slowed down in '09! He barely got by A-Rod at Wimbledon & blew a lead at the USO vs Del Po! Those last 5 Majors won took almost a decade to acquire! Chang got to #2 in the World in 1996 so we need to figure him in there getting to AO & USO finals losing both to Becker & Sampras respectively!

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

In Pete’s declining years a lot of players were beating him and he had patient struggles to make an impact, so Agassi benefited, but not hugely. Dre was never an alpha, he was, as you say, a floor below many other great players of the time, but he certainly benefited hugely from the tour looking the other way on his drug bust…

It seems like the tour hasn't learned from this. Here we are almost 30 years later, and they are looking the other way on Jannik Sinner's drug bust...

Novak won two Slams in 2016, not three. It was a great year and I'm not bad-mouthing him, but he was struggling in the second half - perhaps due to a kind of "dominance exhaustion," as he had been so crazy good for the previous year and a half.

If this "dominance exhaustion" thing is real, I hope Jannik Sinner experiences this at the US Open. His fans really need to be humbled. I hate that Grigor got injured, and Jannik got away with his poor performance in that match.

 

[Moxie]

I'm still trying to get the definition of a "bridge player," not to be obtuse. I understand why you think there is such a thing, given Murray's career. But, if there had never been an Andy Murray, would you have been looking for one?

You say it's not "second tier." Do you mean an actual threat, who runs with the big boys but rarely tops them? Especially at big moments? I guess this is where del Potro and Wawrinka come in. I wondered that you didn't mention Safin, but, when asked, you said he was basically an underachieving elite, or something like that. Which I would agree with. Plus, he couldn't be counted on the be reliably around to be a "bridge," I'd say. However, he won 2 Majors, and Murray won 3. In the time of the Big 3. Doesn't that really qualify him for the other thing that we say about him: that in another era, he'd have been a fully "elite" player?

So what are we looking for? Thiem makes sense, as does Zverev. The Thiem/Zverev of the next few years? My picks would be Draper and Mencik.

 

[Moxie]

What a complete essay; well thought out! Giving me a headache taking me so far back! As for Novak in 2016, "flailing" is so out of line! The man had won just about everything for well over a yr. & 1/2, completed his Nole-Slam at the FO, & he relaxed a little! He still won 2 Majors, 4 Masters, was in the finals of the USO & YEC, set the ATP #1 ranking rec. @ 16,950, & the #1 ranking came down to that last match in Nov. vs Murray! The Sampras/Agassi era is a little exaggerated! Sampras owned him in important spots; esp. those USO's late in his career! This is a lot! I'll have to come back!

El Dude might have overstated that Novak was "flailing" in 2016, after he won the Nole Slam, but he was. Lost early in Wimbledon to Querrey, lost first round at the OG. But, more importantly he was at the beginning of a two-year drought of not winning Majors, which continued to 2018. Sure, he "relaxed a bit" after the French Open win, which was a huge goal for him, in 2016. However, he went on a two-year walkabout after that. Which qualifies as "flailing." Which is why Murray was able to get to the YE#1. He WAS the best player in the world at the end of 2016.

 

[El Dude]

I'm still trying to get the definition of a "bridge player," not to be obtuse. I understand why you think there is such a thing, given Murray's career. But, if there had never been an Andy Murray, would you have been looking for one?

You say it's not "second tier." Do you mean an actual threat, who runs with the big boys but rarely tops them? Especially at big moments? I guess this is where del Potro and Wawrinka come in. I wondered that you didn't mention Safin, but, when asked, you said he was basically an underachieving elite, or something like that. Which I would agree with. Plus, he couldn't be counted on the be reliably around to be a "bridge," I'd say. However, he won 2 Majors, and Murray won 3. In the time of the Big 3. Doesn't that really qualify him for the other thing that we say about him: that in another era, he'd have been a fully "elite" player?

So what are we looking for? Thiem makes sense, as does Zverev. The Thiem/Zverev of the next few years? My picks would be Draper and Mencik.

As with many such terms I use, it isn't a rigidly defined thing, but yes - basically the Thiem/Zverev/Medvedev of the next few years. A bridge player COULD be a second tier guy, but the best of that group that could even win a Slam or two, but is never THE best player (Medvedev reached #1, but let's be honest: he was never the best player on tour).

Draper and Mensik are valid picks. I think Mensik has more upside, but it remains to be seen whether his Miami title was a harbinger of what is to come or more of a Rune-esque flash of what would eventually turn out to be unrealized potential (so far, for Rune).

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Courier and Safin falling off fairly quickly and at a young age makes what Dmitrov is doing really impressive. Grigor may not have reached the peak that Courier and Safin did, but his longevity is amazing. He was a factor during a great chunk of the Big 3 era, and he has continued to bring it in the current era.

 

[El Dude]

Courier and Safin falling off fairly quickly and at a young age makes what Dmitrov is doing really impressive. Grigor may not have reached the peak that Courier and Safin did, but his longevity is amazing. He was a factor during a great chunk of the Big 3 era, and he has continued to bring it in the current era.

Him and Monfils, too. I mean, Monfils is #50 right now so a bit back from Grigor at #25, but he turns 39 in two weeks and is almost five years older than Grigor.

 

[Moxie]

As with many such terms I use, it isn't a rigidly defined thing, but yes - basically the Thiem/Zverev/Medvedev of the next few years. A bridge player COULD be a second tier guy, but the best of that group that could even win a Slam or two, but is never THE best player (Medvedev reached #1, but let's be honest: he was never the best player on tour).

Draper and Mensik are valid picks. I think Mensik has more upside, but it remains to be seen whether his Miami title was a harbinger of what is to come or more of a Rune-esque flash of what would eventually turn out to be unrealized potential (so far, for Rune).

Rune is arguably the best pick, as he seems not to be stepping up to make a big three, but has the talent for a Major or two, if he pulls his head together. I was trying to offer options. I'm still trying to see the upside of Mensik. While he did play well enough to impress me, in that Miami final (and I swear it's not just because he beat Novak,) I have yet to see that same interesting game from him, again. He's young, and can improve, but I don't see much flair to his game. He's a bit of a servebot with extras. Likewise Draper could be a bridge, not an elite. He has the whiff of Dominic Thiem about him.

 

[Moxie]

Courier and Safin falling off fairly quickly and at a young age makes what Dimitrov is doing really impressive. Grigor may not have reached the peak that Courier and Safin did, but his longevity is amazing. He was a factor during a great chunk of the Big 3 era, and he has continued to bring it in the current era.

Dimitrov finally decided to get serious about his career rather late. It doesn't make up for the talent he squandered, IMO. I do appreciate his late-career dedication, though, and am sorry for this bad injury. I hope he comes back from it.

@El Dude mentioned Monfils in the same context. He may have also squandered his talents earlier in his career. But his rededication, combined with his talent, and inclination for showmanship, are making him one of the biggest draws, and best stories in men's tennis, these days. Monfils d. Baez in the 2nd round of RG this year was one of the most thrilling matches you'll see this year.