[Blog] Why We'll See a New Slam Winner in 2017

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,113
Reactions
5,762
Points
113
Next in my flurry of off-season doldrums blogs:

http://www.tennisfrontier.com/blogs/el-dude/why-well-see-a-new-slam-winner-in-2017/
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,113
Reactions
5,762
Points
113
One comment. In that list, the biggest surprise for me was to see some of the placements of new Slam winners relative to each other. For instance:

*Connors and Borg won their first Slams in the same year, despite being four years apart in age.
*Lendl won his first Slam just a year before Edberg and Becker, despite a gap of six and seven years, respectively! This one surprised me the most.
*Roger won his first Slam only two years before Rafa, despite being five years apart. Of course I knew this, but it was a good reminder. Despite being just a year older than Andy and Novak, Rafa almost seems like a cross-generational player.
 

Fiero425

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
11,475
Reactions
2,563
Points
113
Location
Chicago, IL
Website
fiero4251.blogspot.com
El Dude said:
One comment. In that list, the biggest surprise for me was to see some of the placements of new Slam winners relative to each other. For instance:

*Connors and Borg won their first Slams in the same year, despite being four years apart in age.

*Lendl won his first Slam just a year before Edberg and Becker, despite a gap of six and seven years, respectively! This one surprised me the most.

*Roger won his first Slam only two years before Rafa, despite being five years apart. Of course I knew this, but it was a good reminder. Despite being just a year older than Andy and Novak, Rafa almost seems like a cross-generational player.

This just demonstrates the level of competition at any given time! With Borg, he was without peer on clay; Vilas actually his pigeon! Connors had to compete against several top players ending their careers; Rosewall, Laver, Newcombe, & Nastase! Lendl had to deal with the end of Borg and the prime of McEnroe and Connors! Roger's delayed ascension to greatness was obviously kept in check early on by Sampras, Agassi, Safin, Hewitt, & a host of other more than competent players! It happens; all in the timing! :angel: :dodgy: :rolleyes: :p
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,113
Reactions
5,762
Points
113
I hear and agree with you, but would challenge your statement about Roger. I think what you say is true to some extent, in that he lost to some specialists (e.g. in 2001, Henman at Wimbledon and Corretja at Roland Garros), and that he had some trouble with some of his earlier-blooming peers like Hewitt and Nalbandian (although not as much Safin), but the other factor is that Roger was somewhat a late-bloomer. Not hugely so, but his best peers--Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, and Nalbandian--all found their top forms at younger ages, and Roger didn't really find his peak until age 22ish, which is later than most greats.
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
Fiero425 said:
El Dude said:
One comment. In that list, the biggest surprise for me was to see some of the placements of new Slam winners relative to each other. For instance:

*Connors and Borg won their first Slams in the same year, despite being four years apart in age.

*Lendl won his first Slam just a year before Edberg and Becker, despite a gap of six and seven years, respectively! This one surprised me the most.

*Roger won his first Slam only two years before Rafa, despite being five years apart. Of course I knew this, but it was a good reminder. Despite being just a year older than Andy and Novak, Rafa almost seems like a cross-generational player.

This just demonstrates the level of competition at any given time! With Borg, he was without peer on clay; Vilas actually his pigeon! Connors had to compete against several top players ending their careers; Rosewall, Laver, Newcombe, & Nastase! Lendl had to deal with the end of Borg and the prime of McEnroe and Connors! Roger's delayed ascension to greatness was obviously kept in check early on by Sampras, Agassi, Safin, Hewitt, & a host of other more than competent players! It happens; all in the timing! :angel: :dodgy: :rolleyes: :p
All due respect to Lendl, Mac wasn't the same player when Borg left and when he got married..his game took a bit of a sabbatical..however he was unable to recapture his brilliant success when he tried to reboot his career. Lendl found openings in Mac's S/v game and totally bossed the 2nd phase of JPM. I still recalled Mac being drilled in the face and body numerous times. It was dreadful to watch.. if there were ever a time for a newcomer to break through it may 2017.
 

Fiero425

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
11,475
Reactions
2,563
Points
113
Location
Chicago, IL
Website
fiero4251.blogspot.com
the AntiPusher said:
Fiero425 said:
El Dude said:
One comment. In that list, the biggest surprise for me was to see some of the placements of new Slam winners relative to each other. For instance:

*Connors and Borg won their first Slams in the same year, despite being four years apart in age.

*Lendl won his first Slam just a year before Edberg and Becker, despite a gap of six and seven years, respectively! This one surprised me the most.

*Roger won his first Slam only two years before Rafa, despite being five years apart. Of course I knew this, but it was a good reminder. Despite being just a year older than Andy and Novak, Rafa almost seems like a cross-generational player.

This just demonstrates the level of competition at any given time! With Borg, he was without peer on clay; Vilas actually his pigeon! Connors had to compete against several top players ending their careers; Rosewall, Laver, Newcombe, & Nastase! Lendl had to deal with the end of Borg and the prime of McEnroe and Connors! Roger's delayed ascension to greatness was obviously kept in check early on by Sampras, Agassi, Safin, Hewitt, & a host of other more than competent players! It happens; all in the timing! :angel: :dodgy: :rolleyes: :p
All due respect to Lendl, Mac wasn't the same player when Borg left and when he got married..his game took a bit of a sabbatical..however he was unable to recapture his brilliant success when he tried to reboot his career. Lendl found openings in Mac's S/v game and totally bossed the 2nd phase of JPM. I still recalled Mac being drilled in the face and body numerous times. It was dreadful to watch.. if there were ever a time for a newcomer to break through it may 2017.

How can you say that? In 1984, McEnroe had one of the most epic seasons ever up to that time! He was undefeated until Paris final and won both Wimbledon and US Open without a loss of a set! He was on fire and Lendl who had owned him the previous 2 seasons didn't have an answer for his immaculate attacking style! How soon we forget! :nono
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
I never could have imagined at (2000)Indianapolis RCA championship that this slender tall friendly kid (Roger Federer)with a ponytail who was gracious enough to take a photo with some of the folks from my community club from the suburbs of western Chicago would become the GOAT. It shows that you never know when you may cross paths with greatness.
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,113
Reactions
5,762
Points
113
Yeah, the record supports Fiero's view more - Mac's best year was 1984, and then he collapsed after that, recovering to be more of a second tier type.

Anyhow, here is the h2h with Lendl, year to year:

Yeaer: McEnroe - Lendl (Slams)
1980: 2-0 (incl USO for McEnroe)
1981: 0-1 (FO for Lendl)
1982: 0-4 (USO to Lendl)
1983: 3-2 (Wim to McEnroe)
1984: 5-1 (FO to Lendl, USO to McEnroe)
1985: 3-2 (USO to Lendl)
1987: 0-1 (USO to Lendl)
1988: 0-1 (FO to Lendl)
1989: 1-3 (AO to Lendl)
1990: 0-2
1991: 0-1
1992: 0-1

So think AP just missed that middle part where McEnroe re-righted the ship. John started out strong, then Lendl was more dominant in 1981-82--so right as Borg was leaving. Then John took control and dominated in 1984. Lendl got it back at the 1985 US Open and dominated McEnroe from that point on.
 

Fiero425

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
11,475
Reactions
2,563
Points
113
Location
Chicago, IL
Website
fiero4251.blogspot.com
El Dude said:
Yeah, the record supports Fiero's view more - Mac's best year was 1984, and then he collapsed after that, recovering to be more of a second tier type.

Anyhow, here is the h2h with Lendl, year to year:

Yeaer: McEnroe - Lendl (Slams)
1980: 2-0 (incl USO for McEnroe)
1981: 0-1 (FO for Lendl)
1982: 0-4 (USO to Lendl)
1983: 3-2 (Wim to McEnroe)
1984: 5-1 (FO to Lendl, USO to McEnroe)
1985: 3-2 (USO to Lendl)
1987: 0-1 (USO to Lendl)
1988: 0-1 (FO to Lendl)
1989: 1-3 (AO to Lendl)
1990: 0-2
1991: 0-1
1992: 0-1

So think AP just missed that middle part where McEnroe re-righted the ship. John started out strong, then Lendl was more dominant in 1981-82--so right as Borg was leaving. Then John took control and dominated in 1984. Lendl got it back at the 1985 US Open and dominated McEnroe from that point on.

Lendl began to "toy" with McEnroe from '85 USO on! Ivan had taken on Tony Roche to help him elevate his game to win Wimbledon! He did the job, but no matter how hard he worked, even skipping a couple FO's he could have won, he wasn't able to upset any grass specialists like Edberg, Cash, or Becker! He wasn't upset himself, but at times, a Mayotte would take him to 5 sets! Ivan had one shining moment on grass, winning Queens over Edberg and Becker in straights in '90! That was his last great chance after skipping FO to practice on grass, relinquishing his #1 ranking in the process! :nono :angel: :dodgy: :cover
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
Fiero425 said:
El Dude said:
Yeah, the record supports Fiero's view more - Mac's best year was 1984, and then he collapsed after that, recovering to be more of a second tier type.

Anyhow, here is the h2h with Lendl, year to year:

Yeaer: McEnroe - Lendl (Slams)
1980: 2-0 (incl USO for McEnroe)
1981: 0-1 (FO for Lendl)
1982: 0-4 (USO to Lendl)
1983: 3-2 (Wim to McEnroe)
1984: 5-1 (FO to Lendl, USO to McEnroe)
1985: 3-2 (USO to Lendl)
1987: 0-1 (USO to Lendl)
1988: 0-1 (FO to Lendl)
1989: 1-3 (AO to Lendl)
1990: 0-2
1991: 0-1
1992: 0-1

So think AP just missed that middle part where McEnroe re-righted the ship. John started out strong, then Lendl was more dominant in 1981-82--so right as Borg was leaving. Then John took control and dominated in 1984. Lendl got it back at the 1985 US Open and dominated McEnroe from that point on.

Lendl began to "toy" with McEnroe from '85 USO on! Ivan had taken on Tony Roche to help him elevate his game to win Wimbledon! He did the job, but no matter how hard he worked, even skipping a couple FO's he could have won, he wasn't able to upset any grass specialists like Edberg, Cash, or Becker! He wasn't upset himself, but at times, a Mayotte would take him to 5 sets! Ivan had one shining moment on grass, winning Queens over Edberg and Becker in straights in '90! That was his last great chance after skipping FO to practice on grass, relinquishing his #1 ranking in the process! :nono :angel: :dodgy: :cover

I didn't mean to imply that Mac went to the toilet after Borg but he has admitted he lost his greatest competitive rival but he still was able to win championships. I know that 1984 was his best year but his lost focus at RG was unforgivable. Yes, Lendl added Roche who architected a game that John's limited fitness had no answer.
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,167
Reactions
2,989
Points
113
I guess 2013 also did not have a new GS winner [Wawrinka won in 2014]
 

Rational National

Club Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2016
Messages
85
Reactions
0
Points
0
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,113
Reactions
5,762
Points
113
mrzz said:
I guess 2013 also did not have a new GS winner [Wawrinka won in 2014]

Thanks. I fixed the article.
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

Roger and Rafa will make a slam final in 2017..those two have so much genius it's almost maddening..
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,113
Reactions
5,762
Points
113
Q

Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

Well, I will say that what I actually observe about the tour leads to a different conclusion than the research of this article. The research says that there will almost certainly be a new Slam winner, but that is based upon historical frequency which doesn't take into account the actual context and field of the tour.

So personally speaking, I agree with you. I HOPE we'll have a new Slam winner because I'm ready for fresh blood and an Andy-Novak dogfight would be such a bore, but I think it is more likely that we'll see a new one in 2018.

That said, I think there are possible narratives that would lead to a new Slam winner, with those five being the most likely. To provide hypotheticals to what I wrote:

*Milos finds his fullest form at Wimbledon. Maybe Roger Federer takes out one of Novak or Andy in the SF or even QF, or even both (or maybe del Potro does in the other). Milos faces a gassed Roger in the final and wins.

*A similar scenario for Dominic at Roland Garros, but with Rafa and Novak taken out and Dominic facing Andy in the final and winning.

*Nick Kyrgios gets on a roll and maintains focus. If so, he could win AO, WIM, or USO.

*Zverev develops over the year and takes a step forward by the US Open, entering the elite by defeating one of them in the final (although I think this is more likely in 2018).

*Kei...well, he'd need a lot of help to win a Slam title but a similar scenario the Milos/Dominic one above could allow him to thread the needle.

Now any of these on their own are unlikely, but I think there's a decent chance that one of these scenarios happens.
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

I am not so sure JMDP can defeat the big 4 plus Stan in a best of 5 format..to win a slam he may have to encounter 3 or 4 of them..that's a tall order
 

delPoFearhand

Futures Player
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
162
Reactions
0
Points
0
the AntiPusher said:
Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

I am not so sure JMDP can defeat the big 4 plus Stan in a best of 5 format..to win a slam he may have to encounter 3 or 4 of them..that's a tall order

Unless he gets his ranking back up to where it "should" be- in the top 10 for sure, maybe even top 5. Then he could, depending on a favorable draw of course, only have to face 2 to get a GS title. Of course that will take time, but by Wimbledon I think he'll be top 10, maybe top 5 by USO.
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
delPoFearhand said:
the AntiPusher said:
Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

I am not so sure JMDP can defeat the big 4 plus Stan in a best of 5 format..to win a slam he may have to encounter 3 or 4 of them..that's a tall order

Unless he gets his ranking back up to where it "should" be- in the top 10 for sure, maybe even top 5. Then he could, depending on a favorable draw of course, only have to face 2 to get a GS title. Of course that will take time, but by Wimbledon I think he'll be top 10, maybe top 5 by USO.

It's so hard..Djoker, Murray , Federer and Nadal are so incredibly stingy at all the MS events which is where JMDP will need to make his gains to get back into the top ten immediately. Yes he can grind out the 500 levels events. However, it will a course be a lot harder but not impossible.
 

sid

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
798
Reactions
10
Points
18
the AntiPusher said:
Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

Roger and Rafa will make a slam final in 2017..those two have so much genius it's almost maddening..

I also put more stock in Del Potro or Stan @ this stage than Roger & Rafa,can not see these 2 lighting up what thay did in the past.Maybe Raonic wil take a Slam maybe not.The Big 2 will make more Slam finals than the others,that's how I think things will go.
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
sid said:
the AntiPusher said:
Rational National said:
When was the last final that didn't involve either Novak, Andy or Stan? I assume Cilic / Kei, but even then when was the last one before that (Was it Roger / Murray Wimbledon or Rafa / Ferrer at the French)

The reason I say, is no matter what the statistical analysis might say, the consistency of Novak and Andy coupled with the intermittent genius of Stan means that 2017 is likely to have at least one (if not 2) of the above in every final - Once there, I don't see anyone on the rise that could genuinely beat them at the moment - of course it will eventually, but I saw nothing in 2016 to say that it will happen in 2017 - in fact I put more stock at this stage in a Del Potro return to the winners circle than I do Raonic (who I do believe you correctly identify as the most likely newbie) and thus I think I would be more than happy to offer 10/1 on a new GS winner in 2017

Roger and Rafa will make a slam final in 2017..those two have so much genius it's almost maddening..

I also put more stock in Del Potro or Stan @ this stage than Roger & Rafa,can not see these 2 lighting up what thay did in the past.Maybe Raonic wil take a Slam maybe not.The Big 2 will make more Slam finals than the others,that's how I think things will go.

It's not that JMDP doesn't have the talent but it would take a perfect storm like USO 2014 when Cilic won without facing Nadal(who didn't play due to injury), Djoker who was taken out by Nishikori, Murray lost a grueling 4 setter to Novak and Stan who lost to Nishikori. Yes, Cilic played great against Roger and destroyed a jaded Nishikori in the final. If Roger and Rafa are able to regain their top form, Stan may fall back to the sub top 5 level again.