Bypassing Masters Titles

[GameSetAndMath]

Anyway, the one good thing to come out of it is I'm sure if Del Potro hadn't won there we wouldn't have seen any classic matches from him since. Unfortunate for him that to win it he needed to hit the ball so hard he basically broke his wrist and lost a whole year on tour.

I don't understand as to exactly what you mean by the first sentence above.

As for your second remark, I always wondered whether JMDP basically lost his
entire future by winning USO at the expense of the wrist. When playing against big
name players and when there is a lot at stake, people think they have to really put
some mustard on their shot. That might have led to JMDP hitting his forehand and
backhands so hard (almost at the speed of serve) which basically was the cause
of his wrist problem.

 

[Front242]

Anyway, the one good thing to come out of it is I'm sure if Del Potro hadn't won there we wouldn't have seen any classic matches from him since. Unfortunate for him that to win it he needed to hit the ball so hard he basically broke his wrist and lost a whole year on tour.

I don't understand as to exactly what you mean by the first sentence above.

As for your second remark, I always wondered whether JMDP basically lost his
entire future by winning USO at the expense of the wrist. When playing against big
name players and when there is a lot at stake, people think they have to really put
some mustard on their shot. That might have led to JMDP hitting his forehand and
backhands so hard (almost at the speed of serve) which basically was the cause
of his wrist problem.

Yeah, that lone slam win pretty much cost him his career so far alright. What I meant by the first sentence is sure he had some big wins early in that US Open beating Nadal, etc but he'd been Roger's whipping boy before that and it likely clicked a switch in him for having beaten Roger, who'd easily beat him every time before that. Clearly it boosted his confidence a lot and I don't think we'd have seen matches like his Wimbledon semi against Novak, for example without that enhanced confidence personally, as it took his game a notch higher.

 

[Front242]

Of course, to add to that, one tough match that Roger did well to win, being down 2 sets to 1 in RG '09 came before the US Open win for Del Potro so it's clear he was on the rise before the US Open that year, but the AO '09 match with Fed was embarrassing for Del Potro (Fed won 6-3, 6-0, 6-0). This recent setback with his wrist is unfortunate as he was on his way back playing well again with a great performance in Shanghai and I still think winning that '09 US Open title paved the way for two things, namely the abrupt semi end to his career (it's never come close since the wrist surgery) and improved confidence from that lone slam victory. Pity they coincided as he's really had a tough time with injuries since that win.

Unfortunately even if his wrists were both 100% I feel maybe he's lost the confidence to hit full force now as he's worried about really damaging the right one again. Of course, it's the left one giving trouble these days and that means he'll be slicing more and more like he was last year and unable to go for the DTL BH, a shot he really needs to stand a good chance of beating the top guys. Poor Juan.

 

[August]

Some players with only one mandatory event just happen to win a slam, some others only a Masters.

In recent years, DelPo and Stan won a slam but not a Masters. On the other hand, Ferrer, Tsonga, Söderling, Berdych, Ljubicic won a Masters.

There are 4 slams and 9 Masters. I think 2 GS champs and 5 M1000 champs follow that ratio quite well.

 

[Fiero425]

Of course, to add to that, one tough match that Roger did well to win, being down 2 sets to 1 in RG '09 came before the US Open win for Del Potro so it's clear he was on the rise before the US Open that year, but the AO '09 match with Fed was embarrassing for Del Potro (Fed won 6-3, 6-0, 6-0). This recent setback with his wrist is unfortunate as he was on his way back playing well again with a great performance in Shanghai and I still think winning that '09 US Open title paved the way for two things, namely the abrupt semi end to his career (it's never come close since the wrist surgery) and improved confidence from that lone slam victory. Pity they coincided as he's really had a tough time with injuries since that win.

Unfortunately even if his wrists were both 100% I feel maybe he's lost the confidence to hit full force now as he's worried about really damaging the right one again. Of course, it's the left one giving trouble these days and that means he'll be slicing more and more like he was last year and unable to go for the DTL BH, a shot he really needs to stand a good chance of beating the top guys. Poor Juan.

I would have thought his doctor would have told Delpo he needed to recreate or develop a different way of hitting that "slappy" forehand! He should have at least cut back on trying to knock off winners from well behind the baseline! I'm surprised more injuries aren't being registered on the tour! The game went through ways of slowing it down only to have the top players pumping up and whipping through shots to keep the speed and power at the highest levels! All the more reason I think most of these guys won't make it to 30 playing top flight tennis!

 

[Moxie]

One more factor is that there are simply far more Masters tournaments - more than twice - so its simply more probably to win one first, then a Slam.

But let's do some investigation. Here are all Slam winners of the last 40 years, in two categories, whether they won a Masters title (or its equivalent) first, or whether they won a Slam first:

Masters Title first:
Murray, Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Safin, Ferrero, Roddick, Costa, Hewitt, Johansson, Moya, Ivanisevic, Agassi, Bruguera, Muster, Gomez, Courier, Lendl, McEnroe, Tanner, Vilas, Connors, Borg, Orantes, Panatta

It should be noted that quite a few of the above players won their first Masters just before their first Slam, including Moya, Nadal, Roddick and Safin.

Slam win before Masters win (includes Slam winners with no Masters wins)
Wawrinka, Del Potro, Gaudio, Kuerten, Krajicek, Rafter, Chang, Sampras, Becker, Stich, Edberg, Cash, Wilander, Kriek, Noah, Teacher, Gerulaitis, Edmondson

Conclusion: While the first list is longer, it isn't so much longer to make it rare for a player to win a Slam first. In other words, more often than not a Slam winner will first win a Masters title, but it isn't unusual for the latter to happen. All factors taken into account and it isn't inherently more likely for a player to win a Masters first, except insofar as there are more than twice as many Masters tournaments, thereby increasing the probability.

Thanks for that research, Dude, and the graph. I had to come back to absorb it. There seems to be a slightly higher total Slam count in the first group, but there are top tier guys in the second, as well.

 

[Front242]

Of course, to add to that, one tough match that Roger did well to win, being down 2 sets to 1 in RG '09 came before the US Open win for Del Potro so it's clear he was on the rise before the US Open that year, but the AO '09 match with Fed was embarrassing for Del Potro (Fed won 6-3, 6-0, 6-0). This recent setback with his wrist is unfortunate as he was on his way back playing well again with a great performance in Shanghai and I still think winning that '09 US Open title paved the way for two things, namely the abrupt semi end to his career (it's never come close since the wrist surgery) and improved confidence from that lone slam victory. Pity they coincided as he's really had a tough time with injuries since that win.

Unfortunately even if his wrists were both 100% I feel maybe he's lost the confidence to hit full force now as he's worried about really damaging the right one again. Of course, it's the left one giving trouble these days and that means he'll be slicing more and more like he was last year and unable to go for the DTL BH, a shot he really needs to stand a good chance of beating the top guys. Poor Juan.

I would have thought his doctor would have told Delpo he needed to recreate or develop a different way of hitting that "slappy" forehand! He should have at least cut back on trying to knock off winners from well behind the baseline! I'm surprised more injuries aren't being registered on the tour! The game went through ways of slowing it down only to have the top players pumping up and whipping through shots to keep the speed and power at the highest levels! All the more reason I think most of these guys won't make it to 30 playing top flight tennis!

Hitting as hard as he does, or rather used to (as he doesn't imo hit as hard now as he did in 2009) is definitely going to mean even if he hangs around till 30, he likely won't be a force by then with so much wear and tear. Plus he's already a poor mover. A poor mover banged up even more in 5 years time won't be winning much I reckon. Hard to believe he's only 25. Looks way older.

 

[herios]

I think it ios only a matter of time until both JM and Stan will win their maiden master title.

 

[Front242]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

 

[herios]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more about slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

 

[Front242]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more abour slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

I said at this stage. Surely beating Fed's record number of slams should be the priority now at this latter stage of his career. Masters titles are great and he has the record there but they play very much second fiddle to slams and I'm sure he's well aware of this.

 

[Kieran]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more abour slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

I would say that if you gave any player a choice, they'd care a "whole lot more" about a slam win than a few MS titles, let alone even one.

As for the OP, these things happen opportunely sometimes. Players get in position, have the event of their life, and if things fall sweetly for them, they'll take it.

Could be a slam, or an MS title: just so happens that lately it's (very rarely) slams. Other guys have won MS titles and not won slams...

 

[herios]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more abour slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

I would say that if you gave any player a choice, they'd care a "whole lot more" about a slam win than a few MS titles, let alone even one.

As for the OP, these things happen opportunely sometimes. Players get in position, have the event of their life, and if things fall sweetly for them, they'll take it.

Could be a slam, or an MS title: just so happens that lately it's (very rarely) slams. Other guys have won MS titles and not won slams...

Geez, you know I am expecting you to asses more realistically your boy's intentions. Whenever he enters an event, he does not only waits for things to fall into place for him and then says "Gracias" I will take it.
He fights equally hard whenever and wherever he plays. Period. That makes him such an outstanding champion. Always 100%. Wake me up when he wil do otherwise.

 

[Moxie]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more abour slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

I would say that if you gave any player a choice, they'd care a "whole lot more" about a slam win than a few MS titles, let alone even one.

As for the OP, these things happen opportunely sometimes. Players get in position, have the event of their life, and if things fall sweetly for them, they'll take it.

Could be a slam, or an MS title: just so happens that lately it's (very rarely) slams. Other guys have won MS titles and not won slams...

Geez, you know I am expecting you to asses more realistically your boy's intentions. Whenever he enters an event, he does not only waits for things to fall into place for him and then says "Gracias" I will take it.
He fights equally hard whenever and wherever he plays. Period. That makes him such an outstanding champion. Always 100%. Wake me up when he wil do otherwise.

Yes, but I think what Front and Kieran have said are valid. Federer and Nadal are pretty much at the point where they only have to care about Majors. Djokovic would probably happy to win Cincy, to complete the circuit, and rack up a few more 1000s in the count. However, when any of them find themselves in the last Sunday, they had bloody better win, or what's the point? I think that's where Rafa was in Canada and Cincy last summer. He was almost the "accidental winner." I think he would have been willing to do either as a tune-up. I'll be surprised if he pushes hard to defend both next summer. The focus will be the USO again.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Some players with only one mandatory event just happen to win a slam, some others only a Masters.

In recent years, DelPo and Stan won a slam but not a Masters. On the other hand, Ferrer, Tsonga, Söderling, Berdych, Ljubicic won a Masters.

There are 4 slams and 9 Masters. I think 2 GS champs and 5 M1000 champs follow that ratio quite well.

Interestingly, among the five "one master wonders", 4 of them won the Paris indoor
ATP 1000. If I remember right Ljubicic won the IW once playing against Roddick I think.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more about slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

This is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[herios]

Quite possible as Fed and Nadal surely care a whole lot more about slams at this stage and I dare say so does Djokovic and that may mean they don't go all out at the masters events.

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more abour slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

I would say that if you gave any player a choice, they'd care a "whole lot more" about a slam win than a few MS titles, let alone even one.

As for the OP, these things happen opportunely sometimes. Players get in position, have the event of their life, and if things fall sweetly for them, they'll take it.

Could be a slam, or an MS title: just so happens that lately it's (very rarely) slams. Other guys have won MS titles and not won slams...

Geez, you know I am expecting you to asses more realistically your boy's intentions. Whenever he enters an event, he does not only waits for things to fall into place for him and then says "Gracias" I will take it.
He fights equally hard whenever and wherever he plays. Period. That makes him such an outstanding champion. Always 100%. Wake me up when he wil do otherwise.

Yes, but I think what Front and Kieran have said are valid. Federer and Nadal are pretty much at the point where they only have to care about Majors. Djokovic would probably happy to win Cincy, to complete the circuit, and rack up a few more 1000s in the count. However, when any of them find themselves in the last Sunday, they had bloody better win, or what's the point? I think that's where Rafa was in Canada and Cincy last summer. He was almost the "accidental winner." I think he would have been willing to do either as a tune-up. I'll be surprised if he pushes hard to defend both next summer. The focus will be the USO again.

Moxie, what I had a problem with in Front's statement was the verb he used. He said "cares", which is completely different than "should care", which I would have been in agreement with.
Of course. slams are more important than masters, for every player, but how much more, that is again an assumption to say "a whole lot more".

 

[brokenshoelace]

Where did you get the impression that Rafa cares a 'whole lot' more abour slams than masters? Based on what I have seen him foing last year, it did not look like it.

I would say that if you gave any player a choice, they'd care a "whole lot more" about a slam win than a few MS titles, let alone even one.

As for the OP, these things happen opportunely sometimes. Players get in position, have the event of their life, and if things fall sweetly for them, they'll take it.

Could be a slam, or an MS title: just so happens that lately it's (very rarely) slams. Other guys have won MS titles and not won slams...

Geez, you know I am expecting you to asses more realistically your boy's intentions. Whenever he enters an event, he does not only waits for things to fall into place for him and then says "Gracias" I will take it.
He fights equally hard whenever and wherever he plays. Period. That makes him such an outstanding champion. Always 100%. Wake me up when he wil do otherwise.

Yes, but I think what Front and Kieran have said are valid. Federer and Nadal are pretty much at the point where they only have to care about Majors. Djokovic would probably happy to win Cincy, to complete the circuit, and rack up a few more 1000s in the count. However, when any of them find themselves in the last Sunday, they had bloody better win, or what's the point? I think that's where Rafa was in Canada and Cincy last summer. He was almost the "accidental winner." I think he would have been willing to do either as a tune-up. I'll be surprised if he pushes hard to defend both next summer. The focus will be the USO again.

Moxie, what I had a problem with in Front's statement was the verb he used. He said "cares", which is completely different than "should care", which I would have been in agreement with.
Of course. slams are more important than masters, for every player, but how much more, that is again an assumption to say "a whole lot more".

Nadal has already broken the Masters 1000 events record and no active player (other than Federer, who won't break the record) is even close. Yeah, I'd think he cares WAY more about Slams at this point. I'm pretty sure he'd gladly take breaking the slam record in exchange for never winning a Masters 1000 event again.

 

[August]

Some players with only one mandatory event just happen to win a slam, some others only a Masters.

In recent years, DelPo and Stan won a slam but not a Masters. On the other hand, Ferrer, Tsonga, Söderling, Berdych, Ljubicic won a Masters.

There are 4 slams and 9 Masters. I think 2 GS champs and 5 M1000 champs follow that ratio quite well.

Interestingly, among the five "one master wonders", 4 of them won the Paris indoor
ATP 1000. If I remember right Ljubicic won the IW once playing against Roddick I think.

Yeah, Ljubicic beat Roddick in the final and Nadal in the SF.

Completely forgot Robredo from that list, he won his only Masters event in Hamburg after Berdych's only, when Fed and Rafa had withdrawn.

 

[Iona16]

Some players with only one mandatory event just happen to win a slam, some others only a Masters.

In recent years, DelPo and Stan won a slam but not a Masters. On the other hand, Ferrer, Tsonga, Söderling, Berdych, Ljubicic won a Masters.

There are 4 slams and 9 Masters. I think 2 GS champs and 5 M1000 champs follow that ratio quite well.

Interestingly, among the five "one master wonders", 4 of them won the Paris indoor
ATP 1000. If I remember right Ljubicic won the IW once playing against Roddick I think.

Henman and Rusedski were also "one master wonders". Both won in Paris.