Dominance of the Big Four, revisited

[Fiero425]

Skeletor and He-Man
The like was for them.

- - The more I think about it, the more upset I get thinking about how the ATP tour has "rigged" the game for the top players! In my old age, I still hark back to the 70's, 80's & 90's to laud obscure, but talented "B" players not only making major finals, but on occasion actually winning one with a Masters event or 2! Sampras got a break at Wimbledon and the USO playing the likes of Pioline, Philippoussis, Martin, Ivanišević, Chang, Moyer, and his personal pigeon Jim Courier! I'm not saying I want to see bad major finals, but early round upsets were expected; injury, illness, tough matches, and more parity! Earlier in the thread we talked about how the tour has really guaranteed the "creme of the crop" in tournament finals by making sure they're rested and ready to go; hense going to best of 3 sets in Masters and more byes inactied in tournaments outside of the majors!

It's not so bad there isn't a diversity in championship winners, but even the semi-finalists & finalists are the same players; Federer, Nadal, Murray, Djokovic, & Del Po! In the last 10 years I can only think of Soderling making a significant impression, upsetting both Federer and Nadal at the French Open in successive semi's! Due to how the top players are coddled, it's the same 4 players making the semi's in smaller events! TCC brings it up almost every tournament that the same 4 or 5 players will take more than 60% of the yearly championships! I used to think the other players didn't have enough heart or they just didn't know how to finish; the Spanish Armada of Ferrer, Amalgro, etc, Berdych, Tsonga, and of course Roddick in his day! Am I exaggerating? Am I the only one who sees this? Anybody else care? :cry :cry :cry

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

they keep beating all the other players,

maybe the rest need to improve, or maybe we have to wait for this "weak era" to end.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Skeletor and He-Man
The like was for them.

- - The more I think about it, the more upset I get thinking about how the ATP tour has "rigged" the game for the top players! In my old age, I still hark back to the 70's, 80's & 90's to laud obscure, but talented "B" players not only making major finals, but on occasion actually winning one with a Masters event or 2! Sampras got a break at Wimbledon and the USO playing the likes of Pioline, Philippoussis, Martin, Ivanišević, Chang, Moyer, and his personal pigeon Jim Courier! I'm not saying I want to see bad major finals, but early round upsets were expected; injury, illness, tough matches, and more parity! Earlier in the thread we talked about how the tour has really guaranteed the "creme of the crop" in tournament finals by making sure they're rested and ready to go; hense going to best of 3 sets in Masters and more byes inactied in tournaments outside of the majors!

It's not so bad there isn't a diversity in championship winners, but even the semi-finalists & finalists are the same players; Federer, Nadal, Murray, Djokovic, & Del Po! In the last 10 years I can only think of Soderling making a significant impression, upsetting both Federer and Nadal at the French Open in successive semi's! Due to how the top players are coddled, it's the same 4 players making the semi's in smaller events! TCC brings it up almost every tournament that the same 4 or 5 players will take more than 60% of the yearly championships! I used to think the other players didn't have enough heart or they just didn't know how to finish; the Spanish Armada of Ferrer, Amalgro, etc, Berdych, Tsonga, and of course Roddick in his day! Am I exaggerating? Am I the only one who sees this? Anybody else care? :cry :cry :cry

The absence of upsets is due to 32 seeding system in GS. This was started only
recently (i have to look up the exact year), may be 97 or so. When they had only
16 seeds, it is lot easier to draw a dangerous player in the early round before you
get your foot in.

However, the system changed not with the intent to protect the top tennis
players. It changed as a result of controversy over Wimbledon seedings. Clay
courters like Gustav Kurten etc threated to boycott the Wimbledon as they were
not getting seeded (due to a special committee deciding seed (there was no
formula before) based on perceived grass performance). Wimbledon did not want
to give up altering the seeding. So, finally it became a 32 seed system. The intent
was that highly ranked clay courters (in the ATP ranking) do not get completely
thrown out in the open due to special seeding for wimbledon.

 

[BalaryKar]

Skeletor and He-Man
The like was for them.

It's not so bad there isn't a diversity in championship winners, but even the semi-finalists & finalists are the same players; Federer, Nadal, Murray, Djokovic, & Del Po! In the last 10 years I can only think of Soderling making a significant impression, upsetting both Federer and Nadal at the French Open in successive semi's! Due to how the top players are coddled, it's the same 4 players making the semi's in smaller events! TCC brings it up almost every tournament that the same 4 or 5 players will take more than 60% of the yearly championships! I used to think the other players didn't have enough heart or they just didn't know how to finish; the Spanish Armada of Ferrer, Amalgro, etc, Berdych, Tsonga, and of course Roddick in his day! Am I exaggerating? Am I the only one who sees this? Anybody else care? :cry :cry :cry

I remember long time back I had said that to some extent the consistency of Nole and Nadal can be blamed on Fed. What I meant back then was that Fed really showed what a true Top Ranked guy should DO. The No.1 guy has no business to loose to the lesser mortals. I remember one quote of Becker that in his prime he would really hesitate to wipe the lesser mortals with breadsticks and bagels. Sampras was content with breaking the opponent once in the set. If no break at all, Sampras was still fine and clean up the opponent in the tiebreaker. Fed took this to the next level by breaking the serve as much as possible, never hesitating to serve bagels and breadsticks. Of course, back then Broken Shoelace did not agree that Nole and Nadal consistency can be attributed to Fed. He may be right and it may be due to the homogenization only. What is really admire about Nadal is the progression on hard courts! First QFs, then SFs, and then championship. Consistency!

My basic belief and nothing much with facts. Champions like Pete, Edberg, Agassi, et. al., were all so damn great that they could as well have achieved consistency, if not to the degree that we see today. The lesser mortals know that if the masters of the game refuse to lose, its very difficult for them to win. This has happened so many times to Ferrer, Wawrinka, Berdych, Davydenko, et. al. Back then the champions, with the exception of Connors, were kind of ok to loose. See from the 90's-03's dominant chart that Sampras retained No.1 with winning 1 and 2 titles of the important 14. The top 4 are way more greedy now :cry

 

[Kieran]

I agree to an extent, BalaryKar. I mean, Roger chased Pete's records, so there's an element of building on what went before, or taking past greats as the example and trying to best them. Standing on the shoulders of giants. You see a record set and try break it. This is the natural development of things. But I think the current bunch of makeweights are the least impressive I've seen. They have neither the gall nor the guile to upset their own applecarts, let alone anybody elses. They win nothing and I'd say, to change your closing line a little, they're way less greedy than any previous bunch of second-tier players...

 

[shawnbm]

they keep beating all the other players,

maybe the rest need to improve, or maybe we have to wait for this "weak era" to end.

:snigger

 

[Moxie]

I agree to an extent, BalaryKar. I mean, Roger chased Pete's records, so there's an element of building on what went before, or taking past greats as the example and trying to best them. Standing on the shoulders of giants. You see a record set and try break it. This is the natural development of things. But I think the current bunch of makeweights are the least impressive I've seen. They have neither the gall nor the guile to upset their own applecarts, let alone anybody elses. They win nothing and I'd say, to change your closing line a little, they're way less greedy than any previous bunch of second-tier players...

I also agree with the notion that if you have a few all-time/very greats in short-succession, generationally, they'll definitely be inspired by each other, and be motivated to perform, and to break records. I think Roger, being so talented, had Pete to chase, and Rafa, Novak and Andy have seen what Roger did and were pushed by it. They met a challenge, to varying degrees of excellence. I'm not sure what to say about the also-rans, or "makeweights," as you say, of this era. Are they so paltry, or just over-matched by talent and ambition (lethal combination)? The upsets have sometimes come out of left-field (Rosol, Darcis, Stakovsky, Robredo,) from players that feel they have nothing to lose. (And lose, they tend to, in the next round.) The mid-packers may feel an ambition to later rounds and so don't put it all on the line, though perhaps they should. It may be a talent-gap, or an ambition-gap, or a bit of both. For my money, I think the top crop now are a bit ferocious, and that's hard to beat.

 

[shawnbm]

Muy bien dicho, Susana.

 

[Haelfix]

I do agree that the dominance of the big four is at least partially attributable to the lack of talent in the younger generations. I mean its not normal that the 25+ generation (even outside the top 4) are the ones who mostly show up as contenders and comeback players.

Wawrinka, Ferrer, Berdych, Tsonga, Mardy Fish a few years ago, etc etc

I think whats going to happen at some point, is that we're going to get a generation of new players at some point that are going to be clearly superior to the 25 and under crowd, and they're going to mostly dominate for several generations, not unlike the Murray/Novak/Rafa group.

 

[Fiero425]

I do agree that the dominance of the big four is at least partially attributable to the lack of talent in the younger generations. I mean its not normal that the 25+ generation (even outside the top 4) are the ones who mostly show up as contenders and comeback players.

Wawrinka, Ferrer, Berdych, Tsonga, Mardy Fish a few years ago, etc etc

I think whats going to happen at some point, is that we're going to get a generation of new players at some point that are going to be clearly superior to the 25 and under crowd, and they're going to mostly dominate for several generations, not unlike the Murray/Novak/Rafa group.

I usually say about the talent now is that there's plenty, but most just don't know how to finish a match! Darcis finished off Nadal at Wimbledon, but going out himself with an injury in the next round didn't help the look of this new generation of players! At the French Open Nadal was on the ropes in the 1st round against some tall, German kid, Brand! After winning the 1st set convincing, he played it close getting to a 2nd set tie-breaker, but just gave it away more than Nadal winning it! The Spanish Armada of players are a true enbarrassment unable to do anything against the top players no matter the lead! Ferrer has a couple wins over Nadal, but little else! The rest of the contigent like Verdasco, Almagro, Lopez, & Granollers have had horrible losses with points to win a match against the Big 4! Lopez was up a set and serving for it in a 2nd set tie-breaker with a 5-2 lead and gave it all back to Federer; on clay in Europe a few years ago! Verdasco was up 2 sets and pounding Andy Murray at Wimbledon this past season! I told myself, he won't finish the upset! I was right! Grigor Dimitrov, Janowicz, Berdych, Raonic, & Tsonga have had a couple wins here and there, but it doesn't result in a tourney win losing to another top player later! (Off the top of my head) There are plenty of other examples where these players have all the shots, but it means nothing allowing the top players to get past them again and again!

 

[Haelfix]

I usually say about the talent now is that there's plenty, but most just don't know how to finish a match!

One of the interesting things about this is that usually (historically) when you are young, you end up pulling off a few real tough wins that you probably would not have won when older and established. Playing without the pressure is an enormous benefit. Think, Marat Safin when he tuned out and beat Sampras at the USO.

Young players often make tactical mistakes late in matches, but its often the case that they can get in and stay in, the zone much more readily.

One of the things i've noticed with the Dimitrovs, Tomic and Raonic's of the world, is that they get into the tail end of matches, and the opponent all of a sudden turns on a second gear that they themselves don't possess. So it looks to me more like a lack of talent, and not so much that they can't reach their potential. Dimitrov is a bit of an exception incidentally.. THat really looks more mental than anything else.

 

[Front242]

It was often lack of stamina and cramping that screwed Dimitrov in his big matches last year too. If he can work on that and the mental aspect he can be a world class player. Great to watch so I hope to see him work hard at being the best he can next year.

 

[Fiero425]

It was often lack of stamina and cramping that screwed Dimitrov in his big matches last year too. If he can work on that and the mental aspect he can be a world class player. Great to watch so I hope to see him work hard at being the best he can next year.

Our little "Baby Fed!" He hasn't had much exposure of late, but the couple times I did see him this year, you'd think it was Roger himself from 10 years ago! :clap :clap :clap

 

[brokenshoelace]

It was often lack of stamina and cramping that screwed Dimitrov in his big matches last year too. If he can work on that and the mental aspect he can be a world class player. Great to watch so I hope to see him work hard at being the best he can next year.

Our little "Baby Fed!" He hasn't had much exposure of late, but the couple times I did see him this year, you'd think it was Roger himself from 10 years ago! :clap :clap :clap

Nah.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Baby Fed shifted his base to Florida to tain together and practice with Maria during the
off season. (practice what?)

 

[calitennis127]

I put together this chart back in April, and was going through some files and found it and decided to complete it. It offers a very telling picture:

I've got to admit, I'm kind of ready for some new blood - a dark-horse to come in and upset things a bit. I don't really see much changing in 2014, but maybe we can hope for at least one big tournament going to someone else.

Del Potro is mainly to blame for this, particularly when you look at how he basically just gave away the Infian Wells and Cincinnati Masters Events when he clearly should have won them based on talent and surface.

 

[Fiero425]

I put together this chart back in April, and was going through some files and found it and decided to complete it. It offers a very telling picture:

I've got to admit, I'm kind of ready for some new blood - a dark-horse to come in and upset things a bit. I don't really see much changing in 2014, but maybe we can hope for at least one big tournament going to someone else.

Del Potro is mainly to blame for this, particularly when you look at how he basically just gave away the Infian Wells and Cincinnati Masters Events when he clearly should have won them based on talent and surface.

Exactly what I was talking about! It's almost obscene to see the domination so complete! They used to talk about women's tennis like this with Martina, Evert, Graf, and Seles! You had a little sprinkling of Mandlikova, Sabatini, Shriver, & Austin, but it was the same situation! I'm not going to say it's unprecedent that just a handful of male players dominate the tour, but it was another era! We have a number of great athletes, but it's the mental side that seems to make the difference now! The courts, rackets, and balls have really homogenized playing conditions and tactics; too boring for words! Routine points of 20+ strokes are ridiculous, which extend matches to 3+ hour affairs; even the women! In some ways, I feel like I'm still recovering from that AO men's final in '12! Had been up all day and watched Nole and Rafa go at it live here in Chicago going into the next day; 5:53! :nono :cry :nono

 

[Moxie]

I put together this chart back in April, and was going through some files and found it and decided to complete it. It offers a very telling picture:

I've got to admit, I'm kind of ready for some new blood - a dark-horse to come in and upset things a bit. I don't really see much changing in 2014, but maybe we can hope for at least one big tournament going to someone else.

Del Potro is mainly to blame for this, particularly when you look at how he basically just gave away the Infian Wells and Cincinnati Masters Events when he clearly should have won them based on talent and surface.

I'm not clear how you can put so much "blame" on Del Potro for not breaking up the color blocks on that chart with white spaces, though he has been considered a contender who has under-performed and been injured. I'm pretty sure there are other top 10 players who have also fallen short of chances to break up the "quadruply."

In any case, I think it's a reach to say he "should" have won Indian Wells, though he was close to getting his first MS1000, having made the final. But it's a bigger reach to say he should have won Cincy, since he lost in the SFs. (There, you could more rightfully 'blame' Isner.) You might more likely have said he missed a better chance to add a white space by not beating Djokovic in Shanghai, where he DID make the final, and was arguably closer...but you're really just complaining about 2 (of the 3) MS that Nadal won this year on HCs, and Del Potro for not preventing it. Even before this year, (and Rafa's improved HC game,) his record in MS and Slams on HCs was better than Juan Martin's, so it's clearly (to use your word,) not a question of JMDP's talent on the surface over Nadal's.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Dude, can you make a similar chart with finalists (not the winners) of the big tournaments
from 2004 to 2013. I think that chart will also be full of colors.

That way people will come to know the true dominance of big-four.

 

[Moxie]

Dude, can you make a similar chart with finalists (not the winners) of the big tournaments
from 2004 to 2013. I think that chart will also be full of colors.

That way people will come to know the true dominance of big-four.

Forgive me, but how would that tell us anything? The also-rans are also-rans. Often they played each other, (the top 4) in finals, it's true, but doesn't matter that much who the other finalist was. It matters who the winner was. I'm pretty sure the chart he's shown us explains the dominance.