The Big 3 - Buying or Selling?

[Kieran]

I'm asking this because on another thread, Mile asked a pertinent question: "who are now the Big 3?"

Just a stock-take on the top of the game, a quick one, to see do we actually still have a Big 3? Or is it a Big 1+? Or is it still a Big 3+1? If they were shares, would you be buying, or selling?

Nole (1): 2 slams (Oz & W), 5 MS titles (Rome, Paris, IW, Miami, MC), WTF.

BUYING?
SELLING?

Roger (2): 2 MS (Cinci, Shanghai)

BUYING?
SELLING?

Murray (3): 1 MS (Madrid)

BUYING?
SELLING?

Rafa (7): 1 slam (RG)

BUYING?
SELLING?

In the race to London, they line up like this:

1. Nole
2. Andy
6. Rafa
7. Roger

Fedal's stock is waning, isn't it? But I'd still buy shares in Rafa while the price is so low. It's bound to get a boost over the next six months.

And Andy is back in the mix. But with regards Big 3, or 2, or 4, it's gotten a little shaky. Can't throw Rafa out because he owns a slam, and can't drop Roger because he has the all-time record - but more importantly to the present, he's won two MS over the last year, and reached the Wimbledon and WTF finals. Can't really raise Andy to Big 3 (or 4) status yet, because although he reached the final in Oz, he dropped a calf just at the moment when he was taking charge.

So is the notion of Big 3 too silly, vague or redundant now? Should we get rid of it, as being outdated? Or is there still a market for this concept?

 

[Fiero425]

I agree for the most part, but it makes sense to say "The Big 1" and all the rest! Nole's owned this season so far like no other before him! I think he'll give it his all to win FO this season, then allow someone else to take Wimbledon more than likely; "ya can't win them all," but it would be nice! :clap :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Kieran]

Well, Nole's stock is so strong, it's not going to fall for a while yet. But if he wins Paris, he has an extra week this year to recuperate. I'm not so sure it's a Big 1+, though. Let's see where that stands after Wimbledon...

 

[herios]

Nole = Buy
Roger = Hold
Rafa = Sell

 

[Great Hands]

Well, it's definitely a big 1 this year so far - Novak has been completely dominant.

If we use the old phrase 'big 4', they are still dominating this year. Look at the finals of all the big events so far this year:

AO: Djokovic - Murray
IW: Djokovic - Federer
Miami: Djokovic - Murray
Monte Carlo: Djokovic - Berdych
Madrid: Murray - Nadal

That's 9 out of 10 final spots taken by the big 4. And unless Stan and/or Ferrer spoil the party, it'll be 11 out 12 final spots this year for the big 4 by Sunday.

The race is not really relevant to this, because even though Roger's at 7, we're in the clay season, which is not his happiest hunting ground the last few years - Roger's best tournaments are to come. I mean, come Wimbledon, he's still one of the favourites, more so than any of the non-slam winners out there. And no matter how shaky Rafa looks, he's still above the non-slam winners out there in terms of his RG prospects.

So - Novak is the big 1, but the other 3 of the big 4 are still the ones most likely to take advantage if he slips up.

 

[TennisFanatic7]

Nole and Andy = Buy
Roger = Sell
Rafa = I'll pay you to take the damn shares off me!

Re the Big Magic Number debate, right now it's too blurry. Historically, this will be remembered as the era of the big 3 but going into each tournament you still have to look at a big 4. Yeah, Nadal is way off the pace right now but look at what happened to Roger in 2013 and Andy in 2014 and how they have re-established themselves as a comfortable cut above the "young" upstarts. Every Masters tournament and every major now, the same four men are the top of the list of who's going to win.

The pecking order at this exact moment is pretty clear. Djokovic is far and away the best player on tour. Murray isn't far behind - it doesn't seem this way because he keeps losing when he comes up against Nole, but nobody else has actually beaten Andy in a meaningful tournament this year, but he is far and away the number 2 player....

...Depending on which Roger turns up. Federer has been an irrelevance in most of the big tournaments this year, either leaving them off his schedule or losing to guys like Seppi (I mean come on, Seppi? Seriously?), but in the tournaments where the "real" Roger decides to turn up, he has a good claim to having his nose ahead of Andy in the 'second-in-command' stakes by virtue of actually being able to beat Nole.

Rafa will be interesting to watch for the remainder of the year. Maybe this is the beginning of a sad decline, maybe this year is his blip, just like 2013 for Fed and 2014 for Andy, we'll see.

 

[Great Hands]

Can't really raise Andy to Big 3 (or 4) status yet, because although he reached the final in Oz, he dropped a calf just at the moment when he was taking charge.

I'm still trying to get my head around people's interpretation of that AO final. Murray got distracted for a period in the 3rd set when he thgouth novak wa compromised physcially. He then regained his composure shortly after and played some great stuff - he almost broke Novak to go up 4-3 in the third set with some of the best tennis of the whole match being played. In the 4th set, a combination of mental and physical fatigue - they'd played 3 of the most gruelling sets I've seen all year - possibly the 3 most gruelling - and simply being outplayed, meant that he got bagalled in the 4th.

This leads to all this talk of his 'mental demons', but...exactly the same happened to Kei today. He got breadsticked in the final set, and that was a THIRD set, and the first 2 sets played weren't anything like the gruelling sets Djokovic and Murray played. And Kei trains for 5 set matches, an wins them. So do you, Kieren, think Kei has 'metnal demons' too?

did Stan have 'mental demons' when novak baggled him in thw ao semi - or was he just tired and outplayed?

i think Novak is breadsticking and balleing a lto at he moent (not JUST Andy, but kei, stan and others) because when he plays well, he's just THAT good. especially on slow hards, which is all andy has played him on this eyar, and where andy has never beaten him since 2011, when novak became th4 all-tme grwat he is today.

so far t6hi syear, novak has 10 bagels - 10! - and 11 breadsticvls. that's 21 copmlete annihailations in sets, and some against top players. when he does this to toher players, no one psychoanalyses their metnal issues. when it happens to andy, suddenly it's metnal issue. it doesn't make sense.

i thini people get distracted cos andy shouts at himself a buit. but he did that throghout his semi fianl against berdych, played great and won the match in 4. djokovic is just a bwetter player, especcialy on slow hards.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Nole and Andy = Buy
Roger = Sell
Rafa = I'll pay you to take the damn shares off me!

I thought OP's question was about status for the big three.

 

[Great Hands]

Can't really raise Andy to Big 3 (or 4) status yet, because although he reached the final in Oz, he dropped a calf just at the moment when he was taking charge.

I'm still trying to get my head around people's interpretation of that AO final. Murray got distracted for a period in the 3rd set when he thought Novak was compromised physically. He then regained his composure shortly after and played some great stuff - he almost broke Novak to go up 4-3 in the third set with some of the best tennis of the whole match being played. In the 4th set, a combination of mental and physical fatigue - they'd played 3 of the most gruelling sets I've seen all year - possibly the 3 most gruelling - and simply being outplayed, meant that he got bagelled in the 4th.

This leads to all this talk of Andy's 'mental demons', but...Novak thrashed Kei in the final set today. And that was a third set, and the first 2 sets played weren't anything like the gruelling sets Djokovic and Murray played. And Kei trains for 5 set matches, and wins them. So do you, Kieran, think Kei has 'mental demons' too?

Did Stan have 'mental demons' when Novak bagelled him in the AO semi - or was he just tired and outplayed?

I think Novak is breadsticking and bagelling a lot at the moment (not JUST Andy, but Kei, Stan and others) because when he plays well, he's just THAT good. Especially on slow hards, which is all Andy has played him on this year, and where Andy has never beaten him since 2011, when Novak became the all-time great he is today.

So far this year, Novak has 10 bagels - 10! - and 11 breadsticks. That's 21 complete annihilations in sets, and some against top players. When he does this to other players, no one psychoanalyses their mental issues. When it happens to Andy, suddenly it's a mental issue. It doesn't make sense.

I think people get caught up in thinking it's mental because Andy shouts at himself a bit. But he did that throughout his semi final against Berdych, played great and won the match in 4. Djokovic is just a better player, especially on slow hards.

And when was Andy 'taking charge'? It was 1 set all, and he had one break, right at the start of the set, which is virtually meaningless when these two play, because their matches are normally break-of-serve fests. When Andy was 2-0 up in that 3rd set, I was still thinking of Novak as the favourite for the set and the match, because he's the better player, especially on slow hards, and Andy's never beaten him at the AO, and in fact no one has beaten him at the AO in the last 5 years except Stan (and that only just!), and Andy doesn't have Stan's offensive game to take the match out of Novak's hands. Andy has to try to grind Djokovic down, which is almost impossible over 5 sets on slow hards, currently. And Andy got that break because Novak went through a short spell of feeling sub-par physically. Once Novak upped his level again shortly after, he promptly began to win again, because he's better.

If Novak played an in-form Andy at WD, on the other hand, then Andy would have a chance...

 

[Great Hands]

Can't really raise Andy to Big 3 (or 4) status yet, because although he reached the final in Oz, he dropped a calf just at the moment when he was taking charge.

I'm still trying to get my head around people's interpretation of that AO final. Murray got distracted for a period in the 3rd set when he thought Novak was compromised physically. He then regained his composure shortly after and played some great stuff - he almost broke Novak to go up 4-3 in the third set with some of the best tennis of the whole match being played. In the 4th set, a combination of mental and physical fatigue - they'd played 3 of the most gruelling sets I've seen all year - possibly the 3 most gruelling - and simply being outplayed, meant that he got bagelled in the 4th.

This leads to all this talk of Andy's 'mental demons', but...Novak thrashed Kei in the final set today. And that was a third set, and the first 2 sets played weren't anything like the gruelling sets Djokovic and Murray played. And Kei trains for 5 set matches, and wins them. So do you, Kieran, think Kei has 'mental demons' too?

Did Stan have 'mental demons' when Novak bagelled him in the AO semi - or was he just tired and outplayed?

I think Novak is breadsticking and bagelling a lot at the moment (not JUST Andy, but Kei, Stan and others) because when he plays well, he's just THAT good. Especially on slow hards, which is all Andy has played him on this year, and where Andy has never beaten him since 2011, when Novak became the all-time great he is today.

So far this year, Novak has 10 bagels - 10! - and 11 breadsticks. That's 21 complete annihilations in sets, and some against top players. When he does this to other players, no one psychoanalyses their mental issues. When it happens to Andy, suddenly it's a mental issue. It doesn't make sense.

I think people get caught up in thinking it's mental because Andy shouts at himself a bit. But he did that throughout his semi final against Berdych, played great and won the match in 4. Djokovic is just a better player, especially on slow hards.

And when was Andy 'taking charge'? It was 1 set all, and he had one break, right at the start of the set, which is virtually meaningless when these two play, because their matches are normally break-of-serve fests. When Andy was 2-0 up in that 3rd set, I was still thinking of Novak as the favourite for the set and the match, because he's the better player, especially on slow hards, [and i thought those first 23 stes had probably taken too much out of andy for him to win another 2, plus he's never beaten novak after losing the first set] and Andy's never beaten him at the AO, and in fact no one has beaten him at the AO in the last 5 years except Stan (and that only just!), and Andy doesn't have Stan's offensive game to take the match out of Novak's hands. Andy has to try to grind Djokovic down, which is almost impossible over 5 sets on slow hards, currently. And Andy got that break because Novak went through a short spell of feeling sub-par physically. Once Novak upped his level again shortly after, he promptly began to win again, because he's better.

If Novak played an in-form Andy at WD, on the other hand, then Andy would have a chance...

 

[DarthFed]

I will buy Roger's stock. He's winning a slam this year! Might not finish 2nd but that would make it better than 2014.

 

[nehmeth]

Nole = Buy
Roger = Hold
Rafa = Sell

Well, Murray's ranked #3 and Ralf has dropped out of the top 4.

Nole - Buy
Fed - Hold
Murray - Buy

Ralf - Hold for another couple weeks.

 

[herios]

Well, it's definitely a big 1 this year so far - Novak has been completely dominant.

If we use the old phrase 'big 4', they are still dominating this year. Look at the finals of all the big events so far this year:

AO: Djokovic - Murray
IW: Djokovic - Federer
Miami: Djokovic - Murray
Monte Carlo: Djokovic - Berdych
Madrid: Murray - Nadal

That's 9 out of 10 final spots taken by the big 4. And unless Stan and/or Ferrer spoil the party, it'll be 11 out 12 final spots this year for the big 4 by Sunday.

I am glad you summarized it up to date because what I am seeing here is:

Novak 4 times in finals and won all of them
Andy 3 times and won 1
Roger, Tomas and Rafa only 1 which they lost.
So in fact out of the Big 4, only Novak and Andy are performing well, Rafa and Roger are on even terms with Tomas (!!!) and basically a lot less relevant than they used to be.
The Fedal duo is fading, as far as I am concerned.
I will make a projection here, Roger and Rafa could end up the season in the 5-8 range, which would not surprise me at all.

 

[DarthFed]

Wishful thinking in regards to Roger. Fast courts are around the corner

 

[britbox]

Well, it's definitely a big 1 this year so far - Novak has been completely dominant.

If we use the old phrase 'big 4', they are still dominating this year. Look at the finals of all the big events so far this year:

AO: Djokovic - Murray
IW: Djokovic - Federer
Miami: Djokovic - Murray
Monte Carlo: Djokovic - Berdych
Madrid: Murray - Nadal

That's 9 out of 10 final spots taken by the big 4. And unless Stan and/or Ferrer spoil the party, it'll be 11 out 12 final spots this year for the big 4 by Sunday.

I am glad you summarized it up to date because what I am seeing here is:

Novak 4 times in finals and won all of them
Andy 3 times and won 1
Roger, Tomas and Rafa only 1 which they lost.
So in fact out of the Big 4, only Novak and Andy are performing well, Rafa and Roger are on even terms with Tomas (!!!) and basically a lot less relevant than they used to be.
The Fedal duo is fading, as far as I am concerned.
I will make a projection here, Roger and Rafa could end up the season in the 5-8 range, which would not surprise me at all.

No surprises there Herios old pal - you've been projecting that for about 10 years.

 

[Fiero425]

Well, it's definitely a big 1 this year so far - Novak has been completely dominant.

If we use the old phrase 'big 4', they are still dominating this year. Look at the finals of all the big events so far this year:

AO: Djokovic - Murray
IW: Djokovic - Federer
Miami: Djokovic - Murray
Monte Carlo: Djokovic - Berdych
Madrid: Murray - Nadal

That's 9 out of 10 final spots taken by the big 4. And unless Stan and/or Ferrer spoil the party, it'll be 11 out 12 final spots this year for the big 4 by Sunday.

I am glad you summarized it up to date because what I am seeing here is:

Novak 4 times in finals and won all of them
Andy 3 times and won 1
Roger, Tomas and Rafa only 1 which they lost.
So in fact out of the Big 4, only Novak and Andy are performing well, Rafa and Roger are on even terms with Tomas (!!!) and basically a lot less relevant than they used to be.
The Fedal duo is fading, as far as I am concerned.
I will make a projection here, Roger and Rafa could end up the season in the 5-8 range, which would not surprise me at all.

No surprises there Herios old pal - you've been projecting that for about 10 years.

Well a couple years anyway! :snicker :laydownlaughing :dodgy:

 

[Kieran]

Actually, if it was a stick exchange, Rafa's stock would be the cheapest, so it would be the stock to buy. He can only gain after Paris. His stock will rise.

Nole, I'd hold, Roger I'd probably sell, based upon the idea that he won't be as successful this year as last.

Andy? Buy.

 

[Kirijax]

Djokovic: Buy Buy Buy!

Murray: Buy!

Federer: Sell!

Nadal: Sell! Sell! Sell!

 

[herios]

No surprises there Herios old pal - you've been projecting that for about 10 years.

Really?? Perhaps you can tell me where did we meet 10 years ago, cause I cannot recall

 

[britbox]

^ OK, mild exaggeration... I'll refine it to 5 or 6 years... and we met under the clock at tennis.com. You were wearing a "Roger is finished" badge.