Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you said there are Big 4, are you referring to Wawrinka as the 4th member? If not, are you talking about Murray, who is ranked behind Berdych, Roanic, Ferrer, Dimitrov, and Del Potro, in addition to the top 4 players of the year.
Is there, as of right now, only the Big 3, meaning Djokovic, Nadal, and Federer?
In all seriousness, what is your issue with Andy Murray??? Dude, get a life.
To answer your question, there is only a Big 3 right now, and even that is stretching it considering the gap in ranking points between #2 and #3. For all intents and purposes, there is currently a Big 2 - Djokovic/Nadal or Nadal/Djokovic, depending on your preference.
On a slightly related note, I wonder how many matches Nadal and Djokovic will play against one another in their careers by the time one or both retire. They are currently at 42 (an all-time ATP record). You have to think 50 head-to-head matches is a possibility. (Of course, even if they get to 50 it will still fall far short of the 80 matches Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova played against one another in the 1970s and 1980s.)
Only the current Top 3 have accomplished more in the game than what Murray has.
He has 2 Slams, 7 Major Final appearances, an Olympic Gold medal, 9 Masters titles and a career high ranking of #2.
The other players ranked above him on the rankings right now (other than the Top 3) cannot hold a candle to that.
Only 2 other players have won a Grand Slam in the form of Del Potro (who I believe is not returning until after the USO - ie the Fall season) and Wawrinka.
But, the fact that he has dropped to Number 10, and has not won any titles since his stunning Wimbledon 2013 championship run, is a worrying sign, even allowing for missing the last Fall season and WTF's due to injury.
The run to the RG Semis was a good one, even if he was destroyed by a rampant Nadal there.
I hope he can turn it around this upcoming summer season, he is still only 27, but will have to wait and see.
Paul is a primary Murray fan so maybe he may have some inside info.
Murray's subpar play since returning from his fall 2013 injury does have to make one wonder what is going on. Is his age catching up to him? Is he "full" now that he's won a Grand Slam and more specifically Wimbledon? Is there something else going on?
Regardless what the reasons are for Murray's fall-off, or even if there are any specific reasons, that story bears watching over the next 6-12 months.
I'm not sure why something has to be "going on" with Murray. He might just be having a bad year. That happens.
This is an easy question if you just look at the points the top 2 have. Nadal and Djokovic continue to be leagues ahead of everyone right now. Federer should not be discounted, but he lost out on his chance to beat Djokovic in a best-of-5 match. It has to do with age on his part, and mental strength too. Nadal and Djokovic are not only the fittest players physically, but they are the most mentally strong.
Big 3. Although out of the rest of the top 10 I still put Murray ahead of them as able to beat not only 1 of the top 3 but possibly 2 of them in a best of 5 tournament. I am not a fan of his, mostly can't stand his body language and don't consider him exciting to watch, but I think after a good 2013, some injury, he is just on a small slump and expect him to bounce back the second half of the year.
I'm not sure why something has to be "going on" with Murray. He might just be having a bad year. That happens.
Maybe there is something going on with Murray, maybe there isn't. But it is unusual for a player of Murray's caliber to suddenly drop off in quality without reason.
It is possible that it has taken him longer than expected for him to fully recover from his late 2013 back surgery, which is not an insignificant injury. (On a related side note, that injury is part of the reason why he's dropped to #10; his ranking should go up after the U.S. Open when he can only gain points, including at the Shanghai and Paris Masters and possibly the ATP Tour Finals if he qualifies.)
Maybe there is something going on with Murray, maybe there isn't. But it is unusual for a player of Murray's caliber to suddenly drop off in quality without reason.
It is possible that it has taken him longer than expected for him to fully recover from his late 2013 back surgery, which is not an insignificant injury. (On a related side note, that injury is part of the reason why he's dropped to #10; his ranking should go up after the U.S. Open when he can only gain points, including at the Shanghai and Paris Masters and possibly the ATP Tour Finals if he qualifies.)
Funny and strange as it sounds, but in many ways the current crop of players that don't crash and burn and fade away after early successes is arguably not the norm, and historically unusual.
Think Jim Courier, Marat Safin and even Lleyton Hewitt in the not so distant past.
Funny and strange as it sounds, but in many ways the current crop of players that don't crash and burn and fade away after early successes is arguably not the norm, and historically unusual.
Think Jim Courier, Marat Safin and even Lleyton Hewitt in the not so distant past.
Completely true. Murray was never in the same league as Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic...he was just always lumped in with them. The 3 of them are in a class unto themselves and defintely not the norm when it comes to productivity and longevity.
Completely true. Murray was never in the same league as Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic...he was just always lumped in with them. The 3 of them are in a class unto themselves and defintely not the norm when it comes to productivity and longevity.
Though I agree to some degree, I think that bolded statement above is also a little unfair to Andy Murray. He was "lumped in" with Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic because he was a lot better than the guys right below him, i.e. the guys from 2011-2013 that I called the Second Four - Ferrer, del Potro, Berdych, and Tsonga. (As a side note, I collectively called the guys in the Second Four by that grouping because they were distinctly better than the guys below them.) While Murray's 2 Grand Slam titles and 7 Grand Slam finals appearances pale in comparison with the individual accomplishments of the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic trio, he by himself has as many Slam wins and Slam finals as Ferrer, del Potro, Berdych, Tsonga, Stan Wawrinka, and Robin Soderling have combined. (The six men listed in the latter half of the previous sentence account for 7 of the 8 Grand Slam finals appearances not made by Federer (14), Nadal (17), Djokovic (14), or Murray (7) since the 2007 French Open, a total of 30 Grand Slam events with 60 Grand Slam finalists; only Andy Roddick at Wimbledon in 2009 is not included.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
