Tennis Thread

[Roy H.]

No Golden Slam as Novak loses.  Hopefully he still gets the US Open and this Japan trip doesn't derail that.

Wow, I’m shocked. Who did he lose to?

Alexander Zverev of Germany. It was in the semis, so he can take the bronze still.  He can also take the bronze in mixed doubles.

It’s weird, too, because he basically dominated the first set.I still think that he would have had a good shot at winning if this was under Grand Slam rules, but so be it.

[Goldstar88]

No Golden Slam as Novak loses.  Hopefully he still gets the US Open and this Japan trip doesn't derail that.

Wow, I’m shocked. Who did he lose to?

Alexander Zverev of Germany. It was in the semis, so he can take the bronze still.  He can also take the bronze in mixed doubles.

It’s weird, too, because he basically dominated the first set.I still think that he would have had a good shot at winning if this was under Grand Slam rules, but so be it.

Zverev is a wildcard. If he’s getting his second serve in, he can beat anyone. There are only a few players that have the skillset to beat Novak: Rafa, Medvedev, Thiem, Tsistsipas, and Zverev.

[Moranis]

Novak lost to Busta of Spain, threw a tizzy, and then withdrew from mixed doubles citing a shoulder injury. If he is really injured the US Open is in doubt and you have to feel bad for his mixed doubles partner who doesn't get a chance to win a bronze

[gouki88]

Novak lost to Busta of Spain, threw a tizzy, and then withdrew from mixed doubles citing a shoulder injury. If he is really injured the US Open is in doubt and you have to feel bad for his mixed doubles partner who doesn't get a chance to win a bronze

He loves his tantrums

[Goldstar88]

Novak lost to Busta of Spain, threw a tizzy, and then withdrew from mixed doubles citing a shoulder injury. If he is really injured the US Open is in doubt and you have to feel bad for his mixed doubles partner who doesn't get a chance to win a bronze

He loves his tantrums

And that’s why the fans don’t love him like they do with Roger and Rafa. Really sucks for his doubles partner.

[Moranis]

Novak pulled out of the Master's event in Cincinnati citing that he needed more time to recover from the Olympics.  His next event will be the US Open.  Be interesting to see how he starts out and if he gets any problematic early match-ups.

[Moranis]

Interesting 1st round match at the US Open with some controversy.

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/32116329/andy-murray-lost-respect-stefanos-tsitsipas-taking-lengthy-bathroom-break-5-hour-match

[tenn_smoothie]

Since the 2005 French Open, the only grand slam that was not won by Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or Novak Djokovic was the 2009 U.S. Open won by Juan Martin Del Potro.

Adding in Andy Murray, no one else made a final last year (Murray and Federer 1 appearance each, with the other 6 slots split evenly by Djokovic and Nadal).  Those four are the only men left at this years Australian Open, which means 4 of the last 5 Grand Slams semi finals comprised those four (last year at Wimbledon Federer lost in the quarters to Tsonga or it would have been 5 straight). 


I don't ever remember a time where 4 men (I'm including Murray since he is clearly way better than everyone else) dominated the rest of the field like this.  Totally impressive, especially since they are all doing it on all 3 surfaces. 


The questions I'm struggling with are

Is this good for tennis?  If not, what can tennis do about it?

What does this mean for American tennis (since none are American)?

Who is going to be the person to challenge those four?

late 70's into early 80's .............. Connors, Borg, McEnroe.

People forget that Jimmy Connors came back in 1982
to sweep Wimbledon (vs McEnroe) and the US Open (vs Lendl) and regain the World #1 ranking.

[Moranis]

Since the 2005 French Open, the only grand slam that was not won by Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or Novak Djokovic was the 2009 U.S. Open won by Juan Martin Del Potro.

Adding in Andy Murray, no one else made a final last year (Murray and Federer 1 appearance each, with the other 6 slots split evenly by Djokovic and Nadal).  Those four are the only men left at this years Australian Open, which means 4 of the last 5 Grand Slams semi finals comprised those four (last year at Wimbledon Federer lost in the quarters to Tsonga or it would have been 5 straight). 


I don't ever remember a time where 4 men (I'm including Murray since he is clearly way better than everyone else) dominated the rest of the field like this.  Totally impressive, especially since they are all doing it on all 3 surfaces. 


The questions I'm struggling with are

Is this good for tennis?  If not, what can tennis do about it?

What does this mean for American tennis (since none are American)?

Who is going to be the person to challenge those four?

late 70's into early 80's .............. Connors, Borg, McEnroe.

People forget that Jimmy Connors came back in 1982
to sweep Wimbledon (vs McEnroe) and the US Open (vs Lendl) and regain the World #1 ranking.

They certainly won a lot, but there was always others winning titles, like Vilas, Wilander, Noah, etc.  For that stretch there (and it really hasn't been much better since that original post) there has just been complete and utter domination by the 3 men that have won the most grand slams in the sports history.  To have that happen at the same time is astonishing.  Imagine how many title they'd have if they weren't taking them from each other.

[Goldstar88]

Interesting 1st round match at the US Open with some controversy.

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/32116329/andy-murray-lost-respect-stefanos-tsitsipas-taking-lengthy-bathroom-break-5-hour-match

That was a great match. Went almost 5hrs...Murray had a lot of opportunities and he just  played too safe at times. Tsistsipas and his antics are becoming obnoxious. A lot of the players despise him for it.

[Moranis]

And seriously since Marat Safin won the 2005 Australian Open, the only guys not the big 3 to win are as follows

09 US - del Potro
12 US - Murray
13 WI - Murray
14 AU - Wawrinka
14 US - Cilic
15 FR - Wawrinka
16 WI - Murray
16 US - Wawrinka
20 US - Thiem (and Novak probably would have won if he didn't DQ himself)

That is it.  In basically 17 years, only 9 grand slam titles have not been won by the big 3 and of those 6 were won by Murray and Wawrinka. 

[Goldstar88]

And seriously since Marat Safin won the 2005 Australian Open, the only guys not the big 3 to win are as follows

09 US - del Potro
12 US - Murray
13 WI - Murray
14 AU - Wawrinka
14 US - Cilic
15 FR - Wawrinka
16 WI - Murray
16 US - Wawrinka
20 US - Thiem (and Novak probably would have won if he didn't DQ himself)

That is it.  In basically 17 years, only 9 grand slam titles have not been won by the big 3 and of those 6 were won by Murray and Wawrinka.

It’s wild. Hoping someone new breaks through and beats Novak at this years US Open. Feel like the only players that can beat him are Zverev and Medvedev. My money is on Zverev. He’s been on a tear  lately.

[tenn_smoothie]

Since the 2005 French Open, the only grand slam that was not won by Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or Novak Djokovic was the 2009 U.S. Open won by Juan Martin Del Potro.

Adding in Andy Murray, no one else made a final last year (Murray and Federer 1 appearance each, with the other 6 slots split evenly by Djokovic and Nadal).  Those four are the only men left at this years Australian Open, which means 4 of the last 5 Grand Slams semi finals comprised those four (last year at Wimbledon Federer lost in the quarters to Tsonga or it would have been 5 straight). 


I don't ever remember a time where 4 men (I'm including Murray since he is clearly way better than everyone else) dominated the rest of the field like this.  Totally impressive, especially since they are all doing it on all 3 surfaces. 


The questions I'm struggling with are

Is this good for tennis?  If not, what can tennis do about it?

What does this mean for American tennis (since none are American)?

Who is going to be the person to challenge those four?

late 70's into early 80's .............. Connors, Borg, McEnroe.

People forget that Jimmy Connors came back in 1982
to sweep Wimbledon (vs McEnroe) and the US Open (vs Lendl) and regain the World #1 ranking.

They certainly won a lot, but there was always others winning titles, like Vilas, Wilander, Noah, etc.  For that stretch there (and it really hasn't been much better since that original post) there has just been complete and utter domination by the 3 men that have won the most grand slams in the sports history.  To have that happen at the same time is astonishing.  Imagine how many title they'd have if they weren't taking them from each other.

For what it's worth -

1976
French - Panatta
Wimbledon - Borg
US Open - Connors

1977
French - Vilas
Wimbledon - Borg
US Open - Vilas

1978
French - Borg
Wimbledon - Borg
US Open - Connors

1979
French - Borg
Wimbledon - Borg
US Open - McEnroe

1980
French - Borg
Wimbledon - Borg
US Open - McEnroe

1981
French - Borg
Wimbledon - Borg
US Open - McEnroe

1982
French - Wilander
Wimbledon - Connors
US Open - Connors

1983
French - Noah
Wimbledon - McEnroe
US Open - Connors

Also note that:
Connors won Wimbledon and US Open and Australian in '74. (Connors banned from the French or he would have won the Grand Slam)
Borg won Paris in '74, '75 & Wimbledon in '76,
McEnroe won Wimbledon '84, US Open '84
(The Australian was not a high priority in this era, though still a Grand Slam event)

A couple of interlopers, but the Big 3 dominated.

[Goldstar88]

Novak is running into some trouble for his quest for the calendar slam and most majors of all time. He’s playing a 20 year old American who took the first set 6-1. Djokovic is leading in the second. Incredible match on ESPN

[Moranis]

Novak is running into some trouble for his quest for the calendar slam and most majors of all time. He’s playing a 20 year old American who took the first set 6-1. Djokovic is leading in the second. Incredible match on ESPN

won the 2nd set 6-3 and is leading 5-1 in the 3rd.  Seems like the trouble is probably averted.