Next new Major winner

[mrzz]

If Wawrinka could make a late run from "talented-but-flakey," why not Gael?

Because -- and I now I am starting a debate here -- Wawrinka is WAY more talented than Monfils.

 

[Federberg]

^I'm not sure I agree with that @mrzz. If your argument is that he has a better head on him then ok, but in terms of tools? I would disagree.

Brings up an interesting question though. Is Hewitt more talented than Nalbandian? I would argue not. Talent is just one component

 

[britbox]

Monfils isn't winning a major... ever.

 

[El Dude]

May as well be Monfils as Dimitrov. I looked up his RG results and they're not so good. Highest he ever got was R32 in '09. Is he really a contender on clay, or are we just out of 3rd options? Legitimate question.

For me, pretty much. I see the tiers for RG like so:

Favorite: Nadal
Serious Contenders: Novak, Stan, Andy
Darkhorse candidates: Roger, Thiem, Nishikori, Dimitrov

Everyone else is in a "vaguely possible if the miraculous happens." As you can see there are only three Slamless players on there.

Now if we're talking about players who haven't won Roland Garros, Andy is at the top of the list. Still not a great clay-courter, his results are much improved over the last couple years.

 

[Federberg]

For me, pretty much. I see the tiers for RG like so:

Favorite: Nadal
Serious Contenders: Novak, Stan, Andy
Darkhorse candidates: Roger, Thiem, Nishikori, Dimitrov

Everyone else is in a "vaguely possible if the miraculous happens." As you can see there are only three Slamless players on there.

Now if we're talking about players who haven't won Roland Garros, Andy is at the top of the list. Still not a great clay-courter, his results are much improved over the last couple years.

Murray is a serious contender and Roger isn't? If you're basing it on the assumption that Roger isn't going to give it his all there, then I have to say... that's an assumption. You can't seriously be saying that Andy is in Roger's league as a clay-courter. Surely not!?

 

[mrzz]

^Let us fly under the radar a bit, Federberg! It worked too damn well...

 

[El Dude]

Murray is a serious contender and Roger isn't? If you're basing it on the assumption that Roger isn't going to give it his all there, then I have to say... that's an assumption. You can't seriously be saying that Andy is in Roger's league as a clay-courter. Surely not!?

Fair enough. Maybe I'm trying to protect myself but not getting my hopes up. Further, Roger hasn't reached the French SF since 2012, and not won a big clay title since Madrid in 2012 (although he did win Istanbul in 2015).

But wait...2012...last Slam title. Hmm...

 

[Carol]

I don't believe in " X has not won since......or X has won this and that". If they are really good they can win anytime and any place but I'd say it depends to certain factors and also in what conditions mentally and phisically each players is

 

[El Dude]

Carol, my point is that Roger has been a weaker player on clay over the last five or so years than he was in his prime. Now that might be self-evident, because he's been a weaker player overall, but like Rafa on grass, he's fall further on clay than on his better surfaces.

 

[britbox]

I'm still not seeing Nishikori as a major winner. When he's been in touching distance he's fallen apart. The US Open match with Cilic being the best example. Dimitrov... not really seeing him as one either... like his current form and hope he kicks on... he' got game... hope his start to 2017 isn't a flash in the pan.

 

[Moxie]

Murray is a serious contender and Roger isn't? If you're basing it on the assumption that Roger isn't going to give it his all there, then I have to say... that's an assumption. You can't seriously be saying that Andy is in Roger's league as a clay-courter. Surely not!?

Dude clarified a bit, above. In 2017 terms, Murray is more plausible than Roger on clay...not because Andy will ever be a "better" clay-courter than Roger, by any estimation, but because Fed is unlikely to blow his grass season out by pressing that hard on clay, given his odds. And because clay is so demanding, given his age. Should the stars align, I'm sure he'd give it his all. He said going into the AO final that he was willing not to be able to walk for 5 months. That's a champion's mentality, and he still has it.

 

[Carol]

Carol, my point is that Roger has been a weaker player on clay over the last five or so years than he was in his prime. Now that might be self-evident, because he's been a weaker player overall, but like Rafa on grass, he's fall further on clay than on his better surfaces.

I've always considered Roger as a very good clay player, even better than Novak and much better than Muzz, it doesn't matter if he didn't win any GS in the last years not even on grass and HC but look what he did two weeks ego, what he couldn't do when he was healthy and playing all around the year he has done now after have been 6 months out of the court

 

[Moxie]

I'm still not seeing Nishikori as a major winner. When he's been in touching distance he's fallen apart. The US Open match with Cilic being the best example. Dimitrov... not really seeing him as one either... like his current form and hope he kicks on... he' got game... hope his start to 2017 isn't a flash in the pan.

I was tempted to pick Nishikori as my next new winner. And I would cite the USO for the exact opposite reason you bring it up. He almost didn't enter because of a cyst on his foot, or something. He had probably the hardest road to the final (5-setters, late night matches,) and, though we all say he's 'made of glass,' he beat Djokovic in 4, and did make the final. That's a lot of grit and stamina. It's not surprising he had nothing left for the final. But that performance is what gives me a glimmer of hope for him. What I can't figure out is where he fits, in the most likely Major, for him. He's a good all-around, but not stand-out on any surface. I will say that, if he stays healthy, and others fall away, he's my pick. As to Dimitrov....I'm with you. I'm not seeing it, but in two years the tennis world will likely look different.

 

[El Dude]

Don't forget, also, that Cilic was playing like Stanimal in that tournament - he was unbeatable. Remember how he blew Roger away?

I could see Dimitrov being a mainstay in the QF/SF for the next year or two, then finally sneaking a W in at some point. He's exactly the type of player that sneaks a Slam title in during a regime change.

 

[Moxie]

Since we don't have separate threads for the tournaments this week, and it fits here: Sasha Zverev won the title in Montpellier today, over Gasquet, and Dimitrov won in Sofia. So they're both still on track.