The Tennis Thread

Aye that was a proper golden era of tennis. Murray was just unfortunate that he happened to peak when these guys were all still playing at the top of the game also, because ultimately, he just wasn’t as good as the other three. Still an unbelievable player however.

 

Even take away that big 4. Compare Draper to other players from those years that reached 4 or higher.

Is Draper better than David Ferrer, David Nalbandian, Juan Del Potro, or Nikolay Davydenko?

Not a * hope in *

 

Yes Murray was a very special player and if somebody had said to me when I was a lad a Scotsman would win Wimbledon not once but twice I would have thought they are insane.

He was unlucky not to win at least one Australian Open as well. But 2 Wimbledon titles alone is fantastic with a US Open, An end of year ATP Championship, a firm world number one for a while , 2 Olympic Golds and numerous tour titles. Yes a very special player indeed.

 

Add Wawrinka into that as well. A winner of 3 different slams.

 

Aye but that's the thing. Players that were regularly in the top 15 or so had a lot more quality than the likes of Draper.

So many names we're not mentioning on that list that I've just forgotten about tbh. Tennis used to be class in the mid 2000s to mid 2010s in particular.

 

I'd say he's the modern day Henman or Rusedski, both got to 4th but weren't particularly special

 

I didn't even realise Henman got as high as 4th in his career. But aye that's defo much more his level.

The big 4 in tennis gets talked about all the time, but the quality just below that was at a really, really high level too and that gets overlooked

 

Henman reached 5 semi finals of grand slam events by the time he reached a career high of world number 4 on July 8th 2002, that was just after he reached his 4th Wimbledon semi final. His semi final appearances at Wimbledon were in 98,99, 01 and 02. The other 2 were in the 04 French and US Opens. Henman peaked at number 6 in 2004.

 

10 years ago the number 4 was Wawrinka, and Draper isn't far off him ability wise. @cidermaster said today's number 4 is 'far weaker' than number 4 of the past. It's not true. Draper wouldn't struggle against the top 10 of the past, he'd be capable of beating many of them. Nostalgia bias is in play here.

Draper is 23 and has won 3 ATP titles, including 1 masters. Murray at 23 had won the same, albeit a different Masters. Although Murray reached the US Open final at 21 and had far less injury issues. I don't think Draper is as good as Murray but he's not far off at the same age, considering his injury issues.

 

Ferrer is underrated, but he's better than Nalbandian and Davydenko. Del Potro maybe not, but Del Potro's body fell apart.

 

Nah disagree man. Draper isn’t at the level of those guys in my view.

But hey ho all about opinions

 

The game's average level is already more athletic and data analytical than 10 to 15 years ago, so Draper would definitely be able to give those guys a solid game, especially when he's also been able to beat Alcaraz at his current level.

 

Wawrinka won 3 slams, all different ones. He was absolutely miles ahead of what Draper currently is. He was competing against the very best in the history of tennis to win them also. So right now, there’s really no argument that can be made to back up the claim that currently the 4th best player is well behind what it used to be. He is only 23, but that’s irrelevant in this argument, because this argument is all about how good the player is right now, and the fact is, number 4 back then is a lot stronger than it is currently.

 

It would not surprise me that Draper will be outside the top 10 this time next year. But I could be wrong. Only time will tell.

There have been much tougher seasons to be world number 4 in the previous decades , no doubt about that. You go by the players around at the time. At the the moment there is a Big Two , one Mega Great hanging on and weak opposition to challenging the big 2.

 

Wawrinka didn't win his first slam until he was 28. You don't have a clue what you're talking about tbh. Wawrinka at 23 had just broken into the top 25, and using slams at the end of a player's career as the only metric to judge quality is a nonsense argument for where a player is right now. There's much more of the season than just the four slams. Anyone who follows the tour year round can see Draper has real quality. His body holding up is another story though.

 

It’s you who doesn’t have a clue and are all over the place. Age is irrelevant. It’s ability we are talking about here, not potential. Draper has made one semi in a slam, and hasn’t been past the 4th round in any others. As I said earlier which you conveniently ignored, Andy Murray was probably 4th best for much of his career behind the three obvious ones. So is Draper currently better than what Murray was?

 

The reason Draper is 4 in the world right now is due to the decline in the game. In years gone by, he wouldn’t be anywhere near as high as that. Not really sure how that can even be disputed to be honest.

 

I've already responded to your initial post about Murray. You using slams as the only metric shows that you don't really understand tennis or what you're talking about.

 

Slams are ultimately what the best players are judged on. Same as golf with majors. You’ve chose to ignore the Murray thing and pluck out the fact Wawrinka was number 4 ten years ago. I’ll try a different way. Would you agree that Murray was probably 4th best for much of his career? How does he compare to Draper?

 

Those within the game place much more value on non-slam events than the casual observer, as they're aware they 500 and 1000 events still have a lot of value.

Can't comment much on golf I just enjoy a round.

No I haven't, I answered it directly.

Yep, it was a comparison of the tour then to the tour now. There isn't much difference between Wawrinka's ability then and Draper's now. The average athletic and tactical level of the tour is higher now than it was then.

I've already answered you directly about this. Read up. Murray is one of the best of all time, I don't think Draper is as good as Murray. Murray was a lot better than Wawrinka btw, which Stan has admitted himself.