For the first time since 2004, neither Roger Federer nor Rafael Nadal nor Novak Djokovic nor Andy Murray are in the Masters 1000 tournament. The so-called Big Four, which has dominated the circuit for the past two decades, was previously reduced to the Big Three due to a serious injury to Morena’s hip. Now with the epidemic, none of the other three agreed to leave Europe to play a tournament in the United States. Thus, to take the first step on the road to rule the men’s circuit at the Miami Open was an open path for the next generation.
Dominic Thiem did not even travel to deal with physical problems. The key was particularly tasty Daniel Medvedev, 25, runner-up at the Australian Open, the world’s No. 2 seed and first seed in Miami; Stefanos Tsitipas, 22 years old, # 5 and head 2 in Florida; And Alexander Zverev, 23, # 7 and author of a recent criticism of world rankings that accumulates points during an epidemic – the German thinks he should be better placed “recently” because of his results.
What happened then, like this Bonus round Of three? Neither of them made it to the semi-finals. Zverev also did not advance beyond his debut. He conceded his defeat to 21-year-old, # 83-year-old boy Emil Roussuvori. Medvedev and Tsitsipas fell in the quarterfinals. The Russian 32-year-old # 12th century Spanard fell to Roberto Botista Agut and the Greek was exterminated by # 37-year-old Pol Hubert Herkaj on the planet. Yes, “Mini Three” disappointed.
Perhaps “to disappoint” is not the most appropriate verb for the occasion. It would not be fair to think that the trio should have gone further (rather than “rather”) to Miami. It may also be naïve to believe that, one day, Medvedev, Tsitsip and Zverev may repeat the dominance that the Big Four practiced and still practice in slams. But, in the end, it is a large section of the tennis public – especially those who have started following the game at some point in the last 20 years – who will judge the Mini Three or whoever contends for the top positions in the rankings. Years to come.
The reference to the Big Four is still very close and very strong. The Big Three still dominate the slams. Thiem was the only “foreigner” to win a slam in the final 16 (!) Tournament of this type – and this was when Nadal and Federer did not compete, and Djokovic was disqualified for the jackpot by the line judge. Therefore, most fans get to see X-Next General, Mini Three, Ruble and so on. As inferior beings, who are, among other things, “disappointed”.
At some point, expectations should be adjusted. The public has to understand that the dominance of the Big Four was something unique in the history of tennis and this is normal – indeed! – It is not repeated. It’s not bad. The most likely scenario for the Big Three post is something like what happens in the WTA today: a dozen names with a real probability of winning each tournament. And, fortunately, the women’s circuit will see the final of the Miami Open between Ashley Barty and Bianca Andriscu, resourceful tennis players who fill their eyes.
For my part as a journalist, columnist, analyst or whatever, it is to see, judge and explain to you. Yes, Medvedev, Tsitsipas and Zverev – each in their own way – left something to be desired in Miami. The Russian was not doing well physically, the Greek lost a game that seemed under control, and the German made a presentation below his best.
More than the trio’s condemnation to miss a great opportunity in a Masters 1000, but much more, the collective result has made this mini-three clear from the Big Three today and the distance from the Big Four that ruled until 2017. So far, not one in the men’s circuit, neither alone nor in a small group with a marketing label, was he able to prove what the Four Fours did for each big tournament.
Dealing with this adjustment of expectations and telling his audience that “so will Federer never happen” or doing anything else is a problem for ATP. Up to three pensions, there will be time. Until then, we can take advantage of the Big Three and understand the Mini Three.
