Stanislas Wawrinka’s run through this year’s Australian Open was impressive and included a dramatic, five-set win over defending champion Novak Djokovic. Wawrinka fought through heat, and a stacked slate of opponents in order to win the tournament. His final win even came against world No. 1, Rafael Nadal.
But rest assured, the big three of Nadal, Djokovic and Roger Federer are not going anywhere.
From 2005 to 2012, the big three won all but four of the major tournaments (Wimbledon, The U.S. Open, Roland Garros and the Australian Open). Marat Safin, Juan Martín del Potro and Andy Murray were the only people to hoist a trophy until Wawrinka broke through last week.
Del Potro’s 2009 U.S. Open win appears to be the most similar to Wawrinka’s recent success.
Del Potro made the semifinals at the French Open in 2009 before winning the U.S. Open two slams later. Similarly, Wawrinka made the semifinals of the U.S. Open last year before going on to win this year’s Australian Open.
Another striking similarity is that Wawrinka defeated both Djokovic and Nadal, No. 1 and No. 2 in the world respectively, on his way to the crown down under. In 2009, del Potro defeated Nadal and Federer on his way to the title.
Unfortunately for del Potro, he has yet to return to a Grand Slam final, let alone win, since his victory in 2009. A lingering wrist injury as well as bad luck has prevented him from breaking into tennis’s big three.
Time will tell if Wawrinka can build off his newfound success but if the past is any indicator, it will certainly be an uphill battle against some of the most dominating players the game has ever seen.
Even in this year’s Australian Open, Federer and Nadal made the semifinals. And remember, the French Open is next, which Nadal has casually won eight of the last nine. Who won the one Nadal didn’t? That’s right. Federer.
Wawrinka’s success seems to come on hard courts. He has only made one quarterfinal on the clay in France, and has never seen the quarterfinals on the lawns of Wimbledon.
Del Potro and Safin got their Grand Slam wins on hard courts too. Clay courts and grass courts are too nuanced for inexperienced players.
Watch Nadal move at the French Open or Federer play at Wimbledon and then watch anyone else. The difference is clear.
Success on hard courts is probably because they are the most common on the professional circuit. Of the top-14 tennis tournaments in the world, four Grand Slams and ten Masters tournaments, nine of them are played on hard courts. Because of this, it is easy to see why players typically get their first Grand Slam win in Melbourne or New York. They have more experience playing high pressure matches on hard courts.
Also, this year’s Australian Open was nonconventional due to the fact that it saw four sustained days of temperatures over 105 degrees. The heat was probably why the first day, nine players couldn’t finish their matches and withdrew from the tournament, including the top-ranked American, John Isner.
Despite the turbulence in the first few days, the big three still managed to beat the heat and last until the quarterfinals.
The top ranking in men’s tennis has stayed with Nadal, Federer or Djokovic since Feb. 2, 2004. It’s safe to say it isn’t going anywhere anytime soon either.
Wawrinka’s win is refreshing and honestly, I’m happy for the guy. That being said, it is a bit premature to claim tennis’s greatest dynasty anything but over.
Will another player not named Nadal, Federer or Djokovic win a Grand Slam event this year? Email sports@dailycardinal.com and let Grey know what you think.
