The men known to us as the Big 4—Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, and Andy Murray—have done a lot for the game in the last five years. They’ve played with a combination of brilliance, commitment, and sportsmanship that's a match for any other men’s generation. They’ve won every Grand Slam but one for the last seven years. Collectively, they've won 62 Masters titles; all other active players combined have won 16. But in their dominance, have these four future Hall of Famers also stalled the sport’s evolution?
Three years ago, tennis was in the grip of big man fever. At the U.S. Open that year, Juan Martin del Potro, the 6-foot-6 Argentine, became the tallest player ever to win a major, while his fellow giant and former junior rival Marin Cilic made his own strong showing at the same event by knocking out Andy Murrray. The cognescenti agreed: The game was about to get taller. At Tennis Magazine, we ran an article charting four decades of rising men’s heights, from the 5-foot-8 Rod Laver in 1969, to the 5-foot-11 Bjorn Borg in 1980, to the 6-foot-1 Pete Sampras in 1990, to the 6-foot-6 del Potro in 2009.
The consensus at the time was that height wasn’t what it used to be. More specifically, it wasn’t the detriment that it used to be. Unlike the big-serving beanpoles of old, del Potro and Cilic—along with 6-foot-6 Sam Querrey, 6-foot-5 Tomas Berdych, 6-foot-4 Gael Monfils, and even 6-foot-9 John Isner—were versatile enough to play a smaller man’s baseline game. The previous year, at the 2008 U.S. Open, I had watched Cilic return serve brilliantly in a losing effort against Novak Djokovic. I wrote a column wondering whether increased height would be the trend of the future, but not for the reasons we had thought. In the cases of Cilic and del Potro, it wasn’t their serves that were helped by their size, but their wingspan. Cilic in particular benefited from this on his return; he was one of the few players I had ever seen who could keep two hands on his backhand even when the server stretched him wide to that side.
Fast forward to today, when Cilic took on Roger Federer in the quarterfinals in Shanghai. After a long slump, the Croat is ranked almost exactly where he was three years ago, at No. 16; as 2013 begins, he appears ready to make another run for the Top 10 (last time, in early 2010, he topped out at No. 9). Watching him today, though, I didn’t get the feeling Cilic was breaking new ground for tall tennis players, the way I had three years ago. Against Federer, his height appeared to be a liability. Cilic is not slow, but he’s not as quick or agile or versatile as Federer, or Djokovic, or Nadal, or Murray. Today Federer had success wrong-footing Cilic; he was better at the little things, the pickups and half volleys and improvised shots; and he was the superior defender.
Speed, defense, flexibility, versatility, consistency: Those are the things that, rather than raw power, win the most important tennis matches these days, and it’s no accident that they're all strengths of the Top 4. In the last two years, Djokovic has made being flexible seem more crucial than ever, while Murray has done the same for versatility—he won the U.S. Open with a little bit of everything, except brute strength. The taller men on tour can belt serves and forehands as well as the Big 4, but they can’t match them in the departments listed above.
Still, increased height continues to be considered part of the future of men’s tennis. In 2009, it was del Potro, Cilic, Berdych and others who were on the horizon; now it’s Canada’s Milos Raonic. At 6-foot-5, though, Raonic will never win with speed or defense; if he’s going to be the next Slam champ and member of the Top 5, he’s going to have to win in a way that’s different from how Slams are being won today. He’ll do it with old-fashioned serving power, something that hasn’t been in vogue since the 1990s heyday of his idol Pete Sampras and Goran Ivanisevic.
Maybe the Big 4 has just stalled tennis’ inevitable upward evolution for a few years. Or maybe they’re an extension of the physical norm that always returns to dominate tennis. Bill Tilden, Don Budge, Jack Kramer, Pancho Gonzalez, and Sampras were all around the same height as today’s Top 4 (the great Aussies, Laver, Rosewall, Hoad, were generally shorter). Maybe, whether players are rushing the net or staying at the baseline, a lean and lanky 6-foot-2 will always be the ideal build for a men's tennis player. Maybe it will always be the best way to serve with pace and accuracy, while also covering the whole court.
For now, Cilic is out and three of the Big 4 have moved on to the semifinals in Shanghai. The fourth is Tomas Berdych, who plays Djokovic. The 6-foot-2 Serb is 9-1 against the 6-foot-5 Czech. We’ll see if he can keep the game from growing one more time.