Видео

osaka won 15 points last 5 games Iga won 26 63%

thank you Gill 22 titles 5 grand slams yearly wins Iga 65 67 and 45 so far this year not even close to others

- I cannot believe how much you guys missed your reasoning behind the wta big 3 thing - they are lumped together as big 3 not mainly because of their overall results rather its the way they matchup - rybakina is one of the few players that has a winning record against iga - sabalenka have a losing record against iga but some of the losses saba suffered were by razor thin margins (us open semis, madrid finals) - saba and ryba AO finals adds fuel to the big 3 narrative big time - on the other hand you guys are being so generous to gauff she is nice girl but let's be honest, not only she has an 11-1 record but the way she lost them is just sad (complete mismatch), there's no way in hell you can put iga and gauff on something like a big 3 the way they matched up so far - the reason why people don't consider iga as big 1 is because she has not been dominant GS wise (only in RG)

Grass is very dangerous. A slip and a fall forced Henin into a second retirement with a severe elbow injury. People prefer dualistic thinking. Good and Evil, Agassi/Sampras. Beatles/Stones, Nadal/Federer. Djokovic made it awkward.

Heres my WTA top 5 Iga, Saba, Elena Noami and Justine Coco isnt top ten. Winning matches over lower ranked players who commit tons of unforced errors is not how its done Ability wise, shes not close to those 5

Even in Rap music there's a BIG 3 Debate J. Cole - Kendrick Lamar - Drake 😅 There's the Holy Trinity Movie Trilogies

Joel, Amy & Gill - agree with all THREE! Djoker: No Wimby-24. Hamburg is a beautiful city-HH. Seeing Novak & Rafael @ Hamburg & Paris Olympics should be Wunderbar und ausgezeichnet!! Thanx guyz. Best, Milan p.s. Amy - yes it would shock me for Rafa @ Wimby-24.

Coco really could have been a 3 time Roland garros champion if she could get pass IGA 🤷🏾‍♂️

I think the Big 3 in the WTA excluding Coco owes to the fact that there is the perception that, at their best, Rybakina and Sabalenka will beat Swiatek on fast and medium courts, whereas Coco would probably lose to all three, due to the overwhelming power Rybakina and Sabalenka have on those surfaces, leaving the matches on their racquets (and Iga even more dominant on slower surfaces). Statistically I would agree that it is a Big One, with Swiatek dominating in results vs the field, and then you would probably have to include Coco in a larger Big 4. I think over time (I would say over the next 2-3 years), things will settle, with either Coco having more success in matches against the other 3 (she's only played Rybakina once, and it was virtually a tie, as is the head to head vs Sabalenka at 4-3), and Rybakina and/or Sabalenka having more consistent success in Grand Slams, or both or neither. I think the actual timeframe is still short to talk of a definitive Big 3 or Big 4, I would agree that its only a Big One at the moment. Also I think in very short time Osaka will join the conversation into a Big 5, just by judging her form at Roland Garros.

There's no WTA big 3. There's Swiatek, and then Sabalenka, Rybakina and Gauff lagging behind.

Summary of the video (hosted by Americans): Gauff (from USA) deserves to take the place of Rybakina in the big 3. Now, if we refer to the numbers, it is either a big 1 or a big 4 but we must not only look at the numbers, you also have to look at what the players themselves think. Several players say that Elena, Iga and Aryna are the players to beat since 2023 (+ There are interesting rivalries between these 3 players). Coco is not YET fully integrated into this group of players (from the outside but also from the inside)

Guys you need a better interface.

Gill attempted some comparison between Rybakina's movement and Gauff's forehand as things that could hold them back from beating Swiatek. That comparison doesn't really work, because Rybakina has a winning record (4-2) against Swiatek, while Gauff has a miserably losing record (1-11) against Swiatek.

Why can't Rafa play Wimbledon, it's not like he's gonna be playing 7 five set matches given that he'll likely draw Sinner or Alcaraz in the first round.

WTA was never really a big 3 for the reasons you guys outlined. For me, all about whether Osaka comes to the party. That's a game changer. Her, Gauff, Sabalenka, Iga, possibly Rybakina, all in exciting 50:50 matches on hardcourt, in the biggest tournaments.

The ATP is leaning heavily into the big 2 narrative. Seen on their social media, posters of them being rivals and buddies and nice guys. Very much wanting to follow the blueprint of Rafa and Roger, where the fanbase was split on their favourite and both were attractive brands.

Amy and Gill both wearing mauve. Any particular reason?

You need to rebrand the podcast

I think wta big 3 originated from Sabalenka and Rybakina having similar weapons that can trouble Iga. Coco is not included because the obvious criteria are whether they can beat Iga or put her on the stretch.

We’ve seen Rybakina stomp Iga and Aryna and she’s made it to finals or won this year. I love Coco but she’s not there yet- and I mean “yet”.

Great discussion as ever! I do think the timeline of the "WTA Big 3" discussion is key though, if you want to understand why this phrase gets used, and you didn't really refer to this - instead you got into the weeds on some points, like Gauff's play style, which I think are far less fundamental and rather more dubious. Shouldn't the starting point here be that the big 3 term started to be used in the first half of the 2023 season. If you take that period in microcosm then there is no mystery at all. Sabalenka won the AO and Madrid, Rybakina won Indian Wells and Rome, made final of AO and Miami, and was the defending Wimbledon champion; and Iga was Iga, though didn't actually win a big title until Roland Garros. Gauff was nowhere near their level over this period - it would have been incomprehensible for anyone to put her alongside those 3 until the North American hardcourt season. There's no doubt that those 3 were in a tier of their own over that 6-month period, surely. So I think really the issue is a) people too quick to look for a pattern of 3 on the basis of just 6 months of results; b) stickiness - once a term or a narrative like this takes hold, people are slow to update based on the changing reality - it's a sort of confirmation bias. As you say, if they were quicker to update then this would bring Gauff into the conversation and has Iga clearly out on her own. Those seem to me to be the key points.

Great podcast, thank you. 👍

Iga is incredible. She seems not to get the recognition she deserves as she's humble and quiet.

They really got start thinking about changing the name of this podcast

Amy is dumb as hell. "I have a theory about Coco. Her game isn't pleasing to some people". Gross. Coco had a month and a half of great tennis ON HOME SOIL when the rest of the field was dead tired and the temp was 100 degrees. There is no big three. There's just iga and sabalenka.

If Swiatek wins Wimbledon, the talk around her will change.

It isn't that Nadal doesn't want to beat Novak's record. Nadal knows that he doesn't have much of a chance at Wimbledon, not because he prioritize his body more 😂

Ancient Romans: 'omne trinum perfectum'.

I think the answer to the WTA “big 3” thing is very clear- it’s about the head-to-heads. There’s this very satisfying rock-paper-scissors relationship in the matchup advantages (Iga beats Saba, Saba beats Ryba, Ryba beats Iga), and at the same time, it feels like any of the the three could beat the others on the right day. Coco doesn’t fit as nicely into that equation specifically because of her matchup with Iga, even if she does as well if not better against the rest of the field.

Effortless is definitely a myth if you want to be at the top of your “game” in any profession. Innovative episode on the three obsession in all areas of life! Enjoyed it guys. Keep it coming.

Iga's not the big one in the eyes of a larger audience because she isn't doing it across slams. QF Wimbledon, 4th round USO, 3rd round AO... that's not big one material yet. I think there will be more of a coronation once she starts racking up more grand slams. People don't watch madrid and rome like they watch wimbledon and the uso.

Coco is the only one who carries American tennis. Actually a question I would like to ask for the mail bag. Is our American tennis players generally slightly overranked because despite some making deep runs at Grand slams, it really feels like they're at least a tier or two away from seriously contending for a Grand slam title and they rack up points during the American swing during the winter time that I feel bloats their ranking and then rarely impress on Clay or grass

About Gauff, it is just that she has not been at the top for long enough. Let her there one more year and then the perception will change. But of course Osaka will then be 2 or 3。 About Rybakina, she does beat Swiatek on a regular basis, and that is why she is considered as top 3. About the notion of triad, you make way too much out if this. Look who won grand slams on the last two years and you have a base ground for that notion.

Sabalenka is better than everyone but Iga. Watch her play, she passes the eye test and repeating as Aussie champ speaks for itself. I don’t think Rybarkina will win Wimbledon and I don’t think Coco will repeat as USO champ.

Post French Open, and did Carlos even get a mention?

Best episode in a long time! And that's not even a knock on the quality being bad at all, in fact quite the contrary - this episode was just amazing. Loved the almost academic breakdown of the concept of Three, one that I'm also kind of obsessed with, i have my theories too, mostly about groups of 3 friends, or people in a conversation etc etc. I'll be happy to expand if asked to, but this meta conversation really really spoke to me! 🙌🙌🙌

Big 3 WTA is cute talk once Osaka reminds everyone where they were when she was around collecting hard court slams 😆

The Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost and Coco.

If Iga were American, she would be carried on her arms. Either she's boring, she has a weak personality, she wins too much, she has no competitors, her matches are too short, she doesn't wear make-up... or worst of all, she doesn't like her style of tennis... XD and other absurdities. You also repeat some of them here in your conversation. There hasn't been a great number one for many years who has been at the top for 3 seasons. Neither Barty nor Oska was that regular. Even Wozniacki, who had a problem playing with big hitters in slams.

The American media and US fans are trying to convince themselves that Coco is better than Rybakina this year, and let's be honest, Rybakina has won 3 WTA500 tournaments this year and played the WTA1000 Final. Do you know how many finals Coco has? yes, zero, only won one 250 tournament. If we have to force it, Aryna and Elena, when they play their best tennis, are the BIG3. But in reality there is Światek... then the rest. Iga already has more titles in her career than Coco, Elena and Aryna. That says a lot.

another point about 3. it is the most stabil number. your kitchen table (with 4legs) might wobble, your tripod never will, even when it's tilled badly to one side. it will remain stabil.

people are very good at finding patterns. Sometimes too good, finding the patterns where there are none. There goes your conspiracy theories. So, if people want to find the pattern of 3, they will certainly find it and stick with it. Next big 3 on ATP side? easy. Alcaraz, Sinner, Rune. What about Medvedev or Zverev or Tsitsipas? don''t fit the pattern, so they are out. Data says otherwise, but people see what they want to see.

Joel losing his mind about the number 3 is amazing

Joel spoke so well about the 3.

I agree with with Amy’s theory. It’s because of the way Coco was winning her matches from Doha to her first three matches in Rome. I am a huge fan of Coco but some of her matches during that period were really not fun to watch.

Djokovic was soooo miserable in the last Olympics, bad in singles, and even worse in mixed doubles - failed to show for the bronze medal match. Broke lots of rackets!

Hi Gill - I hope your Gran is still alive. Which town is she from?: There's HAMburg in the north where they play tennis, and there's HOMburg, like the hat, over by the French border. They aren't pronounced the same.

I prefer when tennis is an anybody can win on any different day.

Amy isn't that how tennis works ? Coco just wins ugly.

Iga does not have the personality to carry being #1. I know she is but she is never going to be a Serena type personality. I just don't see her changing that image. You are correct Joel.