PDA

View Full Version : More Entertaining Decade


President
08-04-2009, 03:43 PM
I see a lot of debate on here about the 90's vs the 00's. What often doesn't get addressed is which decade was more entertaining.

I don't want people to just vote for whichever decade had your favorite players, but rather which produced the best and most entertaining tennis.

FredMurray
08-04-2009, 03:50 PM
The 80s were more entertaining than both, IMO of course.

Anyway,I voted for the 90s because no player was completely dominant.

JeMar
08-04-2009, 03:50 PM
80s.

(10char)

President
08-04-2009, 03:54 PM
Notice how I said "more entertaining decade", not "most entertaining decade". This is only between the 1990's and the 2000's.

フェデラー
08-04-2009, 03:58 PM
00's. But 80's were great. But by far 00's. Federer and Nadal have provided the most entertaining tennis of the century.

BorisRogerFan
08-04-2009, 04:07 PM
The 80s without a doubt:

Mac -Connors

Mac-Borg

Mac-Lendl

Becker-Lendl

Edberg-Becker

and..

Leconte, Noah, Gilbert, Mecir...

President
08-04-2009, 04:08 PM
The 80s without a doubt:

Mac -Connors

Mac-Borg

Mac-Lendl

Becker-Lendl

Edberg-Becker

and..

Leconte, Noah, Gilbert, Mecir...

As I said before...please keep 80's nostalgia out of this. Keep discussion limited to 90's vs 00's :)

President
08-04-2009, 04:10 PM
Personally I think the 00's are a lot more entertaining. The quality of tennis seems much better and more enjoyable. For example, 90's Wimbledon was (to me) a bit boring. The rallies were too short, and I felt that we didn't get to see any variety. Now, we have just had 3 great Wimbledon finals in a row, all more entertaining than anything 90's Wimbledon had to offer (imo).

To me, the evolution of tennis has led to much more enjoyable matches.

norbac
08-04-2009, 04:13 PM
For the men the 00's has been better, for the women the 90's.

BorisRogerFan
08-04-2009, 04:15 PM
Then 00s by far. 90s, specially the second half, are vastly overrated. 1997-2003 is quite possibly the worst period in Open era.

T1000
08-04-2009, 04:20 PM
2000-end of 2005 was very good, especially 2005 (best year in tennis imo)

2006-2009 has been boring

90s was better overall because you didnt know who was gonna win, at least 5 contenders to each slam

JoshDragon
08-04-2009, 06:02 PM
2000's, but I wasn't watching tennis in the 90s.

EtePras
08-04-2009, 06:33 PM
90's was exciting... with no good players in the world at all, the chokefests made every match unpredictable.

Bilbo
08-04-2009, 06:47 PM
The 70's... ahh yes, Manolo Orantes' old stomping grounds. Can it really get ANY better than that?

Bilbo
08-04-2009, 06:49 PM
The 80s without a doubt:

Mac -Connors

Mac-Borg

Mac-Lendl

Becker-Lendl

Edberg-Becker

and..

Leconte, Noah, Gilbert, Mecir...

Borg's best years were in the 70's my friend... as were Connors'.

VivalaVida
08-04-2009, 06:49 PM
Def the 2000's cuz my favorite players Federer and Safin played in this time.

sh@de
08-04-2009, 07:05 PM
2000's for me

GameSampras
08-04-2009, 09:04 PM
I didnt catch any 80s as it was before my time.. Early to mid 90s IMO were the most exciting that I have witnessed. 92-96 or so. From probably 98-03 it was pretty rough.. Alot of the greats retired and early 00s Pete was gone almost, Andre on his last legs.


03-07 was just plain dreadful.. And I thought we seen a change with some new blood developing and becoming slam winners around 08 . But unfortunately, I was wrong.. Its been the Fed-Nadal show for the better part of 4 years now. Tennis is a tough sport to watch when 2 players are dominating as much as Nadal and Fed have for around a half a decade.

I think new stars need to be developed for ATP to get behind. New slam winners and consisentent proven stars need to finally come along

norbac
08-04-2009, 09:14 PM
I didnt catch any 80s as it was before my time.. Early to mid 90s IMO were the most exciting that I have witnessed. 92-96 or so. From probably 98-03 it was pretty rough.. Alot of the greats retired and early 00s Pete was gone almost, Andre on his last legs.


03-07 was just plain dreadful.. And I thought we seen a change with some new blood developing and becoming slam winners around 08 . But unfortunately, I was wrong.. Its been the Fed-Nadal show for the better part of 4 years now. Tennis is a tough sport to watch when 2 players are dominating as much as Nadal and Fed have for around a half a decade.

I think new stars need to be developed for ATP to get behind. New slam winners and consisentent proven stars need to finally come along

The 08 Aussie Open gave me so much hope....At the beginning of this year I thought it would be epic with the big four as main contenders at Slams and a lot of outside contenders but just look at who has won all the Slams so far this year.....

World Beater
08-04-2009, 09:15 PM
for sure it was the 90's.

i loved watching rusedski - sampras...or sampras - goran.

those aces and two stroke points were prime examples of athleticism, talent and mental toughness.

oh how the good times are gone!

GameSampras
08-04-2009, 09:18 PM
The 08 Aussie Open gave me so much hope....At the beginning of this year I thought it would be epic with the big four as main contenders at Slams and a lot of outside contenders but just look at who has won all the Slams so far this year.....


2008 was looking kind of promsing..Djoker was playing on all cylinders and looked like he was the next big thing.. But he has taken a bit of downward spiral unfortunately due to whatever reasons..


Murray still shows he isnt ready for the big time of winning slams...


Sadly we are back to a two man show.. When Nadal is out Fed is dominating. With Fed struggling, Nadal was dominating. Its kind of sad after all these years, not ONE OTHER PLAYER has proven to be legimitate slam winners , get the top and STAY THERE.

And the sad thing is I thought we might have begun to seen that already.. Fed is still tough but I dont think he is the unstoppable monster he used to be 05-06. And also Djoker and Murray have played him well outside the slams.. But for some reason as soon as slams show up... What happens?? DJoker and Murray dont step up.. Of course no one else does either.. Its almost as if no one is CAPABLE of WINNING AS SLAM..

And thats sad.. Im sorry. These guys really need to get it together and try devloping some big time careers for themselves.. Because outside of Fed and Nadal.. Not one other player has

grafselesfan
08-04-2009, 10:25 PM
2008 was looking kind of promsing..Djoker was playing on all cylinders and looked like he was the next big thing.. But he has taken a bit of downward spiral unfortunately due to whatever reasons..


Murray still shows he isnt ready for the big time of winning slams...


Sadly we are back to a two man show.. When Nadal is out Fed is dominating. With Fed struggling, Nadal was dominating. Its kind of sad after all these years, not ONE OTHER PLAYER has proven to be legimitate slam winners , get the top and STAY THERE.

And the sad thing is I thought we might have begun to seen that already.. Fed is still tough but I dont think he is the unstoppable monster he used to be 05-06. And also Djoker and Murray have played him well outside the slams.. But for some reason as soon as slams show up... What happens?? DJoker and Murray dont step up.. Of course no one else does either.. Its almost as if no one is CAPABLE of WINNING AS SLAM..

And thats sad.. Im sorry. These guys really need to get it together and try devloping some big time careers for themselves.. Because outside of Fed and Nadal.. Not one other player has

Djokovic and Murray are dissapointing to me at the moment too. I am not a Murray fan at all to be honest, but he still should be stepping up more in the slams than he is now. Everytime I mention he hasnt delivered in the slams yet other than the U.S Open last year (where he still put up a meek performance vs Federer who he has fared well against overall of late) his fanatics come up with all the excuses in the book. Really I could see that once or twice, but eventually you just have to put up or shut up. 3 slams in a row now he has lost to someone he wasnt expected to lose, not even reaching the big battle he was expected to reach. If he loses to Federer and Nadal and performs admirably in doing so that is one thing, but he isnt even reaching them. OK great tennis in the Masters events, yes we all know Federer and Nadal (the two great players of this era) step it up for the slams which makes the same success vs them them harder. Still all this great tennis and big wins in Masters events, and then it comes to the slams poof except one U.S Open final. Come on now, you have to do better then that.

Djokovic is an even bigger dissapointment right now perhaps. I dont know what to make of him at the moment. He is turning into the new Safin. Mentally he is so fragile and he has become such an insanely streaky player, almost to the point of being a Safin-like nut. His rumoured off court partying ways are becoming very Safin-like too. I mean I actually like that aspect of them in a way, it is cool they enjoy life and are not just these stodgy personality-less tennis geeks, but to some degree you have to prioritize and keep it in balance if you want to be a true champion.

DunlopDood
08-04-2009, 11:30 PM
I voted 90's because I have such fond memories of that decade. Plus, there were so many big names playing then (Becker, Sampras, Agassi, Rafter, Courier, Kafenikof, Kuerten, Moya) I'm sure I missed a bunch. Today it seems that Nadal and Federer are winning everything.

JoshDragon
08-05-2009, 10:25 AM
I didnt catch any 80s as it was before my time.. Early to mid 90s IMO were the most exciting that I have witnessed. 92-96 or so. From probably 98-03 it was pretty rough.. Alot of the greats retired and early 00s Pete was gone almost, Andre on his last legs.


03-07 was just plain dreadful.. And I thought we seen a change with some new blood developing and becoming slam winners around 08 . But unfortunately, I was wrong.. Its been the Fed-Nadal show for the better part of 4 years now. Tennis is a tough sport to watch when 2 players are dominating as much as Nadal and Fed have for around a half a decade.

I think new stars need to be developed for ATP to get behind. New slam winners and consisentent proven stars need to finally come along

It's not a tough sport to watch if you like them. It's only difficult if your favorite player retired from tennis nearly 7 years ago.

Enigma_87
08-05-2009, 10:36 AM
00's based on the quality of the game.
90's based on variety of styles and surfaces.

96-00 were pretty bad, 00-02 with the exception of the USO and RG were also not that great.

Federer and Nadal's rivalry took it to another level. Agassi was a headcase most of the time in the 90's and we weren't able to watch an rivalry as intense as Fed-Nadal.

With the development in technology most of the tennis players make shots from all around the court that seemed virtually impossible back 10 years ago.

So overall if you want to watch better variety in style, but less quality - 90's. If you want to watch more quality tennis and less variety in style - 00's. I choose the latter one.

theroleoftheunderdog
08-05-2009, 10:39 AM
2008 was looking kind of promsing..Djoker was playing on all cylinders and looked like he was the next big thing.. But he has taken a bit of downward spiral unfortunately due to whatever reasons..


Murray still shows he isnt ready for the big time of winning slams...


Sadly we are back to a two man show.. When Nadal is out Fed is dominating. With Fed struggling, Nadal was dominating. Its kind of sad after all these years, not ONE OTHER PLAYER has proven to be legimitate slam winners , get the top and STAY THERE.

And the sad thing is I thought we might have begun to seen that already.. Fed is still tough but I dont think he is the unstoppable monster he used to be 05-06. And also Djoker and Murray have played him well outside the slams.. But for some reason as soon as slams show up... What happens?? DJoker and Murray dont step up.. Of course no one else does either.. Its almost as if no one is CAPABLE of WINNING AS SLAM..

And thats sad.. Im sorry. These guys really need to get it together and try devloping some big time careers for themselves.. Because outside of Fed and Nadal.. Not one other player has

:cry::cry::cry:

CCNM
08-05-2009, 01:54 PM
I watched more tennis in the 1990's (was in school & didn't have to work!:)), and liked it a lot-almost seriously considered grabbing my mom's old raquet & hitting balls.

THUNDERVOLLEY
08-05-2009, 03:00 PM
The 90s. More legends, more variety (instead of the mindless hack baseliner obsession today and legions of hyped failures never proving themselves), and many wars. Very exciting tennis era to live through.

Emelia21
08-05-2009, 04:23 PM
The 90's for me, great memories :)