astronautzor
Rookie
Some decline in their 20s, some peak at 30+.. some retire early, some retire late.
Whatever you lose entering your 30s, you can gain so much more, Tactical play, Anticipation, Mentality, Accuracy
Sure,you decline in a 100m sprint from when you are 25 to when you are 35.
But a lot of other things have yet to hit peak, as concentration peaks at the age of 43 (according to studies), most brain activities peak after 40
So it all depends if you decline to much physically, skip trainings, motivation, unhealthy food etc.. it then outweighs the positive things that peak in your 30s
And thus retires, which was the case of a lot of athletes back in the day
Wawrinka and Agassi are the prime examples of that you can play better tennis in your late 30s then in your early "peak physical age"
It all depends if you only lose 5% of your "physical abilities" but gain 10%+ in other departments..
Ronaldo at 34 years of age in a contact sport like football manged to turn around a 0-2 deficit to 3-2 by scoring an hattrick.
And football is way more "Physical" dependent than tennis.
Does this mean that Ronaldo is in same "physical" shape as when he was 24-26? or runs as fast? No.
But he has probably managed to reduce his decline to something like 5%-10% at max, and the other parts that peak in old age are able to somewhat neutralize his "decline"
Some make fun of the fact Federer lost 1 set to a 35 year old Agassi in the USO Final, but my belief is that Federer probably would have straight setted a 25 year old Agassi.
Peak is when you have the perfect balance, previously that age was around 24-27.. the trend i see now 28-31.
Thats why it frustrates me when people assume "Weak era" because of all this, when it surely didnt help Novak in Indian Wells when a 35 year old Kohlschreiber could still
Play his best tennis.. does it make it a strong era? Perhaps, but sure as hell doesn't make it a weak one.
Whatever you lose entering your 30s, you can gain so much more, Tactical play, Anticipation, Mentality, Accuracy
Sure,you decline in a 100m sprint from when you are 25 to when you are 35.
But a lot of other things have yet to hit peak, as concentration peaks at the age of 43 (according to studies), most brain activities peak after 40
So it all depends if you decline to much physically, skip trainings, motivation, unhealthy food etc.. it then outweighs the positive things that peak in your 30s
And thus retires, which was the case of a lot of athletes back in the day
Wawrinka and Agassi are the prime examples of that you can play better tennis in your late 30s then in your early "peak physical age"
It all depends if you only lose 5% of your "physical abilities" but gain 10%+ in other departments..
Ronaldo at 34 years of age in a contact sport like football manged to turn around a 0-2 deficit to 3-2 by scoring an hattrick.
And football is way more "Physical" dependent than tennis.
Does this mean that Ronaldo is in same "physical" shape as when he was 24-26? or runs as fast? No.
But he has probably managed to reduce his decline to something like 5%-10% at max, and the other parts that peak in old age are able to somewhat neutralize his "decline"
Some make fun of the fact Federer lost 1 set to a 35 year old Agassi in the USO Final, but my belief is that Federer probably would have straight setted a 25 year old Agassi.
Peak is when you have the perfect balance, previously that age was around 24-27.. the trend i see now 28-31.
Thats why it frustrates me when people assume "Weak era" because of all this, when it surely didnt help Novak in Indian Wells when a 35 year old Kohlschreiber could still
Play his best tennis.. does it make it a strong era? Perhaps, but sure as hell doesn't make it a weak one.
