Originally Posted by Steve0904
Quoted for truth. Especially that bolded part. Fantastic stuff Hitman.
I'll go with 2011 being the start of the strong era. It seems like a safe option. The rise of Djokovic, and now the rise of Murray. Federer still going strong, and Nadal still ruling the red clay.
2011 saw Djokovic become an all surface champion, and even Murray broke through by being one of a select few to make the semi finals of all four slams in a row. 2012, strengthened that with Murray V Djokovic rivalry really coming into the spotlight, some epic five sets matches between them. And Federer rising to the top to claim W, and Nadal being Nadal at RG. 2011 is the start of the real strong era.
It can be said that 2005 - 2010 was the Fedal Era. Where it was pretty much a two horse race, and the questions were can Federer break the record, and then can Nadal catch him. 2011, Djokovic becomes the first multi time slam champion while Roger and Rafa are playing, so Fedal era is no more, there is a new elite player in town, and he is beating them both, it is more than just about them. And with Murray maturing last year, becoming Olympic and slam champion, now we have legit competition.
2011 is the era of the big four - that is twice as many players than the big two of the Fedal Era. Yeah, Djokovic won AO 08, but like I said before, he could have won USO 07, would that have made 07 a strong era year? Besides, he did nothing after that until he finally managed to get a win over Roger in USO 10, a prelude to what was going to happen in the following strong era season.
And yes Novak won a slam in 08, but Safin beat a much younger and primed version of Roger in AO 05. Nalbandian beat Roger in probably the best indoor match of the last 8 - 10 years arguably, and was beating Fedal in Masters events too. But because Roger was still number one, it was weak era. Yeah, whatever.