View Single Post
Old 01-22-2013, 10:14 AM   #22
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 9,235

Originally Posted by TMF View Post
The advanced nutrition and medical gets totally blown out of porportion. Of course it helps modern players, but it's not going to turn a player into superhuman. If you're injured due to physcial stress on court, you still have to take time off, have surgeries, and even injuries can stay permanent(eg hip injury). Nole is incredibly fit, but does anyone believe advanced science is going to keep him playing as long as Rosewall? Hell no. Nothing can help if he put so much stress on his leg, shoulder, knee, etc(as we have seen many of his matches).

I supposed if Laver had all the access to modern science...nutrition, better doctor, better equipments in the 60s, he would win 400 titles ?? LOL
You're twisting the words. Like I wrote in past posts which you again fail to acknowledge, one of the big reasons players played longer in the past was three reasons, money, money, money. Pancho Gonzalez was not that rich for example. He had bills and ex wives to take care of. These players at the beginning of the Open Era played in big money tournaments to literally cash in on the big money in tennis. It wasn't close to the money they have today where a guy like Sampras can retire early and never worry about bills or finances again.

Just recently Agassi has played to his mid thirties, retiring at age 36. Sampras probably could have played a number of years longer considering he won his last major in his last tournament at I believe age 32. You have your hero saying he wants to play in the Olympics in a few years at around age 35. So are you going to say that players cannot play in later ages at that point?

Navratilova played into her late thirties very successfully.

Jimmy Connors played past age 40 and was very competitive. He was in I believe his mid thirties for example when he crushed Edberg at the US Open. He was 39 when he went to the US Open semi in 1991. The key to this I believe is that the players we mentioned are all fantastic players. If they decline the decline is from such a high level that they still are often very good and competitive. It's not always the case but guys like Rosewall or Gonzalez were winning tournaments into their forties although they generally weren't a top force (with the exception of Rosewall in 1974) in the majors.

Players in the past generally retired early also. Rosewall, Laver, Agassi, Connors, Gonzalez, Navatilova and probably in the near future Federer will be the exceptions. Notice anything in common with these people? They're all great players.

Sometime I think my fingers will get tired repeating the same answers over and over and over again.

Here's a match by the old guy Jimmy Connors at age 39. Pretty grueling rallies here.
Connors was always a grinder but he knew how to finish off rallies at the net.

Last edited by pc1; 01-22-2013 at 01:41 PM.
pc1 is offline   Reply With Quote