View Single Post
Old 01-27-2013, 10:09 AM   #18
NadalAgassi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tudwell View Post
Ha, I may have predicted that, but then I hate Serena. I don't hate Djokovic, but I'm generally more conservative in my estimations. If Nadal comes back somewhere near his 2008-2012 form, then he'll be the favorite for the French and he'll be more likely to win Wimbledon than Djokovic (and so will Murray and Federer). Murray has shown that he can trouble and even beat Djokovic at the hard court slams, and I wouldn't count out Nadal or Federer either - assuming neither of them suffers a severe drop in form. Plus, if guys like Tsonga and Wawrinka continue to trouble Djokovic the way they have, he's not always going to be the victor in those matches. He'll have his Rosol moment sometime.

But of course he's got a good shot at getting double digits. I'm just fairly conservative. If Federer wins another slam, Nadal another two or three, and Murray another three or four, and Djokovic reaches double digits, that means there will be no other slam winners outside of those four for the next three years at the earliest. And I know there aren't a ton of promising up-and-comers, but people are going to break through at some point.
1. I definitely dont think there will be another slam winner outside the current top 4 (quite possibly outside of Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal, and who knows with Nadal at this point, it might be nobody outside of Djokovic and Murray even) until atleast 2017. The up and comers stink and none will ever win a slam, so it will have to be someone who is in juniors now, and someone in juniors now will take atleast another 4 years to win a slam IMO. Mens tennis is a mans sport, not a boys sport, even in the case there are young phenoms. Even Nadal who is as precocious as you will ever see in todays game didnt win a slam until atleast his 4th year on tour, and his first non clay slam until his 7th.

2. I dont think when someone new or more than one new player wins their first slam it means Djokovic, Murray, or even Nadal will never win another slam. It just means they wont win everyone anymore. Djokovic is only 25 now, and seeing Federer contending for slams at 31 is it easy to imagine Djokovic or Murray contending for slams up until that age atleast. I know many will say Djokovics game is more physically demanding which is true, but Djokovic, Murray, Nadal also wont be facing Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray in their physical primes like Federer in his 30s and having to deal with when they reach that age either. Hopefully they will atleast face something better than Raonic and Tomic mind you.

3. Your estimation means not only do you think we will see an new slam winner before the end of 2015 (possible even though I think not) but you actually think Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal will win 0 more slams after 2015, do I have that right? If so, I am sorry, but I think that is completely crazy.

4. Murray is not going to win more slams than Djokovic over the next 3 years IMO, and I dont think most would expect that to happen. Do you really believe Murray is going to be the better player of the two overall in the future? I could see Murray having a multi slam year and a #1 type year, but only one IMO. So if Murray wins 3 or 4, Djokovic will almost certainly win atleast that many, likely taking him to double digits.

Last edited by NadalAgassi : 01-27-2013 at 10:13 AM.
  Reply With Quote