What is a weak era or strong era in tennis?

[zcarzach]

I think its clear: a strong era is when your favorite player is most successful; a weak era is when your least favorite player is most successful.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by zcarzach

I think its clear: a strong era is when your favorite player is most successful; a weak era is when your least favorite player is most successful.

That's if you're not objective about the era.

The mid 1950's to late 1950's were extremely strong in my opinion. They had Pancho Gonzalez at the peak of his career. Segura and Sedgman were unbelievable players who could beat anyone that ever lived. Trabert was a fantastic player with no stroke weaknesses. Vines compared Trabert to Don Budge but a bit slower. And of course you had Hoad and Rosewall. You add Olmedo, Cooper and Anderson and that is unbelievable depth of great players. A number of these players have been called the GOAT.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by zcarzach

I think its clear: a strong era is when your favorite player is most successful; a weak era is when your least favorite player is most successful.

But there are members who believe tennis gets better over time....60<70<80<90<00. Now does that automatically means the current great players > than the past great by default? No, they have to backup with their perfomance...winning slams, stats, records, domination, etc. Fed is the current player, but had he only achieved half of what he has right now, then he's not a goat candidate, but qualify in the top 10. All fans would place him behind Borg, Laver, or Sampras, regardless if he's playing in a current generation with higher standard. In the future, if a player(ie Nole) that matches(no need to surpass) Fed's accomplishment, I would have to put him ahead simply because the bar is higher.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by TMF

But there are members who believe tennis gets better over time....60<70<80<90<00. Now does that automatically means the current great players > than the past great by default? No, they have to backup with their perfomance...winning slams, stats, records, domination, etc. Fed is the current player, but had he only achieved half of what he has right now, then he's not a goat candidate, but qualify in the top 10. All fans would place him behind Borg, Laver, or Sampras, regardless if he's playing in a current generation with higher standard. In the future, if a player(ie Nole) that matches(no need to surpass) Fed's accomplishment, I would have to put him ahead simply because the bar is higher.

Hahaha! You're living in the past, TMF. It was a great run while it lasted. But, it's over. Djokovic is the current player who plays at a higher level than Nadal, who plays at a higher level than Federer.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Hahaha! You're living in the past, TMF. It was a great run while it lasted. But, it's over. Djokovic is the current player who plays at a higher level than Nadal, who plays at a higher level than Federer.

16>11>5

When Nole mached Fed's accomplishment, he's ahead of Roger, simple as that. Unless the ATP does some crazy thing like split the field into two(amateur, pro) and Nole winning 11 more slams, then he's still behind Fed(but still ahead of Laver).

Despite Fed/Nole are competing against the same field, I'm big enough to put him ahead of Roger(if he ever gets there), but you can't accept Fed > Laver when they are 40 years apart !! LOL

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by TMF

16>11>5

When Nole mached Fed's accomplishment, he's ahead of Roger, simple as that. Unless the ATP does some crazy thing like split the field into two(amateur, pro) and Nole winning 11 more slams, then he's still behind Fed(but still ahead of Laver).

Despite Fed/Nole are competing against the same field, I'm big enough to put him ahead of Roger(if he ever gets there), but you can't accept Fed > Laver when they are 40 years apart !! LOL

You missed the point, as usual. Read again.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

16>11>5

When Nole mached Fed's accomplishment, he's ahead of Roger, simple as that. Unless the ATP does some crazy thing like split the field into two(amateur, pro) and Nole winning 11 more slams, then he's still behind Fed(but still ahead of Laver).

Despite Fed/Nole are competing against the same field, I'm big enough to put him ahead of Roger(if he ever gets there), but you can't accept Fed > Laver when they are 40 years apart !! LOL

This is the most stupid comment ever made here¡¡¡ Djokovic above Laver????

Just because Djokovic was born in the 80´s and Laver in the 30´s???? What a logic¡¡¡

[NadalAgassi]

The Master of Fail has claimed Roddick and Nalbandian are better players than Laver, so of course he would consider Djokovic better than Laver. Why act shocked.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

The Master of Fail has claimed Roddick and Nalbandian are better players than Laver, so of course he would consider Djokovic better than Laver. Why act shocked.

In fact, he surely consider " caro" wozniacky? better than the Rocket ( yes, because we all should know that human nature has improved with the ages...)

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

This is the most stupid comment ever made here¡¡¡ Djokovic above Laver????

Just because Djokovic was born in the 80´s and Laver in the 30´s???? What a logic¡¡¡

LOL...learn to read old man. I said if Nole reach 16 slams, he's ahead of Laver.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

LOL...learn to read old man. I said if Nole reach 16 slams, he's ahead of Laver.

Will he be able to win them in a row, the same year, as Laver did 3 times?

I caught you in false, you stated that Laver had 20 majors so how comes 16 > 20?

[TMF]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

The Master of Fail has claimed Roddick and Nalbandian are better players than Laver, so of course he would consider Djokovic better than Laver. Why act shocked.

The problem is you can't prove that I said that except making up story.



But I can prove some of your idiodicy....

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showp...1&postcount=25

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

The funniest thing is Serena at 5"10 isnt even that tall for a female player, and only 3 inches taller than Henin. 3 inches isnt even that big a deal. Which makes the whole argument, and referencing Serena as the target of its hate, all the more silly. It would be one thing if you were comparing Henin to Venus where there is a 8 inch height difference, but anyone sane minded knows that for whatever power and serving gain Henin might have with 8 more inches, Henin's movement would likely look closer to Sharapova's than to prime Henin if she were that height. The number of female players that height who moved at all well, let alone exceptionally well, is a very short one, and Venus is one of those rare exceptions.

[kiki]

If I was a Federer,Nadal, even a Djokovic fan, I´d hate being in this era and would prefer having been able to test against the true great and competitive players of the past.

It´s like having your degree with no need to pass tests....

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

Will he be able to win them in a row, the same year, as Laver did 3 times?

I caught you in false, you stated that Laver had 20 majors so how comes 16 > 20?

No I didn't. He has 9 pro majors, and 6 of his 11 slams are from the amateur(split fields).

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

No I didn't. He has 9 pro majors, and 6 of his 11 slams are from the amateur(split fields).

Right...and that makes 20 isn´t it?

Not counting he won 200 events...which is about three times what federer has achieved ( by now)

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

If I was a Federer,Nadal, even a Djokovic fan, I´d hate being in this era and would prefer having been able to test against the true great and competitive players of the past.

It´s like having your degree with no need to pass tests....

Sure, like the test against split fields, small pool, require fewer matches to win, half of the field are from one country,....

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

Right...and that makes 20 isn´t it?

Not counting he won 200 events...which is about three times what federer has achieved ( by now)

Fed 16 slams....Laver 11(6 amateur)

Pro majors are NOT slam, and not slam equivalent. You can compare them to Fed's Master Series.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

Sure, like the test against split fields, small pool, require fewer matches to win, half of the field are from one country,....

Yes, like testing day in day out against giants such as Hoad,Gonzales,Rosewall, playing a Wimbledon final against one of the greatest ever grass courters like Newcombe ( and winning in 4 ), another one against another great gc like Roche ( and winning in 4), and, very specially...NOT HAVING A LOUSY RECORD AGAINST MY BIGGEST RIVAL...

Oh¡¡ I forgot, it was just a bad match up...you know, that heavy top spin Fh against my weak one handed bh...shouldn´t be allowed according to Mr Clopton Wingfield rules...

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

Yes, like testing day in day out against giants such as Hoad,Gonzales,Rosewall, playing a Wimbledon final against one of the greatest ever grass courters like Newcombe ( and winning in 4 ), another one against another great gc like Roche ( and winning in 4), and, very specially...NOT HAVING A LOUSY RECORD AGAINST MY BIGGEST RIVAL...

Oh¡¡ I forgot, it was just a bad match up...you know, that heavy top spin Fh against my weak one handed bh...shouldn´t be allowed according to Mr Clopton Wingfield rules...

You can scream all you want but that's not going to make the size of the pool any larger. Bringing up Nadal further prove that he's a great player and already established himself as a clay goat.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

You can scream all you want but that's not going to make the size of the pool any larger. Bringing up Nadal further prove that he's a great player and already established himself as a clay goat.

Nor is your screaming gonna make Federer an instant 3 times slammer...and it is you who has a problem with the pool size ( seems you are Mr Size, anyway), not certainly me.

It´s great having players from Cyprus,Uzbekhistan,Latvia and Luxemburg, you know.A touch of class indeed.