A 38-year old player is the world no 3. Weak era?

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
I think so. Agassi was considered a fossil in 2003-2005 at the age of 33-35 when he was ranked in the top 10. Well, there is a player who's 38 years old and is in the top 3. This must be a super weak era.

A 38-year old had several match points against the world no 1 and holder of 3 Slams too btw.
 
Last edited:

OhYes

Legend
I think so. Agassi was considered a fossil in 2003-2005 at the age of 33-35 when he was ranked in the top 10. Well, there is a player who's 38 years old and is in the top 3. This must be a super weak era.
Agassi didn't have such impact on the game representatives, officials and governing body as Federer does.
It is not weak era as long as Novak is healthy
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Agassi didn't have such impact on the game representatives, officials and governing body as Federer does.
It is not weak era as long as Novak is healthy
2004-2007 is an ultratough era then considering it had peak Federer.
 

Zardoz7/12

Professional
I don't agree, Federer isn't your average 38 year old tennis player, he's the best player to have ever picked up a racket.

Also I think from 2000-2003 was the weakest era, when the likes of Alexander Popp makes Quarters of Wimbledon twice then something is not right lol.
 

Xavier G

Professional
2003-05 was particularly strong because you had legends of the game like 8 times Slam champ Agassi competing and multi Slam champs like Hewitt and Safin plus one time Slam winners like Roddick and talents such as Nalbandian!
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Agassi didn't have such impact on the game representatives, officials and governing body as Federer does.
It is not weak era as long as Novak is healthy
That is why Federer got three SFs with Nadal at the Majors this year and his biggest rival consistently got laughable draws (including the latest M1000 that he won) and the game moved away from Federer's preferred conditions in relation to his biggest rivals. What you say makes sense if you don't know anything.

:cool:
 

Sudacafan

G.O.A.T.
I think so. Agassi was considered a fossil in 2003-2005 at the age of 33-35 when he was ranked in the top 10. Well, there is a player who's 38 years old and is in the top 3. This must be a super weak era.

A 38-year old had several match points against the world no 1 and holder of 3 Slams too btw.
Wow. Just wow.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
I think so. Agassi was considered a fossil in 2003-2005 at the age of 33-35 when he was ranked in the top 10. Well, there is a player who's 38 years old and is in the top 3. This must be a super weak era.

A 38-year old had several match points against the world no 1 and holder of 3 Slams too btw.
“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)


Question:

In 2003 you won your first title in Dubai. How much chances would the Federer of 2003 have against the Federer of today?

Answer from Federer:

Not many chances I believe. The game has extremely changed. It is more dynamic, faster and has become somewhat ruthless. The players are more athletic and the material makes the game faster. I myself have become better. In fact, I had to become better because I had new opponents and new challenges. Tennis on this level doesn’t allow you stagnancy. (March, 2019)
 

OhYes

Legend
yeah totally that was the reason
No, you tell me the reason person with age of 38 is better than Nadal in Wimby and almost beaten No1 in a final that lasted 6 sets, while at the same time he had more freshness than his 6 year younger colleague after the match.
It has to be weak era.
 

OhYes

Legend
Yep, there were players who were actually at their peaks at the time - peak Nadal on clay/grass, peak Roddick, peak Davydenko, peak Hewitt, peak Nalbandian. Now you have peak Basilashvili and peak Bautista-Agut.
Peak Nadal :rolleyes:
Just don't..
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
No, you tell me the reason person with age of 38 is better than Nadal in Wimby and almost beaten No1 in a final that lasted 6 sets, while at the same time he had more freshness than his 6 year younger colleague after the match.
It has to be weak era.
Well yeah thank you for proving my point despite the dozen spelling/grammar errors.
 

Born_to_slice

Semi-Pro
2004-2007 is an ultratough era then considering it had peak Federer.
Yet 11 years older half crippled meth addict took peakerer to 5 sets, while contemporaries from strong era were bending in straights. Guess experienced ATG is dangerous in every era. Last I checked, Federer serves as good as ever, runs more than ever and is turning the tides in his most embarrassing match-up against 5 years younger opponent. Great player who's game aged extremely well in extraordinary physical condition.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)


Question:

In 2003 you won your first title in Dubai. How much chances would the Federer of 2003 have against the Federer of today?

Answer from Federer:

Not many chances I believe. The game has extremely changed. It is more dynamic, faster and has become somewhat ruthless. The players are more athletic and the material makes the game faster. I myself have become better. In fact, I had to become better because I had new opponents and new challenges. Tennis on this level doesn’t allow you stagnancy. (March, 2019)
Federer on crack
 

van_Loederen

Semi-Pro
as we know, the strength of an era depends mostly on the top guys.
and currently we have 2 GOAT contenders.

not saying it's a strong era (for a couple of reasons), but not so weak either.
 

octogon

Professional
I don't agree, Federer isn't your average 38 year old tennis player, he's the best player to have ever picked up a racket.
LOL!

No he isn't! Can we all please stop going along with that media fabricated fantasy, when it's now very clear that he will be surpassed by two players in same era in the most importing metric of the game ( grand slam titles).

Fed is a great player. Probably the greatest Grass Court player ever. But he will end up as the third best player of his era. The sooner Maestronians start accepting this, these less tragic the grief stage will be.

Fed is lasting longer at the top of the game because medical advancements and nutrition allow it. It's happening in all sports (look at Cristiano Ronaldo). Nadal and Djokovic will probably still be top 5 players at 38 because of this. Federer is not some sort of Unicorn.
 

TheAssassin

Legend
Like I said recently, I still remember borderline gross and repetitive jokes how a peaking Djokovic can't figure out mugs and isn't even in the top 20 in the world. It wasn't even that long ago, only 14 months back or so.

Not willing to joke around much now, are we?

Hope another super weak and miserable year or two are still ahead.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Arest me grammar policeman. :-D
I'll help you instead:

"No, you tell me the reason a person aged 38 is better than Nadal at Wimbly and almost beat the world no 1 in a final that lasted 6 sets (wot) while at the same time he was fresher than his 6 year younger colleague after the match (after the match?)
It has to be a weak era.
 

OldschoolKIaus

Hall of Fame
I don't care about weak or not. Despite being a neutral tennis fan with a slight preference for Fedr's beautiful game for me it's just boring and Big 3 are on top for far too long. At least Murray is already dead.

I want new players. New major winners. New talents. New clowns.
 

van_Loederen

Semi-Pro
the argument that Feder's peak period was a strong era because Hewitt, Safin, Roddick were Slam winners, is flawed.
it had only one GOAT contender (him) and he couldn't win absolutely everything.
 
Last edited:

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)

Question:

In 2003 you won your first title in Dubai. How much chances would the Federer of 2003 have against the Federer of today?

Answer from Federer:

Not many chances I believe. The game has extremely changed. It is more dynamic, faster and has become somewhat ruthless. The players are more athletic and the material makes the game faster. I myself have become better. In fact, I had to become better because I had new opponents and new challenges. Tennis on this level doesn’t allow you stagnancy. (March, 2019)
A totally unbiased opinion to give Federer some additional confidence from nothing.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Yet 11 years older half crippled meth addict took peakerer to 5 sets, while contemporaries from strong era were bending in straights.
Yeah one match in tornado like conditions after which Agassi won like 1 set in the next 4 matches proves that he was so tough for Federer. Roddick/Hewitt were incapable of winning sets against Federer in 2004-2007 too, yeah well that's like your opinion man
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
the argument that Feder's peak period was a strong era because Hewitt, Safin, Roddick were Slam winners, is flawed.
Feder's prime had only one GOAT contender (him) and he couldn't win absolutely everything.
The bolded is patently false: I challenge you to point at a three year period for Nadal that is comparable to Nadal's combined performance on clay and grass in 2006-2008.

:cool:
 

OhYes

Legend
I'll help you instead:

"No, you tell me the reason a person aged 38 is better than Nadal at Wimbly and almost beat the world no 1 in a final that lasted 6 sets (wot) while at the same time he was fresher than his 6 year younger colleague after the match (after the match?)
It has to be a weak era.
You are crazy you know that, can't believe you actually tried to correct my text ? :-D
I can put that in better shape than you but I don't really need to while on my phone. This is embarrassing.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
You are crazy you know that, can't believe you actually tried to correct my text ? :-D
I can put that in better shape than you but I don't really need to while on my phone. This is embarrassing.
yeah it's pretty embarassing hehehe. 3 sentences and like 12 errors? hehehehe
 

Tenacity

Rookie
I think so. Agassi was considered a fossil in 2003-2005 at the age of 33-35 when he was ranked in the top 10. Well, there is a player who's 38 years old and is in the top 3. This must be a super weak era.

A 38-year old had several match points against the world no 1 and holder of 3 Slams too btw.
Come at me bro


 
Nope, in any shape or form.

:cool:

EDIT: I might have missed the irony.
2007 is morally equal to 2017 since he was supposed to lose to Youzhny but got lucky with his opponent's back injury. 2006 is equal to 2019 both times lost to Fraud in 4 and 2008 and 2018 are equal since both were coin flips matches decided by outside interference.
 

Born_to_slice

Semi-Pro
Yeah one match in tornado like conditions after which Agassi won like 1 set in the next 4 matches proves that he was so tough for Federer. Roddick/Hewitt were incapable of winning sets against Federer in 2004-2007 too, yeah well that's like your opinion man
Point is if 34-5 yo Agassi with all his physical/mental problems could stay near the top of the game and give supposed GOAT a good run for his money in slams, than that same GOAT's fans shouldn't cry when there's nothing wrong with their player at 37-8. If you think he's doing too good for his age complain to WADA...
 
With all the sincerity I can muster I am saying that this is not worth it OP.
Don't want to sound like yet another asshat on the internet but you really need to reconsider life and what is worth it and what is not.
Everyone knows that this is a weak era.
You don't have to use it to diminish Novak's achievements.
Now before you tell me that they do exactly the same thing with Fraud let me tell you that they need to get a life too.

Everyone is sick of threads like these. They are suffocating us.
Draining us out of energy and intelligence and humor.
You have been here for what 8 years now?
Aren't you sick of the same sh1t again and again and again?!
Go. Do. Something. Worth. It.
 

Omega_7000

Legend
Agassi didn't have such impact on the game representatives, officials and governing body as Federer does.
It is not weak era as long as Novak is healthy
Wow! This is so pathetic! Are you Srdjan?

The officials you are referring to have done everything in their power to screw over Fed. The court speeds have been dropped in favor of Nadal & Djokovic.......Federer is still ranked # 3 in spite of this.
 

Omega_7000

Legend
And peak whatnots....
Federer always had to face tough competition not only from his peers but also a great younger generation....Who does Djokovic have to face? Peak Dimitrov, Raonic, Nishikori? LMAO! Not just one but two and now possibly three generations behind Djokovic and Nadal have been absolute duds.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
LOL!

No he isn't! Can we all please stop going along with that media fabricated fantasy, when it's now very clear that he will be surpassed by two players in same era in the most importing metric of the game ( grand slam titles).

Fed is a great player. Probably the greatest Grass Court player ever. But he will end up as the third best player of his era. The sooner Maestronians start accepting this, these less tragic the grief stage will be.

Fed is lasting longer at the top of the game because medical advancements and nutrition allow it. It's happening in all sports (look at Cristiano Ronaldo). Nadal and Djokovic will probably still be top 5 players at 38 because of this. Federer is not some sort of Unicorn.
I have not seen a better tennis player than federer
 
Top