Well, we could count up the number of 5 set matches that the Big Three played outside of majors. I've never done that.
Checking:
Well, they all played 5 set in DC. Fed played a lot of DC and as early as 1999, and there were matches on carpet. He actually play 9 DC matches on carpet up to 2003. That's good prep for long, grueling matches.
I also have never understood why some Masters used to have 5 set finals and others not. An unusual number of clay masters seemed to have ended with 5 sets, with some brutal ones between Fed and Nadal. Miami used to have 5 set finals. And Madrid. My memory is absolutely amazing, as in amazingly awful. I have trouble remembering what I ate for dinner yesterday. But certainly 5 set finals would be good prep for the end of majors.
2. The sport in terms of technology has not changed in two decades. When the likes of Borg, Mc Enroe etc learnt to play with wooden rackets growing up, it was easy to be displaced by the next gen players who grew up playing with metal ones.
Actually, I don't remember anyone playing with metal but Connors, and that racket was so hard to control that on one used it but him. As I remember the next change was graphite, and that was already huge. I don't know much about the evolution of rackets at that time. I just know they kept changing and no one used wood anymore.
Fed, Rafa etc learnt to play with poly strings, exactly how Raonic, Cilic grew up and how Tsitsipas, FAA have grown up. Besides the increased affordability of the uber rich players to get the best medical treatment, technology in tennis has stagnated the past couple of decades.
This is an unknown area for me. I've never played with any of these rackets, and I don't know if a racket you buy in 2019 would be way better than one bought in 2009. But I do suspect there are a lot of things done with strings that we don't fully know about. Most likely top players continue to tweak and experiment. It does seem logical that the top players are using just about the same things they grew up with, so younger players are not going to have a technological advantage. But the biggest change I think is the extreme wealth of the top players along with all the privileges they now have. People don't think about how lonely it used to be at the top. It makes a huge difference to be traveling at all time with a team, and when you have a super coach who you like and who is not much older, I think the social aspect can hugely extend a career.
Borg didn't have that. Connors didn't have that. None of the old players had that. It was lonely.
Thoughts?
@Gary Duane