Can we have an era worse than 2020-2023 where Finalists are Casper Ruud, Berettini, Kyrgios , Stefanos ?

Is 2020-2013 is the weakest era in history

  • Total voters
    57
The Guru said:
My bad I and others saw that you said all these players were born within 5 years and didn't see the or as an addendum. Either way the argument is still awful. Half those players were less relevant to Federer's career than even late 90s guys like Tsitsipas and Zverev.
Click to expand...
You are wrong about what my argument is. I will address this and why your other conclusions are wrong anyway later when I have time.
 
The Guru said:
Wth are you talking about lol
Click to expand...
Keep pretending as though you started watching and caring about tennis only two years ago once people started criticising this era. Keep pretending as though you close your eyes and cover your ears whenever people disrespect Federer's generational talent, competition or the era he emerged from. That is sure a lot easier for you lol.

For the record, someone in this very thread made these same stale arguments that totally fall flat now in 2024. My post was in response to another posters response to someone who repeated the same disrespectful falsehoods we have been hearing for close to 20 years now. I'm sure you didn't notice that either lol. The chickens are coming home to roost.
 
Last edited:
Silentchimera said:
Keep pretending as though you started watching and caring about tennis only two years ago once people started criticising this era. Keep pretending as though you close your eyes and cover your ears whenever people disrespect Federer's generational talent, competition or the era he emerged from. That is sure a lot easier for you lol.

For the record someone in this very thread made these same stale arguments that totally fall flat now in 2024. My post was in response to another posters response to someone who repeated the same disrespectful falsehoods we have been hearing for close to 20 years now. I'm sure you didn't notice that either lol. The chickens are coming home to roost.
Click to expand...
Lol why are you attributing these opinions and attributes to me. Why are you acting like you're some vigilante putting people in place? This is just crazy levels of clownery.
 
The Guru said:
It bothers me that you hide behind other people or avoid direct questions when I ask them if you want me to take you seriously act like a serious person. You could've just tagged me and asked my opinion but instead u quoted it and tagged me under it which is a clear sign of endorsement. If you think I'm crazy ask anyone else to interpret what that post meant. Sometimes I say dumb **** and am wrong just look at the hewitt/murray thread I ****ed up twice and admitted it immediately instead of backing off and pretending I never said those things. That's what serious people do instead of hurling dumb ad-hominems and calling people brain dead *********.
Click to expand...

Lmao another assumption. All I did was tag you a harmless post to know your opinion and then like a true b 0 t you started attacking me. I am sorry I'll have to put you on ignore.i can't take someone coming after me like a rabid dog for no reason lol. Peace, son!
 
The Guru said:
Lol why are you attributing these opinions and attributes to me. Why are you acting like you're some vigilante putting people in place? This is just crazy levels of clownery.
Click to expand...

The lack of self awareness here is absolutely astounding. There sure is a trend developing here. Not sure I have much more time for this. I'm thinking @NeutralFan might have made the right call putting you on ignore. I'll give you at most a couple more chances to redeem yourself. I certainly do not consider myself a vigilante for challenging falsehoods that have been repeated for almost 20 years. That may be the case if I lived in a totalitarian regime with no freedom of speech, but with respect to a tennis discussion? I don't think so...

As for me wrongly attributing things to you, once again you have falsely misrepresented what I wrote and/or failed once again with your reading comprehension. Please try to remain ethical and be more careful next time. Vigilantes break laws, but at least they are ethical. I mention that, just in case you are still convinced that is the appropriate label for me lol. The bolded is where I very clearly specified the difference.

Silentchimera said:
When people have continuously diminished Federer's era and his generation for almost 20 years the record is going to be set straight. These are the facts that are very uncomfortable for those who have disrespected Federer for far too long. Lesson is not to dish it out if you can't even handle the truth.
Click to expand...

I never attributed this to you. It was attributed to the people that did. Those does not refer to you! My arguments are directed to those people who have been spreading these falsehoods. You know what they say about making assumptions? The lesson in my final sentence is to those people which you would understand if you were following the context.

I hope I have made myself very clear. I will address your (lol I hope I have made the point by now (stay focussed)) comment I said I didn't have time to respond to later. I'm thinking it would be best for you to let this line of discussion finish up now. It's not going well for you and it's time for you to regroup before taking more losses lol. They say it's better to live to fight another day (very appropriate here metaphorically speaking (needs to be clarified in case people with poor reading comprehension misrepresent what i write again...)). :p
 
Last edited:
NeutralFan said:
Can we imagine an era worse than this where Casper Ruud makes multiple finals, Stef makes multiple finals , Kyrgios and Berettini makes final?
Click to expand...

For the entire previous decade, the generation before the above players didn't know how to make slam finals. They should've been challenging for the slams early in the decade and eventually winning them. But the likes of Nishikori/Dimitrov/Raonic/Sock/Janowicz/Goffin/Tomic/Pospisil/Thiem could only muster 4 whole slam finals between them. For a span of 10 long years, they made a slam final 10% of the time, and won a slam final 0% of the time.
 
MrFlip said:
Shuttler 2003 AO - there will never be a weaker slam final opponent
Click to expand...
I watched all of those matches and expected Roddick to lose to Shuttler. Not unreasonable when his epic with Younes El Aynaoui ended 21-19 in the 5th set and left him exhausted. I was glued to the screen watching this late into the night. Great match!
 
Last edited:
duaneeo said:
For the entire previous decade, the generation before the above players didn't know how to make slam finals. They should've been challenging for the slams early in the decade and eventually winning them. But the likes of Nishikori/Dimitrov/Raonic/Sock/Janowicz/Goffin/Tomic/Pospisil/Thiem could only muster 4 whole slam finals between them. For a span of 10 long years, they made a slam final 10% of the time, and won a slam final 0% of the time.
Click to expand...

A harsh reality to accept
 
mike danny said:
Interesting to hear you say that. Why?
Click to expand...
Because Fed, like Djoker would be the chaser if Nadal was his age which could ne easier for him to cope with mentally. He will of course (same as Djoko) lose big time early on, but that he did also in reality (he was 10-23 at some point, cannot get much worse). Like in reality, at the latest in 2015 he would take over though, however, in this alternate scenario, he would be 29 instead of 34 and still plenty of time to turn the H2H around or make it at least very competitive. If he gets Rafa 7 times in 2015-16 like Djoko did, who knows.
In the end it all boils down to how Fed would react mentally to having a better player the same age early on. If he takes that as a challenge and thrives on that then his final H2H against Nadal could look similar to Djoko's and only depends on how often they play when.

Of course, if he gets frustrated by the losses and loses self-belief and motivation it can look different.
 
Angrybirdstar said:
Fedfans trying so hard to devalue Djokovic's competition that they have to argue their own GOAT fell off so hard he wasn't even playing at an ATG level in his early-mid 30s? :unsure:
Click to expand...
Neither was Djokovic. Peak Fedal would comfortably manhandle any 2021-2023 Djokovic slam winning forms.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Because Fed, like Djoker would be the chaser if Nadal was his age which could ne easier for him to cope with mentally. He will of course (same as Djoko) lose big time early on, but that he did also in reality (he was 10-23 at some point, cannot get much worse). Like in reality, at the latest in 2015 he would take over though, however, in this alternate scenario, he would be 29 instead of 34 and still plenty of time to turn the H2H around or make it at least very competitive. If he gets Rafa 7 times in 2015-16 like Djoko did, who knows.
In the end it all boils down to how Fed would react mentally to having a better player the same age early on. If he takes that as a challenge and thrives on that then his final H2H against Nadal could look similar to Djoko's and only depends on how often they play when.

Of course, if he gets frustrated by the losses and loses self-belief and motivation it can look different.
Click to expand...
Don't think the bolded would apply since Fed could've called it quits anytime in 2011 after repeated losses to Djokovic and Nadal, but chose to take the challenge head on. Or when he could've retired at any point in 2016, but chose to still play on.
 
duaneeo said:
For the entire previous decade, the generation before the above players didn't know how to make slam finals. They should've been challenging for the slams early in the decade and eventually winning them. But the likes of Nishikori/Dimitrov/Raonic/Sock/Janowicz/Goffin/Tomic/Pospisil/Thiem could only muster 4 whole slam finals between them. For a span of 10 long years, they made a slam final 10% of the time, and won a slam final 0% of the time.
Click to expand...
Yikes that’s bad. I think with how bad the late 90s gen has been, we forget about the 1990-1995 born gen. Thiem was best of the bunch and he routinely collapsed in that AO final over Djokovic. He really has had it easy in the 2020s. Best time for it too while he slows down.

It’s better to have your peak during weaker years because you’ll win slams regardless of competition. It’s much better to have weaker opponents as you slow down, because these guys can smash the nextgens playing their C game.
 
mike danny said:
Don't think the bolded would apply since Fed could've called it quits anytime in 2011 after repeated losses to Djokovic and Nadal, but chose to take the challenge head on. Or when he could've retired at any point in 2016, but chose to still play on.
Click to expand...
It is a different scenario when you already have 15+ slams under your belt and feel the passing if the torch to younger opponents or if you have someone your age who simply blocks you and steals you the belief that you can ever beat him a la Roddick with Fed. Of course Fed/Rafa are way closer than Roddick/Fed therefore I do not consider that scenario probabke either, but we cannot know for sure how Fed would react to repeated losses against a guy his age. Then again, he overcame Hewitt, Nalby and Agassi as well, so giving up or developing a mental blockade looks unlikely.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
It is a different scenario when you already have 15+ slams under your belt and feel the passing if the torch to younger opponents or if you have someone your age who simply blocks you and steals you the belief that you can ever beat him a la Roddick with Fed. Of course Fed/Rafa are way closer than Roddick/Fed therefore I do not consider that scenario probabke either, but we cannot know for sure how Fed would react to repeated losses against a guy his age. Then again, he overcame Hewitt, Nalby and Agassi as well, so giving up or developing a mental blockade looks unlikely.
Click to expand...
Yes, true, but at the same time considering at that point in 2011 he had never had to deal with 2 guys of Nadal and Djokovic's quality who relegated him to no.3, he could've easily lost belief since it was a new situation for him.
 
NeutralFan said:
Can we imagine an era worse than this where Casper Ruud makes multiple finals, Stef makes multiple finals , Kyrgios and Berettini makes final? That too in span of 4 years .so out of 16 slams we had these clowns making 7 finals and then add Meddy to the mix, Albiet 2 tiers above them but not an ATG making 4 finals. That's total of 11 finals and then add Z and theim lol.
Click to expand...
Sinner will single handedly make this a weaker era
 
fedfan24 said:
Years without any prime ATG level opponents:

Federer - arguably 2003/2004

Djokovic - 2015, 2016, 2021, 2022, 2023

2001-2002 don’t count for Federer as 1 he was pre prime and 2 Pete and Agassi were still knocking around. 2005-2006 doesn’t count as nadal was there on clay and from 2007 grass. 2017-2020 are excluded thanks to excellent clay showings from Nadal.

It’s clear to see Djokovic benefitted the most from poor competition.
Click to expand...

Great points , years without ATG for both the players.
 
No surprise when it happens at Wimbledon, since barely anyone feels comfortable on grass, so the servebots get through to finals with all their cheap service winners....
While the baseliners make more errors than usual due to slippery and uneven grass, or suffer from fatigue or injury after a long clay season...
 
8gxlq6.jpg
 
NeutralFan said:
Oh, please!! Keep your agenda aside. 2024 is not same as 2020-2023 with emergence of Sinner .
Click to expand...
And what agenda is that? I call it like I see it.

Sinner's emergence is completely irrelevant, when you take into consideration the larger picture.

He, like the many before him, was completely outclassed by a geriatric Novak Djokovic.

In fact, it took a very significant drop in Djokovic's game, for Sinner to finally break-free of the Serb's stranglehold on the game, so that he could win his first grand slam.

Even if you don't want to acknowledge this...Sinner has very few credible rivals. Alcaraz has been losing to Djokovic on a consistent basis. So has Zverev and Medvedev.

The field is so weak that they can't even deal with a 36 year old Novak Djokovic.
 
NeutralFan said:
2023 didn't have prime Sinner but 2024 includes a generational talent like Sinner so yeah it's not the same.
Click to expand...
That's like saying that Djokovic wasn't in his prime back in 2010.

The dude was in a grand slam final.

The only reason that Sinner won that slam in Australia is because Novak's level dropped.

Sorry to tell you mate.
 
Looking at the draws from the early 00s, can’t see Old Djokovic winning any W or USO except maybe 2002 W if he battles Hewitt and serves well.
At the USO he’s not beating a combination of Pete, Safin, Agassi, Hewitt at those early ones. Best bet would be 2003 but that would be a battle and too many threats in the draw.
AO he will battle it out with Agassi at 00, 01 and 03, possibly losing 1 or 2. Wins 02. Loses 04 for sure.
RG no chance vs Kuerten. Will have trouble with Ferrero and Coria. Might be able to nick 1.

Overall he won 8 slams from 2020-2023 aged 33-36. I think vs the 00-03 field he wins 3-4 at best. Too many threats and high levels for him to overcome. Certainly 0 chance of 3 slams and close to CYGS in a season.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top