mike danny
Bionic Poster
Best player born in the 90's, ladies and gentlemen.
The head to head is 1-0 to him on clay.Yeah right. Medvedev, the clay giant is a legit threat to Novak lol.
I can't see him being the first to defend the USO since Fed in 2008.He'll win RG and possibly defend USO.
Evans is also 1-0 on clay vs Djokovic.The head to head is 1-0 to him on clay.
Nobody cares about a random loss to Med in a BO3. Medvedev does not have a prayer here. Let's be serious.The head to head is 1-0 to him on clay.
Right. What's the name of the titan who beat him in Rome?No I’m asking an honest question, have you even seen Carlos Alcaraz play live?
You don’t watch tennis at all you’ve said
Well anyways, if you have seen him play in 2023, you’d know he’s the best player in the world.
Has he even qualified for RG?Right. What's the name of the titan who beat him in Rome?
It just shows the incredibly low standards people have for players these days. The guy becomes #1 and has failed to make a Slam QF in 5 attempts. If this happened to literally anyone else they’d be getting demolished.
Medvedev loses and it’s mostly crickets.
Who knew Med was a Fed fan.I think that Medvedev is following in Federer's footsteps. After Federer beat Sampras at the 2001 Wimbledon, he then lost to Henman. Right after that, he failed to make the QF of the next 7 slam events. Medvedev's streak is only at 5(but only 4 losses). Med will likely push this streak to 6 straight QF misses at Wimbledon. But after that, I expect him to slaughter all of Fed's achievements.
Conservatively, I see Med doing the following:
300 consecutive weeks at #1
30 straight slam semis
15 straight slam finals
45 straight slam QF
31 slam titles in all
Del Potro never beat Djokovic in BO5, unless you really want to count DC 2011 as a BO5 win. And Med has 5 wins against Djokovic in total, not just 1. Had they played he would most likely lose, but at least he has the best head to head between all the players in the draw.Med got one win over a terrible Djokovic - easily his worst slam final. big whoop.
delpo beats MUCH MUCH better djokovic multiple times and you put him down.
you talk about inability of young players to beat djokovic in Bo5 and in the same breath you talk up Med's chance in Bo5 vs Djoko on clay. really?
you said this about Alcaraz
"He is most likely not even going to reach Djokovic, leave alone beat him"
so back up your words with actions, Strong Guy.
its not just about whether Alcaraz beats Djokovic.
you first said Alcaraz is most likely not even going to reach Djokovic.
As far as a potential match b/w Alcaraz and DJokovic goes, I'd favour Alcaraz right now for sure, but will reserve judgement till both reach (assuming they do)
I am not a fan of his to put it shortly. He can be funny off the court and I think his game is unique.@Kralingen is it me or you seem to dislike Medvedev more and more lol? (I don't care much about him personally).
Anyway yeah that's pretty bad for a top 3 player.
Not sure, but he must be a real titan if he beat Alcaraz. (something that according to this forum even Djokovic is not able to do)Has he even qualified for RG?
4 attempts not 5, two of which are at RG. It's really not that bad and you can find many instances where a former #1 fails to make a QF in 4 consecutive slams. Nobody claimed that Med is the next Sampras.
We all know Djokovic is a lock for the title, and always was. But with top seeds losing, it's becoming even a weaker tournament.Nobody cares about a random loss to Med in a BO3. Medvedev does not have a prayer here. Let's be serious.
Maroszan, the man with the second highest baseline peak in tennis history.Right. What's the name of the titan who beat him in Rome?
What? You want alcaraz to lose early? Btw i'm not alcaraz fan and won't be surprised if he lose (R4 or QF). But it will just help Djokovic.I want StrongRule to be correct.
Secret Djokovic fan or?I want StrongRule to be correct.
Never.Secret Djokovic fan or?
This is Djokovic's usual level in BO3 for years now, but how many times has he actually lost in BO5? We heard the same stories in 2021, 2022, and yet he keeps winning all the slams.Maroszan, the man with the second highest baseline peak in tennis history.
Anyways, you should know it came after 3 straight weeks of tennis, winning Barcelona without dropping a set then following it up with a Madrid win.
Meanwhile, Djokovic has lost to Musetti, Lajovic, and now Rune in Rome, not even making one semifinal on clay. How is he the favorite?
Del Potro never beat Djokovic in BO5, unless you really want to count DC 2011 as a BO5 win. And Med has 5 wins against Djokovic in total, not just 1. Had they played he would most likely lose, but at least he has the best head to head between all the players in the draw.
What did Alcaraz ever do to be called the favorite against Djokovic in BO5? It's ridiculous to bet against a player who wins 90% of the slams he plays in the last few years. We had that same hype with lots of other players, and they never brought it to BO5.
Hahahahahaha!!Exhibit A:
This is Djokovic's usual level in BO3 for years now, but how many times has he actually lost in BO5? We heard the same stories in 2021, 2022, and yet he keeps winning all the slams.
He did. And yet, if 36 years old Nadal wasn't in the draw, Djokovic would have vultured another DO title. Alcaraz didn't even reach him last year. So until I see it happen, I don't trust any young player to beat Djokovic in BO5. Heard that hype with many others in the past. So far the best they did is winning 2 sets, and not even giving a fight in the other 3.Well, if we're counting the worst slam final Djokovic in USO 21, the DC win for delpo in 11 is not far behind, is it?
how does Med have the best h2h vs djoko definitively among all the players in the draw? Rune leads djoko 2-1, alcaraz 1-0. Admittedly small sample sizes, but nothing to favour Med over them specifically vs Djoko.
Alcaraz has the mental strength/clutchness that no one else born after delpo has shown. has the best stamina among the players.
importantly he won a slam as a teen (only 2 players born in 89-99 have won 1 slam each - 2 useless gens. Alcaraz is from a different gen)
Also Djokovic is 36. didn't even make semi of even 1 CC event. Alcaraz won 2 CC events in lead up to RG - Barcelona and Madrid.
Alcaraz did beat Djokovic in Madrid last year.
Messing around but on a serious note how would it look on people's predictions? It will just make Djokovic fans point out the fact people can't predict matches and ATG's to a greater scale than before.What? You want alcaraz to lose early? Btw i'm not alcaraz fan and won't be surprised if he lose (R4 or QF). But it will just help Djokovic.
But that’s kind of my exact point. Eventually the excuses run thin. If this guy is meant to be the best of the NextGen 90s cohort and a #1, shouldn’t we hold him to a standard of making Slam QFs at bare minimum?Sort of cherry picked.
AO - Finalist
RG - 4th Round
WD - Banned
US - 4th round
Yea this year is definitely a bit of a disappointment but to try and lump in 2022 as equally miserable seems a bit dishonest.
In both 2021 and 2022 we had lots of talks about him being done during the clay season (before Rome), including from @Kralingen. Ok, so this year he lost early in Rome, that's the only real difference. Rune is also a better player than anyone he faced there last year. But I'm still waiting to see him actually get beaten in BO5.In 2020, Djokovic won Rome before RG
In 2021, Djokovic won Belgrade and made final of Rome before RG
In 2022, Djokovic won Rome, made semi of Madrid (losing 3rd set TB to winner Alcaraz)
In 2023, Djokovic hasn't made semi of a single clay court event out of 3 played.
see the difference?
This is not AO (where he's the top guy) or Wim (his 2nd best along with field sucking the worst)
He did. And yet, if 36 years old Nadal wasn't in the draw, Djokovic would have vultured another DO title. Alcaraz didn't even reach him last year. So until I see it happen, I don't trust any young player to beat Djokovic in BO5. Heard that hype with many others in the past. So far the best they did is winning 2 sets, and not even giving a fight in the other 3.
But that’s kind of my exact point. Eventually the excuses run thin. If this guy is meant to be the best of the NextGen 90s cohort and a #1, shouldn’t we hold him to a standard of making Slam QFs at bare minimum?
Isn’t there a standard we can expect from top players?
It's still a sad indictment that he's the best player born in the 90's.Medvedev doesn't have the game for clay to perform consistenly. I thought people knew this could happen. One day he loses to Karatsev, another he wins Rome beating Tsitsipas and Rune. Then to Seyboth Wild. This is what happens.
I think Medvedev has set the standards for a top player well. He is winning big trophies and titles consistently.
He is a slam winner, won 6/9 masters, won the ATP finals. Reached the pinnacle of the sport as #1. He is amongst the elite group in tennis history in terms of achievements.
It's still a sad indictment that he's the best player born in the 90's.
But Hewitt/Roddick are still jokes, right?He is a slam winner and reached an additional 3 finals, won 6/9 masters, won the ATP finals. Reached the pinnacle of the sport as #1. He is amongst the elite group in tennis history in terms of achievements.
Based on achievements, Med has to be the best as of now.the least worst slam player or the one with the highest level among the players born in the 90s is Thiem, not Med, IMO.
It's still a sad indictment that he's the best player born in the 90's.
Well, when you compare the 90's born to other decades, it is indeed pretty sad that he's the best an entire decade could produce.Well he has achieved the most currently. I don't why it would be sad when he has won the things he has deservedly.
Based on achievements, Med has to be the best as of now.
Still, even if we include Thiem, the situation doesn't exactly get much better.
Thiem without a doubt has displayed a higher level than Med, but looking back it's pretty shocking how Thiem has had very few significant runs outside RG: only once did he reach at least the quarters at the AO and only twice did he go deep at the USO. No deep runs at Wimb obviously. And he's almost 30.that would be most achieved, not best. best is based on level.
agree on the later part.
Thiem without a doubt has displayed a higher level than Med, but looking back it's pretty shocking how Thiem has had very few significant runs outside RG: only once did he reach at least the quarters at the AO and only twice did he go deep at the USO. No deep runs at Wimb obviously. And he's almost 30.
It's also shocking how Thiem never won a clay masters, how he should have won two YECs and lost both finals (to Tsitsipas and Medvedev) after seemingly doing the hard work earlier in the tournaments (beating Nadal and Djokovic). Thiem also let the 2020 Australian Open title slip through his fingers.Thiem without a doubt has displayed a higher level than Med, but looking back it's pretty shocking how Thiem has had very few significant runs outside RG: only once did he reach at least the quarters at the AO and only twice did he go deep at the USO. No deep runs at Wimb obviously. And he's almost 30.
It would be hard to learn from something that literally never happened (Djoker beating Raz).He is most likely not even going to reach Djokovic, leave alone beat him. It's amazing how some just never learn from the past.
The analysis on this forum essentially amounts to “until he loses, I won’t believe he can lose”It would be hard to learn from something that literally never happened (Djoker beating Raz).
Medvedev doesn't have the game for clay to perform consistenly. I thought people knew this could happen. One day he loses to Karatsev, another he wins Rome beating Tsitsipas and Rune. Then to Seyboth Wild. This is what happens.
I think Medvedev has set the standards for a top player well. He is winning big trophies and titles consistently.
He is a slam winner and reached an additional 3 finals, he has won Davis Cup, won 6/9 masters, won the ATP finals. Reached the pinnacle of the sport as #1. He is amongst the elite group in tennis history in terms of achievements. A loss in the 1st round won't change what he has done.
This is very close to RG09 upset of Nadal by Soderling , based on what we read about Clayvedev, his impressive back to back to back wins against Zverev, Tsitsipas and Rune , how he master classed and beat everyone in sight at Rome and how he has turned into a monster
He is a slam winner and reached an additional 3 finals, he has won Davis Cup, won 6/9 masters, won the ATP finals. Reached the pinnacle of the sport as #1. He is amongst the elite group in tennis history in terms of achievements.
Give him timeSince he reached the Australian Open final in 2022 in January and became #1, Daniil Medvedev has now lost before the QF in every single Grand Slam since then.
RG 2022- 4R loss to Cilic
WB 2022- DNP as Wimbledon banned Russians
USO 2022- 4R loss to Kyrgios
AO 2023- 3R loss to Korda
RG 2023- 1R loss to Seyboth Wild
He’s had an excellent Bo3 season winning 5 tournaments so far and leading the race. But that being said, how do you become the world #1 and then fail to make even one single Slam QF in your next 5 tries?
Really should be getting more heat for this, if any other NextGen underperformed like this they’d be getting roasted. For some reason tennis fans consistently give Medvedev a pass and I don’t understand it.