Davydenko: The top players of the younger generation are not that good technically.

Do you agree with Davydenko?

  • Total voters
    126
spottishwood

spottishwood

Hall of Fame
What would you say are the biggest differences in tennis now compared to when you were a top player?

In my opinion, tennis is not making much progress. The players who are at the top now – not Nadal and Djokovic, but the younger generation –are not that good technically. I got surprised by that. It’s more physical – big serves, hitting hard–, but we still see that Nadal and Djokovic can control all this power over the new generation. They are still winning Slams and beating guys who are ten years younger than them, which is amazing. Anyway, I do not feel that the new generation is playing on an unbelievable level.

Would be glad to know what TTW thinks.

For ref:
https://www.claytenis.com/en/cov/interview-nikolay-davydenko/
Courtesy of @GabeT .
 
MichaelNadal said:
Their level is fine, it's the inconsistency and choking, and mental midgetry on big points.
Click to expand...
Inconsistency was there in Davy's era also but players seemed a bit more intelligent to me, apart from Gonzalez of course. Most of these dudes suck at point construction. Someone like Berr knows that skill but is too deficient arsenal-wise.
 
Davydenko took the ball earlier and has better footwork than any of them.

So I totally agree with him making this statement. He was Agassi-esque at his best.

Zero point zero percent chance any of these guys could play that way.

Whether they are more effective than Davy overall due to serve/power is another argument.
 
Of course he's right. People here have been noting technical deficiencies in the Next Gen's game for years (I'm thinking forehand analysis threads by @Zoid for example). The Lost gen was actually more technically sound that the current crop of players aged 25 and under, but they couldn't break through against the big four in their prime because they just lacked that kind of a generational talent.

Nothing controversial about what Davydenko is saying. It's just true.
 
Kralingen said:
Davydenko took the ball earlier and has better footwork than any of them.

So I totally agree with him making this statement. He was Agassi-esque at his best.

Zero point zero percent chance any of these guys could play that way.

Whether they are more effective than Davy overall due to serve/power is another argument.
Click to expand...
Well, current top folks are obviously gigantic compared to 5'10 Davydenko but I agree, they suck(at least most of 'em) at point construction. The likes of Davy, Nalby used to be masters of that craft.
 
Wander said:
Of course he's right. People here have been noting technical deficiencies in the Next Gen's game for years (I'm thinking forehand analysis threads by @Zoid for example). The Lost gen was actually more technically sound that the current crop of players aged 25 and under, but they couldn't break through against the big four in their prime because they just lacked that kind of a generational talent.
Click to expand...
Do you think Alcaraz might be one of the better ones :unsure: ? Not being gigantic probably probably helps.
 
I mean, think about making the counterpoint to this argument.

You'd have to argue that the younger generation are technically advanced. lol. Yes, the guys known for 65mph 2nd serves, flubbed volleys, wristy FHs, and a 25% success rate on putaways against Djokodal, along with basically zero grass success and some very questionable statistics on return, are as sound technically as can be.

So let's say they are technically perfect.

Then what would explain their lack of success? These physical beasts, equipped with 23 year old legs and energy, and technical mastery of the game, somehow keep losing to mid-30s players because... because why exactly?
 
Wander said:
Of course he's right. People here have been noting technical deficiencies in the Next Gen's game for years (I'm thinking forehand analysis threads by @Zoid for example). The Lost gen was actually more technically sound that the current crop of players aged 25 and under, but they couldn't break through against the big four in their prime because they just lacked that kind of a generational talent.

Nothing controversial about what Davydenko is saying. It's just true.
Click to expand...

This is of course an interesting point to consider, because solely by virtue of age it's likely that the Next Gen will have far more accomplishments than the Lost Gen.

Will people remember the Lost Gen as underrated and the Next Gen as overrated because of this factor? Maybe in the next 5-10 years, but past that people will just be looking at stats.

Something to consider as we evaluate past champions and how they compare to present and future champions. Things are not always as they seem.
 
spottishwood said:
What would you say are the biggest differences in tennis now compared to when you were a top player?

In my opinion, tennis is not making much progress. The players who are at the top now – not Nadal and Djokovic, but the younger generation –are not that good technically. I got surprised by that. It’s more physical – big serves, hitting hard–, but we still see that Nadal and Djokovic can control all this power over the new generation. They are still winning Slams and beating guys who are ten years younger than them, which is amazing. Anyway, I do not feel that the new generation is playing on an unbelievable level.

Would be glad to know what TTW thinks.

For ref:
https://www.claytenis.com/en/cov/interview-nikolay-davydenko/
Courtesy of @GabeT .
Click to expand...

Davydenko for the win. It's because they can hit big serves and ground strokes that they never learn finesse. Tennis is both.
 
Kralingen said:
You'd have to argue that the younger generation are technically advanced. Yes, the guys known for 65mph 2nd serves, flubbed volleys, and a 25% success rate on putaways against Djokodal, along with basically zero grass success and some very questionable statistics on return, are as sound technically as can be.
Click to expand...
The counterpoint is kind of mortifying LOL. Tsitsipas having Anderson like return will always be a mystery.
 
FrontHeadlock said:
This is of course an interesting point to consider, because solely by virtue of age it's likely that the Next Gen will have far more accomplishments than the Lost Gen.

Will people remember the Lost Gen as underrated and the Next Gen as overrated because of this factor? Maybe in the next 5-10 years, but past that people will just be looking at stats.

Something to consider as we evaluate past champions and how they compare to present and future champions. Things are not always as they seem.
Click to expand...

The Lost Gen may be underrated compared to #NextGen but they were still an abject failure of a generation, they at least were competing with the tail end of the prime for the Big 3 though.
 
The best today has to offer. If we're truly getting technical.

yeah.jpg
 
spottishwood said:
Do you think Alcaraz might be one of the better ones :unsure: ? Not being gigantic probably probably helps.
Click to expand...
Alcaraz has to be one of the better ones but he still goes a bit wild on his ground strokes sometimes and loses control. His serve has power but not the accuracy of the best servers.

On the positive side, he's already broken through on clay and hard courts at Masters level, just not quite at the Slams. I guess a pessimist would draw parallels to Zverev who started having great success at 250/500/1000 level since 2017 but somehow continuously stalled at the Majors. Alcaraz can't afford to do that.
 
Kralingen said:
Davydenko took the ball earlier and has better footwork than any of them.

So I totally agree with him making this statement. He was Agassi-esque at his best.

Zero point zero percent chance any of these guys could play that way.

Whether they are more effective than Davy overall due to serve/power is another argument.
Click to expand...
Most NextGen are far taller than Matchfixidenko.
 
Aabye5 said:
He is very technically sound. I give him credit, and that's why I have always thought the obsession with his height was no about winning Slams.
Click to expand...
He's winning slams regardless. 'How many' is a different matter of discussion. I honestly think that he's a six footer albeit weaker than Stan.
 
Hitman said:
Totally agree with Davydenko. If this guy was at his peak during this time, he would have been rubbing his hands together in glee and prospect of dishing out some beatings on them.
Click to expand...
Never found him very consistent but yeah, at his peak, he could hold his own against the best.
 
spottishwood said:
Never found him very consistent but yeah, at his peak, he could hold his own against the best.
Click to expand...

He would be making mince meat out of the competition out there today, no doubt in my mind. They used to call him Playstation back in the day, because he was like a machine who never missed when he was on. Plus, his peak level is higher than any of the players currently playing with the exception of course of peak Djokodal.
 
I completely agree with Davydenko. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have been in an arms race for 15+ years having to re-tool and improve their games to keep pace in the slam race. They have driven each other to a level of technical excellence that has never been seen before and the youngsters cannot reach it as easily as in the past. The gap in technical standards between a young Lleyton Hewitt, Safin or Federer emerging against old Sampras, Rafter and Agassi wasn't anything like as huge as say a Ruud having to go up against a Nadal at Roland Garros. It's a different league now.

That is the reason why all three continued to dominate the slams into their 30s. You need to be massively fitter, faster and stronger to overcome a situation where you are technically worse than your opponent in 90% of the game.

What has made it worse is that the Big 2, and that other one who now belongs in former pro players forum, don't play the full tour any more so it is more difficult for the younger players to meet them at the smaller tournaments and get experience of their games in less stressful situations. When they do meet them, it is invariably at the back end of a slam and the step up in standard at such a big occasion is usually too overwhelming. As we saw in Paris.

PS. All of the promising young players FAA, HH, Tsits, Zv, Medv, Alcz, Ruud, Rublv etc are 100x better technically than that 1D clown Dodgeydonkey ever was.
 
Wander said:
Alcaraz has to be one of the better ones but he still goes a bit wild on his ground strokes sometimes and loses control. His serve has power but not the accuracy of the best servers.

On the positive side, he's already broken through on clay and hard courts at Masters level, just not quite at the Slams. I guess a pessimist would draw parallels to Zverev who started having great success at 250/500/1000 level since 2017 but somehow continuously stalled at the Majors. Alcaraz can't afford to do that.
Click to expand...
Agreed, he goes a bit wild at times but I'll make an excuse for him as he's quite inexperienced. His serve is probably never gonna be that good sadly, but it's not like all slam winners were great servers.

I sincerely hope that he doesn't end up like Z and I think he'll not falter. Z probably has too much of mental baggage now. Don't to see him win slams sadly. Might have a cilic-esque run or at best Stan like later in his career.
 
I think the younger ones struggle with what’s between the ears. Alcaraz is mentally strong. Rune doesn’t seem to be as strong, in comparison.
 
UnderratedSlam said:
Most NextGen are far taller than Matchfixidenko.
Click to expand...
Of course. Schwartzman is also more technically sound than any of them but obviously his height is too limiting to make him actually better. Wasn't making a short=better point.

But even adjusted for height there are some glaring weaknesses in each NextGen's game, ones that can't be explained by mental muggery or Big 3 being GOATs.
 
Hitman said:
He would be making mince meat out of the competition out there today, no doubt in my mind. They used to call him Playstation back in the day, because he was like a machine who never missed when he was on. Plus, his peak level is higher than any of the players currently playing with the exception of course of peak Djokodal.
Click to expand...
Agreed. His peak level was definitely higher than most of these folks. As for inconsistency, it's not like #Nextgen are wildly consistent.
 
This is a well established fact.

Some of the second serves Zverez has hit over the years are almost physically impossible at his height

It’s interesting that Alcaraz is a young player with ‘classic’ 90’s/early 2000’s technique and has been coached by one of Davydenko’s contemporaries, Ferrero
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

weakera
Nikolay Davydenko says the current ATP Generation aren’t as strong as in the ‘Big 3’ Era
Replies
46
Views
1K
Neptune
Neptune
ForehandCross
Toni Nadal the GOAT Coach :Federer, Nadal Dominate Tennis Because Younger Generation Not Good Enough
Replies
8
Views
708
ForehandCross
ForehandCross
A
Serena's rivals from her generation better than the younger players now.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Vanhool
Vanhool
ForehandCross
Do the Older gen generation use the same racquet tech from their time? Ha racquetring technology not changed drastically since introduction of poly ?
Replies
13
Views
866
Shaolin
Shaolin
zill
The real reason we have not seen any new players come through past the original big 4?
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
DariaGT
DariaGT
Back
Top