Diamond Age has Begun

[Meles]

What gives??

He and Kokk just too many injury issues and now Kyrgios is done making any big performance leaps due to speed. Enjoyed watching him today at Kremlin Cup, but yes I left him out which is what the photo is about. Both are amazing players and its staggering that Kokk after being so injury riddled beat Federer. Bonus if these two do something. Both have it.

 

[Meles]

It will happen because one mug will be a little better than the other mugs and previously mentioned mug will win most of the GS and everyone will declare slightly less sucky mug GOAT.

The 2003 – 2007 gravy train has long sailed. You need to have talent and compete well to win matches these days, not sleepwalk through a vacuum field of amateurs where serve-only Roddick and weaponless 5 foot tall Hewitt can clean up slams like empty morning bottles.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

The 2003 – 2007 gravy train has long sailed. You need to have talent and compete well to win matches these days, not sleepwalk through a vacuum field of amateurs where serve-only Roddick and weaponless 5 foot tall Hewitt can clean up slams like empty morning bottles.

LOL.

You don't think making the top 10 at 19 is talent? Giving Sampras bagels? Winning slams and getting to No. 1 at 20 years old? No talent? Are you insane?

When have Thiem and anybody else even taken it to elderly Federer? You're telling me, with Hewitt's early record against Federer and the fact he took him out when both of them were old men in 2014, that a young, exuberant Hewitt wouldn't be beating Federer today? Are you kidding me?

The kid wasn't Thiem. A total and utter mug. He came into the game and essentially broke into the top 10. His rise was quick. Thiem took forever and he still kind of sucks. He's like a very poor man's Ferrero.

 

[Meles]

But how many SF spots did the next gen get? Just 1 SF by Chung at the AO, 2 if you count Edmund, though at 23, he's not quite the same age group anymore. Old guys, even outside the big 4, like Anderson, Isner, Cilic, Delpo and Nishikori took up more SF spots than the young guys. None of the really hyped guys like Zverev, Tsitsipas or Shapovalov made a deep run. I think any of Zverev, Coric or Tsitsipas might make their first SF next year, but the rest are question marks.

I won't right off players until they're well on their way to 25 with only incremental improvements likely after this. (Wawrinka a very unusual exception.) Bottom line the majors metric is not a great one. Other stats plus ranking is the simplest. Coric, Edmund, Tsitsipas in the 10-15 range in race is very good. Thiem and Zverev WTF again is fine.

 

[Meles]

....You don't think making the top 10 at 19 is talent? Giving Sampras bagels? Winning slams and getting to No. 1 at 20 years old? No talent? Are you insane?

When have Thiem and anybody else even taken it to elderly Federer? You're telling me, with Hewitt's early record against Federer and the fact he took him out when both of them were old men in 2014, that a young, exuberant Hewitt wouldn't be beating Federer today? Are you kidding me?

The kid wasn't Thiem. A total and utter mug. He came into the game and essentially broke into the top 10. His rise was quick. Thiem took forever and he still kind of sucks. He's like a very poor man's Ferrero.

Red herring to perpetuate denial of the 2003-2007 disaster.

Sampras had to contend with the extra early bloomer Hewitt, while Fed scooped up the old tired Hewitt worn out in his youth by the Gold Era players.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Red herring to perpetuate denial of the 2003-2007 disaster.

Sampras had to contend with the extra early bloomer Hewitt, while Fed scooped up the old tired Hewitt worn out in his youth by the Gold Era players.

Hewitt's best play came during the 2005 season where he made his most consistent runs in majors only to be stopped by Safin and Federer...

So not really. Federer had to contend with early Hewitt and peak Hewitt really and dismantled him. My point was that he was a very good player and a good addition to that era. Using him as a way to denounce that era is wrong. It went downhill after 2005 heading into 2006 when he was replaced by Davydenko, Nalbandian and Ljubicic.

 

[abmk]

Well Med with three tournament wins in the year he turned 22. Bendy with three total by then in the great vacuum of 2003-2007.

2003-2007 >> 2016-2018 and 2003-2007 was nowhere near a vacuum, utterly clueless fella.
Berdych had won a Masters by then.
Was 11-25 vs top 10

Medvedev is 1-7 vs top 10 as of now and that win was vs an injured Wawrinka. bah !

berdych had 1 slam QF and 4 4Rs in slams by the end of 2007.
medevedev hasn't even reached 4R of a slam till now.

 

[abmk]

Red herring to perpetuate denial of the 2003-2007 disaster.

Sampras had to contend with the extra early bloomer Hewitt, while Fed scooped up the old tired Hewitt worn out in his youth by the Gold Era players.

again, a load of BS from the ignorant kid who started watching tennis in 2015..
Hewitt's prime years were in 2001-2002 and 2004-05, He was just as good in 2004-05 as he was in 2001-2002.

2003-2007 were all pretty good years, except for 2006 which was relatively weaker (but still clearly stronger than 2016-2018).

But then you wouldn't know sh*t about tennis back then since you started watching in 2015 or so.

 

[abmk]

edit: nm.

 

[ChaelAZ]

More like the weak aluminum foil age.

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

I won't right off players until they're well on their way to 25 with only incremental improvements likely after this. (Wawrinka a very unusual exception.) Bottom line the majors metric is not a great one. Other stats plus ranking is the simplest. Coric, Edmund, Tsitsipas in the 10-15 range in race is very good. Thiem and Zverev WTF again is fine.

People are harsh with with this new gen because the shadows of Nadal being no. 2 at 19, Djokovic being no. 3 at 20, and Murray and Delpo being no. 4 at 21 still loom high. Only Zverev has made that kind of progress with nobody else coming close. I admire your optimism (and I think folks here are way too harsh on you), and I agree it's still too early to make sweeping judgments on this new crop, but I don't think any of these guys will become double digit Slam champs, maybe just a few in the 4-6 range.

 

[IowaGuy]

People are harsh with with this new gen because the shadows of Nadal being no. 2 at 19, Djokovic being no. 3 at 20, and Murray and Delpo being no. 4 at 21 still loom high. Only Zverev has made that kind of progress with nobody else coming close. I admire your optimism (and I think folks here are way too harsh on you), and I agree it's still too early to make sweeping judgments on this new crop, but I don't think any of these guys will become double digit Slam champs, maybe just a few in the 4-6 range.

Wilander
Becker
Chang
Edberg

These and many other great players and slam winners also showed brilliance at a very young age!

 

[mike danny]

Red herring to perpetuate denial of the 2003-2007 disaster.

Sampras had to contend with the extra early bloomer Hewitt, while Fed scooped up the old tired Hewitt worn out in his youth by the Gold Era players.

Old tired Hewitt when he was the same age as Fed and a top 4 player in 2004 and 2005. Hilarious

 

[mike danny]

People are harsh with with this new gen because the shadows of Nadal being no. 2 at 19, Djokovic being no. 3 at 20, and Murray and Delpo being no. 4 at 21 still loom high. Only Zverev has made that kind of progress with nobody else coming close. I admire your optimism (and I think folks here are way too harsh on you), and I agree it's still too early to make sweeping judgments on this new crop, but I don't think any of these guys will become double digit Slam champs, maybe just a few in the 4-6 range.

When he makes stupid claims about 2003-2007, that do you expect?

 

[Meles]

2003-2007 >> 2016-2018 and 2003-2007 was nowhere near a vacuum, utterly clueless fella.
Berdych had won a Masters by then.
Was 11-25 vs top 10

Medvedev is 1-7 vs top 10 as of now and that win was vs an injured Wawrinka. bah !

berdych had 1 slam QF and 4 4Rs in slams by the end of 2007.
medevedev hasn't even reached 4R of a slam till now.

Got my first Diamond Age report on the big Russians vs. Cilic:
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...sians-vs-big-marin-diamond-age-report.629473/

Medvedev beat Nishikori in a final in Japan at an event he's won twice before. And Nishi was effectively in the top 10 and may well make WTF this year despite a slow start due to recovery from injury and skipping the Australian Open. Life in the Strong Era.

 

[Meles]

Old tired Hewitt when he was the same age as Fed and a top 4 player in 2004 and 2005. Hilarious

He did mentally lose it for one year and then the hip was coming on in 2005 so this take no SoBad.

 

[Meles]

see the comparison by the time they were both 22.
Also you idiot, you were the one who asked about what Berdych has done in his career. I responded with that.

Now get a clue instead of embarassing yourself with sh*t stuff like this thread.

I had no idea Bendy Stockholm Syndrome began way back in the 2004 Olympics for the Handwringerers. I'd say Berdych was like Lendl without the slams, but then Lendl won more tournaments in one year than Bendy in a career. I do think Medvedev might actually win a slam as detailed in the Cilic thread linked a few posts above. 74.1% serve points won in main draw of Tokyo is no joke. Let's check your precious Bendy at his beloved Halle run on grass where serve numbers are always betterer...... not bad 75.3% serve points won, but an asterisk with the walkover and still only 54.6% points won to Meddy's 57.5% in main draw at Tokyo.

 

[Meles]

People are harsh with with this new gen because the shadows of Nadal being no. 2 at 19, Djokovic being no. 3 at 20, and Murray and Delpo being no. 4 at 21 still loom high. Only Zverev has made that kind of progress with nobody else coming close. I admire your optimism (and I think folks here are way too harsh on you), and I agree it's still too early to make sweeping judgments on this new crop, but I don't think any of these guys will become double digit Slam champs, maybe just a few in the 4-6 range.

Well with 40 slams up from 2021-2030 its really largely down to this group at least for the first half of that period. We'd have to have some crazy new phenom show up on the radar in the next few years to take over the end of that Diamond Age (2026-2030).

Other talents I've not mentioned in this thread are Sebastian Korda (Petr Korda's son) who is already 18, quite tall, and just won Auz Open junior title. I'm also very impressed with Rudolf Molleker who turns 18 later this month and has played some main draw ATP:
30 / 2018 Hamburg
R32 Clay Rudolf Molleker David Ferrer 7-5 5-7 6-3 H2H 4.33 - 1.20

Korda has had a rough year trying the Challengers and Molleker has a couple SFs and has played pretty much all clay so far at Challenger level.

By the two best young talents we've had showing up on the radar at 15, 16, 17 are first the younger Canadian Felix Auger-Aliassime and then Shapo. FAA now 18. Nothing like him right now of whom I'm aware.

People are not harsh with me, just Fedralinas. You have to remember that Poly strings had a huge impact on the game. Kuerten would never ever have won 1997 RG without Poly strings. The clay courters pretty quickly changed, but the main tour did not really change until 2003-2004 when Fed's eventual success with Poly made it clear that it was a must on all surfaces (Poly string itself improving during this period). Its totally changed the clay court game because great hard court baseliners like Djoko and Fed are now great clay courters. We see non-clay courters like Murray and Cilic suddenly have more success in their late prime too because of this change to the field. Its kind of hilarious to watch clay these days because you have the main Spring season in Europe with all the hard court players in the draw which is kind of what these guys build their stats on, but then you have the South American clay court events. Those fields are exclusively classically trained clay court players that hit heavy and grind. Nishikori tried to go down there in 2017 and vulture and frankly he's just now recovering from the toll of that effort. The same really could be said of Cilic's failure this year, but injuries had him only at Rio where fellow vulturer Monfils won.

Even Nadal's early breakthroughs may be questioned because the tour was in turmoil in 2005/2006 with Poly. A lot of good players did not fare as well with Poly weakening the group of good hard courters back then that have been a reality this decade on clay. At the same time some players were making inroads on clay so your typical clay courter had more dangerous opponents. If you look at clay majors in the 1990s you see a lot of big name specialists getting picked off by big hard court players and servers. If those big hard court players had Poly (like Sampras) it would have been much worse for them and we'd probably have the Americans doing even better on clay along with some others like even Becker and Edberg, etc. Of course Nadal is clearly so great that he also eclipses the entire field on clay so now he represents a higher barrier to entry than has ever been. So even on clay, but especially on the other surfaces the Big 3's early results were against a vacuum caused by many top players not adapting well to Poly on tour. Even your average Fedralina will admit 2006 was weak.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

He did mentally lose it for one year and then the hip was coming on in 2005 so this take no SoBad.

He didn't mentally lose it. The reason his ranking dropped so significantly in 2003 is because he prioritized Davis Cup and saw no reason to chase after the No. 1 ranking when others were already way further ahead in the race at that time (Federer especially).

That is also the reason for some of his early losses in 2004, he was seeded low (for his standards at the time) and ran into Federer in the 4th round or QF until he broke back into the top 10.

The hip was a minor issue at the Australian Open. He had other injuries throughout 2005 though including a fall which resulted in a weird foot injury that had him sidelined for the season post the US Open. He then had a surgery and came back without his trademark speed. He essentially stayed in the top 20 on talent alone.

 

[Zetty]

 

[toby55555]

De Minaur impresses me and he still has a lot of filling out to do, great attitude; and there’s always Nick if he gets motivated.

 

[Guitario]

There is a young British player called Jack Draper, who in the last month has risen from outside the top 1000 to around 450 in the rankings by winning 3 Futures. He is currently the only 16 year old in the top 1000. Obviously, it's far too early to predict what will come of him, but he seems to have a lot of self confidence without being arrogant - and that will help him transition between tours in the future.

 

[abmk]

Got my first Diamond Age report on the big Russians vs. Cilic:
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...sians-vs-big-marin-diamond-age-report.629473/

Medvedev beat Nishikori in a final in Japan at an event he's won twice before. And Nishi was effectively in the top 10 and may well make WTF this year despite a slow start due to recovery from injury and skipping the Australian Open. Life in the Strong Era.

if Nishi is "effectively" in the top 10, the win vs Wawa in Wim 17 is "effectively" null&void since Wawa was injured.

and like I said ..

"2003-2007 >> 2016-2018 and 2003-2007 was nowhere near a vacuum, utterly clueless fella.
Berdych had won a Masters by then.
Was 11-25 vs top 10

Medvedev is 1-7 vs top 10 as of now and that win was vs an injured Wawrinka. bah !

berdych had 1 slam QF and 4 4Rs in slams by the end of 2007.
medevedev hasn't even reached 4R of a slam till now. "

at the same age, medvedev had nothing close to what Berdych had done, even with the current clear weak era as compared to the strong era in 2004-2007.

oh and your thread has been EXPOSED.

 

[abmk]

I had no idea Bendy Stockholm Syndrome began way back in the 2004 Olympics for the Handwringerers. I'd say Berdych was like Lendl without the slams, but then Lendl won more tournaments in one year than Bendy in a career. I do think Medvedev might actually win a slam as detailed in the Cilic thread linked a few posts above. 74.1% serve points won in main draw of Tokyo is no joke. Let's check your precious Bendy at his beloved Halle run on grass where serve numbers are always betterer...... not bad 75.3% serve points won, but an asterisk with the walkover and still only 54.6% points won to Meddy's 57.5% in main draw at Tokyo.

Stockholm syndrome ? Nope. More like you have foot in the mouth syndrome.
Why the hell would one care about a one-off ? Federer dominated Berdych after that match, winning something like 8 or 9 matches in a row all the way till 2009.

berdych isn't like Lendl game-wise.
And here's a clue. Points won% is usually lesser on grass than on HC (due to return points% being lesser).

 

[reaper]

De Minaur impresses me and he still has a lot of filling out to do, great attitude; and there’s always Nick if he gets motivated.

Nick just conceded a W/O in Moscow citing an elbow injury....

 

[Meles]

He didn't mentally lose it. The reason his ranking dropped so significantly in 2003 is because he prioritized Davis Cup and saw no reason to chase after the No. 1 ranking when others were already way further ahead in the race at that time (Federer especially).

That is also the reason for some of his early losses in 2004, he was seeded low (for his standards at the time) and ran into Federer in the 4th round or QF until he broke back into the top 10.

The hip was a minor issue at the Australian Open. He had other injuries throughout 2005 though including a fall which resulted in a weird foot injury that had him sidelined for the season post the US Open. He then had a surgery and came back without his trademark speed. He essentially stayed in the top 20 on talent alone.

I wonder what Rusty is going to do on the coaching front now that Davis Cup is done; we'll he become a full time coach for a single player? Seems a natural with de Minaur who has gotten high enough in the rankings that he might be able to support a super coach.

 

[Meles]

if Nishi is "effectively" in the top 10, the win vs Wawa in Wim 17 is "effectively" null&void since Wawa was injured.

and like I said ..

"2003-2007 >> 2016-2018 and 2003-2007 was nowhere near a vacuum, utterly clueless fella.
Berdych had won a Masters by then.
Was 11-25 vs top 10

Medvedev is 1-7 vs top 10 as of now and that win was vs an injured Wawrinka. bah !

berdych had 1 slam QF and 4 4Rs in slams by the end of 2007.
medevedev hasn't even reached 4R of a slam till now. "

at the same age, medvedev had nothing close to what Berdych had done, even with the current clear weak era as compared to the strong era in 2004-2007.

oh and your thread has been EXPOSED.

EXPOSED. Obviously you haven't watched Med recently. Now he's trying to play like Kyrgios and just had 52 minute match. Bendy's only 52 minute match:

 

[Meles]

There is a young British player called Jack Draper, who in the last month has risen from outside the top 1000 to around 450 in the rankings by winning 3 Futures. He is currently the only 16 year old in the top 1000. Obviously, it's far too early to predict what will come of him, but he seems to have a lot of self confidence without being arrogant - and that will help him transition between tours in the future.

That's the type of progress great players make early on. Noted.

Wow @Mainad , another brit with wheels and excellent height at 6' 2"

 

[Meles]

When he makes stupid claims about 2003-2007, that do you expect?

You can say many things about the competition in that era, but doping was only Federer:

- one-slam wonder Roddick serve-only 3.5 volleys
- five foot tall Hewitt
- wheelchair Safin pursuing political career full-time
- retired Sampras
- 40yo methhead Agassi
- hip-busted Kuerten
- am I forgeting anyone?

:lol:

 

[Meles]

Wilander
Becker
Chang
Edberg

These and many other great players and slam winners also showed brilliance at a very young age!

It’s tough to draw a clear line, but it is clear that the pre-1990s are an utter irrelevance in tennis. It’s like sure those Genghis Khan people were fine horsemen, but that does not immediately put them on top of the GOAT conversation in auto racing or whatever.

The Wool Pants realm definitely covers wood racquets, cold war non-competition, and all that nonsense. I would even venture to say that the Sampras PS85 is a wool pants relic, which makes his feat all the more remarkable.

Frankly, even the 1990s are murky (not compared to the 2003-2007, of course). With all due respect to Sampras and Kafelnikov, perhaps the last slam of the century (USO 2000) just happened to be the last nail in that wool pants coffin, so to speak.

 

[abmk]

EXPOSED. Obviously you haven't watched Med recently. Now he's trying to play like Kyrgios and just had 52 minute match. Bendy's only 52 minute match:

again, more cluelessness from the kid who didn't watch tennis before 2015.
yes, beating Lajovic easily is such a great feat.

like I said ..

"2003-2007 >> 2016-2018 and 2003-2007 was nowhere near a vacuum, utterly clueless fella.
Berdych had won a Masters by then.
Was 11-25 vs top 10

Medvedev is 1-7 vs top 10 as of now and that win was vs an injured Wawrinka. bah !

berdych had 1 slam QF and 4 4Rs in slams by the end of 2007.
medevedev hasn't even reached 4R of a slam till now. "

at the same age, medvedev had nothing close to what Berdych had done, even with the current clear weak era as compared to the strong era in 2004-2007.

 

[abmk]

It’s tough to draw a clear line, but it is clear that the pre-1990s are an utter irrelevance in tennis. It’s like sure those Genghis Khan people were fine horsemen, but that does not immediately put them on top of the GOAT conversation in auto racing or whatever.

The Wool Pants realm definitely covers wood racquets, cold war non-competition, and all that nonsense. I would even venture to say that the Sampras PS85 is a wool pants relic, which makes his feat all the more remarkable.

Frankly, even the 1990s are murky (not compared to the 2003-2007, of course). With all due respect to Sampras and Kafelnikov, perhaps the last slam of the century (USO 2000) just happened to be the last nail in that wool pants coffin, so to speak.

You can say many things about the competition in that era, but doping was only Federer:

- one-slam wonder Roddick serve-only 3.5 volleys
- five foot tall Hewitt
- wheelchair Safin pursuing political career full-time
- retired Sampras
- 40yo methhead Agassi
- hip-busted Kuerten
- am I forgeting anyone?

:lol:

 

[Hamnavoe]

@Meles it's somewhat curious that you joined a tennis forum a year before you started watching tennis. What was going through your head when you made this decision?

 

[Ann]

@Meles it's somewhat curious that you joined a tennis forum a year before you started watching tennis. What was going through your head when you made this decision?

Wait, What?

 

[Hamnavoe]

Wait, What?

It seems to me that abmk is insistent that Meles did not watch tennis before 2015.

As we all know, abmk is an authority on all things even remotely tennis-related, so I have taken his word that Meles only started watching tennis in 2015.

However, Meles' account was created in 2014, so I was wondering why he decided to make an account on a tennis forum before he had even started watching the sport.

 

[Ann]

It seems to me that abmk is insistent that Meles did not watch tennis before 2015.

As we all know, abmk is an authority on all things even remotely tennis-related, so I have taken his word that Meles only started watching tennis in 2015.

However, Meles' account was created in 2014, so I was wondering why he decided to make an account on a tennis forum before he had even started watching the sport.

You young'ins and your ability to absorb detailed minutiae gives me such warm feels for the future.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I wonder what Rusty is going to do on the coaching front now that Davis Cup is done; we'll he become a full time coach for a single player? Seems a natural with de Minaur who has gotten high enough in the rankings that he might be able to support a super coach.

He's joining Channel 9 here in Australia as a commentator for the upcoming Australian tennis coverage so there's that.

 

[Meles]

It seems to me that abmk is insistent that Meles did not watch tennis before 2015.

As we all know, abmk is an authority on all things even remotely tennis-related, so I have taken his word that Meles only started watching tennis in 2015.

However, Meles' account was created in 2014, so I was wondering why he decided to make an account on a tennis forum before he had even started watching the sport.

And Meles was created years before this.

 

[Meles]

@Meles it's somewhat curious that you joined a tennis forum a year before you started watching tennis. What was going through your head when you made this decision?

I joined, but never posted or could read until a year later.

 

[Meles]

again, more cluelessness from the kid who didn't watch tennis before 2015.
yes, beating Lajovic easily is such a great feat.

like I said ..

"2003-2007 >> 2016-2018 and 2003-2007 was nowhere near a vacuum, utterly clueless fella.
Berdych had won a Masters by then.
Was 11-25 vs top 10

Medvedev is 1-7 vs top 10 as of now and that win was vs an injured Wawrinka. bah !

berdych had 1 slam QF and 4 4Rs in slams by the end of 2007.
medevedev hasn't even reached 4R of a slam till now. "

at the same age, medvedev had nothing close to what Berdych had done, even with the current clear weak era as compared to the strong era in 2004-2007.

Wow what a vacuum, Bendy 11-25 vs top 10; nuff said.

 

[accidental]

Even though I don’t rate any of these players very highly it does seem that they will be the next crop of grand slam champions at some stage soon

I just wish they would all collectively step it up and push out the current old gen. If that happened I would be much more on board

 

[Meles]

Even though I don’t rate any of these players very highly it does seem that they will be the next crop of grand slam champions at some stage soon

I just wish they would all collectively step it up and push out the current old gen. If that happened I would be much more on board

Don't think its happening in slams just yet for most of them, but in best of three they should deliver some more scalps all too soon. The NextGen Diamond Age stars versus Big 3 in 2018 we have versus Djoko a record of 4-5:
3 / 2018 Australian Open
R16 Hard Hyeon Chung Novak Djokovic 7-6(4) 7-5 7-6(3) H2H 1.30 - 3.40
15 / 2018 Monte Carlo Masters
R16 Clay Dominic Thiem Novak Djokovic 6-7(2) 6-2 6-3 H2H 2.20 - 1.66
R32 Clay Novak Djokovic Borna Coric 7-6(2) 7-5 H2H 1.33 - 3.25
18 / 2018 Madrid Masters
R32 Clay Kyle Edmund Novak Djokovic 6-3 2-6 6-3 H2H 3.50 - 1.30
27 / 2018 Wimbledon
R16 Grass Novak Djokovic Karen Khachanov 6-4 6-2 6-2 H2H
R32 Grass Novak Djokovic Kyle Edmund 4-6 6-3 6-2 6-4 H2H
32 / 2018 Canadian Masters
R16 Hard Stefanos Tsitsipas Novak Djokovic 6-3 6-7(5) 6-3 H2H 3.75 - 1.25
40 / 2018 Shanghai Masters
F Hard Novak Djokovic Borna Coric 6-3 6-4 H2H 1.17 - 5.45
SF Hard Novak Djokovic Alexander Zverev 6-2 6-1 H2H 1.34 - 3.35

versus Federe (2-4):
3 / 2018 Australian Open
SF Hard Roger Federer Hyeon Chung 6-1 5-2 H2H 1.17 - 5.00 (Chung retirement due to blisters coming into the match)
10 / 2018 Indian Wells Masters
SF Hard Roger Federer Borna Coric 5-7 6-4 6-4 H2H 1.11 - 7.00
QF Hard Roger Federer Hyeon Chung 7-5 6-1 H2H 1.20 - 4.35
25 / 2018 Halle
F Grass Borna Coric Roger Federer 7-6(6) 3-6 6-2 H2H 6.00 - 1.14
40 / 2018 Shanghai Masters
SF Hard Borna Coric Roger Federer 6-4 6-4 H2H
R32 Hard Roger Federer Daniil Medvedev 6-4 4-6 6-4 H2H 1.22 - 4.00

vs Nadal (1-10):
15 / 2018 Monte Carlo Masters
QF Clay Rafael Nadal Dominic Thiem 6-0 6-2 H2H 1.18 - 4.75
R16 Clay Rafael Nadal Karen Khachanov 6-3 6-2 H2H 1.06 - 10.00
17 / 2018 Barcelona
F Clay Rafael Nadal Stefanos Tsitsipas 6-2 6-1 H2H
18 / 2018 Madrid Masters
QF Clay Dominic Thiem Rafael Nadal 7-5 6-3 H2H 9.00 - 1.06
19 / 2018 Rome Masters
F Clay Rafael Nadal Alexander Zverev 6-1 1-6 6-3 H2H 1.20 - 4.75
R16 Clay Rafael Nadal Denis Shapovalov 6-4 6-1 H2H 1.03 - 12.00
27 / 2018 Wimbledon
R32 Grass Rafael Nadal Alex DE Minaur 6-1 6-2 6-4
32 / 2018 Canadian Masters
F Hard Rafael Nadal Stefanos Tsitsipas 6-2 7-6(4) H2H 1.20 - 4.50
SF Hard Rafael Nadal Karen Khachanov 7-6(3) 6-4 H2H 1.20 - 4.80
35 / 2018 US Open
QF Hard Rafael Nadal Dominic Thiem 0-6 6-4 7-5 6-7(4) 7-6(5) H2H 1.22 - 4.30
R32 Hard Rafael Nadal Karen Khachanov 5-7 7-5 7-6(7) 7-6(3) H2H 1.10 - 7.50

 

[abmk]

Wow what a vacuum, Bendy 11-25 vs top 10; nuff said.

LOL, again, more blather coming from you due to your utter cluelessness.
young Berdych was clearly better than Med and that's why he had a 11-25 record vs top 10 in that time frame.

 

[Zara]

LOL, again, more blather coming from you due to your utter cluelessness.
young Berdych was clearly better than Med and that's why he had a 11-25 record vs top 10 in that time frame.

Dear Meles, why did you like this post when he called you clueless? Just trying to understand your psyche given that it strikes as an exception to the rule.

 

[IowaGuy]

I would even venture to say that the Sampras PS85 is a wool pants relic, which makes his feat all the more remarkable.

I saw Sampras play Rafter at Cincinnati in 1998 from near-courtside seats, and it sounded like a cannon going off when Sampras was serving

No 6'1" player has ever had a better serve, IMHO. The PS85 might be the best serving racket of all time! (accuracy + power + spin)

 

[Meles]

I saw Sampras play Rafter at Cincinnati in 1998 from near-courtside seats, and it sounded like a cannon going off when Sampras was serving

No 6'1" player has ever had a better serve, IMHO. The PS85 might be the best serving racket of all time! (accuracy + power + spin)

Let me give you a primer on the history of tennis. Very simple, there were 4 eras with a fifth just starting:

1. Woolpants Era (1920s+)
2. Golden Era (1980s-1990s: Sampras, Kafelnikov, fierce international competition)
3. Weak Era (the 2003-2007 lapse toward woolpants level)
4. Ultra Modern Era (2008+)
5. Diamand Age (2018+)

Let’s examine the woolpants era:

A small group of upper-middle class Anglosaxon men started playing each other for the amusement of affluent public. They were nice middle-aged, mildly athletic men, who wore wool pants and fur coats during their “matches” and still never broke a sweat. They were nice people you enjoyed a scotch and a cigar on their changeovers. They gently bunted balls back and forth over the net. Groundstrokes were rudimentary and passing shots were unheard of, so they all liked to walk briskly forward toward the net, whenever they felt tired and wished to end a point.

In the 1980s tennis started getting international and elements of athletic play were introduced, ultimately culminating in the 1990s Golden Era, when the likes of Sampras and Kafelnikov battled all-time greats in virtually each and every slam round.

A number of tragic events of 2002, precipitated by the Sampras-Kafelnikov retirement and Safin injuries, left the ATP in a state of vacuum, which brought tennis back onto its woolpant knees until the 2008 liberation. And now we have a new wave of Diamond Age talent joining the greats left standing from the Ultra Modern Era.

 

[IowaGuy]

And now we have a new wave of Diamond Era talent joining the greats left standing from the Ultra Modern Era.

Diamond Era Talent: net play notwithstanding

 

[IowaGuy]

Let me give you a primer on the history of tennis. Very simple, there were 4 eras with a fifth just starting:

1. Woolpants Era (1920s+)
2. Golden Era (1980s-1990s: Sampras, Kafelnikov, fierce international competition)
3. Weak Era (the 2003-2007 lapse toward woolpants level)
4. Ultra Modern Era (2008+)
5. Diamand Era (2018+)

Let’s examine the woolpants era:

A small group of upper-middle class Anglosaxon men started playing each other for the amusement of affluent public. They were nice middle-aged, mildly athletic men, who wore wool pants and fur coats during their “matches” and still never broke a sweat. They were nice people you enjoyed a scotch and a cigar on their changeovers. They gently bunted balls back and forth over the net. Groundstrokes were rudimentary and passing shots were unheard of, so they all liked to walk briskly forward toward the net, whenever they felt tired and wished to end a point.

In the 1980s tennis started getting international and elements of athletic play were introduced, ultimately culminating in the 1990s Golden Era, when the likes of Sampras and Kafelnikov battled all-time greats in virtually each and every slam round.

A number of tragic events of 2002, precipitated by the Sampras-Kafelnikov retirement and Safin injuries, left the ATP in a state of vacuum, which brought tennis back onto its woolpant knees until the 2008 liberation. And now we have a new wave of Diamond Era talent joining the greats left standing from the Ultra Modern Era.

Diamond Era talent #2:

Big serve or die. You might as well call it "Tall Guy/Servebot Era"

de Minaur will be the litmus test of whether anyone without a huge serve (on par with aces/game of Sampras) can make top-10 in Diamond Era.

This basically excludes anyone 6'0" or under from being a tennis great in your Diamond Era, despite some of the most exciting-to-watch players of all time being 6'0" or under (Agassi, Laver, McEnroe, Nalbandian, Rios).

I'd personally rather watch youtube re-runs from the Golden Era than watch a bunch of servebot tennis in 2020+

 

[Meles]

Diamond Era talent #2:

Big serve or die. You might as well call it "Tall Guy/Servebot Era"

de Minaur will be the litmus test of whether anyone without a huge serve (on par with aces/game of Sampras) can make top-10 in Diamond Era.

This basically excludes anyone 6'0" or under from being a tennis great in your Diamond Era, despite some of the most exciting-to-watch players of all time being 6'0" or under (Agassi, Laver, McEnroe, Nalbandian, Rios).

I'd personally rather watch youtube re-runs from the Golden Era than watch a bunch of servebot tennis in 2020+

I've been bemoaning what Poly has done to the game myself for sometime, but now I realize its better. The wonders of sport science, tennis analysis (all Big 3 have made critical retools; the latest is Djoko first serve game), and most importantly poly strings have extended great players careers. This means we're seeing a lot more overlap between players as the new young Diamond greats still get some matches with Ultra Modern greats who are making the early part of the Diamond Age so memorable.

The downside as you say with Poly is that the serve has become a more critical asset. Players 6 feet tall are on the borderline now. Despite being the fastest player in the game, I doubt de Minaur is some kind of slam wonder. For him to make top 5 would be an accomplishment.

Your assertion of servebot tennis is not right. None of the top young players have a great serve (see Roddick or Sampras). The Khachanov v Medvedev SF this weekend was the best match of the week for quality. You would think to such giant players would be acing each other right and left with their big serves and slower movement, but the reverse was the case. Medvedev went from 15 aces to just 4 aces. Khachanov went from an ace rate of 29% the previous match to 9% against Medvedev. There match actually had a lot of ground stroke rallies with some monumental hitting. Shorter players don't have the reach and get aced more these days, but its a different story for some of the better taller players. The tall player of the Diamond Age cannot be a giant sloth like a Karlovic, Isner, Anderson, Querrey, or Cilic to some extent. You have to be able to defend.

This does exclude some excellent athletic talent from reaching the very top of today's game, but these players still can do very, very well. Its always great to have some contrast in play and these taller players offer this. Khach v Med was such a great match I'm not worried about these more bot vs bot matches.

I definitely prefer this new, bigger Diamond Age tennis to 90's tennis that was even more serve oriented. Watched the woolpants classic Wilander v Lendl 1989 US Open final and really liked the match, but I much prefer today's tennis. There are a lot more situations today where you have the long epic rally ended by a great offensive shot. There is a lot of subtle variation in baseline play that wasn't there in the past because so few really great baseline players. Tsitsipas is a giant of a player and I've never seen such a beautiful game. He's much more than even Federer when it comes to pulling all the levers in a match.

I'll be fine without Agassi who was a weak rival to Sampras on faster hard courts and grass. Perhaps a little more net play will come to the game as these bigger players develop as they have the reach to cover passes:

Tsits has been diving a lot and may end up better than Becker on that shot.

 

[Meles]

Its a devastating Diamond Age sweep for the new wave of players; Edmund repels Davis Cup wannabe Monfils at European Open. Tsitsipas breaks Lord Gulbis late in both sets for rather decisive win in Stockholm. Khachanov dismantles peak Mannarino in Kremlin Cup

Diamond Age off with a bang @abmk