Laver won 19 Majors adding his 8 amateur slams.
End of an era: Golden Age of tennis is over
- Thread starter Lleytonstation
- Start date
These arent world records, and of course you can still be good at 35. Level of play in team sports are very hard to compare. But if you look at sports you can accurately measure, like Usain Bolt or javelin, the world records are set at a younger age. I mean, even in chess(!!) youre too old at 35 these days
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
But that way, winning most no. of slams etc isn't also comparable to Bolt setting a world record in athletics at the age of 35. Djokovic can set a world record in no. of slams NOW only because of what he also won when he was younger.These arent world records, and of course you can still be good at 35. Level of play in team sports are very hard to compare. But if you look at sports you can accurately measure, like Usain Bolt or javelin, the world records are set at a younger age. I mean, even in chess(!!) youre too old at 35 these days
Of course not
. That would be more comparable to how many wc and olympic golds Bolt won no? But im talking about when Bolt was at his best, and the world records speaks for themselves. As i said, even our own Magnus Carlsen says he isnt as good as he used to be, and he doubts he will be playing the next WC, and he is only 31, and thats chess!
aman92
Legend
1884
aman92
Legend
Yeah sure Golf and Tennis are perfectly comparable as sports
D
Deleted member 762343
Guest
Golden age of tennis ended the day after tennis was born.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Of course not
So again, that is not comparable to any world records set by Djokovic say last year.
A record that accurately shows level of play in tennis isnt easily measured like in running. But given that in every sports were records are easily measured, the record is set at an age younger than 35, its fairly obvious that peak age is below
Krish0608
G.O.A.T.
Alcaraz with an RKO out of nowhere
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Still not following, Djokovic already had even better years than last in 2011/15.A record that accurately shows level of play in tennis isnt easily measured like in running. But given that in every sports were records are easily measured, the record is set at an age younger than 35, its fairly obvious that peak age is below
Sure. What im saying is that if winning a tournament is your only measure, you take away the whole idea of level of opposition being weak or strong. When Bolt ran at 9.58 he could have ran a lot slower and still won. Had his opponent ran on 9.59 he couldnt. Level of opposition is highly relevant for the results you produce.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
I am asking where is the evidence that Djokovic set a world record of performance anyway last year, he didn't.
Aah i see
. I agree, but again, performance in tennis isnt easily measured
Last edited:
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Sure but that's why you can't compare a track and field world record to record of slam tally in tennis and say that somehow reflects badly on tennis today. In ANY era, the slam record holder would have to be at least somewhat 'old' and not quite in their prime anymore. That's the nature of the beast. If it wasn't, you would have to question why tennis players mysteriously stop winning slams after a 2-3 year window.Aah i see
Rafa24
Hall of Fame
if he is allowed to play in any slams. lol. the tour is trash. med, zverev and tsitsi can show signs of greatness but none are consistent.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Of course not
This is somewhat off-topic, but I know that it's a popular view in our minds that a mental sport ought to be one in which you peak later than a physical one, and of course it's going to be true for some mental skills, but I'm not sure that chess is one of them. Chess skill is probably something like a combination of mathematical and musical genius and those are types of skill at which people often peak young. Being a chess grandmaster isn't like being an historian or a politician or a diplomat or a novelist or a feature/comment journalist in which you probably need long experience of studying the world to make your biggest contribution.
But, also, Magnus Carlsen might be burnt out. Wasn't Kasparov still pretty close to his best in his late 30s/early 40s? (And he also retired because of burn out, I think).
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Kasparov was still the world's highest ranked chess player when he left the sport in 2005, at the age of 42.
Im not comparing the two, because a track and field record shows when a certain person ran the fasest, while a slam tally just shows what you achieved, and is more about longevity than peak level of play.
Similar threads
