Federer gen vs current gen

Who wins ?

  • Fed gen

    Votes: 39 67.2%
  • Current gen

    Votes: 16 27.6%
  • Draw

    Votes: 3 5.2%

  • Total voters
    58

Pencak

Rookie
safin alcaraz
roddick sinner
hewitt rune
nalbandian zverev
davydenko medvedev
ferrero tsitsipas
soderling thiem
gonzalez shelton
haas kyrgios
blake berrettini
moya rublev
ferrer ruud
coria musetti
baghdatis aliassime
verdasco shapovalov
ljubicic hurckaz
ancic fritz
fish korda
robredo khachanov
gaudio fils
 
Last edited:

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
The problem with the Federer Gen is not whether it was GOOD or BAD, but rather its short duration.

Safin was easily the most talented, bagged 2 Slams within a 5 year period and has injuries and quite a few first round losses marring his career.

Hewitt was a dogged competitor and champion, but much like his protege, Alex de Minaur, benefitted greatly when the best were not up to snuff. Once Federer and some others started to be more consistent, he was still a fierce competitor, but the matches started to go less and less in his favor.

Roddick is probably the fourth or even fifth most talented player from this era. Players like Haas and Nalbandian were expected to play bigger roles, but at that time too many players were caught up in the party lifestyle and not focused on their careers.

JC Ferrero, Carlos Alcaraz's coach, is another player that had his career unexpectedly shortened.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
The problem with the Federer Gen is not whether it was GOOD or BAD, but rather its short duration.

Safin was easily the most talented, bagged 2 Slams within a 5 year period and has injuries and quite a few first round losses marring his career.

Hewitt was a dogged competitor and champion, but much like his protege, Alex de Minaur, benefitted greatly when the best were not up to snuff. Once Federer and some others started to be more consistent, he was still a fierce competitor, but the matches started to go less and less in his favor.

Roddick is probably the fourth or even fifth most talented player from this era. Players like Haas and Nalbandian were expected to play bigger roles, but at that time too many players were caught up in the party lifestyle and not focused on their careers.

JC Ferrero, Carlos Alcaraz's coach, is another player that had his career unexpectedly shortened.

Hewitt was 100 times better than minaur lol.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Hewitt was 100 times better than minaur lol.

Eh, he was definitely better, but I'm not convinced he was 100 times better. First of all, the average size of the players de Minaur is facing in the top 10 is taller than the ones Hewitt was facing. Alex de Minaur is a bit taller than Hewitt, but his game is very similar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

fedfan24

Hall of Fame
Nadal/Djokovic/Murray gen > Federer gen >>>>> Zverev/Medvedev/Tsitsipas gen >>> Raonic/Nishikori/Dimitrov gen

Alcaraz gen looks a bit worse than Fed’s gen so I’d put them 3rd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Log scale or something. Hewitt was a strong top player just missing the GOAT gear Federer (or zoning Safin) possessed. De Minaur is a punching bag for any in-form top player (Djokovic, Nadal, Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Sinner... can only beat them on a big off day and isn't even competitive when they have a good day).

Hewitt was in top 10 for 5 years, but he spent a lot of his career in the top 20s - 50s. At his peak, he was definitely higher than De Minaur, but the younger Aussie looks to be a bit more ready to last the long haul, although time will tell. De Minaur's greatest asset is that he tends to beat most of the players he should. His biggest disadvantage is that he rarely beats players ranked above him.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Hewitt was in top 10 for 5 years, but he spent a lot of his career in the top 20s - 50s. At his peak, he was definitely higher than De Minaur, but the younger Aussie looks to be a bit more ready to last the long haul, although time will tell. De Minaur's greatest asset is that he tends to beat most of the players he should. His biggest disadvantage is that he rarely beats players ranked above him.
You never know if and when an injury comes to take his legs away... he may be lucky to last longer or unlucky and drop early.
 

soldat

Rookie
safin alcaraz
roddick sinner
hewitt rune
nalbandian zverev
davydenko medvedev
ferrero tsitsipas
soderling thiem
gonzalez shelton
haas kyrgios
blake berrettini
moya rublev
ferrer ruud
coria musetti
baghdatis aliassime
verdasco shapovalov
ljubicic hurckaz
ancic fritz
fish korda
robredo khachanov
gaudio fils

Based on results, I feel the current generation is stronger. Alcaraz > Safin, Sinner > Roddick, Rune > Hewitt, Zverev > Nalbandian, Medvedev > Davydenko etc… most of these players also will continue to play and get even better.
 

soldat

Rookie
Nice clown.

Why do you think the opposite?

Nowadays, the training is better, fitness is better, the sport is more professional, video technology has made improving technique better, we know more about diet and health.

There are more resources and more players so more talent can be found. I would think modern players are better.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Based on results, I feel the current generation is stronger. Alcaraz > Safin, Sinner > Roddick, Rune > Hewitt, Zverev > Nalbandian, Medvedev > Davydenko etc… most of these players also will continue to play and get even better.

The way Safin dismantled Pete in his first final is not equivalent to either of Alcaraz's victories, and I'm not quite ready to put Sinner ahead of Roddick, even though I think the youngster has great potential to surpass Roddick in the years ahead.

No way Rune is better than Hewitt. It's laughable.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Why do you think the opposite?

Nowadays, the training is better, fitness is better, the sport is more professional, video technology has made improving technique better, we know more about diet and health.

There are more resources and more players so more talent can be found. I would think modern players are better.
Nice platitudes. Recent generations have more holes in their technique and ability than a Swiss cheese, or so it seems.
 

fedfan24

Hall of Fame
Why do you think the opposite?

Nowadays, the training is better, fitness is better, the sport is more professional, video technology has made improving technique better, we know more about diet and health.

There are more resources and more players so more talent can be found. I would think modern players are better.
So modern players are fitter. I think Federer’s gen has more ability and variety.
 

soldat

Rookie
So modern players are fitter. I think Federer’s gen has more ability and variety.

Being fit does not preclude variety. Federer’s gen is simply weaker than now, due to all of the above factors, and the game is still as varied as ever.

I would say it’s even more varied now because of the increased consistency of technique across the board.
You used to see players unable to return serve more and error more, now everyone is strong. All players now have to be all court / full coverage now

I think it goes Present > Djokovic/Nadal > Nadal/Federer era > Sampras/Agassi Era
 

fedfan24

Hall of Fame
Being fit does not preclude variety. Federer’s gen is simply weaker than now, due to all of the above factors, and the game is still as varied as ever.

I would say it’s even more varied now because of the increased consistency of technique across the board.
You used to see players unable to return serve more and error more, now everyone is strong. All players now have to be all court / full coverage now

I think it goes Present > Djokovic/Nadal > Nadal/Federer era > Sampras/Agassi Era
:-D
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Eh, he was definitely better, but I'm not convinced he was 100 times better. First of all, the average size of the players de Minaur is facing in the top 10 is taller than the ones Hewitt was facing. Alex de Minaur is a bit taller than Hewitt, but his game is very similar.
I don't think height is very relevant when Hewitt was scoring wins over Sampras, Agassi and Federer which De Minaur would never do.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
I don't think height is very relevant when Hewitt was scoring wins over Sampras, Agassi and Federer which De Minaur would never do.

Hewitt's height was relevant in terms of his burnout. It was also something commented upon when he was no. 1.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
While De Minaur got eviscerated by an old Novak carrying an injury. Hewitt at least gave a peak Novak a competitive match while being completely broken down.

And that's not the only match to illustrate my point either.

De Minaur has only played Djokovic once. Playing any of the big 3 one time is hardly ever good for the soul. You need to learn how to play them.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
De Minaur has only played Djokovic once. Playing any of the big 3 one time is hardly ever good for the soul. You need to learn how to play them.
Djokovic was still carrying an injury though and you talk as if everyone gets embarrassed when they play a Big 3 for the first time.
 

Robert F

Hall of Fame
safin alcaraz--Alcaraz
roddick sinner--Sinner
hewitt rune--Rune
nalbandian zverev--Nalbandian
davydenko medvedev--Davydenko
ferrero tsitsipas--Tsistispas
soderling thiem--Soderling
gonzalez shelton--Shelton (barely)
haas kyrgios--Kyrgios
blake berrettini--Blake
moya rublev--Rublev
ferrer ruud--Ferrer
coria musetti--Musetti
baghdatis aliassime--Baghdatis--he wins vs anyone when it is hypothetical
verdasco shapovalov--Verdasco
ljubicic hurckaz--Hurckaz
ancic fritz--Ancic
fish korda--Fish
robredo khachanov--Khachanov
gaudio fils--Fils--Gaudion never wins vs anyone when it is hypothetical
9-11 Alcaraz Gen wins.
There are a lot of matchups that peak vs. peak would be closer than you'd think.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Being fit does not preclude variety. Federer’s gen is simply weaker than now, due to all of the above factors, and the game is still as varied as ever.

I would say it’s even more varied now because of the increased consistency of technique across the board.
You used to see players unable to return serve more and error more, now everyone is strong. All players now have to be all court / full coverage now

I think it goes Present > Djokovic/Nadal > Nadal/Federer era > Sampras/Agassi Era

This is not a good post(n)
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
Being fit does not preclude variety. Federer’s gen is simply weaker than now, due to all of the above factors, and the game is still as varied as ever.

I would say it’s even more varied now because of the increased consistency of technique across the board.
You used to see players unable to return serve more and error more, now everyone is strong. All players now have to be all court / full coverage now

I think it goes Present > Djokovic/Nadal > Nadal/Federer era > Sampras/Agassi Era
Kyrgios’ TTW burner account exposed!
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
safin alcaraz - Alcaraz 0-1
roddick sinner - Roddick 1-1
hewitt rune - Hewitt 2-1
nalbandian zverev - Nalbandian 3-1
davydenko medvedev - Medvedev 3-2
ferrero tsitsipas - Ferrero 4-2
soderling thiem - Soderling 5-2
gonzalez shelton - Gonzalez 6-2
haas kyrgios - Haas 7-2
blake berrettini - Berrettini 7-3
moya rublev - Moya 8-3
ferrer ruud - Ferrer 9-3
coria musetti - Coria 10-3
baghdatis aliassime - Baghdatis 11-3
verdasco shapovalov - Verdasco 12-3
ljubicic hurckaz - Ljubicic 13-3
ancic fritz - Ancic 14-3
fish korda - Korda 14-4
robredo khachanov - Khachanov 14-5
gaudio fils - Gaudio 15-5
My objective analysis above has FedGen taking this 15-5 in a rout.
 

soldat

Rookie
My objective analysis above has FedGen taking this 15-5 in a rout.

No objectivity or analysis, anyone can make up a result for an imaginary match.

A real analysis would compare match statistics, time played, first serve points won, UE rates, tournament results, etc. My prediction is that you’d objectively find that tennis has become more competitive, more fitness focused, with better technique, with the players of the modern era being stronger in almost every category.
 

daggerman

Hall of Fame
Every player in column B obliterates every player in column A. It's a bit like comparing pros to NCAA players.
 

ShowStealer

Rookie
You are mixing multiple generations together
tennis generation is you age 2 years up 2 years down thats it
now correct your list and start a new topic
 

beltsman

G.O.A.T.
The problem with the Federer Gen is not whether it was GOOD or BAD, but rather its short duration.

Safin was easily the most talented, bagged 2 Slams within a 5 year period and has injuries and quite a few first round losses marring his career.

Hewitt was a dogged competitor and champion, but much like his protege, Alex de Minaur, benefitted greatly when the best were not up to snuff. Once Federer and some others started to be more consistent, he was still a fierce competitor, but the matches started to go less and less in his favor.

Roddick is probably the fourth or even fifth most talented player from this era. Players like Haas and Nalbandian were expected to play bigger roles, but at that time too many players were caught up in the party lifestyle and not focused on their careers.

JC Ferrero, Carlos Alcaraz's coach, is another player that had his career unexpectedly shortened.

ADM doesn't even sniff Hewitt. Can you even imagine ADM beating Sampras? I mean lmao
 

matterer

Rookie
video technology has made improving technique better
Actually the guys with the best technique learned in the 80s and 90s, back when the best tennis players taught tennis and before the rise of sports "science." That's why they're still winning into their late 30s.
 

soldat

Rookie
Actually the guys with the best technique learned in the 80s and 90s, back when the best tennis players taught tennis and before the rise of sports "science." That's why they're still winning into their late 30s.

Or perhaps sports science has improved health, and modern video technology have helped the players born in the late 80s and 90s improve their technique and win into their late 30s. That’s why this current generation is becoming stronger than ever.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Or perhaps sports science has improved health, and modern video technology have helped the players born in the late 80s and 90s improve their technique and win into their late 30s. That’s why this current generation is becoming stronger than ever.

But their technique is faltering. There's no reason for Zverev to be unable to find a solution for his second serve woes.
 
Top