Med: 4
Zverev: 3
Greek Narcissist: 1
And that's being charitable. None are ATG material.
What about FAA? He's the heir to the throne, right?
People might have thought that of Djokovic in 2010.People thought the same of Nadal and Djokovic [that they were not ATG material]
Put myself in there maybe?How many do they each end with:
1. Medvedev -5
2. Zverev - 3
3. Tsitsipas - 4
I don't think anyone was quite so silly about Nadal, but lots of people said things like "he'll never win off clay" and then "he'll always struggle on hard" and then "he'll be finished by the time he's in his late 20s".People might have thought that of Djokovic in 2010.
I don't think that ever was the majority opinion on Nadal.
You'd need to be kinda delusional to say thatlots of people said things like "he'll never win off clay"
Nadal always was so FierceYou'd need to be kinda delusional to say that
2005: Miami F, Canada W, Madrid W
2006: Wimbledon F
2007: Indian Wells W, Wimbledon F
Unless what you meant was, "he'll never be as good as Fed off clay"
People might have thought that of Djokovic in 2010.
I don't think that ever was the majority opinion on Nadal.
Sure, but the ship has sailed for Zed and Med. And especially Thiem.I don't think anyone was quite so silly about Nadal, but lots of people said things like "he'll never win off clay" and then "he'll always struggle on hard" and then "he'll be finished by the time he's in his late 20s".
Ultimately, Nadal and Djokovic both show you how much a player can evolve and change. I think people are quite premature to assume that players in their early 20s can't change and improve a lot.
People were silly. Nadal was never just a claycourter.There was always talk about him being great on clay, but people laughed when he said he wanted to win Wimbledon. Not that long ago there was even a lot of doubt about whether he would ever win the USO.
If Zed and Med become ATGs, tennis really went down the drain
A fair point. Maybe the gen after them will do it.Yes, but no one yet has stepped up to challenge them for M1000s, let alone the Slams (outside of Djokovic).
Med - 4
Stef-1
Zverev-0
LOL @ anyone who predicts 7+ for any of these guys. I mean, that's getting into the territory of legends like Mac, Lendl, Agassi. None of these guys are or are likely to ever be close to that. Tennis is dead if any of these guys becomes as great as Agassi, that would be the saddest day in history
A range of players probably like the women's for the last 5 years, there are only 5 players in the open era who have won 10+ slams so it's the exception not the norm and remember Zed and Med are still young but I'm skeptical that they have the body types to dominate for 10 years, it's not a coincidence that the 4 greatest players of the last 30 years are all more or less the same heightBut who is going to win the Grand Slams in the upcoming 10 years, if not Medvedev, Zverev and Tsitsipas?
Djokovic/Nadal may still win a few ones in 2022 and 2023. But what about the 28 Grand Slams in 2024-2030? If Medvedev /Zverev / Tsitsipas only win 5 slams like you say, who is gonna win the other 23 slams held between 2024 and 2030?
As of today there isn't anyone else who seems capable of taking over and winning all these Grand Slams. Alcaraz and Sinner seem like the best hopes at the moment, but it's still way too soon to predict they will be better than Medvedev and Zverev.
Unless there is new blood coming (and they need to hurry up), it's clear to me Zverev/Medvedev/Tsitsipas rack up a lot more than 0, 1 and 4.
A range of players probably like the women's for the last 5 years, there are only 5 players in the open era who have won 10+ slams so it's the exception not the norm
Depends on the definition of dominant. Federer and Djokovic reinvented it, I think it's unlikely we'd ever see a nextgen guy with a stranglehold on the #1 spot like Novak has had, especially since none of them are all surface GS contenders.However, is it that common on the ATP to not have a dominant no. 1?
Depends on the definition of dominant. Federer and Djokovic reinvented it, I think it's unlikely we'd ever see a nextgen guy with a stranglehold on the #1 spot like Novak has had, especially since none of them are all surface GS contenders.
2/0/0
Combined, yes.Less than Alcaraz, with any luck.
Med 3Medvedev: 2
Zverev: 2
Tsitsipas: 0
Don't think they'll ever dominate. I think Alcaraz will reign before Djokovic retires.It depends on how long Djokovic can maintain a decent level and how long before the crew behind him start really making inroads. The Med/Zed/Tsitsi "era" could be a really short one for all we know. Total speculation, but I'd say each win about 2-4.
Before the Big 3 made this possible, stating something like this would be a blasphemy . The standards are so much different now than a decade ago.Med: 10-20
Zod: 10-20
Tsitsipas: 0-10
It depends on how long Djokovic can maintain a decent level and how long before the crew behind him start really making inroads. The Med/Zed/Tsitsi "era" could be a really short one for all we know. Total speculation, but I'd say each win about 2-4.
Who thought that? I certainly didn't think Rafa or Djoker would win just 3-4 slams. It was obvious both would win far more than that. Nobody predicted 20 majors, but 8 slams each was a common prediction in 2006 for Rafa and in 2009 for Novak.People thought the same of Nadal and Djokovic, and somebody has to win the next ten years of Slams.
Who thought that? I certainly didn't think Rafa or Djoker would win just 3-4 slams. It was obvious both would win far more than that. Nobody predicted 20 majors, but 8 slams each was a common prediction in 2006 for Rafa and in 2009 for Novak.