First 24 years of the 21st Century vs Last 24 years of the 20th Century --- Which Era produced better Tennis Players ?

[Razer]

Total Titles

(1976-1999)

01. Lendl - 94
02. Mcenroe - 77
03. Connors - 68
04. Sampras - 61
05. Borg - 53
06. Vilas - 49
07. Becker - 49
08. Agassi - 44
09. Muster - 44
10. Edberg - 42
11. Wilander - 33
12. Chang - 33

(2000-2023)

01. Federer - 103
02. Djokovic - 98
03. Nadal - 92
04. Murray - 46
05. Roddick - 32
06. Hewitt - 28
07. Ferrer - 27
08. Del Potro - 22
09. Davydenko - 21
10. Zverev - 21
11. Cilic - 20
12. Medvedev - 20


Big Titles

(1976-1999)

01. Lendl - 33
02. Mcenroe - 32
03. Sampras - 29
04. Connors - 26
05. Becker - 23
06. Borg - 20
07. Agassi - 17
08. Wilander - 15
09. Edberg - 14
10. Courier - 9
11. Muster - 9
12. Chang - 8

(2000-2023)

01. Djokovic - 71
02. Nadal - 59
03. Federer - 54
04. Murray - 20
05. Agassi - 10
06. Zverev - 8
07. Medvedev - 8
08. Safin - 7
09. Kuerten - 6
10. Hewitt - 6
11. Roddick - 6
12. Alcaraz - 6

 

[PMChambers]

2000 - 2023 will produce better players because the tools and systems to develop are better including.
• Ability to travel.
• Ability to travel with a coach.
• Acess to specialists, sociology, physio, nutrien, etc.
• Slow motion camera identifies issues.
• Recorded matches both player and opposition. Ability to identify weaknesses such as play and opposition.
• Access to a specialist, IE: Djok with Woodforde as volley specialist, ex-pros. This used to be more national.
• National teams, access to public funding and resources.
• Optimisation of equipment and technique. No weird stuff out there like the '70s.
• conditions are better, cold water and fridge courtside, umbrella, roof, better change rooms, seating, child slaves on call, etc.
• Game stats available, electronically with more data on speed, spin, often, etc.
• Player box, most player luck to have coach with them apart from wife and kids.
• Medical rehabilitation.

 

[Pheasant]

I voted 1976-99 for better top-10. Imagine having 7 slam titles, but only getting 20 weeks at #1. Imagine Becker, who had 6 slam titles, yet only 12 weeks at #1.

There was an article where Becker said that his #1 goal was to be #1. He was obsessed with it. He got his one shot when Lendl hit his 30s. But then, Edberg stole it away, followed by Courier and Sampras. That is ridiculous competition. 12 weeks for a guy like Becker is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[metsman]

Only 4 ATG talents after 2000 - big 3 and Safin and Safin mostly wasted his talent. Hard to compare this to the depth of Sampras, Agassi, Borg, Mac, Connors, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker.

Of course 00-09 basically had all the post 00 talent, and after that is a complete 0, so we're comparing a decade to almost 3 decades of players.

 

[Razer]

Only 4 ATG talents after 2000 - big 3 and Safin and Safin mostly wasted his talent. Hard to compare this to the depth of Sampras, Agassi, Borg, Mac, Connors, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker.

Of course 00-09 basically had all the post 00 talent, and after that is a complete 0, so we're comparing a decade to almost 3 decades of players.

It would have served Tennis better if Safin was a bit more disciplined and was born 13-14 years later, an year like 1993-1994, would have made Tennis more interesting post 2016, but then the slams race would have been more titled in Federer's favour.

 

[The Sinner]

I voted 1976-99 for better top-10. Imagine having 7 slam titles, but only getting 20 weeks at #1. Imagine Becker, who had 6 slam titles, yet only 12 weeks at #1.

There was an article where Becker said that his #1 goal was to be #1. He was obsessed with it. He got his one shot when Lendl hit his 30s. But then, Edberg stole it away, followed by Courier and Sampras. That is ridiculous competition. 12 weeks for a guy like Becker is absolutely ridiculous.

True, but if there were 3 players far better than the rest back then, and with the same longevity as the Big 3, the rest of the top 10 would not have won as much.

 

[metsman]

It would have served Tennis better if Safin was a bit more disciplined and was born 13-14 years later, an year like 1993-1994, would have made Tennis more interesting post 2016, but then the slams race would have been more titled in Federer's favour.

Safin born in 93 or 94 probably starts off playing basketball and then quits to become a full time instagram influencer personality.

 

[Sudacafan]

This is really a tough question. I need more time to say it was the last 24 years.

 

[MissileBackHand99]

VERY difficult to compare eras, as the 70s and 80s didn't have one uniformed tour, as there has been since 1990. Players also skipped Slams in the 70s, 80s and 90s and the Super 9 Series (aka Masters 1000s) weren't mandatory to compete in....so the # of "Big Titles" and "Total Titles" will be skewed towards the 21st Century players. Not to mention the changes in surfaces and equipment (Aussie Open was played on grass until '88 and top players didn't really start coming until '83-'84). Posting title stat numbers are nice and all, but without CONTEXT the argument is flawed

 

[Pheasant]

VERY difficult to compare eras, as the 70s and 80s didn't have one uniformed tour, as there has been since 1990. Players also skipped Slams in the 70s, 80s and 90s and the Super 9 Series (aka Masters 1000s) weren't mandatory to compete in....so the # of "Big Titles" and "Total Titles" will be skewed towards the 21st Century players. Not to mention the changes in surfaces and equipment (Aussie Open was played on grass until '88 and top players didn't really start coming until '83-'84). Posting title stat numbers are nice and all, but without CONTEXT the argument is flawed

You nailed it with one key word; context. Context is massive in every sport, when looking at eras.