If 2003-2007/08 a weak era then what is 2014/15-2019?

[mike danny]

It is a big difference beating Fed at Wimbledon and USO than Roddick and Hewitt.

That depends. Beating 2015 Fed was no more difficult than beating 2004 Roddick. And beating 2004 Agassi at the USO was also harder than beating 2015 Fed.

And Fed also beat 2006 Nadal at Wimb.

 

[mike danny]

It is a big difference beating Fed at Wimbledon and USO than Roddick and Hewitt.

One last thing:

ATG's in 2004-2006: Agassi-old ATG and Nadal-young ATG.

ATG's in 2014-2016: Federer-old ATG and Nadal-prime ATG (which only lasted for half a year in 2014, so he didn't make too much of a difference.)

Overall, not much is separating the 2 periods.

 

[Lew II]

Murray's second serve is worse than the Roddick backhand, his forehand is relatively better but still a pretty big weakness considering the forehand itself is more important than the backhand.

Murray's serve (1st + 2nd) is better than Roddick's backhand, and so is his forehand.

Murray is more complete than Roddick

 

[Lew II]

One last thing:

ATG's in 2004-2006: Agassi-old ATG and Nadal-young ATG.

ATG's in 2014-2016: Federer-old ATG and Nadal-prime ATG (which only lasted for half a year in 2014, so he didn't make too much of a difference.)

Overall, not much is separating the 2 periods.

Players with 80+% of wins in grand slams:

2014-16 --> 5
2004-06 --> 3

Players with 75+% of wins in grand slams:

2014-16 --> 10
2004-06 --> 5

 

[blablavla]

Players with 80+% of wins in grand slams:

2014-16 --> 5
2004-06 --> 3

Players with 75+% of wins in grand slams:

2014-16 --> 10
2004-06 --> 5

1. how many matches played in GS is the threshold?

2. depending on poster's point of view it may suggest:
- the field is stronger, everyone might beat everyone
- the field is weaker, there are no strong competitors that can regularly beat everyone else
but this data per se doesn't prove anything

3. Do you have similar stats from the glorious past era's of ATG playing vs strong field?

 

[Lew II]

1. how many matches played in GS is the threshold?

2. depending on poster's point of view it may suggest:
- the field is stronger, everyone might beat everyone
- the field is weaker, there are no strong competitors that can regularly beat everyone else
but this data per se doesn't prove anything

3. Do you have similar stats from the glorious past era's of ATG playing vs strong field?

The user I was answering was talking about ATGs.

It's not ATG level if you don't win 75/80% of slam matches.

 

[Lew II]

Slam finals/semifinals played against Big3

Djokovic 28/61 (45.9%)
Nadal 27/60 (45%)
Federer 29/76 (38.2%)

Slam finals/semifinals played against Big4

Djokovic 37/61 (60.7%)
Nadal 33/60 (55%)
Federer 34/76 (44.7%)

 

[MoralTruth]

Players with 80+% of wins in grand slams:

2014-16 --> 5
2004-06 --> 3

Players with 75+% of wins in grand slams:

2014-16 --> 10
2004-06 --> 5

No accounting for 2004-06 having a lot of field depth and variety from different players....2014-16 had less good young talent/a up coming gen/emerging players.
Just admit that 2014-2020 is clearly weaker than 2007-2013 was lol and Djokovic had times were his field did not always tower over Rogers.

 

[Lew II]

Players with 18+ wins in Slams:

2003 - 2
2004 - 1
2005 - 1
2006 - 1
2007 - 3
2008 - 3
2009 - 1
2010 - 3
2011 - 4
2012 - 4
2013 - 2
2014 - 2
2015 - 4
2016 - 2
2017 - 2
2018 - 2
2019 - 3

 

[chjtennis]

I think those two eras are about equal and not weak. 2015-2018 was probably weaker era of those, when aged Big4 still won most of the tournaments. No new players coming up. 2019 has been huge improvements, but it still is a year of Big 3.

 

[RS]

 

[Deleted member 771911]

Weaker than weak. The weakest. The absolute weakest. The most absolute weakest. The mostest most absolute weakest.
You catch ma drift?

 

[NoleIsBoat]

2014-2019 was a golden time for tennis, with 3 of the greatest of all time competing in the slam race and playing some of their best ever tennis. Much higher level and competition than 03-07 with your Roddicks, Bagdhatis, Hewitt, Kiefer etc

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Any period that includes Nadal and Djokovic (the two best ever) playing at the same time and slowing each other down in terms of slam wins, YE # 1 and weeks at # 1 is not a week era.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

2014-2019 was a golden time for tennis, with 3 of the greatest of all time competing in the slam race and playing some of their best ever tennis. Much higher level and competition than 03-07 with your Roddicks, Bagdhatis, Hewitt, Kiefer etc

Yep, even 2018 to now. Nadal and Djokovic have played 8 times, taking big titles off each other, they've also both got weeks @ and YE # 1 during that time. Fed had no one to compete with which is why his stats were inflated and all his fans (and Fed himself) bought into the hype. It's why most of them were in disbelief in recent times to find out what we already knew - he was never the GOAT.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

Yep, even 2018 to now. Nadal and Djokovic have played 8 times, taking big titles off each other, they've also both got weeks @ and YE # 1 during that time. Fed had no one to compete with which is why his stats were inflated and all his fans (and Fed himself) bought into the hype. It's why most of them were in disbelief in recent times to find out what we already knew - he was never the GOAT.

I think the penny is starting to drop for a lot of them, but even some are clinging on and now turning to "most endorsements" "most elegant style" in lieu of owning any of the major records.

Still, an incredible player with tons of style. Just lacked the clutch and substance to overcome his ATG rivals enough times to be GOAT. 10-21 overall sums it up.

 

[RS]

2014-2019 was a golden time for tennis, with 3 of the greatest of all time competing in the slam race and playing some of their best ever tennis. Much higher level and competition than 03-07 with your Roddicks, Bagdhatis, Hewitt, Kiefer etc

What was the highest level in slam you saw outside of Djokovic and Nadal at RG in 2015-2019?

 

[NoleIsBoat]

What was the highest level in slam you saw outside of Djokovic and Nadal at RG in 2015-2019?

Federer W 15, 17, 19
USO 15
AO 17
Wawrinka RG 15


Highest might have to go for Stan

 

[RS]

Federer W 15, 17, 19
USO 15
AO 17
Wawrinka RG 15


Highest might have to go for Stan

Now in 2004-2008 minus Federer and Nadal at RG.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

Now in 2004-2008 minus Federer and Nadal at RG.

Haha you love these

Safin AO05
Roddick Wimbledon 04
Agassi USO 04
Djokovic USO 07

 

[TMF]

Any period that includes Nadal and Djokovic (the two best ever) playing at the same time and slowing each other down in terms of slam wins, YE # 1 and weeks at # 1 is not a week era.

Tennis started in 2010 and the tour only evolves around the big three.

 

[Kralingen]

Was this forum basically all extremely detailed “weak era” debates pre 2021? There are so many old threads like this

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Any period that includes Nadal and Djokovic (the two best ever) playing at the same time and slowing each other down in terms of slam wins, YE # 1 and weeks at # 1 is not a week era.

So.. you're basically saying that Nadal and Djokovic only have each other for competition. That doesn't sound weak at all.

And Nadal himself has declined and struggled to meet Djokovic outside of clay.

 

[Third Serve]

Was this forum basically all extremely detailed “weak era” debates pre 2021? There are so many old threads like this

It’s still like that now

 

[Noleberic123]

It’s still like that now

Maybe tennis just sucks as a sport. People have been saying it's a weak era since 97

 

[Third Serve]

Maybe tennis just sucks as a sport. People have been saying it's a weak era since 97

Yes, 1897

 

[titoelcolombiano]

So.. you're basically saying that Nadal and Djokovic only have each other for competition. That doesn't sound weak at all.

And Nadal himself has declined and struggled to meet Djokovic outside of clay.

Yes, I'm saying that the two best of all time are slowing each other down and have been for years.

Since 2018:

Nadal has stopped Djokovic from racking up:

• 1 extra slam which would have him at 20
• 3 extra M1000 titles which would have put that record to bed
• 1 extra YE # 1 in 2019
• 50 extra weeks at # 1

Djokovic has stopped Nadal from racking up:

• 3 extra slams (one of each except the US Open)
• 2 extra YE # 1
• 105 extra weeks at # 1

If either one of them was dominating without the other present just about every record in the book would have fallen and that is just the last three years let alone the last decade. There is no way this can be described a weak era and Fed had nothing like that kind of opposition between 2003 and 2007.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Tennis started in 2010 and the tour only evolves around the big three.

Who is better than them? Tennis has never had greater depth an professionalism and these two are as good as it gets.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

I think the penny is starting to drop for a lot of them, but even some are clinging on and now turning to "most endorsements" "most elegant style" in lieu of owning any of the major records.

Still, an incredible player with tons of style. Just lacked the clutch and substance to overcome his ATG rivals enough times to be GOAT. 10-21 overall sums it up.

I've said a few times, Fed is clearly talented and has been a great adversary for Djokovic and Nadal but the two of them are just better and when all is said and done they will have equal or more slams than him and both will have a leading H2H over him. Both Nadal and Djokovic have done this whilst struggling with each other throughout their careers also. It speaks to their greatness what they have been able to achieve.

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Yes, I'm saying that the two best of all time are slowing each other down and have been for years.

Since 2018:

Nadal has stopped Djokovic from racking up:

• 1 extra slam which would have him at 20
• 3 extra M1000 titles which would have put that record to bed
• 1 extra YE # 1 in 2019
• 50 extra weeks at # 1

Djokovic has stopped Nadal from racking up:

• 3 extra slams (one of each except the US Open)
• 2 extra YE # 1
• 105 extra weeks at # 1

If either one of them was dominating without the other present just about every record in the book would have fallen and that is just the last three years let alone the last decade. There is no way this can be described a weak era and Fed had nothing like that kind of opposition between 2003 and 2007.

So Nadal and Djokovic meet twice a year and that saves it from being weak?

Since 2018, Nadal and Djokovic combined have played 375 matches. Those 8 matches against each other are supposed to salvage the other 367 against mostly weaker competition?

And if we go by your standards, from 2005-2007, Fedal met each other 13 times. They were both younger and played higher level matches against each other.

Nadal stopped Federer from racking up:

1. 3 extra slams
2. 3 extra M1000
3. CYGS and/or Federer Slam

Federer stopped Nadal from racking up:

1. 2 extra slams
2. 2 extra M1000
3. 2 WTFs
4. 127 extra weeks at #1.

So comparing 05-07 Fedal vs 18-21 Djokodal, they competed over:
5 slams vs 4 slams
5 M1000 vs 2 M1000
2 WTF vs 0 WTF

So either call both 05-07 and 18-21 weak, or neither of them weak. If anything, both are weak but the current era is weaker as Fedal contested more big titles in 05-07 than Djokodal did in 18-21.

 

[TMF]

Who is better than them? Tennis has never had greater depth an professionalism and these two are as good as it gets.

How about judging the depth and strength of the entire field rather than just 2 players. Winning titles is about beating field, not just Fedal. LOL

Everyone has conceded that this era is terrible. The NextGen are a joke.

 

[Forehanderer]

Its far worse now. Even the big 3 is just big 1 now. after that its just wta. someone mentioned its already that way. Djokovic can play and win 30+ gs

 

[T007]

Federer gets called a weak era champion and hated on but when it comes to Djokovic and even Sampras fans he didn’t have it easier with Murray as a main rival for 2 full years according to some of Sampras with Agassi out...
Double standards or what?

Hands down the current era is the most weakest in the open era...after stan,murray,berdych are gone we rarely see anyone other than big 3 making QFs/SFs consistently.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

How about judging the depth and strength of the entire field rather than just 2 players. Winning titles is about beating field, not just Fedal. LOL

Everyone has conceded that this era is terrible. The NextGen are a joke.

They are no more or less of a joke than everything below the top two or three in any era with the major exception is that this era contains the two best ever with the third best ever as an ageing challenger.

 

[FedrMatt]

This is definitely a weak era

40 year old Fed, absent Nadal, and a 34 year old is gunning for the CYGS with a completely unengaged field.

 

[darthrafa]

i think Head to Head and no. of GS would be fair to assess the success of djoker. he no doubt is the most successful player of all time but NOT GOAT for tennis as a sport

 

[big ted]

djoko obviously doesn't have a rival so he's cleaning up.. there's no clear no 2 to challenge him day in and day out..

 

[titoelcolombiano]

So Nadal and Djokovic meet twice a year and that saves it from being weak?

Since 2018, Nadal and Djokovic combined have played 375 matches. Those 8 matches against each other are supposed to salvage the other 367 against mostly weaker competition?

And if we go by your standards, from 2005-2007, Fedal met each other 13 times. They were both younger and played higher level matches against each other.

Nadal stopped Federer from racking up:

1. 3 extra slams
2. 3 extra M1000
3. CYGS and/or Federer Slam

Federer stopped Nadal from racking up:

1. 2 extra slams
2. 2 extra M1000
3. 2 WTFs
4. 127 extra weeks at #1.

So comparing 05-07 Fedal vs 18-21 Djokodal, they competed over:
5 slams vs 4 slams
5 M1000 vs 2 M1000
2 WTF vs 0 WTF

So either call both 05-07 and 18-21 weak, or neither of them weak. If anything, both are weak but the current era is weaker as Fedal contested more big titles in 05-07 than Djokodal did in 18-21.

Why only isolate 05 to 07? I can tell you why you cherry picked those years, because because before that neither Nadal nor Djokovic were present as they were too young. You also conveniently forgot to mention the fact that Federer was still around in 2018 and 2019 making slam finals, winning a slam, held the number 1 ranking during that period and had wins over both Nadal and Djokovic. There is no comparison between Fed's joke era and the 2018 - 2021 period. Nice try though.

 

[mika1979]

The dumbest thing is how "starts" in either 2003 or 2004. ****ing Thomas Johansson won the Australian Open in 2002.

There was a drop off in top level talent. Between Pete and Fed. Hewitt was clearly number one for a couple of years. He is pretty much a Ferrer type. I think thats where the weakness is. The rest of the tour is a much of a muchness, although I think Zverev, Medvedev Tsitsipas will prove that this wasnt a weak era

 

[blablavla]

Any period that includes Nadal and Djokovic (the two best ever) playing at the same time and slowing each other down in terms of slam wins, YE # 1 and weeks at # 1 is not a week era.

so when 67 years old Nadal will be competing with 66 years old Djokovic, and destroying all the 'youngsters' in the age group 16 - 66 years old, that's gonna be strong era?

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Why only isolate 05 to 07? I can tell you why you cherry picked those years, because because before that neither Nadal nor Djokovic were present as they were too young. You also conveniently forgot to mention the fact that Federer was still around in 2018 and 2019 making slam finals, winning a slam, held the number 1 ranking during that period and had wins over both Nadal and Djokovic. There is no comparison between Fed's joke era and the 2018 - 2021 period. Nice try though.

Your response does not address the stats at all, sorry. 05-07 was enough to completely eclipse the stats you gave.

Yup, 37/38 year old mummified geriatric Federer was also there for half the time period. I don't think it changes much. Djokovic met a mental-midget Federer in 2019 and an injured Federer in 2020.

Old Agassi was also in Fed's era from 04-05 and young Djokovic was there in 07. Federer met these guys 4 times in Slams during the period.

Face it, Fed's era was weak, but this one is just as weak if not weaker. If you can't bring the numbers to prove it, stop spouting nonsense.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Your response does not address the stats at all, sorry. 05-07 was enough to completely eclipse the stats you gave.

Yup, 37/38 year old mummified geriatric Federer was also there for half the time period. I don't think it changes much. Djokovic met a mental-midget Federer in 2019 and an injured Federer in 2020.

Old Agassi was also in Fed's era from 04-05 and young Djokovic was there in 07. Federer met these guys 4 times in Slams during the period.

Face it, Fed's era was weak, but this one is just as weak if not weaker. If you can't bring the numbers to prove it, stop spouting nonsense.

05 - 07 (3 years cherry picked to include baby Nadal's rise)
18 - 21 (4 years since Djokovic returned from his injury / loss of form)

So first of all, learn to count if you want to have a debate.

Secondly, yes. Whilst Federer isn't as good as the other two, he's still the third greatest ever. Agassi is nowhere near as a comparison.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

so when 67 years old Nadal will be competing with 66 years old Djokovic, and destroying all the 'youngsters' in the age group 16 - 66 years old, that's gonna be strong era?

If we get to the stage when the are winning slams in their 60's then you'd have a very valid point.