If 5 years from now, the Big Three are all still in the Top 5 and winning majors, would that be a major indictment regarding the state of Tennis?

BladeDaywalker

New User
5 years from now, Novak would 37, Nadal would be 38, and Federer would be 43.

If they are still winning Majors such as Novak at the Australian Open or Nadal at the French Open or even Federer winning Wimbledon or making deep runs at multiple Majors, what does that say about Men's Tennis in general?

Would that be a negative mark against the rest of the field that 3 guys in their late 30s-early 40s are still at the top of the game?

How would you feel if nothing really changed 5 years from now at the Majors?
 
They are already getting thumped. Once djokovic turns 36 the big 3 will be over.
Let's look at their match records at recent majors against everyone other than each other:

Big 3 v the Field in Australia was 16-1.

Big 3 v the Field at the US Open was 14-2.

Big 3 v the Field at Wimbledon was 18-0.

Big 3 v the Field at Roland Garros was 17-1.

How are they getting thumped? Other than Thiem, their only losses were two injury-assisted matches in New York, and even then another big 3 member won the title.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
First, I would be shocked if Federer had won a Slam five years from now in his 40's.

Second, I would be asking myself what happened to the next gen.
 

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
Let's look at their match records at recent majors against everyone other than each other:

Big 3 v the Field in Australia was 16-1.

Big 3 v the Field at the US Open was 14-2.

Big 3 v the Field at Wimbledon was 18-0.

Big 3 v the Field at Roland Garros was 17-1.

How are they getting thumped? Other than Thiem, their only losses were two injury-assisted matches in New York, and even then another big 3 member won the title.
Prob used too strong of a word. They are getting pushed alot more by the younger players. Medvedev and thiem are taking matches to 5 sets. Kyrgios is maturing after the bushfires. They are winning wtf and masters.
 

Mark-Touch

Hall of Fame
5 years from now, Novak would 37, Nadal would be 38, and Federer would be 43.

If they are still winning Majors such as Novak at the Australian Open or Nadal at the French Open or even Federer winning Wimbledon or making deep runs at multiple Majors, what does that say about Men's Tennis in general?

Would that be a negative mark against the rest of the field that 3 guys in their late 30s-early 40s are still at the top of the game?

How would you feel if nothing really changed 5 years from now at the Majors?
Blade I'm surprised that you and many others here still don't get it.
There is nothing wrong with the field! They are great players overall.

The BIG 3 are so special (we've never been treated to such greats before, and all at the same time) that they are in a league all their own.
They are so far above the rest of the field that they make it seem like the field is a bunch of amateurs.

And, because they are so far above the rest of the field, they are able to play longer (even as they decline from their peak abilities)
and still beat the rest of the field!
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
If 5 years from now, the Big Three are all still in the Top 5 and winning majors, would that be a major indictment regarding the state of Tennis?
Not the sport overall, just the men's tour, which has been suffering from much of what you're suggesting for nearly two generations.

5 years from now, Novak would 37, Nadal would be 38, and Federer would be 43.

If they are still winning Majors such as Novak at the Australian Open or Nadal at the French Open or even Federer winning Wimbledon or making deep runs at multiple Majors, what does that say about Men's Tennis in general?

Would that be a negative mark against the rest of the field that 3 guys in their late 30s-early 40s are still at the top of the game?

How would you feel if nothing really changed 5 years from now at the Majors?
Its bad enough right now, with the infamous Can't Win A Major Legion (Thiem, Nishikori, Kyrgios, Isner, Dimitrov, Simon, Pospisil, Tomic, Querry, et al), are to this day still holding strong as an aging "Next Generation" who still cannot win majors against the granddaddies of the tour. Notice how no one is talking about this generation finally taking over, as generations did in the past (e.g., the Becker/Edberg generation, which flowed into the Sampras/Courier/Agassi/Chang generation, et al.). They are simply aging, and there's no reason to think Djokovic, Federer and Nadal will not continue to win majors until they simply don't care to anymore, because it won't be due to rising, generational change agents taking their place as seen in the past.
 

Indigo

Semi-Pro
The Big 3 is like a chair with 3 legs. Once you remove one leg from it, it will become unstable and fall. The day one of them retires, the remaining two are toasted.
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
Blade I'm surprised that you and many others here still don't get it.
There is nothing wrong with the field! They are great players overall.

The BIG 3 are so special (we've never been treated to such greats before, and all at the same time) that they are in a league all their own.
They are so far above the rest of the field that they make it seem like the field is a bunch of amateurs.

And, because they are so far above the rest of the field, they are able to play longer (even as they decline from their peak abilities)
and still beat the rest of the field!
This is the worst take. You take any good journeyman from last gen (Roddick, Blake, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Verdasco, even Gonzalez) and they would carve through the current field like butter. Could you imagine a kid like Roddick with a monster 140mph serve and big forehand hitting the scene right now? He'd go HAM on all these mugs (+3 old guys) and clean up titles.

The level of play has absolutely fallen off a cliff. We went for 40+ years with each generation pushing the next one out, and suddenly there's nothing left to fill the void. A few decently talented meh young players. I don't know who or what's to blame, but kids aren't playing tennis anymore.
 

Shaj

Rookie
I don't even think Novak will play as long as Fed..Once he gets the record he will stop.. I think he has much too interests outside tennis rather than to stay in it.I would say two years max he is in it ,not more than that.

Even now,he is constantly fiddling with his schedule.even now I don't think he is fully into Tennis.He is different from Fedal in this aspect..Federer is playing for the records,he wand to maintain his reputation,Nadal is playing coz he doesn't know anything else in life.Novak will be out once he gets those records..

Now the question is what if Fedal add to their tally? How long would Novak play?
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
I don't even think Novak will play as long as Fed..Once he gets the record he will stop.. I think he has much too interests outside tennis rather than to stay in it.I would say two years max he is in it ,not more than that.

Even now,he is constantly fiddling with his schedule.even now I don't think he is fully into Tennis.He is different from Fedal in this aspect..Federer is playing for the records,he wand to maintain his reputation,Nadal is playing coz he doesn't know anything else in life.Novak will be out once he gets those records..

Now the question is what if Fedal add to their tally? How long would Novak play?
I think both Federer and Nadal both enjoy the sport immensely. Of the three only Djokovic looks like he mentally could call it quits before his body does. Murray probably wants to get back but his body already won't let him, which is a shame.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
This is the worst take. You take any good journeyman from last gen (Roddick, Blake, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Verdasco, even Gonzalez) and they would carve through the current field like butter. Could you imagine a kid like Roddick with a monster 140mph serve and big forehand hitting the scene right now? He'd go HAM on all these mugs (+3 old guys) and clean up titles.

The level of play has absolutely fallen off a cliff. We went for 40+ years with each generation pushing the next one out, and suddenly there's nothing left to fill the void. A few decently talented meh young players. I don't know who or what's to blame, but kids aren't playing tennis anymore.
He'd last about half a season before players figure him out and start thumping him routinely. The courts are too slow for young Roddick.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
Of course it would paint the younger generations in a negative light. That is already happening now.
Not really. The general talk among commentators and many fans: What the Big-3 are doing is absolutely incredible!...The diamond age! They say the younger generations are 'unlucky' to be playing in the 'Big-3 era'.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Professional
It won’t happen. 5 years is way too long. Even though we are dealing with the worst next generation of all time, there is no chance in hell Djokovic or Nadal can stay on this level for 5 more years. Medvedev and Thiem already pushed them. I think in 2021 at the latest we will have new slam champions. However, I do think that as far as 2023 Djokovic or Nadal could still win the occasional slam if all things go their way, they just won’t be favorites anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH

SonnyT

Rookie
Absolutely no way. Thiem/Med/Tsisipas right now are all stronger than Djokovic, and faster than Nadal. The last 2 GS, Djokovic and Nadal used experience, smarts and clutchness to win in 5 sets. Maybe by 2021 they will have to vulture to win anything. Nadal is working on copywriting the vulture logo right now.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Young players should’ve started pushing out the big 3 around 2016/2017 like they did vs Sampras around late 90s, then Federer in 2008 and then 2011. A natural changing of the guard.
Not in 5 years when they’re all ancient.

What we’ve seen for 5-6 years is a real void of young talent so big 3, and recently big 2 have been able to hoover up all the slams, without playing at their very best.
 

Username_

Hall of Fame
Nadal and Djokovic (and a dwindling Federer) don't even need to play at their best against next gen. They just tank like kyrgios and tap out mentally out of boredom, until they see each other on opposite sides of the net
 

StANDAA

Legend
The Big 3 is like a chair with 3 legs. Once you remove one leg from it, it will become unstable and fall. The day one of them retires, the remaining two are toasted.
the Big 3 were a chair with 2 legs in 2005 and they were still dominating
 
Federer is sure to be retired by that point.

Yes if Djokovic and Nadal are winning slams still at that point it would be a poor indictment of the game, but it is also very conceivable seeing how well Federer is still doing at this age, and while the newest up and coming generation are atleast better than the godawful last 2, they are still quite weak.
 

scotus

G.O.A.T.
The Big 3 is like a chair with 3 legs. Once you remove one leg from it, it will become unstable and fall. The day one of them retires, the remaining two are toasted.
They are not connected like that. Fed will retire in the next couple of years but the others will continue to battle for the title of GOAT.
 

StANDAA

Legend
This is the worst take. You take any good journeyman from last gen (Roddick, Blake, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Verdasco, even Gonzalez) and they would carve through the current field like butter. Could you imagine a kid like Roddick with a monster 140mph serve and big forehand hitting the scene right now? He'd go HAM on all these mugs (+3 old guys) and clean up titles.

The level of play has absolutely fallen off a cliff. We went for 40+ years with each generation pushing the next one out, and suddenly there's nothing left to fill the void. A few decently talented meh young players. I don't know who or what's to blame, but kids aren't playing tennis anymore.
this
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Of course the blame falls primarily on Federer. He chose to hang around long past the natural tennis retirement age. Why? We can only speculate. Maybe greed? Maybe to feed his ego? Who knows... But he showed Djokovic and Nadal that it's possible to be competitive even as they get older. So now those two are doing it too.
 

Indigo

Semi-Pro
They are not connected like that. Fed will retire in the next couple of years but the others will continue to battle for the title of GOAT.
What I wanted to say is that now since they are older and new generations emerge, their skills are best used combined. So they make a team The Big 3 and eliminate the incoming pretenders. Nadal kills them on clay and hard, Fed on grass and Novak one both grass and hard. When they are together, they terminate these incoming bugs effectively across surfaces and playing styles. Once one of them leaves the team it will leave the remaining two more vulnerable. The most difficult it will be when two leave the team. The remaining one will be left to be eaten alive by next gen newly hatched eggs...
 

zvelf

Professional
This is the worst take. You take any good journeyman from last gen (Roddick, Blake, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Verdasco, even Gonzalez) and they would carve through the current field like butter. Could you imagine a kid like Roddick with a monster 140mph serve and big forehand hitting the scene right now? He'd go HAM on all these mugs (+3 old guys) and clean up titles.

The level of play has absolutely fallen off a cliff. We went for 40+ years with each generation pushing the next one out, and suddenly there's nothing left to fill the void. A few decently talented meh young players. I don't know who or what's to blame, but kids aren't playing tennis anymore.
This speculation doesn't really pass the smell test. If a monster serve made a dominating player right now, then Medvedev, Thiem, Tsitsipas, and Zverev's combined head-to-head against Isner wouldn't be 10-5.
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
This speculation doesn't really pass the smell test. If a monster serve made a dominating player right now, then Medvedev, Thiem, Tsitsipas, and Zverev's combined head-to-head against Isner wouldn't be 10-5.
How long has Isner been a top 20 player with nothing BUT a serve? Also, people forget Roddick was a lot more than a serve because his strokes were kinda ugly.
 

SonnyT

Rookie
In 5 years, the big 3 is Thiem/Tsisipas/Medvedev.

Correction: Roddick had a lot of very 'limited' game!
 

zvelf

Professional
How long has Isner been a top 20 player with nothing BUT a serve? Also, people forget Roddick was a lot more than a serve because his strokes were kinda ugly.
That rhetorical question doesn't pass the smell test either. Karlovic has had an even better serve than Isner and he's only ever ended one year in the top 20 (at #20 actually) so Isner isn't where he's at ONLY due to his serve.
 
First, I would be shocked if Federer had won a Slam five years from now in his 40's.

Second, I would be asking myself what happened to the next gen.
Do you really think it's so implausible that Federer might win a Slam in his 40s? He has no chance whatsoever at Wimbledon 2022? He won't be 40 at the time of Wimbledon 2021, but many of his fans on here would claim that as a 40-something triumph, as he'll only be a month away.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
Do you really think it's so implausible that Federer might win a Slam in his 40s? He has no chance whatsoever at Wimbledon 2022? He won't be 40 at the time of Wimbledon 2021, but many of his fans on here would claim that as a 40-something triumph, as he'll only be a month away.
Yeah but OP meant five years from now and not just two or three, which puts him at 43 years old.
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
Do you really think it's so implausible that Federer might win a Slam in his 40s? He has no chance whatsoever at Wimbledon 2022? He won't be 40 at the time of Wimbledon 2021, but many of his fans on here would claim that as a 40-something triumph, as he'll only be a month away.
Yes. Even the current crop of disappointments will have no terrible dispatching a 40 year old. I hope.
 
Yeah but OP meant five years from now and not just two or three, which puts him at 43 years old.
I thought you might mean that, but you saying "had won" in his 40s made me think you were ruling out any prospect of him winning even two years from now. As for him winning at 40, I certainly wouldn't bet on it, but I don't think it is beyond the realm of possibility.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
I thought you might mean that, but you saying "had won" in his 40s made me think you were ruling out any prospect of him winning even two years from now. As for him winning at 40, I certainly wouldn't bet on it, but I don't think it is beyond the realm of possibility.
Blame it on my poor grammatical choices.
 
Yes. Even the current crop of disappointments will have no terrible dispatching a 40 year old. I hope.
See my post 45. I think Wimbledon could be pretty wide open by then. Djokovic will be 35, and it's my belief that players decline most slowly on their favorite surface, so late in his career he will likely do best in Australia. And younger players tend to be weakest on grass. Maybe Medvedev is an exception. Still, I would bet against Federer doing it.
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
See my post 45. I think Wimbledon could be pretty wide open by then. Djokovic will be 35, and it's my belief that players decline most slowly on their favorite surface, so late in his career he will likely do best in Australia. And younger players tend to be weakest on grass. Maybe Medvedev is an exception. Still, I would bet against Federer doing it.
I am done watching tennis forever the day a 40 year old wins a slam. Serious.
 
It would mean that the Big 3 are the strongest players the sport has ever seen and probably will ever see.

Besides that, it would be ultra boring seeing these grandpa's winning everything.

I don't see it happening tho.
 
I am done watching tennis forever the day a 40 year old wins a slam. Serious.
Okay, that's your prerogative, of course. To my mind, it doesn't seem much different than when 17 year old boys won Slams. Certainly, I would think in the abstract that being 17 ought - for a male player - to be a bigger age handicap than being 35. Perhaps less than 40 but not much less. But having read your posts in this thread, I see that we have very different interpretations of the recent aging of the game, so let's just leave it at that.
 
Top