Spencer Gore
Legend
If a 36 year old beats a 20 year old multiple slam winner in a slam final it will be one of the greatest achievements in tennis history.
When?I thought he already did a few weeks ago?
If a 36 year old beats a 20 year old multiple slam winner in a slam final it will be one of the greatest achievements in tennis history.
is he multiple slam winner hmmHave you been sleeping under a rock, op? Meddy is 27 years old not 20.
I'd say beating an ATG in his prime at 36 would be the far bigger accomplishment. Carlos is not in his prime yet.
Op is probably drunk thenis he multiple slam winner hmm
He's only 20, you think he's in his prime? I keep hearing how Djokodal were babies at 20.
God I hope that's true.Have you been sleeping under a rock, op? Meddy is 27 years old not 20.
This sounds absolutely tragic.Assuming they both get to the final, all Novak has to do is extend the match and make it physical.
Yes HE IS. He could improve or not in the future but he is clearly in his prime currently.He's only 20, you think he's in his prime? I keep hearing how Djokodal were babies at 20.
Fed beat Sampras at Wimbledon, which is worth like 10 slams.Yes HE IS. He could improve or not in the future but he is clearly in his prime currently.
How can anyone be world #1 and Wimbledon champion and not be in his prime lol
And it's different from player/person to another so not sure why you mention Djokodal. Fed certainly wasn't in his prime at 20 either.
How can anyone be world no.2 and 2 time GS champion and not in his prime? It's what I kept hearing about 20 year old Nadal and how he was a zygote.Yes HE IS. He could improve or not in the future but he is clearly in his prime currently.
How can anyone be world #1 and Wimbledon champion and not be in his prime lol
And it's different from player/person to another so not sure why you mention Djokodal. Fed certainly wasn't in his prime at 20 either.
I too think the match - and future matches - have ramifications for the inflation era theory. The FO can be thrown out the window. That loss was due to his inexperienceI pull Gentleman Spencer's 200 year old legs every chance I get.
But I genuinely think if Novak wins this, it will be humongous victory. Carlos is 20 correct. But the way he is playing it's unprecedented. He lacks couple of things, he has a habit of getting carried away and becoming top error happy, but apart from those he is like Big 3 in prime.
Rafa was 19 in 2005, won 11 titles including FO, one or two masters on HC, had more points as the world no 2 than the current no 1, yet to this board he remains a baby prior to 2008Yes HE IS. He could improve or not in the future but he is clearly in his prime currently.
How can anyone be world #1 and Wimbledon champion and not be in his prime lol
And it's different from player/person to another so not sure why you mention Djokodal. Fed certainly wasn't in his prime at 20 either.
Not a baby, but clearly hit his prime starting around 22-23 in 2008. Generally, this is true for male atheletes as well. Typical peak years are from 22-28, just take a look at Roger 2004-2007 or Novak's 2011-2015Rafa was 19 in 2005, won 11 titles including FO, one or two masters on HC, had more points as the world no 2 than the current no 1, yet to this board he remains a baby prior to 2008
I'd say beating an ATG in his prime at 36 would be the far bigger accomplishment. Carlos is not in his prime yet.
Well, as a clay specialist Bull was in his prime at the time but only on clay, that's the point of Bull fans I believe. Their claim is that he needed time to adapt to other surfaces and conditions which is of course true.How can anyone be world no.2 and 2 time GS champion and not in his prime? It's what I kept hearing about 20 year old Nadal and how he was a zygote.
But Nadal was also world no.2 and elite on 2 different surfaces at 20. Yes he was a zygote.Well, as a clay specialist Bull was in his prime at the time but only on clay, that's the point of Bull fans I believe. Their claim is that he needed time to adapt to other surfaces and conditions which is of course true.
To say though that the world #1 in his domain/sport is not in his prime is extremely hilarious because how ridiculous and stupid it sounds. Like c'mon...
I'd say beating an ATG in his prime at 36 would be the far bigger accomplishment. Carlos is not in his prime yet.
Everything is the greatest ever. We can never settle for "good" anymore. No, we demand goatiness in everything.
If everything is the greatest, nothing is the greatest. Save the superlatives for the things that actually deserve them.
If a 36 year old tennis forum commenter beats a 173 year old slam winner in a TTW debate about a Slam final it will be one of the greatest achievements in tennis warehouse history.Everything is the greatest ever. We can never settle for "good" anymore. No, we demand goatiness in everything.
If everything is the greatest, nothing is the greatest. Save the superlatives for the things that actually deserve them.
Pretty much. It would be a bigger indictment if 25 year old Alcaraz lost to 36 year old Djokovic.I agree. Alcaraz/Djokovic of 25 > Alcaraz/Djokovic of 20.
Also, Alcaraz is not an atg yet.
Big difference is that Nadal was only really proven on clay and somewhat on grass instead of Alcaraz on all 3 surfaces. Omg I repeated an answer above.How can anyone be world no.2 and 2 time GS champion and not in his prime? It's what I kept hearing about 20 year old Nadal and how he was a zygote.
When has it happened before in the history of tennis?Everything is the greatest ever. We can never settle for "good" anymore. No, we demand goatiness in everything.
If everything is the greatest, nothing is the greatest. Save the superlatives for the things that actually deserve them.
Because Djokovic is 36 years of age and Alcaraz is a 20 year old once in a generation player with two of the last four slams under his belt.First make up your mind if Djokovic is good or not .
If he is still good , then why is beating Alcaraz a great achievement .
Because Djokovic is 36 years of age and Alcaraz is a 20 year old once in a generation player with two of the last four slams under his belt.
Not in his prime yet. Carlitos is still learning new things about how his body responds to stress, like at RG.He's only 20, you think he's in his prime? I keep hearing how Djokodal were babies at 20.
Big difference is that Nadal was only really proven on clay and somewhat on grass instead of Alcaraz on all 3 surfaces. Omg I repeated an answer above.
Djokovic has already moved this outside of Connors-Rosewall territoryIf age is just a number why have so many of the previous 36/37 year old ATGs failed to defeat much younger ATGs in slam finals?