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.
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.
- Thread starter Spencer Gore
- Start date
Spencer Gore
Legend
When?
Spencer Gore
Legend
Now that you've edited your original post I see you missed the slam final part. A slam final and a Masters 1000 final are quite different beasts.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
It will be, especially considering the fantastic form of the 20 year old heading in.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
No, it will just be another proof how useless the next gen are. Stop trying to hype non existent competition at all cost.
TheNachoMan
Legend
Agreed, the likelihood of that is very low though.
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
I 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.
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.
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
Have you been sleeping under a rock, op? Meddy is 27 years old not 20.
alexio
G.O.A.T.
is he multiple slam winner hmm
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I'd say beating an ATG in his prime at 36 would be the far bigger accomplishment. Carlos is not in his prime yet.
lelopez
Semi-Pro
Assuming they both get to the final, all Novak has to do is extend the match and make it physical. Lito will cramp in NY if the match is anything like in London or Cincy. Hope I'm wrong because I want to see Tiny win this one, but I think Djoker may have the upper hand (plus he's had a cake draw).
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
Op is probably drunk then
mike danny
Bionic Poster
He's only 20, you think he's in his prime? I keep hearing how Djokodal were babies at 20.
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
God I hope that's true.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
This sounds absolutely tragic.
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
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.
TheNachoMan
Legend
Fed beat Sampras at Wimbledon, which is worth like 10 slams.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
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.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
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 inexperience
But with the Wimbledon win Carlos has the experience and the belief. More of an even battle field.
If he wins the vast majority of their meetings in the up coming years while Djoko keeps beating the field, it's yes - it was indeed a weak era.
If Djokovic wins the majority he proves his level was good enough vs tough competition - weak era or not
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
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 2008
Mediterranean Might
Professional
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 2011-2015
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
We don't know. Hewitt peaked at that age for instance, and so did Chang or arguably Becker or Borg.
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
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...
mike danny
Bionic Poster
But Nadal was also world no.2 and elite on 2 different surfaces at 20. Yes he was a zygote.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
God please let this happen.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
I agree. Alcaraz/Djokovic of 25 > Alcaraz/Djokovic of 20.
Also, Alcaraz is not an atg yet.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Yours was the greatest post of all time.
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Pretty much. It would be a bigger indictment if 25 year old Alcaraz lost to 36 year old Djokovic.
CoolCoolCool
Hall of Fame
Probably not happening though. Got the feeling Raz will take this, unless Med miraculously pulls the upset or tires him, but it's unlikely.
WeekendTennisHack
Hall of Fame
Why would peak Djokovic beating baby Alcaraz mean anything? USO2007 doesn't mean much in the eyes of Djokovic fans since he was still a baby.
First make up your mind if Djokovic is good or not .
If he is still good , then why is beating Alcaraz a great achievement . It is not that a 100th ranked player upset player ranked No 1
Now, if Alcaraz is able to put past the gut wrenching loss of the most recent Cinci final and also somehow forget to remember that he won the Wimb final more as Novak choke and wins the USO, that would be an incredible achievement
If he is still good , then why is beating Alcaraz a great achievement . It is not that a 100th ranked player upset player ranked No 1
Now, if Alcaraz is able to put past the gut wrenching loss of the most recent Cinci final and also somehow forget to remember that he won the Wimb final more as Novak choke and wins the USO, that would be an incredible achievement
Oceans II
Professional
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.
Spencer Gore
Legend
When has it happened before in the history of tennis?
Spencer Gore
Legend
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.
Age is just a number.
If you are good enough to make the finals, you are good enough to face any opponent.
Ask @RF-18 if you dont believe me.
Subway Tennis
Legend
Not in his prime yet. Carlitos is still learning new things about how his body responds to stress, like at RG.
He is learning fast, but yes, not in his prime yet.
The story is definitely Alcaraz. This guy is barely out of his teens and is about to do the Wimbledon / US Open double and be a defending 2-time US Open winner.
Doing it all as a little guy is incredible. Totally threw out the theory we had of short guys no longer being able to win majors. He is an alien, it’s great to watch.
Spencer Gore
Legend
If 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?
The year 2005, when Nadal was 18/19, he played the four M-1000s on hardcourt, he won two of them (Canadian Open and Madrid) and was finalist in another one (Miami), where he was 2-0 sets up against Federer and 4-1 up in the third set.
Djokovic has already moved this outside of Connors-Rosewall territory
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
I don't know. Djoker even at 36 is still the best player on tour LOL
Similar threads
- Poll
