Is anything that happened in past safe from revisionism ?

[Raining hopes]

Now it's 2011 Djokovic's turn.

Just read some posts claiming 2018 Djokovic is better than 2011.


Whenever I read something along the lines of 2018 Djokovic is better than 2011, I want to find the nearest pole and bang my head on it.



On grass ,Maybe that is true. But 2018 didn't have half the intensity and his return was relatively much weaker than 2011. 2011 was at a such a high level that even without much grass expertise (like 14,15) he won , simply because he was playing unimaginable tennis ,the surface didn't matter.


On clay, 2011 Rome and Madrid is probably his best form on the surface.

2011 Rome final might be his highest level ever.

2011 HC victories is better than anything in his career except isolated 2016 performances .

He was blasting FH and BHDTL like never before or since. Stamina was at it's peak and defense has never been better even if he did equal it later.

 

[Lleytonstation]

But for Fed it's true right? That seems to be the play these days.

 

[Raining hopes]

But for Fed it's true right? That seems to be the play these days.

Nothing to do with Fred.
Nobody is safe from this.

I have read some people claim similar things about Nadal as well.

Roddick and co weren't really that exceptional but reading the forum these days, it seems as if they played their tennis with drumsticks.

 

[Red Rick]

Nothing to do with Fred.
Nobody is safe from this.

I have read some people claim similar things about Nadal as well.

Roddick and co weren't really that exceptional but reading the forum these days, it seems as if they played their tennis with drumsticks.

The #next gen is exceptional

Exceptionally useless

 

[augustobt]

Of course not. I doubt half of active posters here actually watched any tennis prior to 2013, so it's not very surprising that they always try some kind of revisionism. Some will even say that Nadal wasn't peak in 2011, go figure.

 

[Raining hopes]

The #next gen is exceptional

Exceptionally useless

No, I meant they (Roddick and his peers) weren't exceptional as in relative to Big 3.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

In 30 years they will say the 30 lbs Taiwan porterhouse was greater than any challenge GGG faced in the ring.

mmmm

 

[NatF]

No, I meant they (Roddick and his peers) weren't exceptional as in relative to Big 3.

Who is though? What Fed's generation lacked in another ATG it made up for in depth of slam winner and #1 calibre players.

 

[Red Rick]

No, I meant they (Roddick and his peers) weren't exceptional as in relative to Big 3.

Take Big 3 out and you just have a generation of about 5 multi Slam champions with some of them mid tier ATGs leading into Murray becoming the best of the century with nobody missing Fedalovic.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Revisionism, Raining dude, is when Hulk Hogan claims Andre was 15,000 lbs instead of 10,000 lbs man.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Whenever I read something along the lines of 2018 Djokovic is better than 2011, I want to find the nearest pole and bang my head on it.

All written by people who started watching tennis in the last year or two. Djokovic will never reach a sustained level of his 2011 capacity because he's 32. Sure, he may summon up his 2011 or 2015 level in several matches, but he's never playing weeks or months straight at that level again. It's like McEnroe once said, "the older I get, the better I used to be."

 

[Raining hopes]

Revisionism, Raining dude, is when Hulk Hogan claims Andre was 15,000 lbs instead of 10,000 lbs man.

Revisionism is selling Cena vs Orton 100000000000000th match as the biggest Match ever just because there were two belts that time.

 

[Red Rick]

Everyone was complaining about serve fests at Wimbledon in the 90s, and now every since Fed's main rivals are better baseliners it's everything is bad. Courts are too slow and the 90s were the golden era of men's tennis.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Revisionism is selling Cena vs Orton 100000000000000th match as the biggest Match ever just because there were two belts that time.

 

[Mainad]

Interpretations may change with time but outcomes never do.

 

[Raining hopes]

I actually liked Randy a lot. Especially during his legend killer and McMahon family feud days.

Too bad Trips decided he didn't want to job at WM , killed all his momentum. The match falling so flat after stellar build up was a shame. Taker-Shawn speaking the show didn't help either.

 

[NatF]

I actually liked Randy a lot. Especially during his legend killer and McMahon family feud days.

Too bad Trips decided he didn't want to job at WM , killed all his momentum. The match falling so flat after stellar build up was a shame. Taker-Shawn speaking the show didn't help either.

Needed to be a No DQ match.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

I actually liked Randy a lot. Especially during his legend killer and McMahon family feud days.

Too bad Trips decided he didn't want to job at WM , killed all his momentum. The match falling so flat after stellar build up was a shame. Taker-Shawn speaking the show didn't help either.

I was still full diehard then and yeah, Orton looked so strong. Some foreshadowing with Shane being able to hold his own in fist fight. Then we get to Mania and a boring match, reminded me of Sting and Hogan at Starrcade, just the wrong match, Sting should've destroyed Hogan and Orton should have done the same to Triple. But meh, wrestling politics, Jack.

 

[Raining hopes]

I was still full diehard then and yeah, Orton looked so strong. Some foreshadowing with Shane being able to hold his own in fist fight. Then we get to Mania and a boring match, reminded me of Sting and Hogan at Starrcade, just the wrong match, Sting should've destroyed Hogan and Orton should have done the same to Triple. But meh, wrestling politics, Jack.

Not going to lie, back then I still had some wrestling innocence left. So after the Stephanie stuff, was rooting for H.

But the match fell short of expectations.
And later I realized that how much more interesting and credible Orton would have been as a heel/anti hero had he won the match.