Is Fed in a different Era than djoker? How do we define eras?

[Lleytonstation]

We can never agree on eras and their level. I'm not so sure we can even define eras.

Think about this:

• Fed had won 11 slams by the time djoker reached a slam final and fed bloomed late
• At one point their slam totals were 1-16
• Fed beat sampras on WC while djoker never played him
• Fed played Agassi in a slam final and 14 years later played djoker in a final
• Djoker won all his slams except one after fed turned 30.

So how do we define Eras?

Is it by age?
If so, what is the age gap we make? Is it 5 years? 10 years? 10 seems way too high. A 22 year old playing a 30 year old seems odd to be in the same Era? 25 year old vs a 33 or 35 year old? Nah. Even if it is 5, then how would djoker be in fed Era? That surely doesn't make sense.

What about amount of matches played?
David Nalbandian: Fed 19 djoker 5
Nikolay Davydenko: Fed 21 djoker 8
Tommy Haas: Fed 19 djoker 9
Roddick: Fed 24 djoker 9
Lleyton Hewitt: Fed 27 djoker 7
Safin: Fed 12 djoker 2
Henan: Fed 13 djoker 1
Agassi: Fed 11 djoker 0
Sampras: Fed 1 djoker 0

So obviously that is odd. We know djoker and fed played 51. So what now?

Is it by decade?
Do we just randomly start at the beginning of the decade? 2000 matches and 2009 matches the same Era? Maybe, but Agassi only played in half the decade. Sampras a couple years. Djoker only a few years.

What about overlap?
FAA, shapo, tsits, tiny Carlos, berr, med, etc. are apart of the big 3 Era? Where does raonic, dimitrov, nishi, del po, and others fall?

As you can see, defining an Era is impossible and not something everybody can agree on. I honestly think fed played in 3 eras, Rafa in 2/3 eras, and djoker in 2 and possibly 3 down the road.

 

[Biotic]

Fedr

 

[FRV4]

I thought everything these days is open era. Fed is like the older brother of Djoker and Nadal. Maybe was better, but the younger ones learned from his mistakes and out-accomplished him. I do agree defining an era/generation or whatever is not possible, but if we were to do so, I'd say Fed is in a different area than Djoker and Nadal, though overlapping, like you say.

 

[Lleytonstation]

I thought everything these days is open era. Fed is like the older brother of Djoker and Nadal. Maybe was better, but the younger ones learned from his mistakes and out-accomplished him.

Fair. Open Era. But we see things like golden Era and weak Era and Greek Era and juice box Era and all kinds of shortening eras

 

[Beerus]

Peak Federer brutally dominated an era. Be proud, Lleyton.

 

[mahatma]

Played 50 times against each other, but not in the same era. Had this number been in single digit, there would have been a point. Not much now with their H2H having 50 matches

 

[FRV4]

Fair. Open Era. But we see things like golden Era and weak Era and Greek Era and juice box Era and all kinds of shortening eras

Yeah in that case, I'd say he is in the same yet different era than the other two, wait...

 

[Lleytonstation]

Played 50 times against each other, but not in the same era. Had this number been in single digit, there would have been a point. Not much now with their H2H having 50 matches

Obviously they were in one Era together, but obviously fed belonged to one before too.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Peak Federer brutally dominated an era. Be proud, Lleyton.

So fed wasn't in djokers Era? What was the name of that Era again?

 

[initialize]

Yes different eras for sure. The fact that Fed can still match/outplay his rivals shows who the real GOAT is (and we all know this is true)

 

[pj80]

Yes different eras for sure. The fact that Fed can still match/outplay his rivals shows who the real GOAT is (and we all know this is true)

the one with more slams and better H2H, weeks @ 1?

 

[Kralingen]

You know you raise a very important question Lleyton.

i thought that Federer played in the Greek era, separate from any overlap with Nole.

but now that Djokovic has gotten Tsitsipas and Kyrgios in Slam finals it appears we may have a new Greek era. A very perplexing Ship of Theseus situation for sure.

wait, isn’t Theseus also Greek?

 

[initialize]

the one with more slams and better H2H, weeks @ 1?

Nope because Fed is 6 years older. A seemingly trivial fact for Djokodal fans to conveniently ignore, but in reality the reason Djokodal have barely “surpassed” Fed in the slam department

 

[Herald]

Oh brother, here we go again with this.

 

[FRV4]

You know you raise a very important question Lleyton.

i thought that Federer played in the Greek era, separate from any overlap with Nole.

but now that Djokovic has gotten Tsitsipas and Kyrgios in Slam finals it appears we may have a new Greek era. A very perplexing Ship of Theseus situation for sure.

wait, isn’t Theseus in Greece?

did you get your money back from the Nadal withdrawal?

 

[Entername]

Yeah they are.

1980-1984 = Fed gen (ft. Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Ferrero, etc.)

1985-1989 = Djokodal gen (ft. Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Tsonga, Berydch, etc.)

1990-1994 = Lost gen (ft. Thiem, Raonic, Dimitrov, Goffin, Schwartzman, Sock, PCB, Pouille, etc.)

1995-1999 = Next gen (ft. Medvedev, Zverev, Stefanos, Kyrgios, Matteo, Shapo, Rublev, Ruud, etc.)

2000-2004 = Zoomer gen (ft. Alcaraz, FAA, Sinner, Rune, Nakashima, Brooksby, etc.)

 

[Poisoned Slice]

I'd say they are the same era. Messi and Bobby Charlton different era.

 

[Kralingen]

did you get your money back from the Nadal withdrawal?

On one book I did… but sadly the issue with futures is they usually don’t pay out on injuries. Especially injuries suffered during the tournament. Ah well, you win and lose some. I bet big on Kyrgios to cover the +5 games handicap and won yesterday though.

 

[Russeljones]

Big 3 is FAKE. The PROOF.

I don't know how best to carry this over to the thread (lost the color coding) without pasting it as an image but the point this is making should be quite clear. There is little overlap between the slam winning form of Roger Federer and Nadal and Djokovic after 2010. This tells us that either...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

 

[Lleytonstation]

You know you raise a very important question Lleyton.

i thought that Federer played in the Greek era, separate from any overlap with Nole.

but now that Djokovic has gotten Tsitsipas and Kyrgios in Slam finals it appears we may have a new Greek era. A very perplexing Ship of Theseus situation for sure.

wait, isn’t Theseus also Greek?

Juice box Era

 

[Tennfan123]

How can they be the same era? Federer's peak was over before Djokovic won his first slam. Their eras overlapped, that's all.

 

[Beerus]

So fed wasn't in djokers Era? What was the name of that Era again?

 

[Born_to_slice]

-Federer reaped big benefits by having his physical peak before Djokodal matured.

Anyway, he was de facto a part of 2 "eras", because he played for so long.

 

[Winner]

Earned runs allowed.

 

[FRV4]

On one book I did… but sadly the issue with futures is they usually don’t pay out on injuries. Especially injuries suffered during the tournament. Ah well, you win and lose some. I bet big on Kyrgios to cover the +5 games handicap and won yesterday though.

Draftkings refunded me for Nadal's withdrawal. It was a nice surprise, there would've been no argument from me if the rule was I lost.

not this **** again

 

[Beerus]

not this **** again

You don't like the Spencer?

 

[FRV4]

You don't like the Spencer?

Meh, do what you like

 

[onyxrose81]

Nope because Fed is 6 years older. A seemingly trivial fact for Djokodal fans to conveniently ignore, but in reality the reason Djokodal have barely “surpassed” Fed in the slam department

That also makes Djokovic and Nadal 6 years younger and not able to start playing at the same time…Fed fans seem to want things both ways. Your argument do not make sense.

 

[initialize]

That also makes Djokovic and Nadal 6 years younger and not able to start playing at the same time…Fed fans seem to want things both ways. Your argument do not make sense.

I thought that was self-explainable. Fed’s era was by far stronger than this current “Career Inflation” era

 

[onyxrose81]

I thought that was self-explainable. Fed’s era was by far stronger than this current “Career Inflation” era

If you say so, sure.

 

[Lleytonstation]

You don't like the Spencer?

Haha you know what this means...

 

[Adv. Edberg]

Definitely in different eras. Djoko has won all his slams when Fed has been past 30. Fed won most of his slams before Djoko won his 2nd

 

[initialize]

If you say so, sure.

It’s true. This era’s slam runner-ups are people of Casper Ruud and Kyrgios caliber, quite literally. Fed’s era had unequivocally better competition

 

[I Am Finnish]

The other era ha!

 

[Deleted member 792641]

It’s true. This era’s slam runner-ups are people of Casper Ruud and Kyrgios caliber, quite literally. Fed’s era had unequivocally better competition

Baghdatis

 

[initialize]

Baghdatis

… who’s still better than the other players I mentioned

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

I thought that was self-explainable. Fed’s era was by far stronger than this current “Career Inflation” era

Just like feds early career inflation when he had no rival for like 5 years off clay? He couldn’t even win RG before Rafa emerged in 2005 either. Had a couple of early windows but he wasn’t good on it.

 

[MeatTornado]

Same era, different generation.

 

[Marco Rotim]

According to me :

Players with age gap of 5-6 years are in different age groups but in same generation and obviously in same era.
Players with age gap approaching 10-11 are in different generations but in same era, these days people in 30s play people in 20s so much, can't be in different era and clash.
Players with age gap of 15 or more would be in different eras.

Nadal/Djokovic and Dimitrov/Thiem are from different age groups, but in same generation of athletes who were in prime in 2010s.
Nadal/Djokovic and Zverev/Stefanos are from different generations clearly, Nadal/Djokovic belong to 2010s decade while TsiTsipas/Zverev are players of 2020s decade.
Nadal/Djokovic and Sampras/Agassi are from different eras, the age gap in 15+, when Nadal played Agassi it was the clash of eras, when Nadal will play Alcaraz, it would be same.

Federer and Sampras/Agassi were different generations with no clash of prime form..
Federer and Nadal/Djokovic are same generation, just different age groups with clashes of prime form.
Federer and Kyrgios/Zverev are different eras with no clash in anyway, they haven't even played in slams, right ?

Federer vs Alcaraz/Sinner would not even exist since it is not just different era, it is more like father and son clash.

 

[TheNachoMan]

Zverev and Alcaraz are from the same era. The age difference is about the same there.

 

[initialize]

Just like feds early career inflation when he had no rival for like 5 years off clay? He couldn’t even win RG before Rafa emerged in 2005 either. Had a couple of early windows but he wasn’t good on it.

Fed didn’t have career inflation. Again, he had stronger opponents than the current field today, plus Nadal was still a player in the early 2000s too. As everyone knows Nadal was great on clay but Fed was still the GOAT of everything non-clay.

 

[Vanilla Slice]

Nadal, Federer and Djokovic (mostly Nadal and Djokovic outside of 2017-2018) absolutely redefined the tennis meaning of “eras”

 

[Bambooman]

Nope because Fed is 6 years older. A seemingly trivial fact for Djokodal fans to conveniently ignore, but in reality the reason Djokodal have barely “surpassed” Fed in the slam department

Djokovic just played a guy who is 27.

 

[initialize]

Djokovic just played a guy who is 27.

Yeah a 27 year old professional gamer who isn’t an ATG

 

[Bambooman]

Yeah a 27 year old professional gamer who isn’t an ATG

So much for eras meaning much.

 

[L4S10s]

I believe Andy Roddick answered this question comprehensively already.

 

[Robert F]

For me an Era isn't a class or generation of players. An Era is defined by a common culture/style of the sport. An Era can last several decades or just a few years if something changes the sport.

When the sport went from hanging out in dresses and suits to wearing shorts would be an end and start of an Era.
When the sport went from Amateur/Pro to Pro only is the start of another Era.
The advent of the graphite racquet and foundations of the modern forehand with a more backcourt based game is another Era.

Era's don't have clear years but phase in over each other. McEnroe was probably in 2 eras (growth of the pro only game and later the foundational stages of the modern game), whereas Lendl was successful in the latter Era only (not really flourishing in the 70s')_.

I think the age grouping define well what players were contemporaries of each other and let you look at the overall competition of those generations. For me Fed is in an earlier generation than Djoker and Nadal, but they all played in the same Era.

What defines their Era is the dominance of the big 3, combined with homogenization of the surfaces, the addition of poly, full utilization of the modern forehand and inside out game and increased level of sports training the athletes get now.

 

[6august]

Yeah they are.

1980-1984 = Fed gen (ft. Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Ferrero, etc.)

1985-1989 = Djokodal gen (ft. Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Tsonga, Berydch, etc.)

1990-1994 = Lost gen (ft. Thiem, Raonic, Dimitrov, Goffin, Schwartzman, Sock, PCB, Pouille, etc.)

1995-1999 = Next gen (ft. Medvedev, Zverev, Stefanos, Kyrgios, Matteo, Shapo, Rublev, Ruud, etc.)

2000-2004 = Zoomer gen (ft. Alcaraz, FAA, Sinner, Rune, Nakashima, Brooksby, etc.)

So 1 player born 1984 and another born 1985 are from different eras???

 

[Lleytonstation]

Zverev and Alcaraz are from the same era. The age difference is about the same there.

@MeatTornado probably had the best take on it. Same Era different generation.

Definitely in different eras. Djoko has won all his slams when Fed has been past 30. Fed won most of his slams before Djoko won his 2nd

Yeah that is a big tell right there.

 

[Lleytonstation]

For me an Era isn't a class or generation of players. An Era is defined by a common culture/style of the sport. An Era can last several decades or just a few years if something changes the sport.

When the sport went from hanging out in dresses and suits to wearing shorts would be an end and start of an Era.
When the sport went from Amateur/Pro to Pro only is the start of another Era.
The advent of the graphite racquet and foundations of the modern forehand with a more backcourt based game is another Era.

Era's don't have clear years but phase in over each other. McEnroe was probably in 2 eras (growth of the pro only game and later the foundational stages of the modern game), whereas Lendl was successful in the latter Era only (not really flourishing in the 70s')_.

I think the age grouping define well what players were contemporaries of each other and let you look at the overall competition of those generations. For me Fed is in an earlier generation than Djoker and Nadal, but they all played in the same Era.

What defines their Era is the dominance of the big 3, combined with homogenization of the surfaces, the addition of poly, full utilization of the modern forehand and inside out game and increased level of sports training the athletes get now.

So fed was in 2 by that logic.