Is Weak Era 2 coming to an end?

#1
With Djokovic getting back to his best (and when he is at his best he is the best player of the last twenty years) we once again have 3 world class players competing for the slams -thank the lord.

Hopefully this means the embarrassing last couple of years when Federer and Nadal have been allowed to sleepwalk to titles is coming to an end.

It surely means Weak Era 2 is coming to a close. For now.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#2
With Djokovic getting back to his best (and when he is at his best he is the best player of the last twenty years) we once again have 3 world class players competing for the slams -thank the lord.

Hopefully this means the embarrassing last couple of years when Federer and Nadal have been allowed to sleepwalk to titles is coming to an end.

It surely means Weak Era 2 is coming to a close. For now.
It's still a weak era. Stop posting.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
#3
With Djokovic getting back to his best (and when he is at his best he is the best player of the last twenty years) we once again have 3 world class players competing for the slams -thank the lord.

Hopefully this means the embarrassing last couple of years when Federer and Nadal have been allowed to sleepwalk to titles is coming to an end.

It surely means Weak Era 2 is coming to a close. For now.
3 world class players?
Nadal....check
Djokovic.....check
????????.....who is the other? Zverev? Kyrgios? Thiem?
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
#5
Yo

We can argue about Federer’s place in the all-time hierarchy but to suggest he is not still a world class player is asinine.
Well yes I guess you can add this current Federer.....it’s the same as adding 2006 Agassi to the list of ‘great’ competition for that particular year.
 
#8
LMAO, this era is still a JOKE, players WAY past their bests still winning slams with ease. Don't give me this nonsense horsecrap '3 players competing' when it's the SAME three guys for 15 years, Any young players worth their salt would have pushed these geezers into the retirement home, but no instead we get a guy like Thiem as the main competition, whose true calling is probably being a von trapp family singer.
 
#9
LMAO, this era is still a JOKE, players WAY past their bests still winning slams with ease. Don't give me this nonsense horsecrap '3 players competing' when it's the SAME three guys for 15 years, Any young players worth their salt would have pushed these geezers into the retirement home, but no instead we get a guy like Thiem as the main competition, whose true calling is probably being a von trapp family singer.
So an era when the servebot Krajicek - the Milos Raonic of the 1990s win Slam is strong. The big Dutch boy was essentially a 1hbh Raonic with much better volleys but much worse groundies.
 
#10
So an era when the servebot Krajicek - the Milos Raonic of the 1990s win Slam is strong. The big Dutch boy was essentially a 1hbh Raonic with much better volleys but much worse groundies.
ROFLMAO don't talk about players that you have never seen. Krajicek makes RaoMUG look like an club footed elephant and on top of that has a better serve. Krajicek may as well have been Christopher Columbus to some of you preteens. Raonic making a Wimbledon final is a DISGRACE, imagine Rusedski or Arthurs making a Wimbledon final...Another notch on the belt of so called big server neutralizer Fed to not stop him...
 
Last edited:
#14
ROFLMAO don't talk about players that you have never seen. Krajicek makes RaoMUG look like an club footed elephant and on top of that has a better serve. Krajicek may as well have been Christopher Columbus to some of you preteens. Raonic making a Wimbledon final is a DISGRACE, imagine Rusedski or Arthurs making a Wimbledon final...Another notch on the belt of so called big server neutralizer Fed to not stop him...
I did not say that they were the same. What I said is that Krajicek is an equivalent of Raonic during his time, which means he would have been a Raonic (although with better movement) had he grown up today.
 

Sport

Hall of Fame
#15
Nadal was playing really great yesterday, yet Nole was able to win 2 sets. What the hell is this a weak era?

This Nadal was 100% tougher than any Hewitt, old Agassi, Roddick, Phillippoussis, Baghdatis and the likes.

Do you know why the next gen can't compete against the big 3? Because they are the 3 best players of all time. Federer/Nadal/Djokovic all of them stopped each other from winning more Slams. The distinction Open Era/pre-Open Era should die. It should be Big 3 era/pre-Big 3 Era.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#16
Nadal was playing really great yesterday, yet Nole was able to win 2 sets. What the hell is this a weak era?

This Nadal was 100% tougher than any Hewitt, Roddick, Phillippoussis, Baghdatis and the likes.

Do you know why the next gen can't compete against the big 3? Because they are the 3 best players of all time. Federer/Nadal/Djokovic all of them stopped each other from winning more Slams. The distinction Open Era/pre-Open Era should die. It should be Big 3 era/pre-Big 3 Era.
Putting freaking Roddick and Hewitt in the same category as Scud and Baggy is stupid as hell.

Hewitt for one could probably play about as well as peak Murray, Roddick not far behind. Scud and Baggy are Pioline and Anderson level.
 

Sport

Hall of Fame
#17
Putting freaking Roddick and Hewitt in the same category as Scud and Baggy is stupid as hell.

Hewitt for one could probably play about as well as peak Murray, Roddick not far behind. Scud and Baggy are Pioline and Anderson level.
Neither Hewitt nor Roddick are so good as Murray, who won 3 GS in the Big 3 Era. Hewitt and Rodick have less than 3 GS in the pre-Big 3 Era.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#20
Neither Hewitt nor Roddick are so good as Murray, who won 3 GS in the Big 3 Era. Hewitt and Rodick have less than 3 GS in the pre-Big 3 Era.
Murray would be SLAMLESS if he had to play in their era.

Hewitt and Roddick would've probably won slams if they peaked when Mugray did. Lmao at your double standard logic.

"Pre-Big 3 Era". Murray beat legitimate mugs for one of his slams and Djokovic who gave two away to him like he did with Wawrinka. Stop BSing and just admit the truth.
 
#24
It's still a weak era. Stop posting.
The weak era will Start when Zverev and Coric are the best players on the tour.

There wasn‘t a weak era in the last few years. People only think this because the standard was set so high at the beginning of the 2010‘s.
But compared with the first half of 2010‘s, every era in history is a weak era.
 
#29
ROFLMAO don't talk about players that you have never seen. Krajicek makes RaoMUG look like an club footed elephant and on top of that has a better serve. Krajicek may as well have been Christopher Columbus to some of you preteens. Raonic making a Wimbledon final is a DISGRACE, imagine Rusedski or Arthurs making a Wimbledon final...Another notch on the belt of so called big server neutralizer Fed to not stop him...
I was about to ask you, "Where are the RaoMUGs of yesteryear?" Good to see they are hanging in there, injury and muggery notwithstanding.

For what it's worth, Rusedski actually did make a major final, albeit at the US Open. 1997 was when the strong era of the mid-1990s began to fall away, leaving us with old guys Sampras and Agassi dominating a bunch of young MUGs until 2001, or in majors really 2002.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#31
I was about to ask you, "Where are the RaoMUGs of yesteryear?" Good to see they are hanging in there, injury and muggery notwithstanding.

For what it's worth, Rusedski actually did make a major final, albeit at the US Open. 1997 was when the strong era of the mid-1990s began to fall away, leaving us with old guys Sampras and Agassi dominating a bunch of young MUGs until 2001, or in majors really 2002.
1996 was when everything started going bad. Not '97.
 
#32
Djoko alone is definetly not enough to go from weak to strong, i wouldnt say the 4 semifinalists is a sign of a strong era. I agree it's been getting weaker ever sinse 2013. Glad Federer could add 3 more slams, but Im waiting for the NextGen now, it's time.
 
#35
I guess so. But it got much worse in 1997 and 1998.
1998 was the joke year of all joke years. 1996 was the start though, with Washington making a GS final and Agassi starting to fall off. It was also Becker's last stand.
1997 was the low point.

1998 Wimbledon was actually strong. Henman, Sampras, Ivanisevic, Krajicek in SF. Sampras would have preferred facing Agassi/Rafter in a Wimbledon final over Ivanisevic/Krajicek.
 

msc886

Professional
#36
Neither Hewitt nor Roddick are so good as Murray, who won 3 GS in the Big 3 Era. Hewitt and Rodick have less than 3 GS in the pre-Big 3 Era.
Hewitt and Roddick are like Federer and Djokovic at the French Open. They ran into all-time greats at their primes.
 

IowaGuy

Hall of Fame
#38
So an era when the servebot Krajicek - the Milos Raonic of the 1990s win Slam is strong. The big Dutch boy was essentially a 1hbh Raonic with much better volleys but much worse groundies.
Krajicek was much more athletic than Raonic!

One of only a few players to have a winning lifetime record against Sampras (6-4).
 
#39
INDISPUTABLE DEFINITION OF VARIOUS ERAS

2003 WIM - Weak Era
2003 USO - Average Era
2004 AO, W, USO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2004 RG - Average Era
2005 AO - Average Era
2005 RG - Strong Era
2005 W, USO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2006 AO, W, USO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2006 RG - Strong Era
2007 AO, W, USO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2007 RG - Strong Era
2008 AO, RG, W - Strong Era
2008 USO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2009 AO - Strong Era
2009 RG, W - Weakestestestestestest Era
2009 USO - Average Era
2010 AO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2010 RG, W, USO - Strongestestestestestest Era
2011 AO, RG, W, USO - Strongestestestestestest Era
2012 AO, RG - Strong Era
2012 W - Weak Era
2012 USO - Strong Era
2013-2016 - Strongestestestestestest Era
2017 AO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2017 RG - Strongestest Era
2017 W - Weakestestestestestest Era
2017 USO - Strongestestest Era
2018 AO - Weakestestestestestest Era
2018 RG - Strongestestest Era
2018 W - Strong Era
2018 USO - Will depend on what Weak Era champion
(A player who'd suck in any other era but by having a superior H2H to said weak era champion, strong era champions become GOAT contenders)
does. Since it's hard for weak era champion to win on the WACAdasa hlay surface it's likely to remain strong era.
 
Last edited:
#40
Well yes I guess you can add this current Federer.....it’s the same as adding 2006 Agassi to the list of ‘great’ competition for that particular year.
What?

2006 Agassi was done. Stick a fork in him done. His back was killing him.

Federer is no where near 2006 Agassi. More like 2003 Agassi who still won the 2003 Australian open and became than at that time oldest number 1 player at age 33.

Federer won the Australian this year. Made finals of masters 1000. And if not for a couple of points against Anderson would likely be in the Wimbledon finals.
 
#41
Its a fallacy to argue weak era based on subjective quality of players.

But 5-6 top 10 players getting injured at the same time, which is very rare.

Its a freak accident.

At least, i don't recall that happened in the past in 30 years ive been following pro tennis.

But Nadal can win FO in weak era or not, i think.
 
#42
With Djokovic getting back to his best (and when he is at his best he is the best player of the last twenty years) we once again have 3 world class players competing for the slams -thank the lord.

Hopefully this means the embarrassing last couple of years when Federer and Nadal have been allowed to sleepwalk to titles is coming to an end.

It surely means Weak Era 2 is coming to a close. For now.
You could never write something on which I would agree 100%.
 
#43
Also, the dawn of powerbaseline era,2003-2004. (Was this beginning of weak era 1?).

Beginning 2003-2004, ATP system fundamentally changed.
Surfaces, Tournaments, Ranking, seeding systems. All changed at short span of time.

I don't recall such a big change since beginning of open era 1969.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
#44
What?

2006 Agassi was done. Stick a fork in him done. His back was killing him.

Federer is no where near 2006 Agassi. More like 2003 Agassi who still won the 2003 Australian open and became than at that time oldest number 1 player at age 33.

Federer won the Australian this year. Made finals of masters 1000. And if not for a couple of points against Anderson would likely be in the Wimbledon finals.
Wrong!
2003 Agassi was far better. That year was actually quite competitive. Federer's level dropped significantly since the AO/Sunshine double of 2017. His level at Wimby last year was also a fair bit lower than the AO of that same year, and this year he's dropped even lower. He only got to the QF at SW19 thanks to a cakewalk draw and LOL about Anderson. Davydenko and Nalbandian would have caned Anderson. The fact that Isner and Anderson were in the SF shows how weak this era is. If Djoko wasn't pushed to the limits by Nadal in the SF, thus having a day's less rest, he'd be bagelling and breadsticking the lanky South African.

I bet you every dollar I have, that Roddick would have been watching this Wimbledon, seeing Fed playing and would be kicking himself and thinking to himself, "why didn't I get this version of Roger back in my day"....2017/18 Wimbledon and 2018 AO Federer would have been clobbered by Roddick.
 
#45
ROFLMAO don't talk about players that you have never seen. Krajicek makes RaoMUG look like an club footed elephant and on top of that has a better serve. Krajicek may as well have been Christopher Columbus to some of you preteens. Raonic making a Wimbledon final is a DISGRACE, imagine Rusedski or Arthurs making a Wimbledon final...Another notch on the belt of so called big server neutralizer Fed to not stop him...
You mean the same Rusedski who made a US Open final during the Sampras "strong era", or was it his grandma?
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#46
Wrong!
2003 Agassi was far better. That year was actually quite competitive. Federer's level dropped significantly since the AO/Sunshine double of 2017. His level at Wimby last year was also a fair bit lower than the AO of that same year, and this year he's dropped even lower. He only got to the QF at SW19 thanks to a cakewalk draw and LOL about Anderson. Davydenko and Nalbandian would have caned Anderson. The fact that Isner and Anderson were in the SF shows how weak this era is. If Djoko wasn't pushed to the limits by Nadal in the SF, thus having a day's less rest, he'd be bagelling and breadsticking the lanky South African.

I bet you every dollar I have, that Roddick would have been watching this Wimbledon, seeing Fed playing and would be kicking himself and thinking to himself, "why didn't I get this version of Roger back in my day"....2017/18 Wimbledon and 2018 AO Federer would have been clobbered by Roddick.

Roddick is legit underrated around here. Compared to Baghdatis. LOL.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#48
Exactly! Glad you brought Ancic up....a Mr Anderson equivalent.
I was watching the 2005 Wimbledon final (again) and I noticed how many chances Roddick actually had to turn the tide of the match. Fed was just too clutch for him.

Put today's Fed up against him and he'd have won in 4 sets (even 2005 Wimbledon Roddick).
 
#50
I was watching the 2005 Wimbledon final (again) and I noticed how many chances Roddick actually had to turn the tide of the match. Fed was just too clutch for him.

Put today's Fed up against him and he'd have won in 4 sets (even 2005 Wimbledon Roddick).
Roddick didn't play too well from the ground, but he served well (71%), and yet Federer was still able to break him numerous times.

Federer had great competition in his prime though. He had two of his toughest slam draws in 2004, and difficult opponents in 2007. 2005 featured some great matches against Hewitt too. 2006 was relatively weak compared to those years, but he still won the USO beating two in form players and Wimbledon by beating Ancic (who played well but Federer was just too good) and Nadal (who was always underrated on grass during that year).
 
Top