It's getting pretty sad

#1
I'm watching these "nextgen" matches and feeling sad. Medvedev is supposed to be a force? Is this a joke? They are all lanky retrievers who have good serves only as a result of their height. No one has special strokes. Tsitsipas and Shapovolav are the two exceptions, sort of. But they haven't done anything.

I was re-watching the AO19 final and watching Djokovic basically have a practice session against a clearly-rusty Bull. How could no one push that version of Bull? He hadn't played in months.

It's mind-boggling how pathetic even the "nextgen" is.

Oh, and ATP is even more pathetic. ATP making "next gen" finals and giving players labels is, I think, unprofessional and unethical. It's very wrong.

Tennis is going to fall off a cliff very soon. The sport might, for all intents and purposes, die. I don't see any recovery after the big drop in a few years. Rec players will dry up.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#2
Rec players will not dry up, as they don't care who is the next big tennis star.

Not the serious ones, and who the hell cares about the guy who confused a tennis tournament with an open food court with some entertainment on the side?

:cool:
 
#3
I'm watching these "nextgen" matches and feeling sad. Medvedev is supposed to be a force? Is this a joke? They are all lanky retrievers who have good serves only as a result of their height. No one has special strokes. Tsitsipas and Shapovolav are the two exceptions, sort of. But they haven't done anything.

I was re-watching the AO19 final and watching Djokovic basically have a practice session against a clearly-rusty Bull. How could no one push that version of Bull? He hadn't played in months.

It's mind-boggling how pathetic even the "nextgen" is.

Oh, and ATP is even more pathetic. ATP making "next gen" finals and giving players labels is, I think, unprofessional and unethical. It's very wrong.

Tennis is going to fall off a cliff very soon. The sport might, for all intents and purposes, die. I don't see any recovery after the big drop in a few years. Rec players will dry up.

Medvedev was on a fair old streak of match wins and has just won a title, but he's already 23.

Guys like Stefanos and Dennis the Menace need more time. They're 20 and 19 years old.

I think tennis will be fine but a couple of these guys do need to step up in a big way over the next few years, and Trifecta need to hang around so we see a great battle of generations otherwise it's going to look absolutely crap with them falling off a cliff and sub par players just filling a great big void.
 
#5
Medvedev made the final of Brisbane losing to Nishikori in 3 sets, pushed Djokovic the hardest than anyone in AO 4th round, and won a title last week. He lost a close match to Monfils this week but moves into the top 15 for the 1st time in his career. Looks like he's doing pretty well to me. After the legends leave, the game will move on like it always does and will be fine. There have been transitions before and tennis survived.
 
#7
You can't have Big4 in all eras, tennis is going back to 90s and early 2000s levels of unpredictability.
We don't even need the big 4, as much pathetic you consider them, at least Hewitt , Safin could match Sampras and co as up and coming youngsters. Even if quality of players are much higher these days you can't deny they don't have the same belief as Safin , Hewitt and Roddick did in their first few years against the old guard
 
#10
The Big 3 might've been the best and worst thing to happen to the ATP. The tour wouldn't be what it is now without them and we're very lucky to witness their careers. At the same time, they've set such high expectations that many fans will feel let down and lose interest when young players fail to live up to those expectations. Making matters worse, is the young players can't even breakthrough at the majors. This trend can't continue or the ATP might be hurting in a few years. Mediocrity and parity doesn't generate interest or bring in new fans.
 
#12
I'm watching these "nextgen" matches and feeling sad. Medvedev is supposed to be a force? Is this a joke? They are all lanky retrievers who have good serves only as a result of their height. No one has special strokes. Tsitsipas and Shapovolav are the two exceptions, sort of. But they haven't done anything.

I was re-watching the AO19 final and watching Djokovic basically have a practice session against a clearly-rusty Bull. How could no one push that version of Bull? He hadn't played in months.

It's mind-boggling how pathetic even the "nextgen" is.

Oh, and ATP is even more pathetic. ATP making "next gen" finals and giving players labels is, I think, unprofessional and unethical. It's very wrong.

Tennis is going to fall off a cliff very soon. The sport might, for all intents and purposes, die. I don't see any recovery after the big drop in a few years. Rec players will dry up.
Don't worry, people were saying similar stuff in early 2000s, and sport of Tennis did just well since then.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
 
#13
When Nick Kyrgios the soon to be full time challenger level player was your big hope you are fooked

Nothing will change until someone under 30 years old wins a B05 event and opens the gates
 
#14
Don't worry, people were saying similar stuff in early 2000s, and sport of Tennis did just well since then.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero, Federer, Roddick is one of the best generations ever talent-wise. Future of tennis was very bright in the early 2000s. At the end of 01, Federer/Roddick/Hewitt/Safin/Ferrero all had impressive slam runs, as a group already had 2 slam wins, 3 wins over Sampras at Wimby/USO, and all were 21 or under! 2002 was a bit of a lean year because none of those guys improved a lot but then in 2003, Fed, Roddick, and Ferrero all improved a lot and the young guys totally took over. Not even close to today.

The only comparable period was like 97-98, but Safin first broke out around then, beating Guga and Agassi at RG. Even then, that generation of rafter, guga, henman, moya was better than what we have today. Rafter/Henman were pushing Pete and Agassi at Wimby/USO hard even if they couldn't supplant them, and Guga overthrew Kafelnikov/Muster/Bruguera at RG. Meanwhile today, we haven't had a young player actually do anything or really impress since Delpo in 09. 10 years. That is unprecedented.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
#15
Don't worry, people were saying similar stuff in early 2000s, and sport of Tennis did just well since then.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
and yet again one of these Djokovic/Nadal fans showing how little they know about tennis before Djokovic/Nadal.

Federer/Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick was a very talented generation and all talk was about the future of tennis was excellent with these guys.
 
#16
I'm watching these "nextgen" matches and feeling sad. Medvedev is supposed to be a force? Is this a joke? They are all lanky retrievers who have good serves only as a result of their height. No one has special strokes. Tsitsipas and Shapovolav are the two exceptions, sort of. But they haven't done anything.

I was re-watching the AO19 final and watching Djokovic basically have a practice session against a clearly-rusty Bull. How could no one push that version of Bull? He hadn't played in months.

It's mind-boggling how pathetic even the "nextgen" is.

Oh, and ATP is even more pathetic. ATP making "next gen" finals and giving players labels is, I think, unprofessional and unethical. It's very wrong.

Tennis is going to fall off a cliff very soon. The sport might, for all intents and purposes, die. I don't see any recovery after the big drop in a few years. Rec players will dry up.
You may be right.
 
#18
Once the Big3 (+Andy and Stan) retire, I think ATP will be more like WTA - I already made the comparison in another thread. It will move from Lord Of The Rings territory to Game of Thrones territory (with surprises and twists thrown everywhere) and nobody reigning supreme for long.
 

-snake-

Professional
#20
and yet again one of these Djokovic/Nadal fans showing how little they know about tennis before Djokovic/Nadal.

Federer/Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick was a very talented generation and all talk was about the future of tennis was excellent with these guys.

They all were slam winners at least. That was enough to justify the hype. The nextgenners have 0. That's sad.
 
Last edited:

Lew II

Hall of Fame
#21
We don't even need the big 4, as much pathetic you consider them, at least Hewitt , Safin could match Sampras and co as up and coming youngsters. Even if quality of players are much higher these days you can't deny they don't have the same belief as Safin , Hewitt and Roddick did in their first few years against the old guard
Old guard of those days was nowhere near current old guard.

Big4 are yet to let anyone enter the top-2 for a week since july 2005. In 1998-2005 there were 17 different top-2.
 
#23
and yet again one of these Djokovic/Nadal fans showing how little they know about tennis before Djokovic/Nadal.

Federer/Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick was a very talented generation and all talk was about the future of tennis was excellent with these guys.
New balls generation had 3 problems.

- All but 2 of them suffered a lot from injury
- The most talented improved the most
- The other one had a matchup issue with his generation leader

It's super clear that that generation wasn't weak, but also that there was only one ATG talent there. The generation that preceded it was really weak though.
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
#24
When the Big4 will retire at least good players won't underachieve anymore, so that we won't have to read that players like Delpo, Cilic, Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer, Soderling, Raonic, Nishikori are worse than some players that happened to win 1/2 slams...
 
Last edited:
#30
When the Big4 will retire at least good players won't underachieve anymore, so that we won't have to read that players like Delpo, Cilic, Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer, Soderling, Raonic, Nishikori are worse than some players that happened to win 1/2 slams...
Just like how Djokovic won 9 of his 15 majors after 2014 , once field is clear ?
 

upchuck

Professional
#33
and yet again one of these Djokovic/Nadal fans showing how little they know about tennis before Djokovic/Nadal.

Federer/Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick was a very talented generation and all talk was about the future of tennis was excellent with these guys.
It didn't take long before the era before Federer's rise was considered "transitional." There was even commentary about how women's tennis at the time was better/more interesting than men's tennis.
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#37
New balls generation had 3 problems.

- All but 2 of them suffered a lot from injury
- The most talented improved the most
- The other one had a matchup issue with his generation leader

It's super clear that that generation wasn't weak, but also that there was only one ATG talent there. The generation that preceded it was really weak though.
One is still better than zero.
 
#40
But it's getting pretty funny how these threads are much harder to find back in, oh, I don't know, 2017-mid2018... :censored: That year's AO didn't even have to finish for me to realize that would be the case.

Hopefully the NextGen just keeps embarrassing us 90's generations for a few more years, why not... :happydevil:
 
#44
Kinda funny overall feel to this thread. The entire premise is old news and would have looked the part more than a few years ago too. I just took this as a given, so the more pertinent thing to now evaluate is if the next Next Gen will amount to anything or will they be as meagre as the last couple.
 
#46
So in other words, wait until the Big 3 officially retire to draw conclusions on how good they are.
I can only hope that Trifecta last long enough and next next Next Gen rise strongly enough to produce a battle of the generations. If they all just fade and all that's left is a desolate wasteland and a void to fill it would look quite pathetic.
 

upchuck

Professional
#47
So in other words, wait until the Big 3 officially retire to draw conclusions on how good they are.
The top 100 is older than ever. Players are more likely to succeed in their early 30s than ever before. All the trend-lines suggest the timeline when players start achieving their best results has shifted. This is true independent of how long the Big 3 stick around.
 
#48
Medvedev made the final of Brisbane losing to Nishikori in 3 sets, pushed Djokovic the hardest than anyone in AO 4th round, and won a title last week. He lost a close match to Monfils this week but moves into the top 15 for the 1st time in his career. Looks like he's doing pretty well to me. After the legends leave, the game will move on like it always does and will be fine. There have been transitions before and tennis survived.
The only reason why Medvedev won one set against Djokovic, is because the Serbian was playing at 50% of his level to save his energy. Djokovic's shots were extremelly weak and typically didn't pass the service line. A lot of his shots were in the centre of the court and weak. He was really playing like a pusher. Medvedev was not running to keep the rallies, nor was he doing anything special aparte from pushing the ball.

Djokovic significantly raised his level in the semifinal and final. Against Pouille and Nadal, Djokovic shots were more powerful and deep, he was crushing the lines and changing the direction with powerful shots.

Reading your comment, you make it look like Medvedev (not even top 15 like Tsitsipas) would have defeated Nadal just because he won 1 set against a conservative and subpar version of Djokovic. There is something called level of play. It is utterly simplistic to assume that Djokovic is a robot who plays at the same level every match.
 
#49
To me, Medvedev seems like one of those guys who will force players to beat him and play a consistently high level, but he lacks a high gear, and so will have no response should his opponent break through his wall of consistency. His forehand does not spread the court well and is one-dimensional. His backhand is very good with serious versatility but backhands in general are not a dominant stroke.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#50
The top 100 is older than ever. Players are more likely to succeed in their early 30s than ever before. All the trend-lines suggest the timeline when players start achieving their best results has shifted. This is true independent of how long the Big 3 stick around.
Yeah, but players don't peak in their 30's. Other than Anderson, Isner and Stan, nobody else has achieved their best results in their 30's.
 
Top