Its not that the young guys just stink against the big two. They stink against each other.

[Bartelby]

The uniform nature of tennis coaching probably means that there is not as much room for individuation.

 

[big ted]

You guys who grew up only watching the Big 3 think that should be the natural state of affairs for top players to win tournaments all year long. Actually the tour is reverting back to the natural state of mens tennis where players have enough flaws so that they can’t win on all surfaces.

i was thinking this too but didn't know how to put it in words lol... i think in general the new "greats" after the big 3 will prob go back to winning 4-8 slams in their careers... maybe alcarez could rack up a bit more tho

 

[big ted]

To ask for high consistency among the current generation in their prime is asking for them to be among the greatest players ever. And this is exactly what is being asked here:

i think some of us has this notion that each generation should be better than the last but not the case ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[travlerajm]

People rip on Khachanov for his limited game ect. At least the dude made back to back semis in a slam. Thats a big deal now a days. Put him in the HOF.

And Ruud has made the final of the last 2 slams he showed up for.

 

[Tennfan123]

I don’t blame them tbh. With social media, traditional media expanding, the whole thing is a circus and probably pretty intense and overwhelming.

 

[mike danny]

Everyone here is spoiled by the previous strong era. Yeah, this era is definitely weaker than peak Big 3 + Murray + Wawrinka, but now confirmation bias is coming into play to say they are less consistent than players before them. Socallefty is completely right that inconsistency is the norm among players. To ask for high consistency among the current generation in their prime is asking for them to be among the greatest players ever. And this is exactly what is being asked here:



That's kind of a ridiculous expectation. Lendl is in the top 8 players of the entire Open Era. So someone who is not Lendl is now a mug? What?



Here is another post asking them to be Lendl and that posits a hypothetical that has not even happened yet and acts as if it is true. If anyone but Djokovic beats Nadal during the next Roland Garros, will you concede you were wrong?

Here is a look at how a bunch of different players who mostly have 1 or 0 slams have performed in slams from the quarterfinals on and how many years passed between their first QF or better performance to their last QF or better performance. Some faded quickly like Nalbandian in only 5 years and on the other end we have Haas with 15 years. The average across these players is 9.6 years to achieve the QF or better showings. The points are scored with a win being 4, a finalist 3, semis 2, and quarters 1. Thiem may well be done due to injury, but Medvedev, Tsitsipas, and Zverev have a long way to go and are all likely to more than double their current points before their careers are over. If they do, they will end up outscoring everyone on this list except Roddick. That belies the claim of this thread that the young guys stink against each other or the rest of the field. Now you can claim that the era is so weak so they can get far into majors, but that goes against the claims in this thread, which is that they can't beat most of the field and are super inconsistent.

In half a career, Medvedev has shown twice the consistency of Nalbandian's entire career. In half a career, Tsitsipas and Zverev have matched all of Davydenko's slam performances together.

I will only concede that I'm wrong if somebody beats Nadal in a semi or a final at this RG without Rafa playing like absolute garbage to allow this to happen.

 

[mike danny]

Thiem - Meddy USO 20 was alright for quality, probably the best of the bunch.

Which says it all.

 

[zvelf]

I will only concede that I'm wrong if somebody beats Nadal in a semi or a final at this RG without Rafa playing like absolute garbage to allow this to happen.

That's a lot of qualifiers. Why would a young gun beating Nadal in the 4th round or quarters not count?

 

[insideguy]

Look this says it all. The number 2 seed at the Aussie open lost to Jason Brooksby in 4 sets. In the second round. That sums it up.

 

[Rosstour]

It's called parity, and if not for the presence of two enhanced vultures at the top of every Slam, would be creating an incredibly entertaining post-B3 era.

 

[socallefty]

two enhanced vultures

I doubt that other players are not going through similar routines of ‘enhancement’. So, that’s not the differentiator on why the Big2 win.

Solid technique and mental toughness along with supreme self-confidence after winning 20+ Slams and 60+ big tournaments is more of the reason they are hard to beat. Plus endurance peaks for men in the early thirties and they are at their best in Bestof5 matches at Slams where they get a day to rest between rounds.

 

[insideguy]

I doubt that other players are not going through similar routines of ‘enhancement’. So, that’s not the differentiator on why the Big2 win.

Solid technique and mental toughness along with supreme self-confidence after winning 20+ Slams and 60+ big tournaments is more of the reason they are hard to beat. Plus endurance peaks for men in the early thirties and they are at their best in Bestof5 matches at Slams where they get a day to rest between rounds.

You can have everything you just said about the older dudes. And still say the young guys stink. It can be both.

 

[mike danny]

That's a lot of qualifiers. Why would a young gun beating Nadal in the 4th round or quarters not count?

Because Lendl pushed Borg to 5 in a final. For the situation to be equivalent, a semi or a final should be.

 

[Martin J]

Lendl was a great player. In his first slam final at just 21, he pushed peak Borg to 5 sets. Imagine any of these young guys even doing that to 37 year old Nadal in a RG F.

Thiem couldn't even push fairly older Ned to five sets, so you have a point.

Though I don't think it was Borg at his peak (1977/78-1980 was his best period imo) and Ivan was badly beaten in every set he lost. Still, great effort from him.