January 2020-present should be considered its own era

jl809

Hall of Fame
Mid-2016 to now is referred to by some people on here as the “inflation era”; a period where the level of tennis on the men’s tour was comparatively weak and the Big 3 won slams at a low level of play.

But imo, there is just as strong a dividing line between the period pre-January 2020 and the period after it, and a new era - call it what you will - began then.

From 2016-late 2019, slams and M1000s were being won at a level comparable (not consistently better, but comparable) with what the Big 3 had produced in their primes - rarely peaks, but primes.

For slams, this definitely includes Wimbledon 16, RG 17, Wimbledon 17, RG 18, Wimbledon 18, AO 19 and RG 19. You could also make cases for matches at AO 17, USO 17 and USO 18. That’s 7/14 slams as definite and 3/14 debatable. Even the slams that miss the cut (AO 18, Wimbledon and USO 19) featured passages or matches of fantastic play and entertainment from the winner.

For M1000s, this includes IW and Miami 17, MC 17, Madrid 17, Rome 17, Shanghai 17, MC 18, Madrid 18, Rome 18, Cincy 18, WTF 18, arguably Miami 19, Madrid 19, Rome 19, arguably Montreal 19, Paris 19. You can definitely add Davis Cup 19 and ATP Cup 20.

However…

Since the Australian Open 2020, we have entered a new era. “Good” slams include RG 20 - the last god-tier Big 3 slam performance - arguably RG 21 for the SF alone, arguably USO 21 from Medvedev, and arguably RG 22. That’s it. Even then, Nadal and Djokovic looked rough in various rounds of their RG wins. That’s 1 definite slam and 3 “maybes” out of 10.

Meanwhile, we have ALREADY had the following “eeesh” slams: AO 2020, where Djokovic mysteriously went walkabout in the final and still won; USO 2020, with the worst final ever; AO 2021, which Djokovic won injured, and Wimbledon 2021 and 2022, which a stressed Djokovic had to fight through at a relatively low level. Nadal also reached the SFs of Wimbledon with an injury, having won the AO 2022 at a slow, low and messy level.

At the M1000 level, Rome has been won impressively (2021 and 2022), as was Paris in 2021. Other than that, the only high level big tournament wins were the 2020 WTF, where Thiem and Meddy brought a great level vs Djokodal, and 2021 WTF, where Zverev served everyone away. IW 2020-2022? Forget it. Monte Carlo? C’était merde. ATP Cup? Remember that? And so on and so on.

Basically, we have fallen off a small cliff :confused: Whatever this era is, it is a devolution from where we were before. If 2016 onwards is inflation… what shall we call this????
 
Last edited:

RS

Bionic Poster
Wim 19 and USO 19 had pretty good finals and AO 20 was also a good event.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Mid-2016 to now is referred to by some people on here as the “inflation era”; a period where the level of tennis on the men’s tour was comparatively weak and the Big 3 won slams at a low level of play.

But imo, there is just as strong a dividing line between the period pre-January 2020 and the period after it, and a new era - call it what you will - began then.

From 2016-late 2019, slams and M1000s were being won at a level comparable (not consistently better, but comparable) with what the Big 3 had produced in their primes - rarely peaks, but primes.

For slams, this definitely includes Wimbledon 16, RG 17, Wimbledon 17, RG 18, Wimbledon 18, AO 19 and RG 19. You could also make cases for matches at AO 17, USO 17 and USO 18. That’s 7/14 slams as definite and 3/14 debatable. Even the slams that miss the cut (AO 18, Wimbledon and USO 19) featured passages or matches of fantastic play and entertainment from the winner.

For M1000s, this includes IW and Miami 17, clay 17, Shanghai 17, clay 18, Cincy 18, WTF 18, arguably Miami 19, Madrid + Rome 19, arguably Montreal 19, Paris 19. You can definitely add Davis Cup 19 and ATP Cup 20.

However…

Since the Australian Open 2020, we have entered a new era. “Good” slams include RG 20 - the last god-tier Big 3 slam performance - arguably RG 21 for the SF alone, arguably USO 21 from Medvedev, and arguably RG 22. That’s it. Even then, Nadal and Djokovic looked rough in various rounds of their RG wins. That’s 1 definite slam and 3 “maybes” out of 10.

Meanwhile, we have ALREADY had the following “eeesh” slams: AO 2020, where Djokovic mysteriously went walkabout in the final and still won; USO 2020, with the worst final ever; AO 2021, which Djokovic won injured, and Wimbledon 2021 and 2022, which a stressed Djokovic had to fight through at a relatively low level. Nadal also reached the SFs of Wimbledon with an injury, having won the AO 2022 at a slow, low and messy level.

At the M1000 level, Rome has been won impressively (2021 and 2022), as was Paris in 2021. Other than that, the only high level big tournament wins were the 2020 WTF, where Thiem and Meddy brought a great level vs Djokodal, and 2021 WTF, where Zverev served everyone away. IW 2020-2022? Forget it. Monte Carlo? C’était merde. ATP Cup? Remember that? And so on and so on.

Basically, we have fallen off a small cliff :confused: Whatever this era is, it is a devolution from where we were before. If 2016 onwards is inflation… what shall we call this????
It's really 2007-2013 >>> 2014-2019 > 2002-2006 >> 2020-

Recent overrating of past eras compared to modern players. Years pre open era and even just after had questionable periods itself.
 
Last edited:

jl809

Hall of Fame
It's really 2007-2013 >>> 2014-2019 > 2002-2006 >> 2020-

Recent overrating of past eras compared to modern players. Years pre open era and even just after had questionable periods itself.
Yeah 02-06 is being upped a bit recently for sure. This year is making people even more rosy-tinted now
 

jl809

Hall of Fame
I think this post has stood up so far. Alcaraz-Sinner was great but no way 2016-2019 slam champions would be struggling with Tiafoe, Ruud and Ol' Cilic, so USO 22 was another hyperinflation era slam. Hopefully Alcaraz faces Djokovic at the AO and Djokovic can carry some of this form in from the Laver Cup --> now.
 

jl809

Hall of Fame
PCB and Borna Coric as Canada / Cincy champions... if anything this post has got MORE legit actually...
 
2020- gave Federer fans a lot to throw back the arguments they dealt with for years tbh.

It's really at the point were even Nadal and Djokovic fans have moaned about the field and never did I think that day would come.
Not accounting for the 2004-2007 consistent moaning, whenever Djokovic or Nadal were in a slump, there would be plenty of complaining about the competition from their camps. In 2015 and 2016 quite a few Nadal fans here were pronouncing the death of tennis and hoping for new players to step up.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Yeah 02-06 is being upped a bit recently for sure. This year is making people even more rosy-tinted now
14-19 was arguably better at the top but the depth was arguably better in 02-06 which to some people gives it the win. This year has brought it all out I imagine next year will follow suit :(:-D
 

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
03/04/06/10/14/15 pick 3 :p
Jesus

03/04/14 by virtue of NOT being the cursed 06/10/15 combo. 03 was possibly weaker than one of those, but 04/14 are clearly in a different class than the others mentioned.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Jesus

03/04/14 by virtue of NOT being the cursed 06/10/15 combo. 03 was possibly weaker than one of those, but 04/14 are clearly in a different class than the others mentioned.
Hahaha work done. 05/09/12 > 07/11/08 (possibly close) > 13 > 04/14 > 03 > 06/10/15 (possibly 10 weakest)
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Ignore them you know you are massively pro Federer but don't like the opposite

Obviously I'm pro Federer but I don't have a problem with pro Nadal or Djokovic posts if they're sensible.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
2017-2019 actually don't look that bad compared to what we have in 2020-2022. At least we had players like Thiem who could challenge the big 3, and the big 3 had some decent performances in some of their wins.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
You do the exact same but just can't take it from these days.

I only make sensible takes thank you very much. You're just a garbage poster these days and I like pointing out your **** takes. I ignore most others.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
I only make sensible takes thank you very much. You're just a garbage poster these days and I like pointing out your **** takes. I ignore most others.
Whatever you say man. I don't care much what people think of me as a poster.

Really just exposed yourself here.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Whatever you say man. I don't care much what people think of me as a poster.

Really just exposed yourself here.

You're just a sad little baiter who likes to cause friction and arguments. Your MO is well known.
 

jl809

Hall of Fame
2017 and 2018 were really bad as well lol.
Nowhere near as bad though. RG '17, W'17, RG '18, W'18, all very respectable levels for slam wins by the winners, albeit only with 1 'classic' match in those slams (18 W SF). UO '17, UO '18 were still good level from thee winners even though the draws were **** easy, and AO '17 was an epic run from both Fed and Nadal. Some great M1000 levels too from the winners in sunshine double '17, clay '17 etc too.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
No I like debates. And as you admitted you like to start friction with me and my takes so lets call a spade a spade.

Bs you like debates lol. This a guy who likes to cause friction getting called out for causing friction.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Bs you like debates lol. This a guy who likes to cause friction getting called out for causing friction.
Sorry I can't convince you. There have been lots of good debates on the threads it's hasn't all been fighting.
 

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
Nowhere near as bad though. RG '17, W'17, RG '18, W'18, all very respectable levels for slam wins by the winners, albeit only with 1 'classic' match in those slams (18 W SF). UO '17, UO '18 were still good level from thee winners even though the draws were **** easy, and AO '17 was an epic run from both Fed and Nadal. Some great M1000 levels too from the winners in sunshine double '17, clay '17 etc too.
Eh that’s the problem with judging only by winner though.

I’d say 1st half 17 was acceptable, even good. 2nd half 17 to 2nd half 18 (WB 17- RG 18) was scary and bad. Honestly I’m not sure if that calendar year was actually better than 20-22, in all seriousness.

It picked up a lot at WB 18 of course then dipped again. 2019 was a better year than 2020-22 and I genuinely enjoyed it start to finish.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Sorry I can't convince you. There have been lots of good debates on the threads it's hasn't all been fighting.

Guy look at your thread history lol. The amount of threads pitting Federer fans against Djokovic fans is unreal lol. A couple of different types of threads doesn't mean there's not an obvious pattern...
 
Top