D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Well today we have Raonic I guess, but that's it. And even though I like him he's got a limited game that can only take him so far.
Level of competition: Djokovic era vs. Federer era
- Thread starter zvelf
- Start date
Druss
Hall of Fame
The reason why Djoker fans don't pick on Sampras (or Agassi) with the weak era theory is because Sampras' career did not over-lap with Djokovic, so by putting Sampras down, it's not going to elevate Djokovoc. Whereas with Federer, given they have played a massive 45 times, they NEED to belittle Fed to make Djoko look better.
Consistency is not something found here
As far as i can see the only people talking about weak eras are fed and nadal fans.
Druss
Hall of Fame
Take the blinders off your eyes mate.
What blinders buddy? There's a number of guys on here whose only comment to anything is weak era. There have been times which were better and times which were worse it is a fact
abmk
Bionic Poster
yeah, you need to wake up ........
Not at all i dont mind debating stuff just guys like yourself are so full of contradiction it really hurts. Also I am happy to have a go at any Djokovic fan who puts down Fed's era or nadal's achievements.
abmk
Bionic Poster
there are plenty of them ...you'd get em if you woke up ..
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
But why belittle anybody's achievements? If Djoker wins 18, he wins 18. It's really that simple, some of these fans think it's way more complicated than it is..
mattosgrant
Banned
I think the guys born in 1996 are the ones to look for. I think they will prove to be a pretty good crop and have numerous future multi slam winners amongst them.
Druss
Hall of Fame
Kyrgios is one of them, he is a head-case, but once he gets his act together, he will challenge Djokovix.
So stop crapping on Djokovic. It just belittles fed and nadal as he is their main rival
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
That could be true, actually. But it sucks that tennis has to wait potentially several years before this takes place.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I'm not crapping on Djoker by saying he's playing in a weaker period. I don't know why you guys are this insecure, 2011 Djokovic should have erased any doubts in your mind as to whether he could achieve what he did in 2015 with stronger competition.
Not insecure bro there have been stronger periods than this but also weaker. You act like this is the weakest ever and it clearly isn't. The circular references are too much.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
If it's not the weakest ever, it's pretty close to it..
Not really we went through this many times before you and I. Let me guess your age and I promise i haven't looked at your profile. I reckon you were 13 or 14 in 2000 or 2001 as you show such a fondness for that time. Look without much doubt, that Hewitt period was weaker. We have a much better number 1 easily a top tier atg. And the field is about the same journeymen past legends and a few decent prospects. I mean Kyrgios I really like his game I dont mind the attitude but hate the entourage.
Druss
Hall of Fame
Yes it is sad that it's happening. It's a vicious cycle that started about 4yrs+ ago by Nadal fans that backfired on them with the weak clay era and the fact that he too had some 'easy' slams and incl the weak year 2010, and the fact he hasn't won much since 2013. So then Djoker fans carried on rubbing it in. Now it's backfired on them, as it's obvious since mid-2014, it hasn't been nearly as strong as previous years. There are good and bad fans on all 3 camps. At the end of the, all 3 of them will go down as ATGs.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Re: my age, not correct. But you're closer than a lot of others.
Yeah, I know Djokovic is a better player than Hewitt -- but that doesn't change the tennis landscape. Hewitt wouldn't win 3 slams a year in any era, but Djokovic can. So in essence he's taking advantage of a field equal to Hewitt's in 2002 -- he's just a better player..
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Don't disagree with this at all.
They already are. I think the biggest issue is the calibre of the opponent one has to face in the final. I think that this makes it tougher not overall. Facing an inexperienced opponent in the final can really be a blessing. And before anyone says Wawrinka he is a talent compared to some journeymen. Once again the tournament as a whole might be tougher but facing a schuttler clement Baghaditis in a major final is much easier than fed or nadal or djokovic
Agree with that. Only difference is much less gs finals experience. As i said in the previous post on the big occasions I would always prefer to play a guy with less than more.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Well I don't think it's too hard to get to finals now for ATGs like Federer and Djokovic, who are still in decent enough form/shape to make it. There's nobody there to really trouble them besides Wawrinka, who I don't think will have many more shining moments (I'd love to be proven wrong though). Del Potro coming back is a first step, but the game needs someone like him within the top 10 at least.
It's a double edged sword in rating eras. We are top heavy so the atgs make it look easy making semis and finals. Wawrinka has been pretty consistent in slams Raonic was unlucky and played well throughout but the taller guys are always injury prone. I think Milos offers something different as he really goes for it and just looking at him, I met him last year in Melbourne, physically he is a late developer. Not holding My breath on del po, special ks are good
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I expect Raonic to at least win a slam (or more) in the future, but his game seems very limited to me. He can only soar so high so to speak.
Wawrinka hasn't been too bad, but he hasn't been great either after the FO. QF, SF and then a 4th round at the AO.
The game needs someone who can really take advantage of an era after Djokovic. Otherwise we're looking at a time period where nobody really dominates. I don't know though, I'd still watch tennis anyway because that's actually more interesting then when it's "strong".
I don't think the younger guys are as scared as the guys in their mid 20s so I'm sure a dominant player will emerge.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I have a feeling the guys in their 20s now will be like the Moya generation in terms of GS wins. A couple will win a GS or two each -- have some time at #1, ect. But none will really be a game changer. I think it will have to be someone who is a young teenager today, perhaps even 12.
Maybe it's because we see them a great deal but the two Greek kids look top shelf.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Greek kids? Are they young 12 year old juniors, or are you talking about Kyrgios/Kokki?
The Special Ks. I really liked what I saw of kokki especially. And Kyrgios has a truckload of talent. Unlike bernie he is top 5 or eight or whatever
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I don't think they're ATG material personally. Like Raonic they could win a slam or two, but I can't see much beyond that..
Like I said, we may be in for a Moya/Kafelnikov generation of champions.
mattosgrant
Banned
Yeah that is true. Who knows though, they could rise sooner than expected but you look at where they are now (either ranked in pros or still playing juniors) and its seems unlikely it would be faster than that.
mattosgrant
Banned
He was actually born in 1994 so I wasn't counting him in that particular statement. Yes he could be the one or one of the ones. Right now he is a big question mark though. I don't really know what to expect of him in the future at this point. He definitely has the potential, but whether he gets it together is hard to tell.
Druss
Hall of Fame
Correction: it's 1995, not '94.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Yeah, I don't think it's particularly realistic to expect them to be ready to challenge for big titles in a year or two. They're simply not ready yet -- and although they could rise sooner than expected, that "sooner than expected" is still probably a while away.
At least this gives Milos' generation a chance to win GS/Masters.
You have to take into account that masters were 5 setters back then, which makes it similar to slams. This means that fed had to deal with a lot more work on his part to win some of those tournaments. Now Djokovic is playing out of his mind, and the last few months, he is ridiculous. However, would his body hold up as well given playing that much more? His style is similar to nadal, with more firepower, in terms of relying on his footwork and speed. I've noticed, especially in the australian open this year, more than any other year - he is getting to the balls so much faster than before which gives him time to set up and hit an aggressive return back. Would he have been able to do that consistently if he was playing that much more?
Court surfaces were different too. French - slow, wimbledon - incredibly fast. Now wimbledon is similar to the aussie open in terms of speed and bounce in the final week.
Comparing different eras is really pointless. Its all about match ups in everyones prime. Take a simple example - fed lost so many times to nadal on nadals favorite surface when both of them were in their prime. How would djokovic fare? Who knows?
/rambling
Court surfaces were different too. French - slow, wimbledon - incredibly fast. Now wimbledon is similar to the aussie open in terms of speed and bounce in the final week.
Comparing different eras is really pointless. Its all about match ups in everyones prime. Take a simple example - fed lost so many times to nadal on nadals favorite surface when both of them were in their prime. How would djokovic fare? Who knows?
/rambling
Similar threads
