LOL at those who said...

[MeatTornado]

Yeah but he would still win. With Thrash I meant a 4 sets win.
At this point we have not even seen Alcaraz win AO and we are writing scripts of him peaking earlier and stopping djokovic, it is all imaginary.

Okay, well that's different and much more fair. A "thrashing" typically means like what he did to Tommy Paul.

 

[Razer]

Okay, well that's different and much more fair. A "thrashing" typically means like what he did to Tommy Paul.

Yeah, I think such thrashings cannot be done to players who have some potential, they at least take a set.

Novak did "thrash" quite a few of these mugs People like Paul, Di Minaur, Rublev must all be in trauma after their belting

 

[Deleted member 791948]

No reason to make this thread OP unless you are going to name names. I have no idea which Talk Tennis users you are referring to, or if they even exist....

 

[Sudacafan]

I never knew that Alcaraz height is disputed. Why is that?

 

[Sudacafan]

No reason to make this thread OP unless you are going to name names. I have no idea which Talk Tennis users you are referring to, or if they even exist....

Now I learned that they exist, and that they are legions.

 

[fedfan24]

Naa, 2019 & 2020 Novak would still thrash him at the AO, Novak 2018-2019 would still take wimbledon. 2018 novak would still take USO.
Bull would still destroy everyone at french open 2017-2020.

There are no slams to be taken even if peaked earlier.

Big 3 played even in age early 30s peak higher than prime Alcaraz type

Only 35+ versions can be beaten and for that Alcaraz would maybe have to be 23 and at his absolute best

Plus Roger already enjoyed his weak era of 01-07ao, so later novak deserves some weak slams in 20-23 period too, nothing wrong in it.

nah sorry this is wrong. 2020/2021 ao, 2017-2019 uso are all under threat with peak alcaraz and another, w21/22 too if he matures on grass. thiem nearly beat djokovic if he was mentally tougher and alcaraz is better

Djokovic already had his weak slams in 2014-2016. How can anyone call 2004, 2007 weak years

 

[TMF]

nah sorry this is wrong. 2020/2021 ao, 2017-2019 uso are all under threat with peak alcaraz and another, w21/22 too if he matures on grass. thiem nearly beat djokovic if he was mentally tougher and alcaraz is better

Djokovic already had his weak slams in 2014-2016. How can anyone call 2004, 2007 weak years

There's no such weak competition in Federer's generation. Federer and his peers doesn't allow old, past prime 30+ years old players winning slams right and left. The torch was forced to pass to Federer's generation after 32 years old Sampras and his peers, because they couldn't compete with the young players in their 20s.

Unlike the CIE, the torch should have been past to the 90s born players a LONG TIME ago. The absence of talent and serious lack of competition is reason why the old(especially Federer) big 3 still dominate the field.

 

[fedfan24]

There's no such weak competition in Federer's generation. Federer and his peers doesn't allow old, past prime 30+ years old players winning slams right and left. The torch was forced to pass to Federer's generation after 32 years old Sampras and his peers, because they couldn't compete with the young players in their 20s.

Unlike the CIE, the torch should have been past to the 90s born players a LONG TIME ago. The absence of talent and serious lack of competition is reason why the old(especially Federer) big 3 still dominate the field.

I completely agree. 2006 was a bit soft on hard courts but nadal was there to battle on grass and clay (clay especially). Same as 2010 for nadal with a soft rg/w and djokovic in 2015 had 3 soft slams over geriatric fed who couldn’t last longer than 4 sets.

2017-2023 is something different to these types of years. 30-37 year old completely owning the younger gens and outperforming their own prime years in terms of slams won. An entire generation of duds born in 90s. My gut feeling watching tennis has been a sense of inevitability about who will win which isn’t good for any sport

 

[Razer]

There's no such weak competition in Federer's generation. Federer and his peers doesn't allow old, past prime 30+ years old players winning slams right and left. The torch was forced to pass to Federer's generation after 32 years old Sampras and his peers, because they couldn't compete with the young players in their 20s.

Unlike the CIE, the torch should have been past to the 90s born players a LONG TIME ago. The absence of talent and serious lack of competition is reason why the old(especially Federer) big 3 still dominate the field.

The Torch was not passed from Sampras to Federer.

The torch actually fell of Sampras's hands, the torch was too hot for Agassi to hold, then Kuerten became 1, Safin became 1, Hewitt became 1, then Ferrero became 1, then Roddick also had some weeks at 1 before Federer took control of the hot torch and held the torch freely with no rivals until Baby Bull matured on multiple surfaces.

There were 15 different grand slam champions from Safin's 2000 US open till Gaudio's French Open in 2004, a span of 4 years. Even after Roger took over his finalists varied quite a lot until 07 french open when it stabilized with the Bull as his main competitor.

This is Gaston Gaudio's resume, he has never crossed 4th round ever except that 1 time when he did he took the slam, such was the vacuum.