Name a season by a 30+ year old that would win the CYGS this year

[The Blond Blur]

Okey then, Nadal didn't face Cecchinato level of opponent in RG 2019. Nadal didn't face anyone who played as well as Cecchinato did in QF.

This is basically your logic.

Now you’re just straw manning and throwing a temper tantrum lol. Joker was still in his mid 2016-mid 2018 slump when he lost to Cecchinato. Meanwhile RAFA made the AO F, Miami F, won MC, Barcelona, Madrid, and RG. Their forms going into those schlems were as different as night and day.

 

[Kralingen]

HD MATCH VIDEOS:

I've got 5 hours of an Ansible tower code release in front of me tonight so compiled some videos of the various candidates.

if anyone wants to break out the eye test later. There are surprisingly (at least) 20 minute long, HD highlight videos of all these matches.

The matches chosen are the 'disqualifying' losses they had in the year of choosing. For ones I've seen before, Muller-Nadal '17, Agassi-Sampras '01, and Berdych-Fed '12 are all great watches.

Spoiler: Nadal 2017: Muller WB '17

Spoiler: Federer 2015: Seppi AO '15, Stan RG '15

The Seppi video is 43 min long and very HQ. If only the tennis quality matched the video quality. Wawrinka match is fun.

Spoiler: Agassi 2001: Sampras USO '01, Grosjean RG '01

I genuinely could watch Agassi-Sampras all day. Prob my favorite match of them available in HD.

Spoiler: Federer 2012: Djokovic RG '12 full match, Berdych USO '12

70 - Djokovic vs Federer - SF RG 2012

If you like this video, please buy me a coffeehttps://paypal.me/yelanabiSubscribe for more joy and funtwitter.com/djokofundjokofun.blogspot.com

www.youtube.com

Federer vs Berdych - 2012 US Open Quarter Finals Highlights

Highlights of the 2012 US Open Quarter Finals between Roger Federer and Tomas Berdych.

www.youtube.com

Federer fans bemoan his form/error count and conditions v. Djokovic but I think it's a good match. Fed has breaks in the first 2 sets but can't consolidate; still Djokovic comes up with massive returns and passing shots when needed. Not a 'retired' Fed by any means: go watch DelPo-Fed in the previous round to see his quality.
Berdych highlights are must see, honestly.

Spoiler: Nadal 2019: AO vs. Djokovic, WB vs. Fedr

Djokovic Vs Nadal - Australian Open 2019 Final Highlights

Novak Djokovic (1) Vs Raphael Nadal (2)Australian Open 2019 | FinalHead to Head :Djokovic - 27 | Nadal - 25Last Match :Wimbledon 2018 | Winner : Djokov...

www.youtube.com

Roger Federer vs Rafael Nadal | Wimbledon 2019 | Full Match

Relive the fourth Wimbledon meeting between Rafa and Roger in the 2019 semi-final...This is the official Wimbledon YouTube page. To join the Wimbledon story,...

www.youtube.com

Nadal fans avert your eyes. Tbh Djokovic is so ridiculous in this match it's hard to assess Nadal's level.

Spoiler: Ferrer 2012 (GOATy)

Spoiler: actual matches: Ferrer AO/USO, can't find rest

Novak Djokovic VS David Ferrer Highlight 2012 AO QF

Novak Djokovic VS David Ferrer Highlight 2012 AO QF

www.youtube.com

65 - Djokovic vs Ferrer - SF US Open 2012

65 - Djokovic vs Ferrer - SF US Open 2012Subscribe for more joy and funtwitter.com/djokofundjokofun.blogspot.com

www.youtube.com

 

[RF-18]

Now you’re just straw manning and throwing a temper tantrum lol. Joker was still in his mid 2016-mid 2018 slump when he lost to Cecchinato. Meanwhile RAFA made the AO F, Miami F, won MC, Barcelona, Madrid, and RG. Their forms going into those schlems were as different as night and day.

No, I'm just exposing how dumb your reasoning is. Completely ignoring the other opponent and his set of skills.

 

[The Blond Blur]

No, I'm just exposing how dumb your reasoning is. Completely ignoring the other opponent and his set of skills.

You exposed nothing dude. I listed off a bunch of reasons why Muller would have been a tougher opponent than either Shapo or Berry. It’s not my problem that you chose to ignore them. I’ll give you some more. Berry’s BH would have been absolutely lit up like the 4th of July by RAFA’s FH. And unlike Shapo, Muller actually played with some Wilanders in the big moments.

In his very next match Muller pushed the finalist that year Cilic to 5. Cecchinato on the other hand got straight setted by Timmy who went on to get straight setted by RAFA. The only thing that got exposed was your agenda.

 

[Kralingen]

Going to throw out a fun name: Wawrinka 2015, anyone? he turned 30 that year.

loses to peak Djokovic in 5 at AO, wins FO, loses in 9-8 TB at Wimby to Gasquet in QF, loses to 80% 1st serve Fed in USO SF.

The question mark here is obviously Wimbledon. But he did make the QFs against a genuinely good Gasquet and I think he would have beaten Fucsovics in QFs.

His return would be exposed vs. Shapo and Berrettini but he's wily and might be able to pip it. AO/FO are locks, USO he was bad vs. Federer but against baseline grinder types like Medvedev/Zverev his prime HC form would be allowed the chance to thrive.

I think there's a non-zero chance he could do it in all honesty, more than I would give Ferrer 2012 (lol).

 

[Third Serve]

Going to throw out a fun name: Wawrinka 2015, anyone? he turned 30 that year.

loses to peak Djokovic in 5 at AO, wins FO, loses in 9-8 TB at Wimby to Gasquet in QF, loses to 80% 1st serve Fed in USO SF.

The question mark here is obviously Wimbledon. But he did make the QFs against a genuinely good Gasquet and I think he would have beaten Fucsovics in QFs.

His return would be exposed vs. Shapo and Berrettini but he's wily and might be able to pip it. AO/FO are locks, USO he was bad vs. Federer but against baseline grinder types like Medvedev/Zverev his prime HC form would be allowed the chance to thrive.

I think there's a non-zero chance he could do it in all honesty, more than I would give Ferrer 2012 (lol).

Yeah the Djokovic that played that 2015 AO semifinal was definitely not peak lmao. Was a very ugly match but still a decent enough run and certainly better than Medvedev's performance in the 2021 final.

RG he wins clearly.

Wimbledon is a tricky one because it's clearly his worst surface. That being said, he did play pretty well against Gasquet in the QF. I wouldn't bet on him, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

US Open Stan I flat out don't rate. He was terrible in the Federer match (though Fed was great). The US Open field this year would have to be incredibly dire for me to give him even a good chance of winning.

 

[Kralingen]

Yeah the Djokovic that played that 2015 AO semifinal was definitely not peak lmao. Was a very ugly match but still a decent enough run and certainly better than Medvedev's performance in the 2021 final.

RG he wins clearly.

Wimbledon is a tricky one because it's clearly his worst surface. That being said, he did play pretty well against Gasquet in the QF. I wouldn't bet on him, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

US Open Stan I flat out don't rate. He was terrible in the Federer match (though Fed was great). The US Open field this year would have to be incredibly dire for me to give him even a good chance of winning.

lol it was a definite stretch. Tbh I don’t really remember any of the WB match but it was basically his best shot.

He was garbagio vs Fed undoubtedly. But I wasn’t making that 80% 1st serve stat up, Fed put on an absolute clinic in the SF. Plus his game is like Stan’s kryptonite. Even with all those qualifiers though.. yeah he wasn’t great.

main reason I thought of him is he’s one player I’m sure about in terms of mental toughness. and going for a final leg of CYGS vs a NextGen guy he’d have the upper hand there. Still doubt he does it.

 

[DjokoLand]

Going to throw out a fun name: Wawrinka 2015, anyone? he turned 30 that year.

loses to peak Djokovic in 5 at AO, wins FO, loses in 9-8 TB at Wimby to Gasquet in QF, loses to 80% 1st serve Fed in USO SF.

The question mark here is obviously Wimbledon. But he did make the QFs against a genuinely good Gasquet and I think he would have beaten Fucsovics in QFs.

His return would be exposed vs. Shapo and Berrettini but he's wily and might be able to pip it. AO/FO are locks, USO he was bad vs. Federer but against baseline grinder types like Medvedev/Zverev his prime HC form would be allowed the chance to thrive.

I think there's a non-zero chance he could do it in all honesty, more than I would give Ferrer 2012 (lol).

While I get your point I feel Wawrinka loses somewhere along the line In 2021. Wawrinka might peak against Djokovic but he always has a bad loss or 2 in slams over a season and I feel Med would even get him at the AO not because he’s better but because the matchup. Also Wawrinka is woeful at Wimbledon so he would lose to someone and that could be anyone

 

[Fed_Nole]

Please keep in mind that Nole beat Rafa to win RG, he was not lucky in. Therefore I seriously doubt Fed's chance. Sure, Rafa 2021 was far off his peak. But only Nole can (full credit to his contiguous & brutal losing end of clay H2H) take down the "slump" Rafa.

Rafa of 17-19 had better chance than any other "balanced" players in history, simply because of RG.

Still, of Nole 3 majors, only Wimbledon field was weak. Sasha in AO was very solid, Med was in form, Rafa is Rafa. Like always, TTW disrespected and discounted Nole's fabulous achievement.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Interesting premise, but so hard to evaluate.
Per Rafa, I considered his loss to Muller disappointing, but not a Darcis/Brown type loss. It was, as I recall, a high-level match against not a great player - but one capable of a very high level on grass.
What I thinks gets forgotten is that there really is not an absolute, measurable level, as everything (except possibly serve stats, but even then) is influenced by who your opponent is, and how he's playing.

 

[accidental]

Federer 2020

 

[Mivic]

Is 2017 Nadal even a sure bet to win AO21? I know Federer fans like to make out that he was playing great tennis but the guy struggled badly against a teenage Zverev (who would require another three years to reach his first slam QF on a HC and hit almost as many DFs as aces in that match if I recall correctly) and barely scraped through to the final before getting outplayed by a 36 year old Federer (who had been his pigeon in slams up until that point) coming off surgery. Not saying the guy wouldn't have a decent chance at the CYGS, but to say he 'would' do it is a massive stretch to say the least.

 

[BeatlesFan]

2019 RG wasn't bad for Fed, losing to Rafa in the semis after not playing there for a while.

You gotta be kidding. Fed was almost 38 and made the semis of the FO with no match play behind him. Believe me--- neither Nadal or Djokovic will get anywhere near the RG semis at a similar age, despite Rafa being King of clay. He'll be long retired at that point.

 

[mike danny]

Is 2017 Nadal even a sure bet to win AO21? I know Federer fans like to make out that he was playing great tennis but the guy struggled badly against a teenage Zverev (who would require another three years to reach his first slam QF on a HC and hit almost as many DFs as aces in that match if I recall correctly) and barely scraped through to the final before getting outplayed by a 36 year old Federer (who had been his pigeon in slams up until that point) coming off surgery. Not saying the guy wouldn't have a decent chance at the CYGS, but to say he 'would' do it is a massive stretch to say the least.

2017 Nadal would clown Medvedev, so yeah, he is winning the AO.

 

[Sunny014]

Players are all a product of the environment they are brought up in, so this makes no sense to compare previous gen 30 yr olds and see if they will win CYGS now or not.

Sending Federer 2015 to 2021 and expecting he won't win AO is silly, because it doesn't work that way, the 33-34 yr old Fed playing in 2021 would be different from the 1981 born you found in 2015, the injury patterns, peak levels will all vary, his level vs Nadal, his H2H all might also vary, we might find Federer win 2 french opens after 28 when Nadal's footspeed declined considerably or was injured, we might Fed with more confidence in the absence of a Novak to tackle, his injury patterns would change, lot of things will vary, his body structure might also vary.

Can you send a 30 yr old Sampras of 2001 to 2021 and expect him to win ? Nope
But what if Sampras was born in 1991 and then was 30 yrs old in 2021 ? Would you bet against him? He could definetly win as he would be a different player, having modern day fitness into the 30s, a different game with better baselining skills.....

So it is pointless to compare prev gen 30 yrs olds, even Fed makes no sense, a lot can change with 6 years of birth. It is like a child starting to play with a certain type of racquet or be subjected to a certain type of training from age 10 and another from 16, makes a big difference....... Most hypotheticals in TTW are total trash because people just bring a player from 1 year to the present to play, that is not the way to compare players, the BUTTERFLY EFFECT has to be taken into account.

 

[Third Serve]

Is 2017 Nadal even a sure bet to win AO21? I know Federer fans like to make out that he was playing great tennis but the guy struggled badly against a teenage Zverev (who would require another three years to reach his first slam QF on a HC and hit almost as many DFs as aces in that match if I recall correctly) and barely scraped through to the final before getting outplayed by a 36 year old Federer (who had been his pigeon in slams up until that point) coming off surgery. Not saying the guy wouldn't have a decent chance at the CYGS, but to say he 'would' do it is a massive stretch to say the least.

lol

Ned in his 2017 form would do quite well with the 2021 draw. His own draw was at least an order of magnitude more difficult due to the Dimitrov match alone (and I remember Zed playing somewhat okay in their 3rd round but I haven’t seen a second of that match since it happened). Not to mention the final was no meek loss like, say, the 2019 or 2021 finalists’ performances. Wasn’t the best Nadal, but it was at least a decent version of him.

Yeah, I think AO would frankly be pretty easy to hand to him and it’s kind of ridiculous to insinuate otherwise. Again, the Dimitrov match alone should put the nail in that coffin.

And besides, wasn’t Djokovic himself “scraping by” the likes of Fritz and Tiafoe before he improved in the SF-F?

 

[Kralingen]

Players are all a product of the environment they are brought up in, so this makes no sense to compare previous gen 30 yr olds and see if they will win CYGS now or not.

Sending Federer 2015 to 2021 and expecting he won't win AO is silly, because it doesn't work that way, the 33-34 yr old Fed playing in 2021 would be different from the 1981 born you found in 2015, the injury patterns, peak levels will all vary, his level vs Nadal, his H2H all might also vary, we might find Federer win 2 french opens after 28 when Nadal's footspeed declined considerably or was injured, we might Fed with more confidence in the absence of a Novak to tackle, his injury patterns would change, lot of things will vary, his body structure might also vary.

Can you send a 30 yr old Sampras of 2001 to 2021 and expect him to win ? Nope
But what if Sampras was born in 1991 and then was 30 yrs old in 2021 ? Would you bet against him? He could definetly win as he would be a different player, having modern day fitness into the 30s, a different game with better baselining skills.....

So it is pointless to compare prev gen 30 yrs olds, even Fed makes no sense, a lot can change with 6 years of birth. It is like a child starting to play with a certain type of racquet or be subjected to a certain type of training from age 10 and another from 16, makes a big difference....... Most hypotheticals in TTW are total trash because people just bring a player from 1 year to the present to play, that is not the way to compare players, the BUTTERFLY EFFECT has to be taken into account.

I really think hypotheticals are just proxies to see how people approach the game and argue relative strengths of a player.

In general they are not to be taken seriously, as a tennis player can play only one match in reality. The conditions and buildup (including previous H2Hs) are a massive factor which is continuously ignored. The best way I see it is: there exist infinitely many iterations of a player's own form, luck, and opponent's performance; we see only one of them on the day.

I like hypotheticals because they demand discussion and disagreement more directly than any other rhetorical device. In fact that's why I started the thread: I'm tired of people saying 'it's such a weak era, the CYGS wouldn't mean anything' - this is a facile, low-stakes argument. Instead, show me your views on tennis and suggest some other players could do it as well. Put some creativity into your posts. Much more interesting. Of course, you have no issue with the last part.

 

[Sunny014]

I really think hypotheticals are just proxies to see how people approach the game and argue relative strengths of a player.

In general they are not to be taken seriously, as a tennis player can play only one match in reality. The conditions and buildup (including previous H2Hs) are a massive factor which is continuously ignored. The best way I see it is: there exist infinitely many iterations of a player's own form, luck, and opponent's performance; we see only one of them on the day.

I like hypotheticals because they demand discussion and disagreement more directly than any other rhetorical device. In fact that's why I started the thread: I'm tired of people saying 'it's such a weak era, the CYGS wouldn't mean anything' - this is a facile, low-stakes argument. Instead, show me your views on tennis and suggest some other players could do it as well. Put some creativity into your posts. Much more interesting. Of course, you have no issue with the last part.

It is a weak era for sure.

Thiem and Kyrgios should have stepped up around 2015-2016 by being the new dokodal or new fedal, this would have ensured big 3 retired on 18-16-16, however the weak era of mugs kicked in and Novak is in the best position to exploit this.

Federer is so great that even at 40 his reflexes haven't waned enough but nature has sent him knee issues, Nadal has totally broken down due to premature ageing.

Novak is in a comfortable position to vulture.

 

[guga_fan]

Nadal 2017/2019
2017- beats anyone Djokovic faced at Ao, Rg lol, Wimbledon with draw Djokovic had would win it surely as his level was good, Us open current draw can do it as well
2019- again should win Ao as only a peak Djokovic stopped himand no one is even close to that Djokovic at this year's Ao, Rg again easy , Wimbledon 2019 surely he wins and Uo as well since it would be similar draw as ge got in 2019

2017 Nadal was taken to 5 sets by a worse Zverev than Djokovic played this year.

lol

Ned in his 2017 form would do quite well with the 2021 draw. His own draw was at least an order of magnitude more difficult due to the Dimitrov match alone (and I remember Zed playing somewhat okay in their 3rd round but I haven’t seen a second of that match since it happened). Not to mention the final was no meek loss like, say, the 2019 or 2021 finalists’ performances. Wasn’t the best Nadal, but it was at least a decent version of him.

Yeah, I think AO would frankly be pretty easy to hand to him and it’s kind of ridiculous to insinuate otherwise. Again, the Dimitrov match alone should put the nail in that coffin.

And besides, wasn’t Djokovic himself “scraping by” the likes of Fritz and Tiafoe before he improved in the SF-F?

How would he beat a better version of Zverev in Australia quite easily? Djokovic needed to serve 23 aces to win in 4, and Zverev is a bad matchup for 30+ year old Nadal. Wouldn’t bet neither on 2019 or 2017 Nadal to beat him.

People forget even in his prime years Nadal would often lose at AO before the SFs.

 

[Gazelle]

Going to throw out a fun name: Wawrinka 2015, anyone? he turned 30 that year.

loses to peak Djokovic in 5 at AO, wins FO, loses in 9-8 TB at Wimby to Gasquet in QF, loses to 80% 1st serve Fed in USO SF.

The question mark here is obviously Wimbledon. But he did make the QFs against a genuinely good Gasquet and I think he would have beaten Fucsovics in QFs.

His return would be exposed vs. Shapo and Berrettini but he's wily and might be able to pip it. AO/FO are locks, USO he was bad vs. Federer but against baseline grinder types like Medvedev/Zverev his prime HC form would be allowed the chance to thrive.

I think there's a non-zero chance he could do it in all honesty, more than I would give Ferrer 2012 (lol).

Was thinking Wawrinka too, but don't forget he likely still would have to beat Nadal at RG, which I don't really see happening.

I think the premise in the OP is not 100% intellectually honest, because Djokovic enjoys a relative match-up advantage against Nadal not available to most other players. Otherwise I could throw in Fed 2015 and 2017, if he prioritized the slams like Novak did this year and had the same amount of luck. His level in those years was arguably at least up to par with Djokovic' this year.

 

[Gazelle]

2017 Nadal was taken to 5 sets by a worse Zverev than Djokovic played this year.

How would he beat a better version of Zverev in Australia quite easily? Djokovic needed to serve 23 aces to win in 4, and Zverev is a bad matchup for 30+ year old Nadal. Wouldn’t bet neither on 2019 or 2017 Nadal to beat him.

People forget even in his prime years Nadal would often lose at AO before the SFs.

He would have to rely on Zverev choking, not beyond the realm of possibility.

 

[MadariKatu]

There are 2 problems here. On one side, not many players have been good/consistent enough at all 4 slams in general, let alone in one season. Not to mention the age limit.
On the other hand, Nadal at RG. Yes, he played bad-ish, with lots of unforced errors. But would have beaten any other player (from 2021) that day. It was Djokovic's game and redlining execution that got him the victory. He does have a match up advantage vs Nadal, which is even bigger when Rafa has no serve, but still hard to picture other players that would have beaten him.

That's why 2017-2019 Nadal is on the conversation. Hard to pick other players that would beat Nadal at RG, Even in his 2021 form.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say 2017 Federer. My theory is that seeing the field in 2021, he doesn't skip RG. Try to convince me otherwise

 

[Mivic]

lol

Ned in his 2017 form would do quite well with the 2021 draw. His own draw was at least an order of magnitude more difficult due to the Dimitrov match alone (and I remember Zed playing somewhat okay in their 3rd round but I haven’t seen a second of that match since it happened). Not to mention the final was no meek loss like, say, the 2019 or 2021 finalists’ performances. Wasn’t the best Nadal, but it was at least a decent version of him.

Yeah, I think AO would frankly be pretty easy to hand to him and it’s kind of ridiculous to insinuate otherwise. Again, the Dimitrov match alone should put the nail in that coffin.

And besides, wasn’t Djokovic himself “scraping by” the likes of Fritz and Tiafoe before he improved in the SF-F?

Kind of disingenuous to insinuate that Djokovic was scraping through the draw in the same way that Nadal was considering there were extenuating circumstances which hindered Djokovic's level of play in the form of an obvious injury which he was able manage better as the tournament progressed, resulting in an uptick in his form by the final weekend. The same can't be said of Nadal and I don't think his level improved a great deal over the course of the event. The chasm in form between him and Federer in the final was pretty vast. Federer should have made it a lot easier for himself than he did in that one. You say the final wasn't a meek loss on Nadal's part. Well yeah, maybe not in terms of perseverance and clutch, but its a lot easier to stick around when you're up against an opponent that you have an 8-2 head to head record against in grand slam play. With someone like a 2019 Djokovic on the other side of the net who wasn't carrying the same mental baggage that Federer was coming into the final and wasn't returning from a 7 month injury hiatus it would have gotten pretty ugly for Nadal and his true level would have been exposed. Like another poster said, I don't see how Nadal is a lock to beat 2021 Zverev considering that he struggled with what was clearly a worse version of Sascha in 2017, while Djokovic needed what was almost a career best serving performance to come through that one. Also, considering that Medvedev was in better form coming into the final of AO21 than he was coming into the final of UO19 and Nadal's form at UO19 was at least as good as it was at AO17 for my money, I don't see why Medvedev couldn't cause him serious problems. Post-prime Nadal is nowhere near the calibre of player that post-prime Djokovic is in Australia. Granted, Nadal is favourite to come through, but to me calling him a lock against those versions of Medvedev and Zverev is trivialising Djokovic's performance in that event and ignoring the vast differences in match-up dynamics that exist across the respective head to heads.

 

[malbaker86]

2018 Del Potro

 

[MichaelNadal]

You gotta be kidding. Fed was almost 38 and made the semis of the FO with no match play behind him. Believe me--- neither Nadal or Djokovic will get anywhere near the RG semis at a similar age, despite Rafa being King of clay. He'll be long retired at that point.

And its bc Federer played surprisingly well. You wont make the semis of a slam playing like crap. (Unless you're Djokovic)

 

[mike danny]

lol

Ned in his 2017 form would do quite well with the 2021 draw. His own draw was at least an order of magnitude more difficult due to the Dimitrov match alone (and I remember Zed playing somewhat okay in their 3rd round but I haven’t seen a second of that match since it happened). Not to mention the final was no meek loss like, say, the 2019 or 2021 finalists’ performances. Wasn’t the best Nadal, but it was at least a decent version of him.

Yeah, I think AO would frankly be pretty easy to hand to him and it’s kind of ridiculous to insinuate otherwise. Again, the Dimitrov match alone should put the nail in that coffin.

And besides, wasn’t Djokovic himself “scraping by” the likes of Fritz and Tiafoe before he improved in the SF-F?

Don't forget Raonic whom Nadal straight setted. And it was a better Raonic back then.

 

[mike danny]

2017 Nadal was taken to 5 sets by a worse Zverev than Djokovic played this year.

How would he beat a better version of Zverev in Australia quite easily? Djokovic needed to serve 23 aces to win in 4, and Zverev is a bad matchup for 30+ year old Nadal. Wouldn’t bet neither on 2019 or 2017 Nadal to beat him.

People forget even in his prime years Nadal would often lose at AO before the SFs.

Zverev wasn't exactly a winning machine at the AO this year.

Nadal wouldn't win easily, but if Zcerev donates breaks like crazy, Nadal isn't losing to him.

Dimitrov alone played better than anyone Djokovuc faced this year.

 

[mike danny]

Kind of disingenuous to insinuate that Djokovic was scraping through the draw in the same way that Nadal was considering there were extenuating circumstances which hindered Djokovic's level of play in the form of an obvious injury which he was able manage better as the tournament progressed, resulting in an uptick in his form by the final weekend. The same can't be said of Nadal and I don't think his level improved a great deal over the course of the event. The chasm in form between him and Federer in the final was pretty vast. Federer should have made it a lot easier for himself than he did in that one. You say the final wasn't a meek loss on Nadal's part. Well yeah, maybe not in terms of perseverance and clutch, but its a lot easier to stick around when you're up against an opponent that you have an 8-2 head to head record against in grand slam play. With someone like a 2019 Djokovic on the other side of the net who wasn't carrying the same mental baggage that Federer was coming into the final and wasn't returning from a 7 month injury hiatus it would have gotten pretty ugly for Nadal and his true level would have been exposed. Like another poster said, I don't see how Nadal is a lock to beat 2021 Zverev considering that he struggled with what was clearly a worse version of Sascha in 2017, while Djokovic needed what was almost a career best serving performance to come through that one. Also, considering that Medvedev was in better form coming into the final of AO21 than he was coming into the final of UO19 and Nadal's form at UO19 was at least as good as it was at AO17 for my money, I don't see why Medvedev couldn't cause him serious problems. Post-prime Nadal is nowhere near the calibre of player that post-prime Djokovic is in Australia. Granted, Nadal is favourite to come through, but to me calling him a lock against those versions of Medvedev and Zverev is trivialising Djokovic's performance in that event and ignoring the vast differences in match-up dynamics that exist across the respective head to heads.

Yeah, because we all know Medvedev is a tough match-up for Nadal LMAO.

Nadal defeated Dimitrov who played a better tournament than Zverev.

And LOL at suggesting 2017 Nadal was as bad as 2019 Nadal.

 

[Mivic]

Yeah, because we all know Medvedev is a tough match-up for Nadal LMAO.

Nadal defeated Dimitrov who played a better tournament than Zverev.

And LOL at suggesting 2017 Nadal was as bad as 2019 Nadal.

Calm down my friend.

 

[SonnyT]

At '15 Wim and USO, and '16 AO, 34 year old Federer lost to no one but Djokovic. Without his nemesis, he probably would've won 3 consecutive slams. He would still be missing an RG for 4 consecutive though.

 

[Sunny014]

Some 30+ candidates who can do an equally good job that Novak is doing now.

01. Federer 2011 (4 slams booked including a win over nadal)
02. Agassi of 02-04 (4 slams booked, nobody slaughters weak draws better than Andre)
03. Nadal 2019 (3 slams booked and maybe an outside chance at the 4th)
04. Federer 2015 (3 slams booked)
05. Federer 2017 (3 slams booked)
06. Nadal 2017 (3 slams booked)
07. ?

 

[RaulRamirez]

Again, an interesting premise, but people are mentioning players who have never won more than one slam (or Ferret, with 0) in any season. How does that possibly translate to "would" win a CYGS at 30-plus.

Stan's a very good player, but he's never shown that kind of consistency. Ditto for Delpo, even though it was nice to see him play well in 2018.

The best answer is that nobody has won the first three (let alone all four) from 1969 Laver till now. Restricting it to their 30-plus years narrows it further.

So, it kind of leaves it to looking at Roger and Rafa, and much as it's fun to project and hypothesize, they never did this at any point in their careers. Why would they do it in their latter halves? Yes, I get it - they wouldn't have to beat The Big 3 to do it in 2021. But no, there is a tour outside The Big 3, with st least 125 players in them. And they don't all suck.

Sometimes, and I don't know that Novak will win the USO, and give him about a 25-30% chance to do do - one just has to respect actual accomplishments.

 

[guga_fan]

Zverev wasn't exactly a winning machine at the AO this year.

Nadal wouldn't win easily, but if Zcerev donates breaks like crazy, Nadal isn't losing to him.

Dimitrov alone played better than anyone Djokovuc faced this year.

The way he played against Djokovic he would be much more likely to beat Nadal than his own 2017 version that took him to five sets.

Matchups are important and this one favors Zverev quite a bit on HCs, you can’t compre him to Dimitrov.

Zverev came into the tournament in very good form and won his matches prior to the Djokovic one convincingly. Not much else he could do with his draw.

 

[MadariKatu]

2018 Del Potro

Thought that... he wasn't 30 yet

 

[T007]

I've heard a lot about how the weak era is so easy this year. So, name me a season by a player 30+ years of age which would win the CYGS this year.

Scenario: This player gets to take Novak Djokovic's place in 2021. I.e. he will have the same draw at every major that Djokovic did, and Djokovic is not in the field as a competitor.

Caveats: this player has to have competitive form on all surfaces/Slams that year, cannot have missed any majors, and must have been 30 at the start of the season.
(Some examples: only seasons later than Federer 2012-, Nadal 2017-, Djokovic 2018-, Agassi 2001-, Connors 1983-, Lendl 1990-, etc.)

Go ahead: make your case. Should be pretty easy - it's a weak era, after all.

Federer 2012 and 14-15 would have won 3 but 2011 Federer was very underrated....he could have all 4 facing med,Tsitsipas or berrrettini,

 

[TripleATeam]

Federer 2012 and 14-15 would have won 3 but 2011 Federer was very underrated....he could have all 4 facing med,Tsitsipas or berrrettini,

Not underrated, just wasn't 30 for every major.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

I'd pick 2011 Fed but he tirned 30 later thst year unfortunately.

Decent call here. Only lost to 2011 Djokovic and a superior Nadal, all matches that were close.

 

[mike danny]

Calm down my friend.

The overrating of Zverev and Med is getting out of hand.

 

[mike danny]

The way he played against Djokovic he would be much more likely to beat Nadal than his own 2017 version that took him to five sets.

Matchups are important and this one favors Zverev quite a bit on HCs, you can’t compre him to Dimitrov.

Zverev came into the tournament in very good form and won his matches prior to the Djokovic one convincingly. Not much else he could do with his draw.

He's unprocen in BO5 and was a hot mess each time when up a break.

I'm fairly sure he wouldn't last long in a BO5 with Nadal.

 

[guga_fan]

He's unprocen in BO5 and was a hot mess each time when up a break.

I'm fairly sure he wouldn't last long in a BO5 with Nadal.

Well, he did it in 2017 in the same tournament, despite being a worse player at the time. Machups are relevant

 

[mike danny]

Well, he did it in 2017 in the same tournament, despite being a worse player at the time. Machups are relevant

And 3 years later as the better player choked against Thiem.

 

[Amen786]

Fed at 30 had a lousy year and was injured in 2011.

بہت ہی مضحکہ خیز بیان ہے بھائی۔

 

[guga_fan]

And 3 years later as the better player choked against Thiem.

Are you comparing a QF match as an underdog with his first Grand Slam final, one which there was no clear favorite? Thiem also choked a lot there and he beat Nadal at Australia earlier in the year in QFs. Comparing those situations is just nonsense.

Zverev did lose chances against Djokovic in Australia, but the only reason he did not take it to a 5th set was because Novak was serving like he has never done in his career. Nadal can’t match that Djokovic level in Australia in his older age and is always troubled by Zverev on hard, there is just no way to convince me the German wouldn’t have very good chances in that match.

 

[ForehandRF]

بہت ہی مضحکہ خیز بیان ہے بھائی۔

Please use English, man

 

[mike danny]

Are you comparing a QF match as an underdog with his first Grand Slam final, one which there was no clear favorite? Thiem also choked a lot there and he beat Nadal at Australia earlier in the year in QFs. Comparing those situations is just nonsense.

Zverev did lose chances against Djokovic in Australia, but the only reason he did not take it to a 5th set was because Novak was serving like he has never done in his career. Nadal can’t match that Djokovic level in Australia in his older age and is always troubled by Zverev on hard, there is just no way to convince me the German wouldn’t have very good chances in that match.

He would have chances, but yiu also forget that Nadal raised his level after the 3R Zverev match. By the later stages he was a different player.