Potential reason for next gen inability to break through at slam level

D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Hewitt and Safin had this opoortunity because back then, 30+ players were loosing their physical abilities. So the youngers were outperforming them on this area of the game.

Now, for exemple, a 32 years old Nadal, who had dozens of injuries, is still able to compete in 5hours match. Besides, he has a huge experience with more than 1000 matches play. How do you want the Next-Gen to beat that ?

Stop idealizing the past, things have just changed and it won't ever be the same.
Agassi was still quite good back then and the newer generation were breaking through and playing well in majors something they aren't today. No excuse when they are losing to journeymen.

If they had the mentality and talent to be the best like them they'd get the job done. When Sampras was ranked No. 3 and only 28 Hewitt gave him a bagel at the Year Ending Cup. He was 19. When has a young player done that?
 

FiReFTW

Legend
Lack of talent is the reason.

Do you remember what Nadal did as a teenager already? how talented he was? Where is this talent today? These youngsters are 20, 21, 23, 25 and are not half as talented as Nadal as a teenager.

Theres also alot of distractions like someone already said before, social media, facebook, instagram, twitter etc... this did not exist when Nadal or Federer or Djokovic were growing up, they didn't have this, all they did was focused on training hard and playing tennis.

Of course the newer generations are also not as tough anymore or enduring, and they dont have the same passion for tennis that these guys have, they live for tennis, can we say the same about the new generation? They like to play and it gives them money, but do they really have the passion like Federer or Nadal?

Mental strenght is also a big deal, possibly the biggest deal, these youngsters are mentaly completely weak and unable to win important points or matches, and are in awe when their heroes like Djokovic or Federer or Nadal step on the court, they almost turn into fangirls, and their hands probably shake when they have to play them.

Djokovic and Nadal both had incredible mental strenght from early on, Federer actually had a similar problem than these youngsters (tho he was alot more talented) that he had the skills but not the mental game up until 2004 where it just clicked in his head and he didn't look back anymore and went on a rampage.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
My younger cousin for instance claims he's an old soul at 22. For the 30 whole mins I can get him to sit down and drink a beer and BS with me I believe it until he can't help but get back on his phone. Then I follow suit and before ya know it the visit gets boring and we have to move on. I miss the old days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

mike danny

Bionic Poster
But it's not comparable the same way as racquets went through radical changes in that period right before big four dominance. So it's difficult to make a conclusion there and it's no legitimate proofs yet.
I'm only trying to see tendencies what's happening now.
The young ones grew up with the same technology.
 

raph6

Semi-Pro
Agassi was still quite good back then and the newer generation were breaking through and playing well in majors something they aren't today. No excuse when they are losing to journeymen.

If they had the mentality and talent to be the best like them they'd get the job done. When Sampras was ranked No. 3 and only 28 Hewitt gave him a bagel at the Year Ending Cup. He was 19. When has a young player done that?
Agassi had a very special career, he didn't produce his best efforts during his 20s and so he still had gaz left in the tank when he was 30+.

Shapovalov at 18 defeated Nadal at 31 who was ranked number 2 at the time. He also defeated Del Potro in straight sets at that age and other top players like Tsonga, Nishikori etc...

By the way, Nadal was also playing video games at 14. (at the end of the video)
And Murray injured his hands playing PES.

If you think players were training 10h a day back in the days, you are totally wrong. You can't exhaust yourself before match, it's normal they have free time.
 

Zara

Legend
The consensus is this! The big-3 is so atg, that they brought the game to a level, after which it cannot be elevated further and you can on,y keep up! Consider a planck in pole jumping, after which the human body is not allowed to push over anymore, unless evolution makes one's body eveolve beyond its current physical limits! You simply can't have better mentality, run faster, have the most technical variety and hit harder than big-3 anymore! They set the planck that cannot be surpassed! Thats my take on it! Next gen's biggest hope is that big-3 retires sooner, so that it will clear the path in majors draws for them to start winning those titles! With big-3 still in bussiness and motivated - not a damn chance!
It can always be elevated further and it will. That's how evaluation works. We just don't have the ability to perceive it because we are deeply conditioned by our current environment.
 

Apun94

Hall of Fame
With the big three sweeping the last two years worth of slams and all being over the age of thirty I am wondering what the next generation are communally lacking to cause a real threat to the veterans. I speculate that maybe it's something to do with the world in which these younger players live and were brought up in, which includes a lot of technological distractions such as social media and how that effects focus and mindset, which the big three probably just missed. This could be completely farfetched, but I'm interested in opinions
That's not it. They are just not talented enough. SIMPLE.AS.THAT. Not skill wise and certainly not physically
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

Meles

Bionic Poster
Why do young player not have what it takes at majors? It comes down to stamina and serve game especially on hard courts and too a less extent on clay. On clay you have to have the strength to power back defensive shots and put the opponent under pressure or hit an outright winner. Zverev has had this pretty early on because of his long levers. Thiem was a naturally very powerful player and broke through. Khachanov and Rublev have the power. Tsitsipas has long levers. Shapo now has that kind of power on clay. Players like Medvedev and de Minaur are more counter punchers so its not been as easy for them in their early career, but they will get stronger throughout most of their careers.

The other huge factor is stamina which is balanced with an efficient game style. Thiem so often in his early years and even into 2017 hits so hard that he wears himself out at the end of tournaments when facing a player like Nadal. Finally at age 24 at RG and US Open he appears to have that stamina and Thiem is an incredibly hard worker. It also takes a lot more energy when you hit a heavy ball which hurts young clay courters.

Tall players have a natural advantage at a younger age because they tend to have big serves. Big serves make for easier service games and less match time. Its why I've been optimistic for Zverev to have early success because when his serve is one he can be very efficient on serve games as witnessed in Madrid where he was the first player to ever win a clay masters unbroken (faced only 1 BP for the event and on hard courts its only been done three times, twice by Federer and just recently by Djokovic in Shanghai). The problem for Zverev is he has prolonged periods where his serve will not be as effective. He's a great player an can fight as we saw at the French this year, but he went down after coming back to win three straight five setters and it probably took a huge toll on him for the season. Zverev will typically start rolling in 2nd serves and getting into long exchanges on his own serve game which absolutely kills him at majors. If he was hot on serving well into an event he might be able to grind his way to the title the last two matches, but he's not done that to date.

Peak strength for a player is late 20's and stamina probably a few years later. With grueling nature of baseline tennis in the Poly era its hard to win early without a big serve. Witness Nadal, Murray, and Djokovic. Nadal took off on hard courts the year he turned 24 in 2010, Djoko 2011 in 24th year, Murray in his 25th year. ITS INSANE TO EXPECT MOST 20 AND 21 YEAR OLDS TO BREAK THROUGH BEFORE THIS ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE BIG 3 HAVE BEEN ALTERNATING PEAKING AT SLAMS OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.

The other dominant factor in today's Poly game besides baseline play is serve. Serving has gotten better and better over the last fifteen years due to the strings. The serve is a complex stroke and its something older players simply do better more consistently with their strength, stamina, and experience advantage.

On clay the serve advantage for older players is blunted and the longer more neutral rallies tend to advantage faster players. This is why the younger players have done well on clay earlier (Djokovic was very good even back as far as 2007 and 2008). Peak speed is around age 23-24 and so it gets harder for the older players when they hit 30 and beyond. Of course winning the French does take some stamina, but not as much as you might think because the sets tend to be more lopsided as its easier to break and the player with the hotter ground game can dominate. Still its not easy and Djoko did not make his first final until 2012 despite his more efficient hard court strokes. Zverev has a chance for an early breakthrough because at his best he can servebot on clay and in theory can come through to the later rounds of RG fresher than his peers. Tsitsipas at 6' 4" also has a ton of efficiency in his game and his one-handed backhand that he can push back consistently deep to the opponents backhand corner will help him a lot. Coric also now has the stamina and power at a younger age to possibly do well at RG or anywhere for that matter.

Hard courts still tend to favor older players because of serve/stamina/efficiency at majors. Delpo broke through early with his flat and efficient groundstrokes and a good measure of serving. Zverev is not nearly as efficient from the ground so he'll need to rely on big serving to get him far on hard courts. Once he starts rolling in 2nd serves and grinding on his own serve game its basically the beginning of the end for him at majors unless he's made it fresh to the SFs.

Grass is a bit more of a mystery because the games are short and it does not require supreme stamina. Serve is huge which favors older players as is experience on the surface which generally favors older players. Nadal had early success on grass and I suspect his overall huge assets of strength and stamina due to his physical assets helped. His ability to get back first serves in play surely help neutralizing a lot of big servers. The other huge factor then is the experience players on grass back then were ones who had not developed with Poly strings so they just as a group did not have the game overall to really make a huge impact at Wimbledon and stop a younger player like Nadal. It certainly is the case on fast hard courts that speedy players who still have a prayer of breaking opponents can do well if their serve games are close enough as the fast surface makes their serves much harder to break. Nadal certainly fit the bill at a young age. We've had big servers in the Wimbledon finals for most years recently except 2011 and 2013. This tends to favor older players, but as we know Roddick and Sampras had big serves at a very young age. Zverev and Tsitsipas are coming along due to their height, but they just aren't in the same class on serve. Medvedev has been proficient on grass and finally has shown some serve game to match his height. Khachanov also got bigger on serve just this year. With the experience factor hampering all these young players I just don't see them breaking through in 2019.
 

jukka1970

Professional
With the big three sweeping the last two years worth of slams and all being over the age of thirty I am wondering what the next generation are communally lacking to cause a real threat to the veterans. I speculate that maybe it's something to do with the world in which these younger players live and were brought up in, which includes a lot of technological distractions such as social media and how that effects focus and mindset, which the big three probably just missed. This could be completely farfetched, but I'm interested in opinions
I agree with many others that the increase in social media has been a huge factor. I mean of course the talent of these 3 is the biggest reason, but there's no doubt that the media is on you the second you start to show promise. These three as they started to find form was from an error that it wasn't as easy to find out about them. I mean the players are now under a microscope consistently.
 

Jonas78

Legend
Hewitt and Safin had this opoortunity because back then, 30+ players were loosing their physical abilities. So the youngers were outperforming them on this area of the game.

Now, for exemple, a 32 years old Nadal, who had dozens of injuries, is still able to compete in 5hours match. Besides, he has a huge experience with more than 1000 matches play. How do you want the Next-Gen to beat that ?

Stop idealizing the past, things have just changed and it won't ever be the same.
Sorry, this is just recency bias working hard. There is absolutely no reason why a player In his early 20s shouldnt win slams. And it will happen again. In 2009 4 out of 5 in the top5 were 21-23 years, it's not like the world of tennis has turned upside down in nine years.
 

Jonas78

Legend
Real reason: Nadal and Djokovic are too good. Don't expect every next generation to produce a New Big 3. That is unrealistic.
Now even IF that was true, it would be Isner, Delpo, Anderson, Cilic or some other 30 year old winning the slams if Big3 wasnt around. LostGen/NextGen is bad, plain and simple.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
I've seen it suggested that there needs to be a distinction between those who grew up without mainstream internet, smartphones, and social media, and those who didn't.

This makes sense to me. Anyone who was born in the early-to-mid 1980s wouldn't have had access to the internet until they were teenagers. And the late 90s/early 00s internet certainly wasn't as all-encompassing and ubiquitous as it is nowadays, so people born between 1980-1986 would have reached adulthood before the internet would have been such a huge thing.

Smartphones and social media really came to the fore around 2006, so anyone born after 1995ish wouldn't have grown up without them.
Agreed. I was born in 1983. I feel closer to Generation X than Generation Y, but I don't fully belong to either. I feel about 60% in one and 40% in the other.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic and Nadal both had incredible mental strenght from early on, Federer actually had a similar problem than these youngsters (tho he was alot more talented) that he had the skills but not the mental game up until 2004 where it just clicked in his head and he didn't look back anymore and went on a rampage.
The change for Federer, in my opinion, was when his old coach Peter Carter died in a car crash in August 2002. I think Federer realized strongly at that point that he had been wasting his talent in the previous year and not doing himself justice with most of his tournament results. Federer's mentality then changed. He started to become more consistent, although it took until late 2003 to completely consign any traces of the headcase Federer to rest.

Regarding Djokovic, while tough, he seemed to have a fragile side to him also before 2011. Nadal equalled Borg's record of winning the most tournaments as a teenager, with 16.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Agassi had a very special career, he didn't produce his best efforts during his 20s and so he still had gaz left in the tank when he was 30+.

Shapovalov at 18 defeated Nadal at 31 who was ranked number 2 at the time. He also defeated Del Potro in straight sets at that age and other top players like Tsonga, Nishikori etc...

By the way, Nadal was also playing video games at 14. (at the end of the video)
And Murray injured his hands playing PES.

If you think players were training 10h a day back in the days, you are totally wrong. You can't exhaust yourself before match, it's normal they have free time.
Shapovalov isn't top 10 though and when did he hand out a bagel to these players? They aren't on the same level as young Safin or Hewitt.
 

3lite

Professional
Lack of talent is the reason.

Do you remember what Nadal did as a teenager already? how talented he was? Where is this talent today? These youngsters are 20, 21, 23, 25 and are not half as talented as Nadal as a teenager.

Theres also alot of distractions like someone already said before, social media, facebook, instagram, twitter etc... this did not exist when Nadal or Federer or Djokovic were growing up, they didn't have this, all they did was focused on training hard and playing tennis.

Of course the newer generations are also not as tough anymore or enduring, and they dont have the same passion for tennis that these guys have, they live for tennis, can we say the same about the new generation? They like to play and it gives them money, but do they really have the passion like Federer or Nadal?

Mental strenght is also a big deal, possibly the biggest deal, these youngsters are mentaly completely weak and unable to win important points or matches, and are in awe when their heroes like Djokovic or Federer or Nadal step on the court, they almost turn into fangirls, and their hands probably shake when they have to play them.

Djokovic and Nadal both had incredible mental strenght from early on, Federer actually had a similar problem than these youngsters (tho he was alot more talented) that he had the skills but not the mental game up until 2004 where it just clicked in his head and he didn't look back anymore and went on a rampage.
Djokovic was hitting tennis balls in an empty pool with air artillery flying over his head when he first swung a racket. The distractions today are comical in comparison.

The fact of the matter is, the trifecta of Federer/Nadal/Djokovic defines our sport's golden generation so an ugly blip is to be expected once they decide it's time to hang it up.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
I think there are 2 massive things

- Growing with poly made them worse tennis players. I think poly is terrible for training cause there's barely a feedback mechanism to force you to hit a clean, accurate ball. Just spin enough and it'll go in.

-21st century media has born and bred a bunch of absolute mental midgets who are happy playing their overglorified idols and are happy to share the court and receive a spanking and wait it out until Fedalovic hang it up in their late 30s to early 90s.

If you can't beat them, outlive them.
also slower courts+poly has predisposed them to playing a game that works in juniors but not in the pros unless you are an ATG mover, which given that top athletic talent is increasingly going into other sports because there is no money at the lower levels of tennis, is getting rare.

The artificial measures put in place (slower courts, concentration of results/prize money to the top) to inflate the big 3 (and top players in general) is likely going to doom the ATP in the future. They reap what they sow. But yeah, hope seeing the worst collection of young talent in tennis history is worth watching a bunch of 35 year old geriatrics get to 20+ majors against these jokers.
 

TennisCJC

Legend
Nah, Zverev hasn't broken through because he plays 10 feet behind the baseline and needs to volley and serve better. Theim hasn't won a slam yet because he has big swings more suitable to clay where Rafa rules, plays 10 feet behind the baseline and can butcher fairly easy volleys. It has nothing to do with social media.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

bjk

Hall of Fame
We can all agree that the Fed-Nad-'Vic generation is the greatest. That's the generation that grew up with synth gut strings and graphite rackets, and then switched. So maybe that's how all young tennis players should be trained. Train them on Pro Staff 90 just like the greatest generation (and Sampras). Later (in teens) they can switch to the new technology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

StannisTheMannis

Hall of Fame
They read the names “Roger Federer”, “Rafael Nadal”, and “Novak Djokovic” next to their names on a tennis draw and proceed to soil themselves.

Back in the day, the only player in tennis that wasn’t afraid of Federer was Nadal, and then a couple of years after that the only guy that wasn’t afraid of the two of them was Novak. Everyone else was, and still is, fine with getting their checks after losing to them.
 
Theres talent there in a few guys. Just no drive. No prod up their butt to get them moving. Talent means nothing if you're just content on a quick slam pay check and appearance fee. Whiny SnowFlakes like most of this generation. Spoiled, Catered to, "everyone Gets a trophy" generation. Fragile wussies who will never win anything big.

ITs why the geriatrics all well past their prime continue to dominate. It has nothing to do with Fed/Nadal/Nole being so great still. They aren't that great anymore. All 3 VERY vulnerable


Truth is if you put the "Old 3" of today up against the Safins, Roddick, Hewitts of the early 2000s they would probably go down to these guys at the slams. Its not to say this generation is less talented than the early 2000's generations, they just don't have the drive of that generation
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Theres talent there in a few guys. Just no drive. No prod up their butt to get them moving. Talent means nothing if you're just content on a quick slam pay check and appearance fee. Whiny SnowFlakes like most of this generation. Spoiled, Catered to, "everyone Gets a trophy" generation. Fragile wussies who will never win anything big.

ITs why the geriatrics all well past their prime continue to dominate. It has nothing to do with Fed/Nadal/Nole being so great still. They aren't that great anymore. All 3 VERY vulnerable


Truth is if you put the "Old 3" of today up against the Safins, Roddick, Hewitts of the early 2000s they would probably go down to these guys at the slams. Its not to say this generation is less talented than the early 2000's generations, they just don't have the drive of that generation
But they are less talented.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Ha yeah well a great match anyhow. Was great to see those two go at each other again in a 5 setter if I remember correctly
Yep. It was the first time since 2006 Hewitt made the QF at Wimbledon and Roddick was in great form too. It was a fantastic match.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I think Hewitt was a wild card there too right?
Nah he got direct entry into Wimbledon. He was ranked around 55 or so in the world. He only dropped outside the top 100 for the first time since 1999 at the Australian Open that year because he couldn't defend his R16 points from 2008 due to being unseeded coming into the event.

He did make it back to the top 20 that year, but ended the season ranked 22. 45 places above his ranking the previous year, 67. He broke back into the top 20 for the first time since 2008 after reaching the R16 at the 2010 Australian Open, losing to Federer.
 

Sudacafan

Bionic Poster
Eh, I’ve had this debate with others.

I don’t think people born in the early 1980s can really be classified as millennials - there needs to be a category in between Gen X and millennial.
So what year would be the cutoff? Which is the begin year of birth for millennials?
 

clout

Hall of Fame
It’s sad that this question continuously appears on this forum for several years now. I remember as far back as 2014/2015 (long before I joined TTW) that some were shocked at having no 25 or under Slam champions. Now it looks like it’ll be no champs under 32...
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Eh, I’ve had this debate with others.

I don’t think people born in the early 1980s can really be classified as millennials - there needs to be a category in between Gen X and millennial.
Hate to break it to you but I’m pretty sure you’re a millennial lmaoo
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Hate to break it to you but I’m pretty sure you’re a millennial lmaoo
Yes I know I officially am. But as I've said before (and this relates to other generations like Baby Boomers also), the age ranges are too wide for these so called 'generations'. There's no way someone born in the early 80s had the same formative experiences as those born in the late 90s, with technology etc for an example. Most of us didn't get the internet and mobile phones until well into our teens, while the latter group never knew any different.
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Yes I know I officially am. But as I've said before (and this relates to other generations like Baby Boomers also), the age ranges are too wide for these so called 'generations'. There's no way someone born in the early 80s had the same formative experiences as those born in the late 90s, with technology etc for an example. Most of us didn't get the internet and mobile phones until well into our teens, while the latter group never knew any different.
Lol yeah I know what you mean. I've worked in marketing/PR before and everyone agrees that these "generations" are extremely flawed in more ways than one. With the boomer example you brought up, my father (b. 1964) gets lumped into the "boomer" gen where a big chunk of ppl are already retired senior citizens or at the very least 60+ years old while he's still in his mid 50s and working.

With millennials in the tennis world, there seems to be a slight generational gap between even Federer (born in the early 80s) and Nadal/Djokovic/Murray (born in the mid/late 80s). Needless to say, there's clearly also a gap between Djokodal's age group and guys who are in Kyrgios/Thiem/Shapo/Zverev's age group (born in mid/late 90's) even though they are technically part of the same gen. That's why every five years is probably the most accurate way to depict a generation imo given how fast-changing the world is now
 
Last edited:
Top