Proof the level of players improved with time

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#1
Because players started to play with bigger racquets and all of a sudden started hitting missiles in 2008 players like Hewitt and Roddick lost their footing on the top 100 and fell out of it.

Only when they upper their own level in a year like 2009 did they compete better. Then in 2010 the year just left them behind. Don't get me wrong they kept improving (peak Hewitt came at 2014 Brisbane for instance) and showed some good performances (2010 Miami for Roddick) but the level MurryGOAT, Nadal, Djokovic and Fedr, Ferrer, Tsonga, Berdych and even Mardy Fish showed from then on was just too much for them to handle.
 
#7
I agree, the game is super refined now. So hard for anyone outside the big 3 to win a GS. When has this ever happened? Sampras and Agassi seemed inconsistent comparatively. The money and competetiveness now is bigger
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#13
nations represented by top-10:

now: 10
5 years ago: 7
10 years ago: 8
15 years ago: 7
20 years ago: 8
25 years ago: 8
30 years ago: 5
35 years ago: 5
40 years ago: 5
45 years ago: 6
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#14
Raonic reks Laver.

Anyone seriously think that 5 foot 8 skinny Aussie could keep up with a specimen like Raonic?

Athletes are bigger, faster, stronger. Deal with it!!! ROFLMAO
In the 1969 Grand Slams 6 nations were rapresented in the quarterfinals, 4 in the semifinals, 2 in the finals.

In the 2018 Grand Slams 16 nations were represented in the quarterfinals, 12 in the semifinals, 7 in the finals.


1969 Grand Slams were dominated (7/8 finalists, 12/16 semifinalists) by a 12 million people nation.
 
#15
nations represented by top-10:

now: 10
5 years ago: 7
10 years ago: 8
15 years ago: 7
20 years ago: 8
25 years ago: 8
30 years ago: 5
35 years ago: 5
40 years ago: 5
45 years ago: 6
Could this be the first time in history with no fellow countrymen among the top ten?
 
#17
Raonic reks Laver.

Anyone seriously think that 5 foot 8 skinny Aussie could keep up with a specimen like Raonic?

Athletes are bigger, faster, stronger. Deal with it!!! ROFLMAO
Sure - bigger, faster and stronger - although I don't think Raonic has near the foot speed or agility of Laver. But here's the thing: I always say that the greats would find a way in any era. Laver would find a way to beat bigger opponents today (I don't mean the 80-year-old Laver) as he beat players much bigger than him back in the day - Pancho Gonzales, Roy Emerson, Stan Smith, Arthur Ashe, etc., were all significantly bigger than him - check their heaights and weights. Rod also played/thought the game much better than a Raonic, and nearly everyone on the tour today, though of course, the pace of his shots was less (technology also plays a major part!).

Nishikori, Goffin and others, even Diego Schwartman...not big guys, all around the size of Laver ...have all still had success on the tour and none, if extrapolated, could be compared to Rod.
 
#18
Sure - bigger, faster and stronger - although I don't think Raonic has near the foot speed or agility of Laver. But here's the thing: I always say that the greats would find a way in any era. Laver would find a way to beat bigger opponents today (I don't mean the 80-year-old Laver) as he beat players much bigger than him back in the day - Pancho Gonzales, Roy Emerson, Stan Smith, Arthur Ashe, etc., were all significantly bigger than him - check their heaights and weights. Rod also played/thought the game much better than a Raonic, and nearly everyone on the tour today, though of course, the pace of his shots was less (technology also plays a major part!).

Nishikori, Goffin and others, even Diego Schwartman...not big guys, all around the size of Laver ...have all still had success on the tour and none, if extrapolated, could be compared to Rod.

Yes, I was being facetious lol. I respect you too much to keep the charade up
 
#19
Obviously the long term trend should be up, due to changes in training, technology, whatever

But in the shorter term, the level of tennis players defininitely hasn't gone up.

I don't think the level of the ATP Tour has improved since everyone adjusted to poly and at the very top the level has only fluctuated with the Big 3, Murray and Wawrinka.

I will forever wish peak Roddick could have played 2018 Fed in Slams.
 
#21
Just because more people are playing it now, doesnt mean it was easier in the old days.
Actually it does...

Being the best out of 10,000 other players is a lot easier than being the best ouf of 1,000,000 other players. Do the math, what percentage do you need to be in?

You can make the argument that MAYBE somehow the older generation players were the 1 in 1,000,000 players - but we'll never know for sure. What we do know, is that Fed / Rafa / Djokovic ARE the 1 in 1,000,000 players
 

Enga

Professional
#23
Actually it does...

Being the best out of 10,000 other players is a lot easier than being the best ouf of 1,000,000 other players. Do the math, what percentage do you need to be in?

You can make the argument that MAYBE somehow the older generation players were the 1 in 1,000,000 players - but we'll never know for sure. What we do know, is that Fed / Rafa / Djokovic ARE the 1 in 1,000,000 players
Based on what little information I've gleaned about the older generations of tennis, it seems tennis was still popular back then. Hard to find numbers but it is totally possible that they had it equally tough rising to the top. Many names are lost to history, many tennis "prodigies" arent remembered after they missed the chance for the pro tour, and had to carry on in life with a more normal job. Tennis back then didnt have as much money in it, but it was still a game lots of people played.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#24
I will forever wish peak Roddick could have played 2018 Fed in Slams.
This peak Roddick is so overrated...

In all his career he won 2 finals against slam champions:

Sampras on clay (62.5 of wins on the surface)
Ferrero on hardcourt (57% of wins on the surface)
 
#26
This peak Roddick is so overrated...

In all his career he won 2 finals against slam champions:

Sampras on clay (62.5 of wins on the surface)
Ferrero on hardcourt (57% of wins on the surface)
Show me another player with a winning% of over 79% on a surface without having won the Slam on that surface.
 
#29
Obviously the long term trend should be up, due to changes in training, technology, whatever

But in the shorter term, the level of tennis players defininitely hasn't gone up.

I don't think the level of the ATP Tour has improved since everyone adjusted to poly and at the very top the level has only fluctuated with the Big 3, Murray and Wawrinka.

I will forever wish peak Roddick could have played 2018 Fed in Slams.


But but 2018 is Fraud's Peak , see he is even making Roddick like drunken errands to the net !
 
#30
Sure - bigger, faster and stronger - although I don't think Raonic has near the foot speed or agility of Laver. But here's the thing: I always say that the greats would find a way in any era. Laver would find a way to beat bigger opponents today (I don't mean the 80-year-old Laver) as he beat players much bigger than him back in the day - Pancho Gonzales, Roy Emerson, Stan Smith, Arthur Ashe, etc., were all significantly bigger than him - check their heaights and weights. Rod also played/thought the game much better than a Raonic, and nearly everyone on the tour today, though of course, the pace of his shots was less (technology also plays a major part!).

Nishikori, Goffin and others, even Diego Schwartman...not big guys, all around the size of Laver ...have all still had success on the tour and none, if extrapolated, could be compared to Rod.
Most people would say that Laver is one of the greatest movers ever.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#32
With the same career he had, if Roddick was a regular baseliner born in Spain not playing in 2003-09 would be considered to have a very low peak.
 
#38
2017 Nadal would beat 2008 Nadal every time, the game just moves on.
Your rule (even supposing your Nadal example could be proven right) is not always applicable.
I would never beat my own self from 15/20 years ago, though I would drive him nuts with an assorted display of tennis "schemes" (euphemism for tactics).
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#39
He might have better movement and a decent backhand, and the H2H w Djokovic would be like 13-1
I wrote ''with the same career he had''.

For example 2 finals won in all his career against a top10 (LOL)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

NatF

Bionic Poster
#43
On grass I can consent, but I have to remind you he beat 2 top10 in all his career.
As explained to you before he beat Ancic x2, Hewitt and Grosjean in the grass season in 2004 alone, all guys who were by easily top 10 grass players if not top 5 grass courts at the time - maybe you think beating Coria on grass would have been more impressive? :rolleyes: Hewitt especially was on his way back into the top 10 after dropping outside it in 2003, he was in fact top 10 again the very next event at Wimbledon.

Keep cherry picking stats and showcasing you have with no knowledge about the era or players you discuss though.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#44
As explained to you before he beat Ancic x2, Hewitt and Grosjean in the grass season in 2004 alone, all guys who were by easily top 10 grass players if not top 5 grass courts at the time - maybe you think beating Coria on grass would have been more impressive? :rolleyes: Hewitt especially was on his way back into the top 10 after dropping outside it in 2003, he was in fact top 10 again the very next event at Wimbledon.

Keep cherry picking stats and showcasing you have with no knowledge about the era or players you discuss though.
Best players beat in a final by Roddick:

no.3 Ferrero on hardcourt (57% career wins on the surface)
no.4 Coria on hardcourt (58%)
no.11 Srichapan on hardcourt (59.9%)
no.12 Stepanek on hardcourt (55.7%)

LOL

While Murray won 13 finals over top-3 ranked Djokovic, Federer, Nadal, plus 1 over no.4 Nadal on clay.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#45
Best players beat in a final by Roddick:

no.3 Ferrero on harcourt (57% career wins on the surface)
no.4 Coria on hardcourt (58%)
no.11 Srichapan on hardcourt (59.9%)
no.12 Stepanek on hardcourt (55.7%)

LOL

While Murray won 14 finals over top-3 ranked Djokovic, Federer, Nadal.
What about SF? They count too. Beat Djokovic in a couple QF iirc lol

Edit: make that 4 times lol. You can't use just finals.
 
Last edited:

NatF

Bionic Poster
#47
Best players beat in a final by Roddick:

no.3 Ferrero on hardcourt (57% career wins on the surface)
no.4 Coria on hardcourt (58%)
no.11 Srichapan on hardcourt (59.9%)
no.12 Stepanek on hardcourt (55.7%)

LOL

While Murray won 13 finals over top-3 ranked Djokovic, Federer, Nadal, plus 1 over no.4 Nadal on clay.
No one was comparing him to him to Murray here. You should change best to highest ranked as they're not the same.

Again your stats miss out on level of play completely. No rebuttal to what I posted about grass either no surprise.

Also cutting off at the F is silly as it doesn't include examples like Roddick beating Nadal in the Miami 2010 SF, Nadal and Djokovic back to back in the QF & SF of Dubai etc...
 
#48
Obviously the long term trend should be up, due to changes in training, technology, whatever

But in the shorter term, the level of tennis players defininitely hasn't gone up.

I don't think the level of the ATP Tour has improved since everyone adjusted to poly and at the very top the level has only fluctuated with the Big 3, Murray and Wawrinka.

I will forever wish peak Roddick could have played 2018 Fed in Slams.
How is Anderson, Fognini, Isner, Wawrinka etc doing career best results in their 30s? This has become a trend that with more and more experience and training you reach career best results.
 
#49
How is Anderson, Fognini, Isner, Wawrinka etc doing career best results in their 30s? This has become a trend that with more and more experience and training you reach career best results.
Wawrinka broke through at 27 and peaked from 27 to 31 or something. Notorious late bloomer.

Isner isn't really better than he ever has been. Maybe a little more consistent, but he's as useless as ever from the back court apart from one Miami run and just ridden easier draws until he could get beaten by an actual good player. Much the same for Anderson.

Don't think Fognini is better than ever either. Just the field is weaker.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
#50
How is Anderson, Fognini, Isner, Wawrinka etc doing career best results in their 30s? This has become a trend that with more and more experience and training you reach career best results.
Some of it is motivation and focus. Wawrinka didn't put it together mentally until he was 27/28 - Anderson maybe just a late bloomer, I'm completely unconvinced that Fognini and Isner are playing better than ever. For every player that's having career high rankings in their 30's there's a Berdych or Tsonga, guys who were staple top 10 players since mid 20's who are dropping like stones.
 
Top