The lost generation?? (players born 90-95)

J

Jonas78

Legend
This is not intended to be a Fedalovic thread, although thats probably impossible:D.

I have witnessed some discussions here on the forum, where some argue that its a new era, and that "30 is the new 25!". Some have even stated that the time where the players under 25 years win Masters and Majors (like all the really great ones have) are over.

That leads me to... Is it true that tennis has changed for good during the last decade? And that the players born between 90 and 95 will reach their prime near 30y and then start to cash in Majors and Masters in a big way? Or is this a "lost generation", who will get smacked by the players born between 80-90 until the 95+ players (Kyrgios, Zverev etc) are old enough to defeat them?

I have done some calculations, i think they are right:
Players born... Slams won
70-75...... 35
75-80...... 7
80-85...... 23
85-90...... 31
90-95...... 0 (so far)

When the lights go out, what will the numbers for 90-95 be?? :)
 
Last edited:
This is indeed the weakest young generation seen in the Open Era.

We are now in April 2016, and no man born in the 1990s has yet reached a slam final. This includes all men up to the age of 26 years, 4 months.

For comparison, here is the age at which greats won their first slam:

Becker (17)
Wilander (17)
Borg (18)
Nadal (19)
Sampras (19)
Edberg (19)
Novak Djokovic (20)
McEnroe (20)
Connors (21)
Federer (21)
Agassi (22)
Lendl (24)

Read into this what you will...
 
Phoenix1983 said:
This is indeed the weakest young generation seen in the Open Era.

We are now in April 2016, and no man born in the 1990s has yet reached a slam final. This includes all men up to the age of 26 years, 4 months.

For comparison, here is the age at which greats won their first slam:

Becker (17)
Wilander (17)
Borg (18)
Nadal (19)
Sampras (19)
Edberg (19)
Novak Djokovic (20)
McEnroe (20)
Connors (21)
Federer (21)
Agassi (22)
Lendl (24)

Read into this what you will...
Click to expand...
I have my opinions, and i dont think they are far away from yours;). Just wanted a discussion:D
 
Phoenix1983 said:
This is indeed the weakest young generation seen in the Open Era.

We are now in April 2016, and no man born in the 1990s has yet reached a slam final. This includes all men up to the age of 26 years, 4 months.

For comparison, here is the age at which greats won their first slam:

Becker (17)
Wilander (17)
Borg (18)
Nadal (19)
Sampras (19)
Edberg (19)
Novak Djokovic (20)
McEnroe (20)
Connors (21)
Federer (21)
Agassi (22)
Lendl (24)

Read into this what you will...
Click to expand...
Reading into that I see that this current era is dominated by some of the all time greats you mentioned. Djokovic, Federer, Nadal. Kind of hard to have young players making slam breakthroughs when they are facing some of the all time tennis greats.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Reading into that I see that this current era is dominated by some of the all time greats you mentioned. Djokovic, Federer, Nadal. Kind of hard to have young players making slam breakthroughs when they are facing some of the all time tennis greats.
Click to expand...
But Nadal has declined. Federer is soon 35. Djokovic is one man. Shouldnt some player born in the 90 soon at least reach a final?
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Reading into that I see that this current era is dominated by some of the all time greats you mentioned. Djokovic, Federer, Nadal. Kind of hard to have young players making slam breakthroughs when they are facing some of the all time tennis greats.
Click to expand...

Er...."all time tennis greats" are around in basically every generation (except for maybe transitional years like the brief Hewitt era of 2001-02, although Sampras and Agassi were still around then).

The point is that new greats should emerge and defeat the old greats, no matter how supreme the latter are;

- Connors (aged 21) defeated Rosewall to win W and the USO in 1974
- McEnroe (aged 20) defeated defending champ Connors in the USO SF on the way to winning his maiden slam in 1979
- Lendl (aged 24, a very late bloomer by great standards) defeated all-conquering McEnroe to win the RG in 1984
- Sampras (aged 19) defeated Lendl in the QF of the USO in 1990, breaking the latter's 8 consecutive year finals streak, on the way to winning the tourney
- Federer (aged 19) defeated Sampras in the R16 of Wimbledon in 2001, snapping the latter's 31-match winning streak
- Nadal (aged 19) defeated Federer in the RG SF of 2005, on the way to winning his maiden slam
- Novak Djokovic (aged 20) defeated Federer in the AO SF of 2008, on the way to winning his maiden slam

It's not like we have 6 or 7 very talented 1990s-born players in the top 10 now, who are constantly reaching slam finals and semis before being thwarted by the big 4. The best that this generation has done is slam semis by Raonic, Dimitrov and Janowicz (these last two are now AWOL from the top of the game). The top 10 is still lumbered with the likes of Berdych and Ferrer, who are well past their best.

Face facts, the youngest generation is the weakest ever in the ATP.
 
Jonas78 said:
But Nadal has declined. Federer is soon 35. Djokovic is one man. Shouldnt some player born in the 90 soon at least reach a final?
Click to expand...
Nadal may have started declining last year but that's only the past few slams. Fed may nearly be 35 but he's consistently reaching slam semis and finals (2 slam finals last year). Djokovic has reached what? 8 10 of the last 10 slam finals? Forget to throw in Murray into the equation and while he may not be one of the GOATS, he's stopping many young guns at slams including Kyrgios who faced him at 3/4 slams in 2015!
Raonic has reached slam SF's but has been clouded by injury. Dimitrov is just plain inconsistent. Zverev, Thiem etc have only really just had breakouts on tour and haven't even reached a slam QF or Masters SF so it's unreasonable to think they'd be slam contenders. Not sure of other players born after 1990 who people thought had a shot and have failed. But it's an unbelievably hard era to break through.
 
Phoenix1983 said:
Er...."all time tennis greats" are around in basically every generation (except for maybe transitional years like the brief Hewitt era of 2001-02, although Sampras and Agassi were still around then).

The point is that new greats should emerge and defeat the old greats, no matter how supreme the latter are;

- Connors (aged 21) defeated Rosewall to win W and the USO in 1974
- McEnroe (aged 20) defeated defending champ Connors in the USO SF on the way to winning his maiden slam in 1979
- Lendl (aged 24, a very late bloomer by great standards) defeated all-conquering McEnroe to win the RG in 1984
- Sampras (aged 19) defeated Lendl in the QF of the USO in 1990, breaking the latter's 8 consecutive year finals streak, on the way to winning the tourney
- Federer (aged 19) defeated Sampras in the R16 of Wimbledon in 2001, snapping the latter's 31-match winning streak
- Nadal (aged 19) defeated Federer in the RG SF of 2005, on the way to winning his maiden slam
- Novak Djokovic (aged 20) defeated Federer in the AO SF of 2008, on the way to winning his maiden slam

It's not like we have 6 or 7 very talented 1990s-born players in the top 10 now, who are constantly reaching slam finals and semis before being thwarted by the big 4. The best that this generation has done is slam semis by Raonic, Dimitrov and Janowicz (these last two are now AWOL from the top of the game). The top 10 is still lumbered with the likes of Berdych and Ferrer, who are well past their best.

Face facts, the youngest generation is the weakest ever in the ATP.
Click to expand...
Not even counting Janowicz as someone people thought would be a slam champ. One slam SF where he faced an unseeded player in the QF and his run at the Paris Masters like 4 years ago now. Dimitrov, yes he's inconsistent and a let down but we can't act as if there wasn't players in the past who accomplished great things and fell into nothingness. Raonic has been clouded by several injuries yet still reaches slam semi finals.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Nadal may have started declining last year but that's only the past few slams. Fed may nearly be 35 but he's consistently reaching slam semis and finals (2 slam finals last year). Djokovic has reached what? 8 10 of the last 10 slam finals? Forget to throw in Murray into the equation and while he may not be one of the GOATS, he's stopping many young guns at slams including Kyrgios who faced him at 3/4 slams in 2015!
Raonic has reached slam SF's but has been clouded by injury. Dimitrov is just plain inconsistent. Zverev, Thiem etc have only really just had breakouts on tour and haven't even reached a slam QF or Masters SF so it's unreasonable to think they'd be slam contenders. Not sure of other players born after 1990 who people thought had a shot and have failed. But it's an unbelievably hard era to break through.
Click to expand...
So thats were it stands;)? The ones saying the players born 85-90 is so extremely strong, and thats the reason why 90-95 cant break through. On the other hand those who say 90-95 is the weakest ever in open era. Its strange though, the latest born slam-winner currently (Cilic) is turning 28 (b1988). Will it pass 30?
 
Phoenix1983 said:
This is indeed the weakest young generation seen in the Open Era.

We are now in April 2016, and no man born in the 1990s has yet reached a slam final. This includes all men up to the age of 26 years, 4 months.

For comparison, here is the age at which greats won their first slam:

Becker (17)
Wilander (17)
Borg (18)
Nadal (19)
Sampras (19)
Edberg (19)
Novak Djokovic (20)
McEnroe (20)
Connors (21)
Federer (21)
Agassi (22)
Lendl (24)

Read into this what you will...
Click to expand...

Definitely not a complete list. At first look... Courier won his first FO at 20, I believe.
 
duaneeo said:
They're not even top-10. They're ranked behind the likes of Nishikori, Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer, and Gasquet.
Click to expand...
But does that tell us that Nishi, Bird, Tsonga etc are indeed a very strong generation, or are the 90-95 very, very weak? ;)

Take David Ferrer for example. He has produced his best results at the slams ever since 2012, after reaching 30. Has Ferrer developed as a player, or is the field getting weaker?
 
They still might be 0 but I think Theim and Kygrios between them will atleast win a couple, and Raonic or Nishikori might even sneak out 1 (or more). It will be a small number though I bet. I think the 1996 and later crop is the group that is really going to pile up the slams, leaving the 90-95 generation as one of the weakest and least successful in history. One reason I think Djokovic does in fact have a great shot at Fed's slam record as well.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Reading into that I see that this current era is dominated by some of the all time greats you mentioned. Djokovic, Federer, Nadal. Kind of hard to have young players making slam breakthroughs when they are facing some of the all time tennis greats.
Click to expand...

These guys are spending their md 20's ranked below a guy like Berdych though, let alone Djokovivc, Federer and Nadal. They're not meeting the Big 3 at the back end of tournaments often enough to blame them for their lackluster results.
 
mattosgrant said:
They still might be 0 but I think Theim and Kygrios between them will atleast win a couple, and Raonic or Nishikori might even sneak out 1 (or more). It will be a small number though I bet. I think the 1996 and later crop is the group that is really going to pile up the slams, leaving the 90-95 generation as one of the weakest and least successful in history. One reason I think Djokovic does in fact have a great shot at Fed's slam record as well.
Click to expand...
Nishi is actually 89, and Kyrgios 95, so they dont even belong in the 90-95, even worse:eek:
 
NatF said:
These guys are spending their md 20's ranked below a guy like Berdych though, let alone Djokovivc, Federer and Nadal. They're not meeting the Big 3 at the back end of tournaments often enough to blame them for their lackluster results.
Click to expand...

34 year old Ferrer is ranked above them too, LOL! They just suck. No excuses for their level of incompetence. If they were any good they would be able to outrank a 34 year old Federer, middling Murray, and well past his physical peak and recently badly struggling Nadal anyway, but never mind they don't even go that far.
 
mattosgrant said:
Yikes so Raonic and Theim are the only hopes (I guess some dreamers will add Dmitrov). I still will guess they muster a couple slams total. That is probably it though.
Click to expand...
I dont know. I think Kyrgios will get most of the H2H vs Raonic on their best surface. Thiem maybe, but i dont know if he has the mentality. I dont believe in Dimitrov.
 
Jonas78 said:
I dont know. I think Kyrgios will get most of the H2H vs Raonic on their best surface. Thiem maybe, but i dont know if he has the mentality. I dont believe in Dimitrov.
Click to expand...

Of course Kygrios will probably usually beat Raonic, but it doesn't mean he cant win a slam or two. He will still beat Kygrios sometimes, Kygrios isn't the next Federer, and he can also win by not playing him.
 
Russeljones said:
I think he is good enough to pull it off. Should he fall short of 18, I won't hold it against him. Even Federer has not managed it to date.
Click to expand...
Thats the attitude:D. I will follow him more closely than before, but i have to say... I dont share your expectations:cool:
 
Jonas78 said:
This is not intended to be a Fedalovic thread, although thats probably impossible:D.

I have witnessed some discussions here on the forum, where some argue that its a new era, and that "30 is the new 25!". Some have even stated that the time where the players under 25 years win Masters and Majors (like all the really great ones have) are over.

That leads me to... Is it true that tennis has changed for good during the last decade? And that the players born between 90 and 95 will reach their prime near 30y and then start to cash in Majors and Masters in a big way? Or is this a "lost generation", who will get smacked by the players born between 80-90 until the 95+ players (Kyrgios, Zverev etc) are old enough to defeat them?

I have done some calculations, i think they are right:
Players born... Slams won
70-75...... 35
75-80...... 7
80-85...... 23
85-90...... 31
90-95...... 0 (so far)

When the lights go out, what will the numbers for 90-95 be?? :)
Click to expand...

that lost Generation really starts 1988 not 90. 87 was the last year that had two great Players (Novak and murray).
 
dominikk1985 said:
that lost Generation really starts 1988 not 90. 87 was the last year that had two great Players (Novak and murray).
Click to expand...

I wonder if it has to do with mentality at all, or if it's just a coincidence. I was born in 89 and around my age or a year older was like the start of the internet/smart phones/youtube generation where that formed us and that's basically all we can remember from out childhoods. The guys younger than Novak seem to lack the same kind of drive of past champions. Could be a total coinicdence though, I mean we see great players coming in other sports, although I think maybe some could argue they aren't as "fierce"
 
125downthemiddle said:
I wonder if it has to do with mentality at all, or if it's just a coincidence. I was born in 89 and around my age or a year older was like the start of the internet/smart phones/youtube generation where that formed us and that's basically all we can remember from out childhoods. The guys younger than Novak seem to lack the same kind of drive of past champions. Could be a total coinicdence though, I mean we see great players coming in other sports, although I think maybe some could argue they aren't as "fierce"
Click to expand...

Nail on the head.
 
125downthemiddle said:
I wonder if it has to do with mentality at all, or if it's just a coincidence. I was born in 89 and around my age or a year older was like the start of the internet/smart phones/youtube generation where that formed us and that's basically all we can remember from out childhoods. The guys younger than Novak seem to lack the same kind of drive of past champions. Could be a total coinicdence though, I mean we see great players coming in other sports, although I think maybe some could argue they aren't as "fierce"
Click to expand...
When you put it like that, im glad i was born in 78:). We had c64, but still remember much more than electronics from my childhood:)
 
MichaelNadal said:
Nah I expose your stupidity daily. You're the one that follows me (literally) on here and posts on my profile. I'm not friendly with racists boo bear.
Click to expand...
What stupidity have you 'exposed' exactly other than your infantile tendency for childish insults?

Calling people you've never met 'racists' - be careful here now. Would you be able to do that to my face, or anyone for that matter?

Just another tragic keyboard warrior with 50 000 posts on the Internet and a million selfies looking to validate his existence. No wonder you and your fluffer gym-buddy get along so well. But do carry on - it is rather hilarious albeit slightly sad

Also funny how you were nowhere to be seen last few months when Rafa was wiping the floor but now you have suddenly re-emerged giving it large. LOL.
 
ArcspacE said:
What stupidity have you 'exposed' exactly other than your infantile tendency for childish insults?

Calling people you've never met 'racists' - be careful here now. Would you be able to do that to my face, or anyone for that matter?

Just another tragic keyboard warrior with 50 000 posts on the Internet and a million selfies looking to validate his existence. No wonder you and your fluffer gym-buddy get along so well. But do carry on - it is rather hilarious albeit slightly sad

Also funny how you were nowhere to be seen last few months when Rafa was wiping the floor but now you have suddenly re-emerged giving it large. LOL.
Click to expand...

I was nowhere to be seen? Lol ok Stan.
You seen to be so pressed over guys with abs btw. I'm sure you're as beautiful on the outside as you are inside ;)
 
MichaelNadal said:
I was nowhere to be seen? Lol ok Stan.
You seen to be so pressed over guys with abs btw. I'm sure you're as beautiful on the outside as you are inside ;)
Click to expand...
I cannot descend to a level where a visual comparison of my physical appearance is what is used to distinguish one's worth. Tragically vain and shallow are not the terms here. All I can say is - I was on 6.5% body fat few months back - and, no - I don't need validation of my looks from fellow TTW-ers. You, however - seem desperate so good luck with that.

Godspeed fella, keep playing the race card - will get you places in life
 
ArcspacE said:
I cannot descend to a level where a visual comparison of my physical appearance is what is used to distinguish one's worth. Tragically vain and shallow are not the terms here. All I can say is - I was on 6.5% body fat few months back - and, no - I don't need validation of my looks from fellow TTW-ers. You, however - seem desperate so good luck with that.

Godspeed fella, keep playing the race card - will get you places in life
Click to expand...

Aww you not gonna follow me anymore? You still pressed over me telling it like it is? Threads get deleted, but I didn't forget :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

chjtennis
Players Under 25
Replies
36
Views
1K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
pringles
The lost generations in tennis
Replies
3
Views
1K
smoledman
smoledman
Oceansize
Are the men born 89-91 the weakest generation ever?
Replies
19
Views
2K
NadalAgassi
N
S
Born in the 90s
Replies
5
Views
808
HipRotation
HipRotation
clout
The utter dominance of 80's born players since 2000
Replies
7
Views
829
Milehigh5280
Milehigh5280
Back
Top