The reason level of competition debates are pointless

[Deleted member 307496]

Burden of proof is on you.

Repeating yourself makes it all the more obvious..

You have not proven it's a fact that 2014, 2015 and 2016 is weak era.

Is it possible to prove to you that any time period with Djokovic at the helm is a weak period?

How many players are there on the tour?

Many. But that doesn't change what I've stated - the young guns aren't delivering.

Opinion? You said it's a fact that 2014, 2015 and 2016 is weak era.

You asked whether it was a fact, I said yes. You should know when it comes to era related debates opinion is the driving force as there are no facts to support either claim.

Burden of proof is on you.

.

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

He didn't dominate like today in 2011.. Just because he won 3 slams in that year doesn't mean it's automatically on par with 2015 on paper.

Dude, there aren't just Fed/Rafa fans talking about it. The only people in denial are the Djoker crowd.

I do think 2015 was better for him than 2011 but it is not a huge difference. It is not just about 3 Slams it is about the rest as well. 2015 gets the edge due to the post US Open part. He followed up both seasons with the defense of Australia in the next (2012 and 2016), so the differences are quite small.
Well sure if you want you can believe that, but to me it seems more like Fedal fans are butthurt because someone apart from their favorites is able to dominate and reach incredible heights.

The very fact you have to quote 2011 and not 2015 , even though Novak won the same number of majors tells that you inherently know that this is a weak era

What on Earth are you talking about? The other poster said that Djokovic would never dominate any other period and even used quotation mark on domination, like we are not witnessing domination now but something else. What I have seen in 2011 and 2015 though is total domination.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Very inconsistent in your assessment Wawrinka shows up every five months is way more consistent than any of those guys who practically never showed up.

He's about as consistent as Safin was.

There aren't any second tier playes in that time which you are speaking of that are in the same league as some of the guys playing today.

Oh yeah? What about Davydenko for example? Better than anybody not named Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Wawrinka or Murray.

And murray even if he is on par with hewitt like you said wasnt at any stage a dominant number one so i ask you how can that time be stronger? Once again not a clue and i fully expect you to disappear when confronted with facts.

Because that time period had promise. Federer was around and a top 10 player for a year of Hewitt's reign at the time.

Today has no promise. We're to expect Djokovic to keep winning because nobody is on the horizon to stop him.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I do think 2015 was better for him than 2011 but it is not a huge difference. It is not just about 3 Slams it is about the rest as well. 2015 gets the edge due to the post US Open part. He followed up both seasons with the defense of Australia in the next (2012 and 2016), so the differences are quite small.
Well sure if you want you can believe that, but to me it seems more like Fedal fans are butthurt because someone apart from their favorites is able to dominate and reach incredible heights.

I think to most people 2011 is far and away more impressive and that is because of the competition.

People writing what I say off as me being bitter/hating on Novak don't understand that I give him a lot of credit for that year. 2014+ is weak but it isn't Novak's fault.

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

I think to most people 2011 is far and away more impressive and that is because of the competition.

People writing what I say off as me being bitter/hating on Novak don't understand that I give him a lot of credit for that year. 2014+ is weak but it isn't Novak's fault.

However 2015 is the one that is considered the 2nd greatest season in tennis history after 1969 while 2011 is not in contention.
Well I am a new guy here so I am yet to see perfectly who is just fooling around and who is a bitter hater. But as you said above to the other poster "repeating yourself makes it all more obvious" - and boy, a lot of you are just repeating yourselves every day about weak era.

 

[mika1979]

He's about as consistent as Safin was.


Oh yeah? What about Davydenko for example? Better than anybody not named Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Wawrinka or Murray.


Because that time period had promise. Federer was around and a top 10 player for a year of Hewitt's reign at the time.

Today has no promise. We're to expect Djokovic to keep winning because nobody is on the horizon to stop him.

What the hell are you on? Safin was number 1 in your strong time Wawa isn't close. Davydenko spent most of his time during fed's time. Also an emerging Murray was like 6 and 8 against a prime fed. When Fed got himself right he blew the subpar competition out. What Djokovic is facing now can't be called weaker by any STRECH of imagination than the late 90s and early 00s. There is nothing statistically which can point to this. And its not like Novak was terrible during Fed and Nadal times 2011 was a pretty good standard year.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

However 2015 is the one that is considered the 2nd greatest season in tennis history after 1969 while 2011 is not in contention.
Well I am a new guy here so I am yet to see perfectly who is just fooling around and who is a bitter hater. But as you said above to the other poster "repeating yourself makes it all more obvious" - and boy, a lot of you are just repeating yourselves every day about weak era.

2006 is considered one of the greatest seasons of all time and that year had virtually no competition. I think 2015 is on that level.

All I ever see is threads/posts about how Fed is a weak era champ and Djoker is GOAT..

 

[Mainad]

Is this how he tore his meniscus ?

You mean when the cow kicked him in the knee for being a bit too rough with her udder?

 

[Deleted member 307496]

What the hell are you on? Safin was number 1 in your strong time Wawa isn't close.

Puts a hole in your consistency argument then doesn't it?

Davydenko spent most of his time during fed's time. Also an emerging Murray was like 6 and 8 against a prime fed. When Fed got himself right he blew the subpar competition out.

Hewitt lead Fed by an even bigger margin, he turned that around because he peaked for their matches -- same story with Murray recently.

What Djokovic is facing now can't be called weaker by any STRECH of imagination than the late 90s and early 00s. There is nothing statistically which can point to this. And its not like Novak was terrible during Fed and Nadal times 2011 was a pretty good standard year.

Today can be called weaker because uh.. it is? There's no shimmering light or beacon of hope.

Let me ask you. Who's going to be No. 1 after Djokovic? Don't know? Well, from the late 90's to early 2000's, we knew because there was plenty of talent going around.

 

[mika1979]

Puts a hole in your consistency argument then doesn't it?


Hewitt lead Fed by an even bigger margin, he turned that around because he peaked for their matches -- same story with Murray recently.


Today can be called weaker because uh.. it is? There's no shimmering light or beacon of hope.

Let me ask you. Who's going to be No. 1 after Djokovic? Don't know? Well, from the late 90's to early 2000's, we knew because there was plenty of talent going around.

What are you on? Can you read? Safin being number one shows that an inconsistent flashy player could get there in your time. Not at any time afterwards. Wawrinka and Safin are pretty close except stan is a mile from number one today. He would be number one in your time. And by fed catching murray late in his career does that mean he is at his best now? Wow that would make djokovic's achievements unbelievable. Maybe your toasted cheese sandwhich has gone to your head.

 

[mavsman149]

2006 is considered one of the greatest seasons of all time and that year had virtually no competition. I think 2015 is on that level.

All I ever see is threads/posts about how Fed is a weak era champ and Djoker is GOAT..

Actually almost every thread these days are about Djoker is a weak era champ and Fed is GOAT

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

2006 is considered one of the greatest seasons of all time and that year had virtually no competition. I think 2015 is on that level.

All I ever see is threads/posts about how Fed is a weak era champ and Djoker is GOAT..

They are both considered great because one guy was too good for everyone else to handle 90% of the time. You should see by now that I don't believe in strong or weak eras and consider all Slam titles equal.
Well in just a few days of my active time here I came across a thread that Djokovic is the most overrated player ever and had a discussion with OP who eventually attacked me personally. I cannot find that thread because it got deleted probably. Also spotted is this the death of tennis thread.
Before registering I also came across statements that Djokovic is the weakest ever winner of multiple Wimbledon titles and how he is something like a bad copy of Davydenko. Not to mention constant attacks at his game style. So really, you have to see that the other side is provocative too. Novak is not the GOAT yet and the road is still quite long for that.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

What are you on? Can you read?

Can you? You said Wawrinka was more consistent than Safin, yet he's never come close to being No. 1.

Safin being number one shows that an inconsistent flashy player could get there in your time.

Shows he was good enough to get to No. 1.

Not at any time afterwards. Wawrinka and Safin are pretty close except stan is a mile from number one today. He would be number one in your time.

I highly doubt Wawrinka gets to No. 1 in any time period. He just isn't good enough.

And by fed catching murray late in his career does that mean he is at his best now? Wow that would make djokovic's achievements unbelievable. Maybe your toasted cheese sandwhich has gone to your head.

It means Murray isn't as good as you make him out to be; AKA he is a current day Roddick or Hewitt.

Heck, I bet even Roddick and Hewitt would put up more of a fight against current Fed.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Just look at the field in general, Rafa out of form and nowhere near where he was 3-4 years ago, Federer injury riddled and going through surgery, younger players unable to step up.

If you can't admit today is relatively weak it's more proof you're biased but it's not like we need more proof of that, is it?

The thing is, Djokovic's level is so high right now that the chances are pretty high that he'd still be winning majors even if Nadal and Federer were playing better and the younger generation had stepped up.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

They are both considered great because one guy was too good for everyone else to handle 90% of the time. You should see by now that I don't believe in strong or weak eras and consider all Slam titles equal.

I was that way too until I realized people don't really respect those views, unfortunately..

Well in just a few days of my active time here I came across a thread that Djokovic is the most overrated player ever and had a discussion with OP who eventually attacked me personally. I cannot find that thread because it got deleted probably. Also spotted is this the death of tennis thread.

They are trolls. He isn't the most overrated ever, but I do think on some fronts he is overrated. Same deal with Federer though, actually..

I don't think people like Rosewall or Laver are given enough credit. I haven't seen Newcombe's name mentioned here once -- and I've been a member for 3+ years.

Before registering I also came across statements that Djokovic is the weakest ever winner of multiple Wimbledon titles and how he is something like a bad copy of Davydenko. Not to mention constant attacks at his game style. So really, you have to see that the other side is provocative too. Novak is not the GOAT yet and the road is still quite long for that.

I think the "Djoker is GOAT" crowd outweighs the troll crowd though. The biggest fanbase (and rightfully so) is the Djokovic one -- so it makes it a little easier.

Some people from said fanbase make it their mission to present Djokovic as the greatest ever to the masses, and when the masses reject the notion they say they're just bitter.

 

[mika1979]

Can you? You said Wawrinka was more consistent than Safin, yet he's never come close to being No. 1.
Shows he was good enough to get to No. 1.

I highly doubt Wawrinka gets to No. 1 in any time period. He just isn't good enough.


It means Murray isn't as good as you make him out to be; AKA he is a current day Roddick or Hewitt.

Heck, I bet even Roddick and Hewitt would put up more of a fight against current Fed.

An inconsistent player getting to number one makes that era super strong. Bravo peanut.
You said that Wawrinka is on par with Safin which he more or less is therefore in Hewitt's crappy era he gets to number one. Makes Hewitt's era worse. Murray on par with Hewitt and Roddick, I still reckon he is better but ok. Then he gets to number one in the ****ty era of Hewitt's once again making that time worse. Nothing you say is consistent with yout opinion. You just hate Djokovic which is fine but he certainly isn't vulturing

 

[Deleted member 307496]

The thing is, Djokovic's level is so high right now that the chances are pretty high that he'd still be winning majors even if Nadal and Federer were playing better and the younger generation had stepped up.

I don't see it at all. Never before has an ATG dealt with those circumstances, not even the great Pete Sampras or Roger Federer.

 

[abmk]

The thing is, Djokovic's level is so high right now that the chances are pretty high that he'd still be winning majors even if Nadal and Federer were playing better and the younger generation had stepped up.

he straight-away loses wim 14 if federer was playing better. Same goes for USO 15.

also AO 15 as well ..if stan had played better.

that's 3 majors gone.

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

I was that way too until I realized people don't really respect those views, unfortunately..


They are trolls. He isn't the most overrated ever, but I do think on some fronts he is overrated. Same deal with Federer though, actually..

I don't think people like Rosewall or Laver are given enough credit. I haven't seen Newcombe's name mentioned here once -- and I've been a member for 3+ years.


I think the "Djoker is GOAT" crowd outweighs the troll crowd though. The biggest fanbase (and rightfully so) is the Djokovic one -- so it makes it a little easier.

Some people from said fanbase make it their mission to present Djokovic as the greatest ever to the masses, and when the masses reject the notion they say they're just bitter.

I am well aware of the fact that people don't respect the view, but I am not going to change my view to seek approval of those people.

Every player sometimes get more or less praise than he should.

Well that is new. I always heard that Federer and Nadal have bigger fanbases than Djokovic. What changed over night?

It seems like the same case is with weak era crowd. They keep insisting on that desperately even though the other group keeps negating it.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

An inconsistent player getting to number one makes that era super strong. Bravo peanut.

He obviously wasn't that inconsistent if he made it to No. 1, genius.

You said that Wawrinka is on par with Safin which he more or less is therefore in Hewitt's crappy era he gets to number one.

Except he didn't even get to No. 1 in Hewitt's era. He only got to No. 2 or No. 3 because Hewitt held the ranking..

Makes Hewitt's era worse. Murray on par with Hewitt and Roddick, I still reckon he is better but ok. Then he gets to number one in the ****ty era of Hewitt's once again making that time worse. Nothing you say is consistent with yout opinion. You just hate Djokovic which is fine but he certainly isn't vulturing

It doesn't do anything to Hewitt's era. It's already been established his rivals were Agassi, Safin, Kuerten and Federer during that time period. They weren't ever ranked over him (Fed was later, but that's beside the point).

I think you should take a breather and calm down. Dude, it's tennis, no need to get so insulting/hurt over another person's opinion.

 

[Djokovic2011]

he straight-away loses wim 14 if federer was playing better. Same goes for USO 15.

also AO 15 as well ..if stan had played better.

that's 3 majors gone.

Well, you can do the exact same thing with some of Federer's slams so I don't really see your point.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I don't see it at all. Never before has an ATG dealt with those circumstances, not even the great Pete Sampras or Roger Federer.

Dealt with what circumstances?

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I am well aware of the fact that people don't respect the view, but I am not going to change my view to seek approval of those people.

Fair enough, just be prepared for the crazies of other fanbases who will try and convert you.

Every player sometimes get more or less praise than he should.

Recency bias is a huge thing though, people forget how good players were 20+ years ago and go on record saying today guys are better.

Well that is new. I always heard that Federer and Nadal have bigger fanbases than Djokovic. What changed over night?

Djokovic started dominating tennis, a lot of people who want that kind of stuff to continue no matter what support the guy. His long time fans probably feel more comfortable speaking their mind now that he's on top and winning a lot.

It seems like the same case is with weak era crowd. They keep insisting on that desperately even though the other group keeps negating it.

I think people are just getting fed up with the disrespect towards their favorites personally..

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Dealt with what circumstances?

Hungry younger players, other ATGs playing at a high level, ect. It's what started the downfall of Pete Sampras and Roger Federer after all; you need look no further than Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic regarding the latter.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Hungry younger players, other ATGs playing at a high level, ect. It's what started the downfall of Pete Sampras and Roger Federer after all; you need look no further than Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic regarding the latter.

I agree with regards to the younger generation but I honestly don't see how anyone can argue that Novak's not won his slams with other ATGs playing at a high level. That just seems crazy to me.

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

Fair enough, just be prepared for the crazies of other fanbases who will try and convert you.


Recency bias is a huge thing though, people forget how good players were 20+ years ago and go on record saying today guys are better.


Djokovic started dominating tennis, a lot of people who want that kind of stuff to continue no matter what support the guy. His long time fans probably feel more comfortable speaking their mind now that he's on top and winning a lot.



I think people are just getting fed up with the disrespect towards their favorites personally..

Well, you know what they say, new is always better.

Though he is dominating, I don't see him becoming a fan favorite. In fact, people have been quite hostile towards him in certain events. I am sure he has attracted more fans with recent success but his fanbase is still 3rd largest IMO.

That is correct, but two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I agree with regards to the younger generation but I honestly don't see how anyone can argue that Novak's not won his slams with other ATGs playing at a high level. That just seems crazy to me.

He did in 2011, in 2015 not so much.

 

[abmk]

Well, you can do the exact same thing with some of Federer's slams so I don't really see your point.

much lesser than djokovic's.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Well, you know what they say, new is always better.

That isn't always true though.

Though he is dominating, I don't see him becoming a fan favorite. In fact, people have been quite hostile towards him in certain events. I am sure he has attracted more fans with recent success but his fanbase is still 3rd largest IMO.

I think he already is a fan favorite; people just aren't acknowledging it. I've been a member on this forum for 3 years now and not once did I ever see a time where there were a lot of Djokovic fans arguing for the guy. If anything his 2015 campaign has helped him a lot with this.

That is correct, but two wrongs don't make a right.

I guess, but if you want someone to point the finger at there's plenty of those guys around that try and force the Djokovic GOAT argument down your throat.

Like I've said many times before, I don't believe in GOATs. I believe in "best of your generation" and Novak Djokovic will go down as the best of his for sure.

 

[Sartorius]

Bottom line: Competition is always a competition. If you are not playing well, you can lose. Players are there to take you down. Federer and Djokovic could have lost a lot of matches during their dominance. There's a reason why it's only Federer and Djokovic who have put together years with non-stop consistency like 2006 and 2015.

There's one similarity between Federer's 2004-2007 period and what we have been seeing from Djokovic since last year, and 2011 (also to note, since it's been a while for Federer, this is something people forget about him): They almost always played well. Win or lose, hardly any actual bad performances, either they run into someone who red-lines, or a bad patch comes but they are resourceful enough to find a way. Just think of the matches where you have seen Djokovic seriously underperforming since last year: bet you'd need only one hand to count. That's a big problem for the competition: it happens rarely. Djokovic's AO performance is actually a nice example with the Simon match in between.

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

That isn't always true though.


I think he already is a fan favorite; people just aren't acknowledging it. I've been a member on this forum for 3 years now and not once did I ever see a time where there were a lot of Djokovic fans arguing for the guy. If anything his 2015 campaign has helped him a lot with this.


I guess, but if you want someone to point the finger at there's plenty of those guys around that try and force the Djokovic GOAT argument down your throat.

Like I've said many times before, I don't believe in GOATs. I believe in "best of your generation" and Novak Djokovic will go down as the best of his for sure.

Well on this forum he maybe is a fan favorite, but I was referring more to the outside world.

I agree. Some people are getting carried away either by saying that current resume gives him the GOAT title or by being 100% sure that he will add 6-7 more Slams in the future which will be very difficult.

 

[Djokovic2011]

much lesser than djokovic's.

So you're basically saying that Djokovic would be winning less with peak Fedal standing in his way? Well duh. Just like Federer would have won less with peak Djokodal standing in his way when he was at his peak. Again, I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make but you sure sound butthurt about Novak's recent success.

 

[Djokovic2011]

He did in 2011, in 2015 not so much.

If you expect a number #1 player(or more specifically a number #1 player you strongly dislike) to constantly have the toughest competition ever, you must be living in cloud cuckoo land.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Yes, the debates are pointless because there is no need for a debate. Novak Djokovic is currently facing the weakest field of young players in the Open Era, hence his dominance.

 

[mika1979]

He obviously wasn't that inconsistent if he made it to No. 1, genius.


Except he didn't even get to No. 1 in Hewitt's era. He only got to No. 2 or No. 3 because Hewitt held the ranking..


It doesn't do anything to Hewitt's era. It's already been established his rivals were Agassi, Safin, Kuerten and Federer during that time period. They weren't ever ranked over him (Fed was later, but that's beside the point).

I think you should take a breather and calm down. Dude, it's tennis, no need to get so insulting/hurt over another person's opinion.

Nope just a crap time where a small number of points makes you number one

 

[mika1979]

He obviously wasn't that inconsistent if he made it to No. 1, genius.


Except he didn't even get to No. 1 in Hewitt's era. He only got to No. 2 or No. 3 because Hewitt held the ranking..


It doesn't do anything to Hewitt's era. It's already been established his rivals were Agassi, Safin, Kuerten and Federer during that time period. They weren't ever ranked over him (Fed was later, but that's beside the point).

I think you should take a breather and calm down. Dude, it's tennis, no need to get so insulting/hurt over another person's opinion.

Look just come out and say you hate Djokovic. Don't crap on an era because you dont have anything to show in terms of evidence.

 

[weakera]

So Djokovic is dominating you? Nice!

Who has ever denied that he is dominating Tennis?

Nice 'zinger', bro.

 

[Express]

Nadal Fan: "You wait till that DTL stars working. Oh you just wait.." - that's so me right there

I'm surprised no one makes jokes about a return of the Rogelio backhand DTL.

 

[KineticChain]

Spoiler

weak eraerer

 

[The Green Mile]

Sorry to say OP, but I don't think that kind of debate will end anytime soon...

 

[mattosgrant]

Yes, the debates are pointless because there is no need for a debate. Novak Djokovic is currently facing the weakest field of young players in the Open Era, hence his dominance.

While you are probably right on the exact current field, the whole problem stems from the reality most greats who are on top numerous years or sort of have an "era" have weakish years in their era. Federer had 2006, Nadal had 2010, Djokovic had 2015 and maybe 2014 (too early to tell for 2016, if someone like Raonic shines later in the year, and Wawrinka and Murray come up with big wins, and we have new faces in the top 10 we wont be necessarily saying that). However people only acknowledge it when the player they are trying to downplay is involved though, and certainly never when a favorite of theirs is.

Serena is a similar case. People point out how weak the last couple years were at the very top, and forget some of the horrific years of Navratilova and Graf when they were on top. Their are inconsistencies in the other direction too.

 

[mattosgrant]

Sorry to say OP, but I don't think that kind of debate will end anytime soon...

Oh I am well aware this thread wont change a single thing. I am no fool. It is just funny to point it out and put it bluntly like that. It just feels good to do and put it into perspective, even if it wont matter for anything.

 

[mattosgrant]

Can you? You said Wawrinka was more consistent than Safin, yet he's never come close to being No. 1.
Shows he was good enough to get to No. 1.

I think the biggest difference of all between Wawrinka and Safin is the return of serve. Other than that their games are quite similar when they are hot IMO, but their is a huge difference in their returning abilities, particularly against big servers. The Raonic match in Australia really exposed Wawrinka's problems with the really big servers. Also some of his surprising head to heads like against Anderson. I think that is also another reason he hasn't beaten Federer on a faster court, not even old Federer, yet (Federer doesn't have a mammoth serve but it is very offensive with perfect placement and deception).

 

[Poisoned Slice]

nvm wrong thread.

 

[gn]

Only RAFA played in a strong era. 10 out of his 14 Slams came against 17 time Champion Federer and 11 time Champion Novak. RAFA is TRUE GOAT. There ain't such thing as Weak Clay era. It is a BS made up by Djokerer fans. Yet none of these Djokerer fans can admit that Djoker and Fed are MUGS on Clay. In fact, they would fight against each other regarding who is 2nd best clay courter in this era. Another attempt is saying that RAFA's achievements heavily skewed towards Clay. This is untrue. RAFA completely CYGS and pushed Novak to 5 sets in his own backyard and peak FED in his own. Then again you won't see these guys say the same thing for FED at W and Novak at AO.
Losing to Darcis and Brown doesn't change the fact that RAFA had it tough.

OP made a good point that it's pointless to discuss about eras. I agree with that. But let's not forget that only RAFA played in a strong era.

 

[mattosgrant]

Nadal Fan: "You wait till that DTL stars working. Oh you just wait.." - that's so me right there

I cant believe I missed this earlier. That is classic (and I have some tennis following friends who are big Nadal fans and repeated that so often I couldn't help but rolling my eyes anytime I heard it over a beer or coffee).

 

[Dolgopolov85]

At least back in the mid noughties, people acknowledged that 2006 was a weak 'era' and said, well, Fed can only beat whoever is his opposition. The problem with 2015 is there's a bunch of 'reputations' punching well below their weight with no youngsters yet to challenge them. Berdych can't finish above the 2015 Nadal? I mean, that's like the worst version of Nadal in any year from 2005 onwards. That shows you how weak Berdych has become. This is why it would have been better at the time to just give credit to Fed's achievements. I don't remember so much carping over Sampras even though 97 was clearly a weak year and so was 98. Or maybe I was just young to notice plus no internet for all haters of the respective champions to get together. It was with Fed that I noticed that the discussion stooped to the level of discrediting his achievements. Obviously Nole fans don't like drinking the same champagne now but to quote Billy Joel, we didn't start the fire. There have always been weak years and strong years and an era overall is 'balanced'. You think Mac beating Chris Lewis in 1983 was so strong? Had Becker and Edberg arrived earlier, would he have still had a year like 1984? There's no end to this pointless discussion on weak eras.

 

[mattosgrant]

At least back in the mid noughties, people acknowledged that 2006 was a weak 'era' and said, well, Fed can only beat whoever is his opposition. The problem with 2015 is there's a bunch of 'reputations' punching well below their weight with no youngsters yet to challenge them. Berdych can't finish above the 2015 Nadal? I mean, that's like the worst version of Nadal in any year from 2005 onwards. That shows you how weak Berdych has become. This is why it would have been better at the time to just give credit to Fed's achievements. I don't remember so much carping over Sampras even though 97 was clearly a weak year and so was 98. Or maybe I was just young to notice plus no internet for all haters of the respective champions to get together. It was with Fed that I noticed that the discussion stooped to the level of discrediting his achievements. Obviously Nole fans don't like drinking the same champagne now but to quote Billy Joel, we didn't start the fire. There have always been weak years and strong years and an era overall is 'balanced'. You think Mac beating Chris Lewis in 1983 was so strong? Had Becker and Edberg arrived earlier, would he have still had a year like 1984? There's no end to this pointless discussion on weak eras.

That was just due to the internet being nothing like it is today. Believe me had it been there would have been.

 

[abmk]

So you're basically saying that Djokovic would be winning less with peak Fedal standing in his way? Well duh. Just like Federer would have won less with peak Djokodal standing in his way when he was at his peak. Again, I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make but you sure sound butthurt about Novak's recent success.

no, I'm saying federer's level was higher when he was dominating.
Novak is allowed to relax quite a bit now because the competition is frankly atrocious.

 

[helterskelter]

At least back in the mid noughties, people acknowledged that 2006 was a weak 'era' and said, well, Fed can only beat whoever is his opposition. The problem with 2015 is there's a bunch of 'reputations' punching well below their weight with no youngsters yet to challenge them. Berdych can't finish above the 2015 Nadal? I mean, that's like the worst version of Nadal in any year from 2005 onwards. That shows you how weak Berdych has become. This is why it would have been better at the time to just give credit to Fed's achievements. I don't remember so much carping over Sampras even though 97 was clearly a weak year and so was 98. Or maybe I was just young to notice plus no internet for all haters of the respective champions to get together. It was with Fed that I noticed that the discussion stooped to the level of discrediting his achievements. Obviously Nole fans don't like drinking the same champagne now but to quote Billy Joel, we didn't start the fire. There have always been weak years and strong years and an era overall is 'balanced'. You think Mac beating Chris Lewis in 1983 was so strong? Had Becker and Edberg arrived earlier, would he have still had a year like 1984? There's no end to this pointless discussion on weak eras.

Also, Sampras didn't achieve all that much in 1998! He definitely had it pretty easy in 1997.

1995 and 1996 were very strong years, by contrast.