CHillTennis
Hall of Fame
This has been a subject that I've wanted to cover for a while now.
Since the first grand slam championship at Wimbledon in 1877 there has never been a generation of players that has failed to send the old guard into retirement.
Some groups have been harder to take down then others.
Rod Laver was able to win grand slam titles when he was in his early 30s.
So was Jimmy Connors, Andre Agassi, Pete Sampras, and Arthur Ashe.
But eventually father-time has a way of catching up to these players. No matter how brilliant they might have been, during the earlier stages of their career.
Only two things in this world are guaranteed; taxes and death.
But now it seems as though we have finally found an anomaly that seemingly defies the 150 year history of the game.
We are witnessing two players (now both in their mid-30s) who should be well on their way out of the game.
Instead these players have been raking in the grand slam titles.
In the past two years, both Djokovic and Nadal were on course for completing the calendar year grand slam title.
Djokovic was within a whisker of achieving this feat when he was upset by the 25 year old Daniil Medvedev in the finals of the 2021 US Open.
It's a sad day in the sport of tennis, when a 25 year old's defeat of a 34 year old is considered to be an upset.
This dilemma that plagues the Next Gen playres, appears to have no end in sight.
Medvedev was beaten by Nadal in the finals of the Australian Open. As was Caper Ruud in the finals of the French Open.
The much-hyped Nick Kyrgios would find himself on the losing end of a four set match to Djokovic in the finals of Wimbledon.
Had Nadal not been injured leading into that semi-final, it's possible that he would have been the one duking it out with Djokovic.
So why is it that the Next Gen players are not able to beat the Big 3 at the grand slams?
You can read the full article right here:
chilltennis.substack.com
Since the first grand slam championship at Wimbledon in 1877 there has never been a generation of players that has failed to send the old guard into retirement.
Some groups have been harder to take down then others.
Rod Laver was able to win grand slam titles when he was in his early 30s.
So was Jimmy Connors, Andre Agassi, Pete Sampras, and Arthur Ashe.
But eventually father-time has a way of catching up to these players. No matter how brilliant they might have been, during the earlier stages of their career.
Only two things in this world are guaranteed; taxes and death.
But now it seems as though we have finally found an anomaly that seemingly defies the 150 year history of the game.
We are witnessing two players (now both in their mid-30s) who should be well on their way out of the game.
Instead these players have been raking in the grand slam titles.
In the past two years, both Djokovic and Nadal were on course for completing the calendar year grand slam title.
Djokovic was within a whisker of achieving this feat when he was upset by the 25 year old Daniil Medvedev in the finals of the 2021 US Open.
It's a sad day in the sport of tennis, when a 25 year old's defeat of a 34 year old is considered to be an upset.
This dilemma that plagues the Next Gen playres, appears to have no end in sight.
Medvedev was beaten by Nadal in the finals of the Australian Open. As was Caper Ruud in the finals of the French Open.
The much-hyped Nick Kyrgios would find himself on the losing end of a four set match to Djokovic in the finals of Wimbledon.
Had Nadal not been injured leading into that semi-final, it's possible that he would have been the one duking it out with Djokovic.
So why is it that the Next Gen players are not able to beat the Big 3 at the grand slams?
You can read the full article right here:
The Reason Why The Next Gen Players Can't Win Grand Slam Titles
Shocking reveal about the future of men's tennis
