They still beat the best in the world... So quit the Weak Era talk

[Lleytonstation]

It's pretty simple.

You can whine and complain.
You can brings stats and level of play.
You can name names and talk about technology.
You can say it's unfair.

Cool.

It's still the BEST in the WORLD no matter what Era it is.

Sure, we all joke about weak eras and I think we all know this Era could potentially get crushed by others.

But it's the best our species can do with a tennis racquet. Period.

So when Fed crushes players from 04-07 and when Djoker crushes players now, it's because there is no one on the planet that is better.

A slam in any Open Era is worth the same.

If anything, we should be acknowledging how they are heads and shoulder above the best in the world even if we feel the best in the world could be better.

But guess what, they couldn't be better. It's not like there is just some secret tour with players not playing in slams.

As much as it hurts to say, Did Pancho beat the best club players in the world when he beat the likes of Marge, Tabitha, and Agatha? Yes. Because that was the best competition humans could offer.

 

[Federev]

It's pretty simple.

This was when he was thinking of going by “Squirrel Man”.

On the one hand he was discouraged because all he could think of to put fear in the hearts of criminals was the squirrel. He worried that evil doers would think a man dressed as a squirrel was too insignificant.

On the other hand, that quote really helped his confidence, because Ghandi seemed to think it was important enough that he go through with it.

Anyway, I’m glad he thought of “Winged-Squirrel Man” next … and then things just took off from there.

 

[Federev]

Actually, I think “Squirrel-man” is all we ever get without Ghandi’s encouraging quote.

 

[Nadal - GOAT]

It's pretty simple.

You can whine and complain.
You can brings stats and level of play.
You can name names and talk about technology.
You can say it's unfair.

Cool.

It's still the BEST in the WORLD no matter what Era it is.

Sure, we all joke about weak eras and I think we all know this Era could potentially get crushed by others.

But it's the best our species can do with a tennis racquet. Period.

So when Fed crushes players from 04-07 and when Djoker crushes players now, it's because there is no one on the planet that is better.

A slam in any Open Era is worth the same.

If anything, we should be acknowledging how they are heads and shoulder above the best in the world even if we feel the best in the world could be better.

But guess what, they couldn't be better. It's not like there is just some secret tour with players not playing in slams.

As much as it hurts to say, Did Pancho beat the best club players in the world when he beat the likes of Marge, Tabitha, and Agatha? Yes. Because that was the best competition humans could offer.

I would completely agree.. ofcourse some years are stronger than others. Though, all that will matter as time goes by are the numbers.

Novak will go down as the greatest, followed by Nadal and then Fed.

 

[geromino]

Here's your answer on whether every slam is the same https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=GrandSlamTitlesDifficultyAdjusted

 

[Gary Duane]

So when Fed crushes players from 04-07 and when Djoker crushes players now, it's because there is no one on the planet that is better.

Yes.

A slam in any Open Era is worth the same.

Not any slam.

I found your pol confusing. So I chose the wrong option and could not change it.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Here's your answer on whether every slam is the same https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=GrandSlamTitlesDifficultyAdjusted

I mean according to that I am right ha

 

[Lleytonstation]

Yes.

Not any slam.

The value is the same. The stipulations are the same. 128 player draw. 7 opponents you have to be better than on that day.

Yes, some draws work out better, and we can focus on injuries, walkovers, and so on and so on.

But I don't see fed trading 2 slams for one? Do you?

No player would. The value remains equal.

 

[Gary Duane]

The value is the same. The stipulations are the same. 128 player draw. 7 opponents you have to be better than on that day.

The day Wimbledon began with a boycott from top players

On June 25, 1973, Wimbledon started without 81 of the top ATP players, who boycotted the tournament to stand behind fellow player Niki Pilic.

www.tennismajors.com

This is the most obvious example.

I don't believe in weak eras. But I do believe in individual weak slams.

Other than that I favor simply giving champions full credit for winning. When a champion has a super dominant year there is no way to prove whether or not he was simply that good, or whether the competition was weaker that year. It just becomes a perfect storm for food fights between fans.

 

[Lleytonstation]

The day Wimbledon began with a boycott from top players

On June 25, 1973, Wimbledon started without 81 of the top ATP players, who boycotted the tournament to stand behind fellow player Niki Pilic.

www.tennismajors.com

This is the most obvious example.

I don't believe in weak eras. But I do believe in individual weak slams.

Other than that I favor simply giving champions full credit for winning. When a champion has a super dominant year there is no way to prove whether or not he was simply that good, or whether the competition was weaker that year. It just becomes a perfect storm for food fights between fans.

Ah I did forget about some of the politics. But those wouldn't be considered Open.

 

[Gary Duane]

Ah I did forget about some of the politics. But those wouldn't be considered Open.

I know that year was extreme.

But check out the French Open in 1977. Bjorn Borg couldn't play. Compare that to 1976 when he was beaten.

Also think about all the really weak years at the Australian Open early in the open era.

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

Oldschool Fed approves!