He's 6 years younger than Djokovic, 7 years younger than Nadal, and 12 years younger than Federer.
He's also 3 years older than Med, 4 years older than Zverev, 5 years older than Stefanos and 6 years older than Shapo.
At 27 years of age, no player on tour has a BIGGER age advantage than Thiem does right now (at least among those in the top 10). If he's not winning all the big events right now, he never will.
Thiem is 12 year younger than Fed, 7 years younger than Rafa and 6 years younger than Djoker. All of those guys are in their mid to late 30's. Thiem should be beating them like a drum whenever he plays any of them, regardless of surface.I know he's still underachieving in terms of slams, but it's quite impressive nonetheless!
He beat Djoker in 2019 and Nadal in 2020 in slams. I dont think i would say that he is underachiving anymore.I know he's still underachieving in terms of slams, but it's quite impressive nonetheless!
Thiem is 12 year younger than Fed, 7 years younger than Rafa and 6 years younger than Djoker. All of those guys are in their mid to late 30's. Thiem should be beating them like a drum whenever he plays any of them, regardless of surface.
Edit: Oops! Now see Clout's basically identical post previously.
Have you? Djoker sucked.Yeah right... Like it's sooo easy to beat Djokovic or Nadal these days. Have you watched the last RG final? I think both guys level are still pretty high.
Well, it is easier to do it these days than 8 years ago.Yeah right... Like it's sooo easy to beat Djokovic or Nadal these days. Have you watched the last RG final? I think both guys level are still pretty high.
Because it is linked to Federer.Why does age have to come up in EVERY discussion? Yea lots other guys are younger than them too and played them many times while they were over 30 but have nowhere near that amount of success. Just say well done and leep it moving.
Yes, like you did when Thiem beat Djokovic last year.Why does age have to come up in EVERY discussion? Yea lots other guys are younger than them too and played them many times while they were over 30 but have nowhere near that amount of success. Just say well done and leep it moving.
How do you know he didn't?Yes, like you did when Thiem beat Djokovic last year.
And Djokovic didn't even choke then, Thiem was the one choking. Today Nadal choked, and you say he played great.
He was crying for weeks about Djokovic being "too passive" and Thiem not doing anything special.How do you know he didn't?
Yes, like you did when Thiem beat Djokovic last year.
And Djokovic didn't even choke then, Thiem was the one choking. Today Nadal choked, and you say he played great.
Well, Thiem certainly deserves massive credit for both wins.He was crying for weeks about Djokovic being "too passive" and Thiem not doing anything special.
Not according to Djokovic fanboys.Well, Thiem certainly deserves massive credit for both wins.
You are right he sucked. I will also add it looked like he didn't even want to play, was disinterested, and had no energy. Was very strange with all that was on the line, that he didn't even fight or show up, terrible effort!Have you? Djoker sucked.
He was crying for weeks about Djokovic being "too passive" and Thiem not doing anything special.
But Thiem probably deserves as much credit for that match as this one, I think.Djokovic was too passive. His average groundstoke speed was around 70 mph or so. Nothing liken Nadal today who was hitting 95 mph forehands. I've already posted the graphic to show the huge difference from that match and the match at AO, and yet you are still on this topic that I shut down months ago. Shut up!
Right.Djokovic was too passive. His average groundstoke speed was around 70 mph or so. Nothing liken Nadal today who was hitting 95 mph forehands. I've already posted the graphic to show the huge difference from that match and the match at AO, and yet you are still on this topic that I shut down months ago. Shut up!
Let’s also not forget that young Thiem took a ton of losses early on against the three titans...I know it's against the Old Big 3, but some of his performances have been impressive nonetheless.
Why does age have to come up in EVERY discussion? Yea lots other guys are younger than them too and played them many times while they were over 30 but have nowhere near that amount of success. Just say well done and leep it moving.
Geriatrics don't get credit because young guys are 4.0 level players probably, young guys don't get credit because it's just the geriatrics they beat. Put context for youngsters that they are doing worse than before, don't put context for geriatrics that they are the best players ever. #MaestronianAsterisksBecause it is linked to Federer.
lmao you could certainly play that argument for the lolzLet’s also not forget that young Thiem took a ton of losses early on against the three titans...
But Thiem probably deserves as much credit for that match as this one, I think.
Asking the younger Thiem to beat Djokovic in a slam final is too much, I'm sorry. Only Fed fans ask of that.Because it is linked to Federer.
So 2015-2016 Thiem as good as now?lmao you could certainly play that argument for the lolz
no, when did I say that?So 2015-2016 Thiem as good as now?
Young Thiem? You mean the same guy who was 22-23 in 2016? You talk as if he was a 19-20 year old.Let’s also not forget that young Thiem took a ton of losses early on against the three titans...
Geriatrics don't get credit because young guys are 4.0 level players probably, young guys don't get credit because it's just the geriatrics they beat. Put context for youngsters that they are doing worse than before, don't put context for geriatrics that they are the best players ever. #MaestronianAsterisks
Nadal just turned into a mental midget. He can't win any big points. Even in RG final, he owned Djokovic at everything except mentality. Mentally Djokovic was clearly the stronger player in that match.Give Thiem credit. He has become a beast on hard court the last couple years.
At this point in time, he's the second-best HC player in the world, right - and certainly capable of beating #1 on hard.
I will not say that Rafa all of a sudden became older in those tiebreaks - much as I wanted him to win.
Lol wtf.Not bad from baby Zeballos, no?
Djokovic is 33. Nadal is 34. That's not really that old these days when you look at athletes in other sports who peak or still perform at a fairly high level into their mid to late 30s.Thiem is 12 year younger than Fed, 7 years younger than Rafa and 6 years younger than Djoker. All of those guys are in their mid to late 30's. Thiem should be beating them like a drum whenever he plays any of them, regardless of surface.
Edit: Oops! Now see Clout's basically identical post previously.
Have you? Djoker sucked.
I mean, maybe they are the best ever because the younger ones aren't that good. Where is the controversy?Geriatrics don't get credit because young guys are 4.0 level players probably, young guys don't get credit because it's just the geriatrics they beat. Put context for youngsters that they are doing worse than before, don't put context for geriatrics that they are the best players ever. #MaestronianAsterisks
Yeah, sure thing, dude. It's why 38 year old Fed last year put in a better effort than Djokovic this year.No. Nadal played as good as he did in his prime, if not better. Age is just a number.
Was not talking that.Aaking the younger Thiem to beat Djokovic in a slam final is too much, I'm sorry. Only Fed fans ask of that.
So Sampras would still be the best ever if these three had good younger rivals?I mean, maybe they are the best ever because the younger ones aren't that good. Where is the controversy?
Of course it's not old when your best competition is Thiem, as good as he is.Djokovic is 33. Nadal is 34. That's not really that old these days when you look at athletes in other sports who peak or still perform at a fairly high level into their mid to late 30s.
I mean we saw guys like Murray, Safin, Stan and Delpo take slams away from the younger Big 3. Weren't they still the best ever then? So it's not an impossible task.Geriatrics don't get credit because young guys are 4.0 level players probably, young guys don't get credit because it's just the geriatrics they beat. Put context for youngsters that they are doing worse than before, don't put context for geriatrics that they are the best players ever. #MaestronianAsterisks