Today's generation vs. the past

[LttlElvis]

Pretty good article interviewing BJK.

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2009/02/09/king-talks-todays-tennis/#cont

There's always will be debate on who's the greatest players. My favorites have always been Borg/McEnroe/Connors. I am too young to have ever seen Laver, and until Federer the last few years, I thought McEnroe was the best player I have seen, even better than Sampras (IMO).

Pretty strong words from coming from a legend:

"They're a lot better today, every generation just gets better," King said. "Older athletes talk about the glory days, but we're not the best ever.

"It's amazing the spins and what they can get on the ball. Everything's more exaggerated than ever before. They're so good, they train better, and the information available is better than anything than what we had. It'd be great to be a player today. It's great to have choices when you have money and resources."

 

[ohlori]

Pretty good article interviewing BJK.

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2009/02/09/king-talks-todays-tennis/#cont

There's always will be debate on who's the greatest players. My favorites have always been Borg/McEnroe/Connors. I am too young to have ever seen Laver, and until Federer the last few years, I thought McEnroe was the best player I have seen, even better than Sampras (IMO).

Pretty strong words from coming from a legend:

"They're a lot better today, every generation just gets better," King said. "Older athletes talk about the glory days, but we're not the best ever.

"It's amazing the spins and what they can get on the ball. Everything's more exaggerated than ever before. They're so good, they train better, and the information available is better than anything than what we had. It'd be great to be a player today. It's great to have choices when you have money and resources."

(Krajicek Laver comparison aces etc..)

 

[grizzly4life]

all you have to do is look at anything that's easily quantifiable. sprinting/swimming speeds, golf driving distances. everything gets better.

and one thing i think is overlooked........... laver was probably suited to his era. federer is probably suited to his era........ different eras bring out different strengths. could be completely different guys as best if you time machined the guys...... interestingly, i'd think the 50-60's would have been good for rafa.

 

[crabgrass]

hard to say overall, the players today in general hit the ball harder but the equipment can take a lot of credit for that...i think the older generation had more variety and personally i enjoyed it more.
don't agree about the latest always being the greatest,
the greatest footballers (soccer) of alltime are pele,beckenbauer,maradona,cruyff,di stefano and they all played in the 60s,70s and 80s....joe montana's still the greatest quarterback of alltime and most still rate ali as the greatest heavyweight boxer of alltime...just a few examples.

 

[Tshooter]

When I see a match back from the 70s it looks like they were hitting the ball in slow motion. It's simply a different game.

And the players keep improving their fitness and training.

Eddie Dibbs, for example, was a top tenner for years back in the late 70s. That guy never hit the gym. He wasn't unique.

 

[mac1728]

i agree that the players hit the ball harder with more spin, but to say that it keeps getting better, that i don't know. For me tennis was great in the 80s and early 90s. Connors at 39 showed that the players from his generation could play successfully against guys who hit the ball hit harder and with more spin in the us open, mcenroe in the semis against agassi showed that his era could play against the best at wimbledon although he lost the match, you can hit the ball as hard as you can but guaranteed a person who gets it back and places the ball strategically will always win no matter the pace or do we forget some of the so called pushers who played and had great results in the past 10 years. Does anyone not think that Joe Montana could play in the nfl now if he was just out of college or Michael Jordan could not survive in todays nba, please some of you just don't understand.

 

[CyBorg]

Pretty strong words from coming from a legend:

"They're a lot better today, every generation just gets better," King said. "Older athletes talk about the glory days, but we're not the best ever.

"It's amazing the spins and what they can get on the ball. Everything's more exaggerated than ever before. They're so good, they train better, and the information available is better than anything than what we had. It'd be great to be a player today. It's great to have choices when you have money and resources."

She's talking about the women and that's pretty much what she can attest to from personal experience. And even in that respect, any appeal to authority is a fallacy, because as a tennis player King is not automatically a reliable historian (she isn't) or analytician. Her quotes don't even support the claim.

It's amusing just how universally liked (as so the media would suggest) King is today, even though at least half the men's tour hated her guts 35 years ago.

 

[CyBorg]

all you have to do is look at anything that's easily quantifiable. sprinting/swimming speeds, golf driving distances.

Uh-huh. Easily quantifiable.

Adjust for the dimensions of the pools, the new kinds of swimming suits as well as rule changes and yeah you can probably compare.

Because if you don't do this, then you will make half-hazard conclusions based on pure finishing results.

According to pure results, Michael Phelps is a far superior swimmer to Ian Thorpe. And I mean far superior. Phelps shattered Thorpe's numbers in the last olympics by a large margin.

So did athletes suddenly get so much better in four years? Or maybe something else is up?

Sports is a business, first and foremost. Breaking records makes money, which is why multi-million dollar corporations will do everything in their power to make it happen. They'll design suits for you, alter technology, put all kinds of stuff in your body, contribute to rule changes, etc. At the end of the day, once you get past the glitz and glamour the athletes are no better.

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

She's talking about the women and that's pretty much what she can attest to from personal experience. And even in that respect, any appeal to authority is a fallacy, because as a tennis player King is not automatically a reliable historian (she isn't) or analytician. Her quotes don't even support the claim.

It's amusing just how universally liked (as so the media would suggest) King is today, even though at least half the men's tour hated her guts 35 years ago.

Why did the men's tour hate her?

 

[CyBorg]

Why did the men's tour hate her?

From Peter Rowley's book on Rosewall (and yes, there is bias here, but it's not like this is the only source to speak badly of Billie):

(pp 164) "Rosewall's feelings about Billie Jean King can be inferred from his comments on her behaviour in the playoffs of Wolrd Team Tennis in 1974 as 'typical Billie Jean King.' Rosewall was the player-coach of the Pittsburgh WTT team. Billie Jean, accompanied by her male players, dirupted the singles between Rosewall and Buster Mottram, whom Rosewall had earlier in the season reprimanded for heckling one of the Pittsburgh players during a match. Billie Jean threatened an official protest over a line call dispute. However, Rosewall won the set, delivering afterwards his dry comment on an American superstar."

All contemporary books on King paint her as a saint, but in her playing days she was aggressive and offputting in pursuing her slew of personal agendas.

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

From Peter Rowley's book on Rosewall (and yes, there is bias here, but it's not like this is the only source to speak badly of Billie):

(pp 164) "Rosewall's feelings about Billie Jean King can be inferred from his comments on her behaviour in the playoffs of Wolrd Team Tennis in 1974 as 'typical Billie Jean King.' Rosewall was the player-coach of the Pittsburgh WTT team. Billie Jean, accompanied by her male players, dirupted the singles between Rosewall and Buster Mottram, whom Rosewall had earlier in the season reprimanded for heckling one of the Pittsburgh players during a match. Billie Jean threatened an official protest over a line call dispute. However, Rosewall won the set, delivering afterwards his dry comment on an American superstar."

All contemporary books on King paint her as a saint, but in her playing days she was aggressive and offputting in pursuing her slew of personal agendas.

Thanks .

 

[GameSampras]

The game, the courts, the rackets, the nutritionists, the entourage of trainers, is like night and day compared to before. THe only thing you can prove is that every era has its GOAT. Thats about it. I dont think its impossible to compare eras, but you will get more subjectivity out of comparing them to objectivity. People will make opinions based on their own motives in choosing one over the other

 

[GameSampras]

Uh-huh. Easily quantifiable.

Adjust for the dimensions of the pools, the new kinds of swimming suits as well as rule changes and yeah you can probably compare.

Because if you don't do this, then you will make half-hazard conclusions based on pure finishing results.

According to pure results, Michael Phelps is a far superior swimmer to Ian Thorpe. And I mean far superior. Phelps shattered Thorpe's numbers in the last olympics by a large margin.

So did athletes suddenly get so much better in four years? Or maybe something else is up?

Sports is a business, first and foremost. Breaking records makes money, which is why multi-million dollar corporations will do everything in their power to make it happen. They'll design suits for you, alter technology, put all kinds of stuff in your body, contribute to rule changes, etc. At the end of the day, once you get past the glitz and glamour the athletes are no better.

So Cyborg.. Was Federer put into a position to take the GS record over Pete do u feel?

 

[CyBorg]

So Cyborg.. Was Federer put into a position to take the GS record over Pete do u feel?

I don't know what you mean. That's a cumulative record. A bit different than beating a sprinting time.

 

[Chopin]

I don't know what you mean. That's a cumulative record. A bit different than beating a sprinting time.

Cyborg, you're right to draw a distinction between cumulative and quantifiable records.

I'm curious though, do you play tennis yourself, and if so, what level do you play at?

 

[Kirko]

When I see a match back from the 70s it looks like they were hitting the ball in slow motion. It's simply a different game.

And the players keep improving their fitness and training.

Eddie Dibbs, for example, was a top tenner for years back in the late 70s. That guy never hit the gym. He wasn't unique.

you're right, neither did Borg he watched his weight and just practiced & played mathces. I often think thisis the best way maybe not for the uber-player of today, but for guys like us.

 

[cristiano]

THe only thing you can prove is that every era has its GOAT.

If you can prove that every era has a greatest of all times you can make a revolution in logic, so, it would be great

 

[lawrence]

its not a very fair argument

if you went back in time and gave laver a k90 with some fresh strings from 2009, and a fair amount of time to practice, he wouldn't be the same laver