Unless I'm missing something obvious.. thoughts about TT beliefs..

[Guitario]

I haven't been on these forums for long, but I have been a mainstay on other forums for many years, so I know how these things work. Anyway, here's my thought's/queries about how things work around here...
/..
1. It's a weak era - This seems to be a commonly spouted belief, but is it just me or is the answer obvious?

Surely the reason why the likes of Nishikori, Roanic, Cilic etc haven't won more slams is because the current 'top 4' are among the best players to have ever lived.. thus the challengers are not getting the opportunity to grow and develop. Not because they lack ability, but because they can't bridge the ridiculous gap in quality.

2. The 'I love x player thus the rest suck' belief - why does everyone on here seem to favour one player and disregard the others? I follow several players, and don't hate anyone.. so am I unique or is this place populated with immature kids?

3. Djokovic vs Murray

So it's totally fine when Djokovic is playing at a higher level than Murray, but when the situation is reversed, it's because Djokovic is not as his peak?

Isn't this how Djokovic displaced Federer? Or Federer displaced Sampras etc etc..

4. Raonic is a serve bot..

Ok because he has a fast serve and is tall.. he's useless at everything else? Serve bots don't exist, let alone reach 3 in the world.

5. Murray/Djokovic is a pusher - do people really think this, or understand what it is they're saying?

Do they disregard all the winners and flair shots these guys produce just to focus on what supports their current beliefs?

I sense the answer is contained within..

Opinions welcome..

 

[Nashvegas]

I haven't been on these forums for long, but I have been a mainstay on other forums for many years, so I know how these things work. Anyway, here's my thought's/queries about how things work around here...
/..
1. It's a weak era - This seems to be a commonly spouted belief, but is it just me or is the answer obvious?

Surely the reason why the likes of Nishikori, Roanic, Cilic etc haven't won more slams is because the current 'top 4' are among the best players to have ever lived.. thus the challengers are not getting the opportunity to grow and develop. Not because they lack ability, but because they can't bridge the ridiculous gap in quality.

2. The 'I love x player thus the rest suck' belief - why does everyone on here seem to favour one player and disregard the others? I follow several players, and don't hate anyone.. so am I unique or is this place populated with immature kids?

3. Djokovic vs Murray

So it's totally fine when Djokovic is playing at a higher level than Murray, but when the situation is reversed, it's because Djokovic is not as his peak?

Isn't this how Djokovic displaced Federer? Or Federer displaced Sampras etc etc..

4. Raonic is a serve bot..

Ok because he has a fast serve and is tall.. he's useless at everything else? Serve bots don't exist, let alone reach 3 in the world.

5. Murray/Djokovic is a pusher - do people really think this, or understand what it is they're saying?

Do they disregard all the winners and flair shots these guys produce just to focus on what supports their current beliefs?

I sense the answer is contained within..

Opinions welcome..

1. You're probably right
2. Immaturity only explanation
3. See # 2
4. See # 2
5. See # 2

 

[torpantennis]

1. Then how come weak era clowns couldn't even beat 2nd class players from the old era like Ferrers etc? Don't tell me they're excaptionally strong historically!

2. I follow multiple players but due to Big4 war here can't support more than one member of Big4 on this place.

3. Djokovic is far better player, and Murray plays similar playstyle, just lower level. With similar styles there can't be matchup advantage so the better player should always win. If he doesn't then he played bad like it has been in Murrovic.

4. Raonic ain't a servebot, Karlovic is.

5. Murrovic ain't pushers, but they are pro version of pusher i.e counter punchers.

 

[heninfan99]

Try live posting in the Pro Match section during an actual match. You'll see more balanced views along-side what you listed.

I haven't been on these forums for long, but I have been a mainstay on other forums for many years, so I know how these things work. Anyway, here's my thought's/queries about how things work around here...
/..
1. It's a weak era - This seems to be a commonly spouted belief, but is it just me or is the answer obvious?

Surely the reason why the likes of Nishikori, Roanic, Cilic etc haven't won more slams is because the current 'top 4' are among the best players to have ever lived.. thus the challengers are not getting the opportunity to grow and develop. Not because they lack ability, but because they can't bridge the ridiculous gap in quality.

2. The 'I love x player thus the rest suck' belief - why does everyone on here seem to favour one player and disregard the others? I follow several players, and don't hate anyone.. so am I unique or is this place populated with immature kids?

3. Djokovic vs Murray

So it's totally fine when Djokovic is playing at a higher level than Murray, but when the situation is reversed, it's because Djokovic is not as his peak?

Isn't this how Djokovic displaced Federer? Or Federer displaced Sampras etc etc..

4. Raonic is a serve bot..

Ok because he has a fast serve and is tall.. he's useless at everything else? Serve bots don't exist, let alone reach 3 in the world.

5. Murray/Djokovic is a pusher - do people really think this, or understand what it is they're saying?

Do they disregard all the winners and flair shots these guys produce just to focus on what supports their current beliefs?

I sense the answer is contained within..

Opinions welcome..

 

[nadalfan2013]

I haven't been on these forums for long, but I have been a mainstay on other forums for many years, so I know how these things work. Anyway, here's my thought's/queries about how things work around here...
/..
1. It's a weak era - This seems to be a commonly spouted belief, but is it just me or is the answer obvious?

Surely the reason why the likes of Nishikori, Roanic, Cilic etc haven't won more slams is because the current 'top 4' are among the best players to have ever lived.. thus the challengers are not getting the opportunity to grow and develop. Not because they lack ability, but because they can't bridge the ridiculous gap in quality.

2. The 'I love x player thus the rest suck' belief - why does everyone on here seem to favour one player and disregard the others? I follow several players, and don't hate anyone.. so am I unique or is this place populated with immature kids?

3. Djokovic vs Murray

So it's totally fine when Djokovic is playing at a higher level than Murray, but when the situation is reversed, it's because Djokovic is not as his peak?

Isn't this how Djokovic displaced Federer? Or Federer displaced Sampras etc etc..

4. Raonic is a serve bot..

Ok because he has a fast serve and is tall.. he's useless at everything else? Serve bots don't exist, let alone reach 3 in the world.

5. Murray/Djokovic is a pusher - do people really think this, or understand what it is they're saying?

Do they disregard all the winners and flair shots these guys produce just to focus on what supports their current beliefs?

I sense the answer is contained within..

Opinions welcome..

See guys? This is a new poster who is obviously objective about tennis and what he observed on the forum is the fact that Djokovic, Federer and Murray fans are for the most part immature, have absolutely no logic and keep fighting for nothing. He didn't even once mention Nadal and his fans because they are logical, humble and respectful of the sport.

 

[Autodidactic player]

#1 - Weak era is ridiculous. Three of the top ten players of all time are still playing at a high level (and Murray will certainly end his career in the top 20 all-time).

#2 - Many of us like watching certain players because we like their style of play. That doesn't mean we "hate" other players. But this is the internet so there is certainly enough hate to go around.

#3 -Djokovic started out whining to much for my liking. He got much less whinny when he started winning everything and he's now back to whining. Murray has always been a whiner but his whining appears to me to be directed at himself so it's more acceptable to me. Neither are my "favorite" player.

#4 -Just re-watch any of the Raonic matches at the the World Tour Finals, Raonic is turning into a complete player.

#5 - Neither is close to being a pusher. Watch Harold Solomon play Eddie Dibbs in the 1970's and you'll know what a pusher (at the professional level) is!

 

[Phoenix1983]

OP, I agree with many of your points but not No 1.

Fact is, it's not just that the younger players are around but losing constantly to the big 4. They're barely able to break the top 10.

Only one player born in the 1990s (Raonic) has even made a slam final, and we're talking about guys who are now aged up to 26 years old. That's pretty disgraceful, and reflective of a generation who prefers computer games to physical activity.

 

[DreddyTennis45]

k because he has a fast serve and is tall.. he's useless at everything else? Serve bots don't exist, let alone reach 3 in the world

Raonic being #3 is a bloody disgrace to our sport. He doesn't deserve to be in the top 8 let alone #3. Fuming how he gets to mug his way to the top without actually doing anything good. Beating Grampa Fed with one knee? Ok. But only to have his serve go missing (as per usual in big matches) in the final. Cannot believe it.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Ssshhh OP, common sense in these parts is feared as much as the plague....

 

[SinjinCooper]

For #'s 1 and 3, you're either willfully ignoring evidence, ignorant of history, or both.

The other three points aren't interesting. Just trolls being trolls.

 

[Mainad]

Raonic being #3 is a bloody disgrace to our sport. He doesn't deserve to be in the top 8 let alone #3. Fuming how he gets to mug his way to the top without actually doing anything good. Beating Grampa Fed with one knee? Ok. But only to have his serve go missing (as per usual in big matches) in the final. Cannot believe it.

He played a really good match against Murray last week at the O2. Best I've seen him play since Wimbledon. Bit surprised he leap-frogged Stan to get to #3 though considering Stan had only recently won the US Open!

 

[Soul_Evisceration]

Raonic being #3 is a bloody disgrace to our sport. He doesn't deserve to be in the top 8 let alone #3. Fuming how he gets to mug his way to the top without actually doing anything good. Beating Grampa Fed with one knee? Ok. But only to have his serve go missing (as per usual in big matches) in the final. Cannot believe it.

Raonic is a weak Peak Roddick that heavily relies on his serve.

Despite his improvements, he still moves like a lumbering oaf.

If he serves well, the rest of his game follow but he's not clutch on Tiebreaks/Match Points and he's only #3 because of a Nadal/Federer absence.

It's unfortunate that he's currently #3 but he will be back down to the Top 10 by next year if the Big 4 plays like the way they should.

 

[Gary Duane]

#5 - Neither is close to being a pusher. Watch Harold Solomon play Eddie Dibbs in the 1970's and you'll know what a pusher (at the professional level) is!

So true.

 

[Peak Nadal]

Despite his improvements, he still moves like a lumbering oaf.

He was moving really well at the O2. Turns 26 soon so he's primed to enter a few peak years.

 

[Indio]

Raonic, Jonas Bjorkman and James Blake are the only players who finished a year in the Top 5 (since 1990) without having won even a Masters title in their careers. Raonic, unlike the other two, still has time.

 

[Indio]

Raonic, Jonas Bjorkman and James Blake are the only players who finished a year in the Top 5 (since 1990) without having won even a Masters title in their careers. Raonic, unlike the other two, still has time.

You can add Nishikori to that list as well

 

[Antonio Puente]

Isn't this how Djokovic displaced Federer? Or Federer displaced Sampras etc etc..

Djokovic displaced Fed? When Fed won his 16th slam, Djoker had 1 slam. One. Nadal destroyed Fed got a decade. Djoker had nothing... nothing to do with Fed's downfall. Djoker's and Fed's careers are about as intertwined as Borg's and Sampras'.

 

[Russeljones]

I haven't been on these forums for long, but I have been a mainstay on other forums for many years, so I know how these things work. Anyway, here's my thought's/queries about how things work around here...
/..
1. It's a weak era - This seems to be a commonly spouted belief, but is it just me or is the answer obvious?

Surely the reason why the likes of Nishikori, Roanic, Cilic etc haven't won more slams is because the current 'top 4' are among the best players to have ever lived.. thus the challengers are not getting the opportunity to grow and develop. Not because they lack ability, but because they can't bridge the ridiculous gap in quality.

2. The 'I love x player thus the rest suck' belief - why does everyone on here seem to favour one player and disregard the others? I follow several players, and don't hate anyone.. so am I unique or is this place populated with immature kids?

3. Djokovic vs Murray

So it's totally fine when Djokovic is playing at a higher level than Murray, but when the situation is reversed, it's because Djokovic is not as his peak?

Isn't this how Djokovic displaced Federer? Or Federer displaced Sampras etc etc..

4. Raonic is a serve bot..

Ok because he has a fast serve and is tall.. he's useless at everything else? Serve bots don't exist, let alone reach 3 in the world.

5. Murray/Djokovic is a pusher - do people really think this, or understand what it is they're saying?

Do they disregard all the winners and flair shots these guys produce just to focus on what supports their current beliefs?

I sense the answer is contained within..

Opinions welcome..

When refuting using observations not mutually exclusive with the suppositions one means to refute..

You could get paid for setting such a good example.