What bothers you more about the new generations of players?

Voice your opinion below

  • They seem more interested in social media, don’t possess the same drive/ambitions as the older gens

    Votes: 12 21.8%
  • They all play the same brand of tennis with only slight variations, unique players are dying out

    Votes: 28 50.9%
  • Something else (tell us)

    Votes: 15 27.3%

  • Total voters
    55

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
That they aren’t playing good enough
And aren't good enough to begin with. Players like Tsitsipas, Shapo or FAA wouldn't have won anything in the Mac-Connors-Lendl-Becker-Edberg era either. It's the lowest level of new players I've ever seen. Not one ATG among them anywhere. Now someone will counter with: "Felix is only 19, leave him alone!" Well... many of the true greats already had won slams by age 19, some of them two.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
And aren't good enough to begin with. Players like Tsitsipas, Shapo or FAA wouldn't have won anything in the Mac-Connors-Lendl-Becker-Edberg era either. It's the lowest level of new players I've ever seen. Not one ATG among them anywhere. Now someone will counter with: "Felix is only 19, leave him alone!" Well... many of the true greats already had won slams by age 19, some of them two.
It also annoy me that they act as if they won 10 slams and king of the world when winning a match. Shapo is the worst in that imo. It’s so cringe. And all of them got that attitude to some extent.
I start to wonder if it’s that kind of attitude that makes them so mentally weak on court.
Thiem maybe only one that doesn’t have that.
 

StANDAA

G.O.A.T.
And aren't good enough to begin with. Players like Tsitsipas, Shapo or FAA wouldn't have won anything in the Mac-Connors-Lendl-Becker-Edberg era either. It's the lowest level of new players I've ever seen. Not one ATG among them anywhere. Now someone will counter with: "Felix is only 19, leave him alone!" Well... many of the true greats already had won slams by age 19, some of them two.
while that’s true, they would STILL be a problem even if they were ATG-talented, because of the poll options. Half of them would be more concerned with posting heartfelt/funny tweets instead of working their butt off endlessly on a tennis court just to improve by even a tiny bit like the other greats of the game used to in the past and the other half, actually dedicated, would play the same with just slight variations in which groundstroke is better or worse or if they can serve or return better.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
They are just annoying entitled bunch of spoiled previliged millenial brats! The very same type to sit online on social media websites and do nothing, but troll the hell out of everyone, just for their own amusement...Kyrgios is the brightest example of that...
I think maybe social media made them get a too high ego from young age. Thinking they are greater than they are in reality. Which is not so good it seems on court. Fake it till you make it doesn’t work in sports.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
And aren't good enough to begin with. Players like Tsitsipas, Shapo or FAA wouldn't have won anything in the Mac-Connors-Lendl-Becker-Edberg era either. It's the lowest level of new players I've ever seen. Not one ATG among them anywhere. Now someone will counter with: "Felix is only 19, leave him alone!" Well... many of the true greats already had won slams by age 19, some of them two.
I'm pretty sure the old pro's hyping them are literally forgetting how much better their own results were at that age.
 

MeatTornado

G.O.A.T.
And aren't good enough to begin with. Players like Tsitsipas, Shapo or FAA wouldn't have won anything in the Mac-Connors-Lendl-Becker-Edberg era either. It's the lowest level of new players I've ever seen. Not one ATG among them anywhere. Now someone will counter with: "Felix is only 19, leave him alone!" Well... many of the true greats already had won slams by age 19, some of them two.
The saddest part is that the bar is so low that they don't even need to be an all-time great to stick out, but no one can even do that. Who wouldn't welcome another Roddick/Safin/Hewitt level player whose peak could at least briefly get to the top and win a slam or two against the old guard without being an ATG like Mac or Lendl.

There's not even a next Berdych/Ferrer/Tsonga level of player in this group so far.
 

raph6

Semi-Pro
And aren't good enough to begin with. Players like Tsitsipas, Shapo or FAA wouldn't have won anything in the Mac-Connors-Lendl-Becker-Edberg era either. It's the lowest level of new players I've ever seen. Not one ATG among them anywhere. Now someone will counter with: "Felix is only 19, leave him alone!" Well... many of the true greats already had won slams by age 19, some of them two.
It bothers me also but I think the game has evolved and now the old players are too good physically to fall like the previous ones at 32/33 years old. It will be impossible for a teenager in the future to dominate like Nadal or Becker
 

MeatTornado

G.O.A.T.
It bothers me also but I think the game has evolved and now the old players are too good physically to fall like the previous ones at 32/33 years old. It will be impossible for a teenager in the future to dominate like Nadal or Becker
I'm totally fine with this development. Teenagers don't really dominate in any other sport I can think of, tennis was always an outlier in that regard anyway. But that's still no excuse for the 22-28 year olds barely being able to hang with the 32-38 year olds.
 

Robert F

Semi-Pro
I think it's the young generation are not evolving the game hence the old guard continues to be the masters of the game.

Oddly, where the sport was when the Big 3 were developing their game (before they turned pro), it was in transition. So they got some of the classic training as it evolved into today's game of super spin strokes. I feel they go the best of both worlds. Fed being oldest might have retained the most of the classic game. Nadal may be the closest to the current game with his heavy spin, but his court sense of moving forward when necessary still shows appreciation for the classics. Then I think of Djoker hitting in the swimming pool, which forced him to have clean/simple strokes and less of the hitches of the current players on the forehand.

Unfortunately, with how the game has evovled, you probably have a better chance of becoming a pro if you master the baseline. However the game is going to evolve, it might be risky for whoever is going to breakthrough with it. From a coach's perspective, do you take a risky approach where the player might be the next ATG or he bomb's out never making it to the top 100? Or do you create another steady baseliner who will break the top 100 but might not go much farther? Maybe this is part of Kygrios's failure. He can do some fun stuff but to sustain it, is tough.

What could be the next evolution of the game?
A return to S and V seems unlikely?
Could more players take an all court aggression game and move forward more? Maybe.
I wonder if the next step will be big/tall/mobile players--someone like Opelka. A mobile servebot?
 

thehustler

Semi-Pro
They are just annoying entitled bunch of spoiled previliged millenial brats! The very same type to sit online on social media websites and do nothing, but troll the hell out of everyone, just for their own amusement...Kyrgios is the brightest example of that...
If you look at how they categorize millennials a lot of people start the 1st year as 1981 that's the year Federer was born so that would make him a millennial and Djokovic and Nadal for sure. So it is not a millennial thing it's just a who works harder and works on the right types of things thing. Perhaps these younger players get caught up in the hype of themselves or look at what the big 3 have accomplished and just go I can't compete with that right now I'll have to wait until they get older way older or retire before I can make my mark. Not everyone has the same drive to accomplish the same things maybe these younger guys are OK with a slower development waiting for the big 3 to retire and then making their mark even if it means they won't be considered an all time great because playing tennis is more fun to them that it is their job/career.
 
R

Robert Baratheon

Guest
That all of them have a shït base level and none of them are truly consistent which again is because they don't have a high base level.
They all play the same is another problem.
And most of them lack weapons which could have made them a dominant force.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
They can't win. That's the bottom line. Until that changes we get to see the Big 3 continue to win everything, and that's just boring.
 

beard

Hall of Fame
yeah but they are contributing to the "inflation era" argument against Djokovic in the future.
As Novak's fan I don't give a sheet about that argument, as Fed's fan does not give a sheet about weakest era ever when Fed vulture about 10 slams.
Hope Novak to take as many weak era slams as he can, if Fedish type weak era begin again ...
 

StANDAA

G.O.A.T.
There's not even a next Berdych/Ferrer/Tsonga level of player in this group so far.
right there is why it’s pointless to compare eras. They couldn’t get one slam being far better than these guys who just need to wait for Fedalovic to turn 89-95 and then split the Slams up between each other.
 

OhYes

Legend
So many hypocrites :rolleyes: Why don't you admit your wishes like:
What bothers me most is they are going to let vulturevich steal feds crown because they are incompetent nincompoops.
...so we can move to next point, which is - why are they not good enough ?

It's all your fault you idol worshippers, you cult makers. You made a demigod on social media and expect from kids to be selective in beating ? Your demigod needs to retire first for that to happen, but that is not going to be anytime soon. What is worse, he is going to interfere in Council plans for paying those young players more money. He doesnt want strong younsters, he wants things to stay the same.
 

James P

Legend
I like them just fine. It's not a terrible career to win 2-4 slams, and these guys have plenty of time.
 

Robert F

Semi-Pro
Relative to the Big 3 it does seem to be weaker competition. But if you took the top 20 now, would they have any problem beating the top 20 of 1990?

I feel the tennis is better but boring.
 

Lgoel

New User
The tragedy is not that big 3 are good. It is that no other player is good enough even among their peers and can reach semi finals or finals consistently. You see these players losing in earlier rounds to many other players

Think of 2009 when del potro won us open.. He had to go through nafal and fed when they were great players. Not a single new player like that now. Only thiem on clay is worthy opponent. Rest are just illusuion
 
Top