Will the Big 3/4 era go down as one of the most iconic time periods in sport ever?

Z

Zain786

Semi-Pro
In sport we often have dynasties right, we had the LA Lakers and Boston Celtics in the 70's and 80's, 2000's, Chicago Bulls from 92 - 98. Miami Heat's big three era, Mayweather - Pacquiao era from 2003 - 2015. Tyson era from the early 80s to late 90s, Barcelona's historic treble winning teams from 2008 - 2011. Borg - Mccenroe era, Sampras - Aggasi.

Will the big three/four era go down as an iconic period in all of sport, will it join the historical periods listed above -

Federer - 17 slams, 24 Masters 1000, 6 WTF - 47 Tier 1 Titles
Nadal - 14 slams, 27 Masters 1000, 0 WTF, 1 OG - 42 Tier 1 Titles
Djokovic - 10 slams, 25 Masters 1000, 4 WTF - 39 Tier 1 Titles

Numerous records broken, left, right and centre, check this infographic created on excel by me which highlights their dominance -


222.jpg
 
222.jpg
...how does one upload an image, I have some images to share with all of you showing multiple winners since 1990
 
all the examples above are great dynasties in sport..and you will catch an occasional expose on their historic accomplishments.., they are also mostly american sport franchises with loyal fanbases.. tennis died in this country a while back. each year the body gets colder. so it certainly is and will be considered by many the greatest era in tennis..and it will get some airplay until every major has retractable roofs and there will be no real need to re-hash the past during extended rain delays.
 
swizzy said:
all the examples above are great dynasties in sport..and you will catch an occasional expose on their historic accomplishments.., they are also mostly american sport franchises with loyal fanbases.. tennis died in this country a while back. each year the body gets colder. so it certainly is and will be considered by many the greatest era in tennis..and it will get some airplay until every major has retractable roofs and there will be no real need to re-hash the past during extended rain delays.
Click to expand...
Yikes, pretty dismal view of the game!
 
I think if anything history will remember the Federer v Nadal era for the simple fact it captured the imagination and interest of people who perhaps wouldn't typically be interested in tennis...it transcended the sport in a way.

I'm sure the Novak fans will disagree and say that history should remember him right alongside those 2 and I agree...however it won't. History will remember Novak as an absolute great of the game (possibly the greatest by time he retires), however his appeal for the most part has been limited to people who are already fans of the game.

The 2006 - 2009 Nadal v Federer rivalry is far more akin to your Celtics v Lakers rivalry of the 80's, whilst it won't go down as the most iconic it will certainly be remembered as a time when tennis was able to take center stage and steal some column inches and air time from the larger sports of Football, Basketball and Baseball/Cricket within respective countries.
 
Dave1982 said:
I think if anything history will remember the Federer v Nadal era for the simple fact it captured the imagination and interest of people who perhaps wouldn't typically be interested in tennis...it transcended the sport in a way.

I'm sure the Novak fans will disagree and say that history should remember him right alongside those 2 and I agree...however it won't. History will remember Novak as an absolute great of the game (possibly the greatest by time he retires), however his appeal for the most part has been limited to people who are already fans of the game.

The 2006 - 2009 Nadal v Federer rivalry is far more akin to your Celtics v Lakers rivalry of the 80's, whilst it won't go down as the most iconic it will certainly be remembered as a time when tennis was able to take center stage and steal some column inches and air time from the larger sports of Football, Basketball and Baseball/Cricket within respective countries.
Click to expand...
And Nike approves of this message.
 
uscwang said:
And Nike approves of this message.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I was going add that factor as to why history will remember the Federer v Nadal rivalry more vividly, it was at a time when Nike were going hard on their push into tennis and having the 2 stars in their stable allowed them to promote the rivalry in it's entirety as opposed to just one side of it.
 
Zain786 said:
In sport we often have dynasties right, we had the LA Lakers and Boston Celtics in the 70's and 80's, 2000's, Chicago Bulls from 92 - 98. Miami Heat's big three era, Mayweather - Pacquiao era from 2003 - 2015. Tyson era from the early 80s to late 90s, Barcelona's historic treble winning teams from 2008 - 2011. Borg - Mccenroe era, Sampras - Aggasi.

Will the big three/four era go down as an iconic period in all of sport, will it join the historical periods listed above -

Federer - 17 slams, 24 Masters 1000, 6 WTF - 47 Tier 1 Titles
Nadal - 14 slams, 27 Masters 1000, 0 WTF, 1 OG - 42 Tier 1 Titles
Djokovic - 10 slams, 25 Masters 1000, 4 WTF - 39 Tier 1 Titles

Numerous records broken, left, right and centre, check this infographic created on excel by me which highlights their dominance -


222.jpg
Click to expand...

Homogeneous surface, power baseline era.
Maybe that's why we have numerous records broken.
David Ferrer was among all time great in terms of consecutive slam quarter-finals or something, as I recall.

We have inflation in total count of slams amassed by a few dominating players.

Numerous records broken, maybe only to compare players from 2003 or so..

If we continue to have homogeneous surfaces, standardized balls, current ranking and tournament system, we will continue to have dominating players with final slam count near 20 from now on !
 
Last edited:
Dave1982 said:
I think if anything history will remember the Federer v Nadal era for the simple fact it captured the imagination and interest of people who perhaps wouldn't typically be interested in tennis...it transcended the sport in a way.

I'm sure the Novak fans will disagree and say that history should remember him right alongside those 2 and I agree...however it won't. History will remember Novak as an absolute great of the game (possibly the greatest by time he retires), however his appeal for the most part has been limited to people who are already fans of the game.

The 2006 - 2009 Nadal v Federer rivalry is far more akin to your Celtics v Lakers rivalry of the 80's, whilst it won't go down as the most iconic it will certainly be remembered as a time when tennis was able to take center stage and steal some column inches and air time from the larger sports of Football, Basketball and Baseball/Cricket within respective countries.
Click to expand...
What about kids that grew up with Djokovic dominating not nadal and Federer?
 
Certainly this era is far less iconic than the great Australian era. In a 20 year span from 1953 to 1972 a small group of Australians not only won some 46 grand slam men's singles titles but, unlike the current tennis crop, also dominated grand slam doubles.
 
Livedeath said:
This era consists of 3 double digit slam owners, it is bound to create more hype and noise.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it's the commentators jobs to promote the current game. But this era is clearly over hyped. Plenty of past era's had great champions and awesome matches.
 
NatF said:
Indeed, it's the commentators jobs to promote the current game. But this era is clearly over hyped. Plenty of past era's had great champions and awesome matches.
Click to expand...
We cant put the blame entirely on the commentators, yes i agree some of them become delirious and sort of swoon when they watch these aforementioned players, and start passing sweeping remarks that this is the best player, best era, best forehand, best athelete and list never ends. I cant expect everyone to be like Richie Benaud but that is ok, they have to keep in mind the young viewers also who are not aware of the previous eras. But the onus is on the fans too when they dismiss the previous era greats as if they were kindergarten. I still watch previous era matches and I am still enthralled by them.
 
Good question, however...
Zain786 said:
In sport we often have dynasties right, we had the LA Lakers and Boston Celtics in the 70's and 80's, 2000's
Click to expand...
Handegg is totally ignored by 95+% of the world's population. Not the best example to start with.

As for images, upload the picture, then paste the link into the "Image" signet of the posting box.
But is it any different from the figures in this Wiki article? It makes the case pretty convincingly.

Also, how many times must it be repeated that the Olympics is no Tier1 tournament, per the ATP itself? It's an exhibition-style event.
Just citing who won it since 1988 ought to convince anyone.
 
NatF said:
Indeed, it's the commentators jobs to promote the current game. But this era is clearly over hyped. Plenty of past era's had great champions and awesome matches.
Click to expand...
It may be their job, but outside of the BBC they overdo it horrendously. It's as if they wanted to escape the fact the, deep down, matches consist in repeating the same shots/moves thousands of times. Some players stand out (Top10), but it gets irksome when commentators attempt to magnify what is essentially a mindless task.

Viz. that annoying South African guy, who even praises aces to no end. Ugh. Contemptible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Winner Sinner
The difference in success in proportion in the masters 1000 of the big three
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
RS
RS
Z
The Greatest Era in Mens Tennis - 2005 - ?
Replies
6
Views
828
beast of mallorca
beast of mallorca
uscwang
Big 3 will be breaking records left and right in the next 3 to 5 years
2 3 4
Replies
163
Views
6K
Mileta Cekovic
Mileta Cekovic
Druss
Rating from strongest to weakest eras in the Open Era
Replies
36
Views
4K
Russeljones
Russeljones
mike danny
Numbers of each Big 3 member that will never be surpassed by the other 2
Replies
2
Views
602
LaVie en Rose
LaVie en Rose
Back
Top