mike danny
Bionic Poster
Delpo is the last great youngster, Djoko the last ATG.
That's pretty much how it is.
That's pretty much how it is.
Check out this thread from 2017:I wonder if there was this much concern for new ATGs when Federer won AO 17 and 18 and people thought Djokovic was out of the picture.
LOL who am I kidding?
2009 was the best year of his career.Yeah, that is correct. Maybe he didn't peak yet.
Laughable stuff.Big 2 are just too good. If you put Medvedev, Tsisipas, Zverev into 03-06 clown era they can win multiple slams.
Djokovic is playing a higher level of tennis than any other 00s AO champ. He still moves and defends like he is 24, but serves & returns better than ever. He’s evolved into the best most indestructible player everLaughable stuff.
Med couldn't take a set off past prime Djoker. Yet he is going to win USO or AO against actually prime great players? Clearly not winning on grass or clay.
I'm talking about Shapovalov.2009 was the best year of his career.
Meddy boy would probably not even win slams in the early 2000's before Fed officially arrived.Laughable stuff.
Med couldn't take a set off past prime Djoker. Yet he is going to win USO or AO against actually prime great players? Clearly not winning on grass or clay.
Check out this thread from 2017:
Seems pretty unanimous to me. People have been memeing the next gen for about as long as they’ve existed on the tour. I had always thought so too, even before joining this forum.
Actually there was. Even I was sitting there thinking it was ridiculous. That is the whole point. It doesn't matter who you are a fan of, we all can see it.I wonder if there was this much concern for new ATGs when Federer won AO 17 and 18 and people thought Djokovic was out of the picture.
LOL who am I kidding?
I was switching to Dasco.I'm talking about Shapovalov.
You started this with your out of 10 rankings, now you'll gonna pay the consequences
Those threads were not about beds but about tennis matches.You started this
You started this with your out of 10 rankings, now you'll gonna pay the consequences.
So he is winning the FO?Djokovic is playing a higher level of tennis than any other 00s AO champ. He still moves and defends like he is 24, but serves & returns better than ever. He’s evolved into the best most indestructible player ever![]()
Check out this thread from 2017:
Seems pretty unanimous to me. People have been memeing the next gen for about as long as they’ve existed on the tour. I had always thought so too, even before joining this forum.
Nadal is highest level on clay. Djokovic on HC and grass.So he is winning the FO?
And no, he does not beat any player from the 2000's, especially the late 2000's, and if he did it wouldn't be the beat down you saw last night.
Yeah, I expected more from the Mad Lad.It was simply not good enough from Medvedev today, not much else to say about it. Losing to Djokovic, even an older Djokovic, in the Australian Open final is reasonable, expected even. The total mental collapse we saw today was inexcusable. I'd back Berdych and Tsonga, who weren't even Top 5 in their generation, to have given more fight
So did I. And I didn't grumble when that same Dimitrov was number 3 in the world while Federer and Nadal swept Slams after just as lackluster resistance from the field than we are seeing now, if not even worse. Sheet happens.Heard this for 5+ years. Dimitrov was once that guy... he is almost 30.
Nadal is highest level on clay. Djokovic on HC and grass.
How many ATGs are there?
How many years are we considering for the pool to draw ATGs from?
How many ATGs/year, or more accurately years/ATG is it?
Should we expect an ATG every x years, and what is x?
Yep, saw it first hand last night.Sheet happens
So did I. And I didn't grumble when that same Dimitrov was number 3 in the world while Federer and Nadal swept Slams after just as lackluster resistance from the field than we are seeing now, if not even worse. Sheet happens.
Big 2 are just too good. They have redefined longevity.two per decade would be normal.
When will an eventual new ATG win his first major? It's been 13 years and counting...
I think it’s a question of probabilities, at least how I think of it. What‘s more likely, the appearance of 3 once-in-a-lifetime level of players (helped by technology and science) or the sudden and sustained drop in the level of tens or hundreds of them?But at 34+ for the big3, an ATG should at least snag one or two by now. ATG's beat other ATG's even if rarely. Zero slams to show for it. Imagine the onslaught if these guys played a young big3?
Big 2 are just too good. They have redefined longevity.
No offense, but I'm talking about immediately after Federer won (like this thread, immediately after Djokovic won). Of course the next gen has been mocked since they came on the scene. But the "yearn" for a lack of new talent always goes silent when Federer does something to extend his legacy. That's from October.
And when Cilic cried. And when Anderson stumbled into the US Open final in a way he can't even explain himself. And when Thiem looked like an impostor in his first final appearance. All worse performances than Medvedev's today. Yet this one was the last straw.Yep, saw it first hand last night.
Probably took you less than a year man lol...Maybe you would have if it lasted more than a year...
It still exists, lol.
I think it’s a question of probabilities, at least how I think of it. What‘s more likely, the appearance of 3 once-in-a-lifetime level of players (helped by technology and science) or the sudden and sustained drop in the level of tens or hundreds of them?
I think it’s a question of probabilities, at least how I think of it. What‘s more likely, the appearance of 3 once-in-a-lifetime level of players (helped by technology and science) or the sudden and sustained drop in the level of tens or hundreds of them?
So...two per decade would be normal.
When will an eventual new ATG win his first major? It's been 13 years and counting...
And when Cilic cried. And when Anderson stumbled into the US Open final in a way he can't even explain himself. And when Thiem looked like an impostor in his first final appearance. All worse performances than Medvedev's today. Yet this one was the last straw.
Probably took you less than a year man lol...
And when Cilic cried. And when Anderson stumbled into the US Open final in a way he can't even explain himself. And when Thiem looked like an impostor in his first final appearance. All worse performances than Medvedev's today. Yet this one was the last straw.
Probably took you less than a year man lol...
No offence, but Federer won AO vs 5 years his junior ATG and his nemesis in Majors for the longest time, after coming off of a six months hiatus.
If you didn't get why that is a reason to consider his achievement monumental regardless of everything, you just don't know tennis.
![]()
Damn, that old one?It still exists, lol.
The new one. I guess Nacho forgot to add you.Damn, that old one?
So...
1952 - Connors
1956 - Borg
1959 - McEnroe
1960 - Lendl
1964 - Wilander
1966 - Edberg
1967 - Becker
1970 - Agassi
1971 - Sampras
1981 - Federer
1986 - Nadal
1987 - Djokovic
This look about right?
Tsonga and Berdych were underated.It was simply not good enough from Medvedev today, not much else to say about it. Losing to Djokovic, even an older Djokovic, in the Australian Open final is reasonable, expected even. The total mental collapse we saw today was inexcusable. I'd back Berdych and Tsonga, who weren't even Top 5 in their generation, to have given more fight
Bro this is like thread 10,000 bemoaning the same nonsenseThe last three ATG's have been Fed, Rafa, and Djoker. All three still present at an age where when they won their first slams we would have said they would of retired by age 30 or earlier.
Of course they are the three greatest ever, but at 34/35/40 soon, they are not in their prime of their careers and should be had by other ATG's.
Yet it has not happened.
While we debate whether Murray and Wawa are ATG's, we can not all agree on it, and look what they did against the big 3 in their primes.
Now lets take a look at the next-gens, all to eventually become "has-gens."
Not one guy under 30 has a slam except Thiem. Clearly at age 27 he is not an ATG with essentially a half slam and has a high ranking of 3. So he is clearly out.
Now, there are some younger guys that could still rack up some slams and reach number one, such as Med, Zverev, Sinner, Tsits, and some unknowns.
However, at age 25, and two losses in slam finals against an aging big 3 and a high ranking of 3, his time to prove he is an ATG is lost.
Zverev? Going on 24, with a high ranking of 3, and one slam final appearance (in a half slam), think all hope of ATG status is loss there.
Sinner?Guy is young but done literally nothing so far except get TTW wet.
Tsits? Maybe there is something there, but at age 22, his time to win a slam in the big 3 era is quickly running out.
Unknowns? There will always be some young guys that get us moist, but they will do what they do and let us down with just a tease.
So it is simple, if you cant beat an aging big 3 and win slams and reach number one, you are no ATG.
Think about how much we debate Wawa and Murray about being ATG's, and their accolades against a prime big3 are tremendous.
Forget big3 bias, what we are seeing in tennis is a sad affair.
Utter. Trash.
![]()
So in all other sports players continue to improve, the Big 3 train with the same techniques as the rest and do very well, yet the rest of the tour sees its level drop? Why? How does that make sense?Why 'sudden drop'? The younger generations are simply worse than the ones before... all of them. Has something to with technique and lifestyle. It hardly strains credulity that there is a global trend in tennis that produces worse players. ATGs are unique figures whose appearance is less dependent on historical trends, so it is indeed a greter coincidence to have three apparently goat-level players at the same time.
Yeah, they were. According to my wife, they were both 9/10.Tsonga and Berdych were underated.
That’s true in part, but also the Big 3 are older, less consistent, and more injury prone than they were 5-10 years ago, yet both the Lost and Next Gen have not managed to be as competitive in slams as guys like Murray, Stan, and Delpo were when the Big 3 were more dominant week-in, week-out. So what does that ultimately say about their talent level?But that’s just the flip side of the Big 3 being so good. Take them out and you’d have several new ATGs. Just like if medbedev had met anyone else at the AO final he probably would have won comfortably and we’d be talking about a new star
That's fine.The new one. I guess Nacho forgot to add you.
LOL my point exactly.
Hardly anyone gave a **** when the pretty backhand was taking advantage at 35-36 years of age.
Nobody would have given a **** if the pretty backhand converted the 40-15 at nearly 38 years of age.
But NOW you want to be concerned for the future. "Big 3 have won too much, enough already"? That old story again? LOL
Fixed.Yeah, they were. I think they were both rated a 9/10 in those AOs.