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.
ZERO ATG's present or in the making: Going on 13 years
- Thread starter Lleytonstation
- Start date
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
RS
Bionic Poster
2009 was the best year of his career.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
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
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Meddy boy would probably not even win slams in the early 2000's before Fed officially arrived.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
The trolls are out in full force trying to rewrite the narrative. It is in line with what is happening all over the world in all walks of life. Snowflakes and all that.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
RS
Bionic Poster
RS
Bionic Poster
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
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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
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.
Towny
Hall of Fame
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
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.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Nadal is highest level on clay. Djokovic on HC and grass.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Yeah, I expected more from the Mad Lad.
TheAssassin
Legend
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.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
that hurt deep. Why would you say that to me?
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
two per decade would be normal.
When will an eventual new ATG win his first major? It's been 13 years and counting...
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Yep, saw it first hand last night.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Maybe you would have if it lasted more than a year...
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Big 2 are just too good. They have redefined longevity.
Born_to_slice
Legend
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
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?
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Looks like everyone else is too bad. More unbalanced games than ever. Medvedev is probably the worst volleyer of all time to have made the top 5.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
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.
TheAssassin
Legend
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...
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
It still exists, lol.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
I mean, both are exceptionally unlikely TBH. Usually most eras have 1 of those guys at most (70s had Borg, 80s didn't have any, 90s had Sampras).
Although I guess Pancho/Rosewall/Laver were around at the same time, so the 3-GOATs-in-one-era has sort of happened before.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
James P
G.O.A.T.
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?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
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...
^^^
Yet another one who has no clue about what the opinions around here were. All these instances got plenty of attention even back then, as have those seasons ever since, as have the whole "lost ten", "next gen" and "next next gen" groups and their failures.
To write that it was just now found out that there is a huge problem is a massive ignorance.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
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...
As for as Djokovic goes? There's a year and a half between WB '18 and AO '20, which is when I saw this hoarding was getting out of control.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
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
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
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.
LOL my point exactly.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Guys, the Sinner shall win the Grand Slam in 2022. It's over.
Born_to_slice
Legend
Damn, that old one?
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
The new one. I guess Nacho forgot to add you.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes if going by birthyear.
Another way, going by primes:
Connors and Borg - mostly 70s;
McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg - mostly 80s;
Becker - 80s/90s;
Sampras, Agassi - 90s;
Federer - 00s;
Nadal - 00s/10s;
Djokovic - 10s.
70s - 2
80s - 4.5 (!)
90s - 2.5
00s - 1.5
10s - 1.5
but Djokovic sprang up in 2011, the first year of the new decade. No ATG has appeared since then at all and nobody is promising except maybe Sinner. FAA already a solid no, the way he gets exposed in big (for him) matches. (Alcaraz etc too young to make any judgment yet.)
RS
Bionic Poster
Tsonga and Berdych were underated.
vex
Legend
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?
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.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
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?
isn’t it much more likely that all our debates are simply the result of the Big 3 anomaly? Take them out and we’d have other ATGs, other multislam winners. We would not know what we missed.
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?
Born_to_slice
Legend
That's fine.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
I don't think that you know what "your point" is. Federer has plenty to be proud fighting against his own generational challengers (at the time Nadal was 31), that doesn't in any way affect the opinion of the badly failing "next gens".
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
90gens don't just lose, they lose pathetically...
I would never not say Cilic didn't play a pathetic final @ '17 WB and didn't finish AO '18 with a pathetic choke (even then, his level in the middle three sets beats anything the nextgen mugs showed in their slam finals pfft). Well now he's gotten too pathetic to even be relevant, which is good. Only look at what came to replace him...
RS
Bionic Poster
Fixed.
Similar threads
