2021 Wimbledon

[I6MTW]

2 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Nole too was a super aggressive baseliner in the early part of his career. Then he found the perfect balance between offence and defence, not that he can't play low % aggressive tennis.....he just finds the most efficient way to win, smartest player on tour. 

Nole is the perfect product of modern tennis style and courts slowing down.(even though he has a decent record on all surfaces, but the speed is so different from the 90s). I am not sure how he would've fared in 90s or earlier eras. Probably wouldn't have won 20 slams. Similar for Nadal. Maybe Federer as well, though he seems the least of the 3 to fail in different eras. 

Edited July 12, 2021 by I6MTW

[Gollum]

5 hours ago, nevada said:

Another notable name from that era is Safin - against whom Djokovic has a losing H2H as well. Djokovic won the AO in 2008 but lost at Wimbledon to Safin.

Nole had fitness issues in the 2000s, changed post 2011. Also he was (relatively) a late bloomer like Fed, Safin won 2 matches against him when he was yet to hit his strides as a top dog. 

 

Fed too had his struggles against many guys before 2003...Rafter, Kafelnikov, 2 extreme ends when it comes to playing style. 

[I6MTW]

1 minute ago, Gollum said:

Nole had fitness issues in the 2000s, changed post 2011. Also he was (relatively) a late bloomer like Fed, Safin won 2 matches against him when he was yet to hit his strides as a top dog. 

 

Fed too had his struggles against many guys before 2003...Rafter, Kafelnikov, 2 extreme ends when it comes to playing style. 

Safin was also declined when he won against Nole two times. He was nowhere near the 05 level. His injury permanently put an end to his big titles contention and his career overall. He retired after a few years after injuries. So like those victories weren't peak Nole, neither were they Peak Safin.

 

I would love to have seen a Peak Safin vs Djokovic matchup. 5 set thriller all over it. 

[Gollum]

6 minutes ago, I6MTW said:

Nole is the perfect product of modern tennis style and courts slowing down.(even though he has a decent record on all surfaces, but the speed is so different from the 90s). I am not sure how he would've fared in 90s or earlier eras. Probably wouldn't have won 20 slams. Similar for Nadal. Maybe Federer as well, though he seems the least of the 3 to fail in different eras. 

Nadal is the only guy out of the 3 who would have been reduced to 3 months window per year in the 90s. 

 

Fed would have been fine. Nole would have been a superior version of Agassi, fine. Fastest court in this era is Shanghai, you can check the CPI. Nole won 4 times, Fed twice, Nadal zero. 

[I6MTW]

17 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Nadal is the only guy out of the 3 who would have been reduced to 3 months window per year in the 90s. 

 

Fed would have been fine. Nole would have been a superior version of Agassi, fine. Fastest court in this era is Shanghai, you can check the CPI. Nole won 4 times, Fed twice, Nadal zero. 

Was Agassi good on all surfaces? I don't remember. I mean he did win Wimbledon once when the grass was actually grass but I never considered him to be a good grass courter. It was more of an easy draw and weak opponents. Whenever he faced actual grass courters using their serve and volley style he lost to them. 

 

He was overrated on clay. Did well on slow hard courts his best surface. Even fast hard courts he wasn't that successful. Agassi would've benefitted the most from the surface homegenization sadly he was in his last years when courts were slowed down. Probably would've won a lot of slams in this era. Perfect for his style. 

 

Djokovic would've probably won around 10 slams, little more than Agassi because of a better serve, but since he's less agressive in return compared to Agassi he wouldn't have been as successful on fast surfaces against the likes of Sampras etc. 

 

Federer maybe the same. But his return is decent. The chip and block return is good against great servers. And it worked against Sampras in 01. I felt had Federer not beaten Sampras then he would've won the tournament. He still would've lost the next year to Bastl. Federer had a great all round game with little weakness (except BH against Nadal), but in the 90s I feel he would've done well. Maybe a Sampras like career. 

 

I am not sure how Djokovic would have won 6 Wimbledons then .

 

Nadal of course. Maybe 1  or 2 HC slams that's it. And maybe 4-5 RG. Back in the 90s the clay competition was stronger and the surface was slower. The clay Nadal plays on is actually fast clay except for Madrid which is essentially super fast high altitude clay. I don't know how Nadal would've fared on slow clay and heavy competition. He would've won maybe 6-8 slams at max. Especially the racquets then wouldn't have generated enough topspin to moonball his way to victory. 

[Real McCoy]

.

Edited April 11, 2025 by Real McCoy

[Gollum]

6 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

@Gollum Thanks again for proving you are just another nole fan. I knew it when you were bitching about 40-15 long ago that you were one lol.

Going by how toxic Fedtards are better if sane people become Nole fans. No difference between Fedtards and Sachinstas. 

[Real McCoy]

.

Edited April 11, 2025 by Real McCoy

[I6MTW]

1 minute ago, Gollum said:

Going by how toxic Fedtards are better if sane people become Nole fans. No difference between Fedtards and Sachinstas. 

Nolefam is toxic as well .I see on MTF how Nole fans rejoice and celebrate every fed loss as if it was an upset over peak fed. The loses this year Nole fam was rubbing it in on Federer fans and rubbing salt on wounds. They were even insulting Federer and happy that he lost, despite him being 40 , on his last legs and two surgeries. This isn't even a Fed in his prime for Noletards to be gloating about. Fed doesn't even matter in the big picture anymore. Still they are salty and insecure. 

 

Fedtards aren't as worse as Noletards have been in recent years. Most of them are Serbian fans. They view Federer as vindictive , evil personality, and act like they have a personal vendetta, when in reality they are all just figures who earn millions and have no affect on their personal lives. I'm not even sure if Federer or Djokovic hate each other (they do dislike each other) personally as much as the fanbases dislike their idols rival. 

 

That way Nadal fans are more decent. I have to give it to them. Though they have their flaws as well. Like over highlighting some of Nadal's achievements and playing down Fedovics etc. 

[Real McCoy]

.

Edited April 11, 2025 by Real McCoy

[Gollum]

1 hour ago, Real McCoy said:

Why am I toxic. Because I called you out for what you are?

I didn't even mention you dude. Feeling self-conscious or what? 

[Real McCoy]

.

Edited April 11, 2025 by Real McCoy

[Ranvir]

Djokovic will have at least 25 slams by the time he retires. The next US Open and Australian Open are all but guaranteed. He would have won last year's US Open if not for his stupid mistake. Nadal might win one more French Open.

 

It's not just the court speed that has changed since the 90s, the racket technology has as well.

 

They had to slow Wimbledon down for the spectators sake. It wasn't fun watching Sampras, Ivanisevic and Krajicek blasting aces all day long and each point lasting just 3 shots.

 

Sampras however was good from the back of the court, able to hold his own in rallies against Agassi. He also had some high profile wins on clay against French Open champions Thomas Muster, Jim Courier and Kafelnikov. Out of all of the serve volley players I have seen he was by far the only one who was good from the back of the court, he became more of a net rusher towards the end of his career but otherwise he was very comfortable on the baseline.

[Ranvir]

2 hours ago, I6MTW said:

He was overrated on clay. Did well on slow hard courts his best surface. Even fast hard courts he wasn't that successful. Agassi would've benefitted the most from the surface homegenization sadly he was in his last years when courts were slowed down. Probably would've won a lot of slams in this era.

He reached 3 French Open finals and won one. That is a good record. What he achieved in the 90s, winning all 4 Grand Slams when each one had a significantly different surface and playing speed was an amazing achievement.

[nevada]

12 hours ago, Gollum said:

Nole had fitness issues in the 2000s, changed post 2011. Also he was (relatively) a late bloomer like Fed, Safin won 2 matches against him when he was yet to hit his strides as a top dog. 

 

Fed too had his struggles against many guys before 2003...Rafter, Kafelnikov, 2 extreme ends when it comes to playing style. 

 The point is, with players like Safin, Hewitt etc around, the competition in Fed's youth was not as bad as it is today, where it is filled with mental midgets who can't serve out a set or just hold serve, period! Djokovic is not a late bloomer - he is a latest bloomer! Dominating at 34, just like he did in 2011, 10 years ago. Barring the Laver era, has there ever been an instance of a player being a dominant #1 10 years apart? Fed reclaimed #1 in 2017 at age 36, but he was nowhere close to being the dominant player that Djokovic is today. The big 3's domination for so long has made tennis boring to watch. Fed is done but unless Nadal and Djokovic retire, we might not see a new era of slam champions anytime soon.

[Ranvir]

2 hours ago, nevada said:

 The point is, with players like Safin, Hewitt etc around, the competition in Fed's youth was not as bad as it is today, where it is filled with mental midgets who can't serve out a set or just hold serve, period! Djokovic is not a late bloomer - he is a latest bloomer! Dominating at 34, just like he did in 2011, 10 years ago. Barring the Laver era, has there ever been an instance of a player being a dominant #1 10 years apart? Fed reclaimed #1 in 2017 at age 36, but he was nowhere close to being the dominant player that Djokovic is today. The big 3's domination for so long has made tennis boring to watch. Fed is done but unless Nadal and Djokovic retire, we might not see a new era of slam champions anytime soon.

I guess the difference has been in diets and other methods which are giving athletes more longevity than ever, players are also more disciplined in their private lives. In the 80s and 90s top players like McEnroe, Becker, Sampras were beginning to fade in their late 20s.

 

It's the same in football. Messi and Ronaldo are still going as strong as ever, scoring tonnes of goals despite being in their mid 30s. Other legends like Maradona, Baggio, Ronaldo9, Figo, Rivaldo were past it at 30. Messi has just won his first international trophy at 34, in which he was top scorer and player if the tournament. Other younger players like Neymar, Hazard, Mbappe have not been able to outperform Messi and Ronaldo.

[Number]

Apart from football and tennis same thing happening in Cricket as well. Barely any fast bowler who can be called express quicks. Slight movement or bounce and batting line ups finding difficult to cross 150 runs.

No doubt sportsmen of previous era are quality wise way ahead.

I do have a theory about it and it may sound ridiculous to some.

The atheletes of current gen have grown up on PlayStation, competed and came through ranks among mediore Playstationers.

The amount of real hard practice prev gen did, this gen isn't even close.

 

 

[Real McCoy]

.

Edited April 11, 2025 by Real McCoy

[I6MTW]

1 hour ago, Real McCoy said:

Sampras was also taking care of his diet and exercise. Its not like he was drinking beer and eating pizza the day before a match. Tennis was his main focus. Maybe mcenroe and becker were not that serious about fitness. I know becker had a problem with drinking and going after women. He had problems with them and wasted all the money on them and divorce settlements. Tennis is a sport where you can't be dominating in your mid 30s. One reason is the field and next gen is poor

There is also the possibility of doping and micro doping which may not be detected in tests. Federer is the oldest no.1 and GS champion. Nadal and Djokovic won the FO at 34 and playing in clay is a young man's sport. All 3 of them are dominating in an increasingly physically exhausting sport than ever. Nadal has openly said he has taken TUEs and Djokovic had a CVAC chamber which is legal according to ATP. Who is to say that Federer also doesn't have one. And what do they do when someone goes to the locker room for a MTO. very suspicious.

The big 3 and Ronaldo/messi are super stars with a "GOAT" title attached to them. I don't like it but it is what the media promotes the idea to the fans. Maybe they are milking these people for all their worth by allowing them better "sports science". I'm sure that tennis after big 3 is gonna be dead. Already children are interested in playing video games and not even going out. Eastern Europe and players in the west with EE heritage are the ones who are going to lead the sport and bring back interest.

Even LeBron James and Kevin Durant are the best basketball players at their mid 30s with no real decline. Tom Brady is 43 and he's still playing. 

 

MJ was dominating Basketball until his mid 30s before sudden retirement .

 

Agassi was also at the top (top 10) in his mid 30s before injuries forced him to retire. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by I6MTW

[Real McCoy]

.

Edited April 11, 2025 by Real McCoy