Best Era in Men's Tennis

by **Julius Jackson** » Thu, 26 May 2011 21:37

Which era has the most skilled players and the greatest competition overall?

Without question its the current era of Federer/Nadal/Djokovic. Fed and Nadal are 2 of the top 3 players of all time (if not top 2) and Djokovic is currently dominating them. Fed could easily win 2 more slams to put him at 18, 4 ahead of Sampras. Nadal will likely wear down in a few yrs so I'd expect him to top off at 12-13 titles. Djokovic has 2 and looks poised to grab everything in his path...

As for the field, the current field has to be deepest, most talented one to ever exist. Players train longer, harder, and more efficiently than ever, with more $$ invested in the gm than ever before.

by **jayl0ve** » Fri, 27 May 2011 05:35

I agree actually, I think we are witnessing the best era of men's tennis, right now

by **Rob ITST** » Fri, 27 May 2011 07:27

I don't think you can make comparisons of different eras.

The courts today are slower, the ball bounces higher. Of course, the equipment really helps them today. Larger, lighter, more powerful racquets, with strings that allow you hit a ton more spin... you can just hit shots that really weren't possible before. The training today is better too - the knowledge of how to train, how to eat, etc, has increased dramatically over the past 10 years or so.

The level might be higher today, but I don't think it's because the are more skilled. Imagine Borg or Sampras with Luxilon strings and todays racquets. They'd be doing the same things we see Nadal and Federer do. Now imagine Nadal or Djokovic with a wood racquet, or even a mid size graphite racquet, and natural gut strings. There's no way in hell they could do what they do today.

I predict that in 10 years, we're going to see players doing things that will make people say they are the best of all time.

by **jayl0ve** » Fri, 27 May 2011 07:29

I was thinking about that a few nights ago, what tennis is going to look like in the future...except I'm talking like 50 years from now.

200 mph forehands?? haha who knows....it's gonna be nuts though.

by **SlicerITST** » Fri, 27 May 2011 08:55

There is one limit to tennis and that is us humans. Like with most things the future is with robots.

by **VillaJ100** » Fri, 27 May 2011 11:05

I agree with rob, also in the mid 90's you had sampras, agassi, Becker, Chang, muster, rafter, rios, EDBERG, kafelnikov, ivanesevic, stich and kraijcek playing, and that's a crapload of talent there (all with arguably different and more variable play styles than exist today). But when you start comparing talent its pretty much impossible, I mean like does anyone really think laver would have a chance against someone like del potro in the modern game? His technique would probably get him to top 20 at best. Same with Pete, the guy was amazing but if he had his time again he probably wouldn't win 14 slams, just because courts and tech are against him.

by **supinesmokey13** » Fri, 27 May 2011 14:12

jayl0ve wrote:I agree actually, I think we are witnessing the best era of men's tennis, right now

IN TERMS OF Athletic ability and compettion yes in terms of skill no as of today how many genuine all-court players do we have in the top ten that means they are accomplished in every area of the court not many as you dont need a net game to thrive in this era case slowing downs surfaces has reduced the need for specialist skills case in point soderling, novak, fed era had skill but not many competitors safin, nalbandian, gonzo ( underated as one everyone thinks he just got a for hand and forget he has a gold medal in doubles), grosejean, haas, malisse, melzer, lopez, kiefer, henman, everyone in this list had a true all court game, the 80's was the best for eveything skill, compettion variety of style net guys cash, mac,edberg,becker, basliners lendl connors, wilander, borg. we have gone from lendl giving up his clay season to perfect a sv game to win wimby to nadal vs berdych 2010 serve volley percentage 0%, all we have seen is the evoultion of the baseliner to the top of tennis and the net guy fall to second the fact you dont need to serve volley to win wimbledon tells you everything

by **Chederer** » Fri, 27 May 2011 14:21

until we get a little bit more competition from murray and a few others this generation will definitely not be the best ever; IMO the best era of tennis ever was in the 80's when you had McEnroe, Lendl, Vilander, Gerulitas, Connors, Bjorg---that era was the best ever

by **Saarbrigga** » Fri, 27 May 2011 14:31

In my opinion the era of Sampras was the best.

Pete won 7 Wimbledon titles and 5 US Open titles in the era of some of the greatest fast-court specialists ever.

His opponents on grass, fast hard (US Open) and carpet:

- Rafter (2 times US Open champion)
- Becker (3 times Wimbledon, 2 times AUS Open, 1 time US Open Champ)
- Krajicek (1 times Wimbledon Champion, very good on grass and carpet)
- Henman (3 times semi finalist in Wimbledon)
- Edberg (2 times Wimbledon, US Open and AUS Open Champ)
- Stich (1 time Wimbledon Champ, 1 time runner up AUS and French Open)
- Ivanisevic (1 time Wimbledon Champ + 3 times runner up)
- McEnroe and Lendl in later days
- and some others.

And on clay there was also a very strong competition:

- Bruguera
- Muster
- Courier
- Kafelnikov
- Mantilla
- Moya
- Costa
- Ferrero
- Rios
- Corretja
- and of course Kuerten (imo top 5 all time on clay).

by **Amazing Matheja** » Fri, 27 May 2011 14:46

Niten Doraku wrote:...
His opponents on grass, fast hard (US Open) and carpet:

- Rafter (2 times US Open champion)
- Becker (3 times Wimbledon, 2 times AUS Open, 1 time US Open Champ)
- Krajicek (1 times Wimbledon Champion, very good on grass and carpet)
- Henman (3 times semi finalist in Wimbledon)
- Edberg (2 times Wimbledon, US Open and AUS Open Champ)
- Stich (1 time Wimbledon Champ, 1 time runner up AUS and French Open)
- Ivanisevic (1 time Wimbledon Champ + 3 times runner up)
- McEnroe and Lendl in later days
- and some others....

HAHA!

Sorry...

by **VillaJ100** » Fri, 27 May 2011 15:06

I thought he was a 4 time semi finalist? And he reached the semis of 3/4 the slams, not a bad achievement.

by **Amazing Matheja** » Fri, 27 May 2011 15:09

No man, don't get me wrong... I always liked Henman, i always like S&V player, but no matter what he did, i have never seen him as a possible GS winner... Even at Wimb'... :oops:

by **jayl0ve** » Fri, 27 May 2011 15:10

Yeah I don't think anybody ever believed he was really going to win a GS.

But skill-wise, he was an awesome player.

by **VillaJ100** » Fri, 27 May 2011 15:18

Yeah true. Although if he had beat Coria in the 2004 RG semi, i think he would have nailed crappy gaudio. One think that makes him a role model for young kids i think is that he completely maximised all his talent, he had a very attractive and classic play style but was never the most talented player, however by doing what he did best and making the most of his skills he reached 6 slam semi's and finshed in the year end top 10 for about 6 years in a row, thats some good consistency.

by **Amazing Matheja** » Fri, 27 May 2011 15:20

They renamed Henman Hill to Murray Hill, no? It kinda shocked me a bit... Mostly regarding on who got the benefit of it... Did they do it for every strong British player? Or did they do it only for Murray? If so, that's a disgrace, if you allow me...

Best Era in Men's Tennis

Best Era in Men's Tennis

Who is online