The weak era argument is weak - MensTennisForums.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:17 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 172
                     
The weak era argument is weak

I have noticed a trend where certain fans and haters always mention that the Pete Sampras era was so strong and the Federer era so weak. I think these people forget to factor in some important and fundamental variables when they say one era is weak and another is strong. These people tend to just look at the players and their careers and judge how strong the era is strictly based on this.

However, that would be totally ignoring scientific method and other variables. For example, if Federer didn't exist, you would probably be looking at something like this. While, this is just pure guess work because no one knows how the ATP would be without Federer but this doesn't need to be accurate to prove my point.

Roddick 3 slams
Safin 4 slams
Hewitt 5 slams

So that would most likely be sort of accurate if Federer didn't exist. So according to some Sampras fans, this would fit the criteria for a "strong and competitive" era where everyone has a few slams and battle hard for them.

So what is my point? You can't look at one players dominance and say he dominated because the era was weak. That dominatpnt player could have very well ruined some promising careers by being so dominant, which makes the weak era argument totally weak.

Another example of this fallacy, which happens in a lot of sports, not just in tennis, would be this NHL example.

Take this draft year for example where each team in the NHL drafts the worlds most promising hockey players. It turned out that the 2nd overall pick, Nedved, became a bust and the 5th over all pick, Jagr, became the best player in that draft.


1 1 Quebec Owen Nolan R Cornwall Royals [OHL] 1200 422 463 885 1793
1 2 Vancouver Petr Nedved L Seattle Thunderbirds [WHL] 982 310 407 717 708
1 3 Detroit Keith Primeau C Niagara Falls Thunder [OHL] 909 266 353 619 1541
1 4 Philadelphia Mike Ricci C Peterborough Petes [OHL] 1099 243 362 605 979
1 5 Pittsburgh Jaromir Jagr R Kladno [Czech] 1346 665 988 1653 937
1 6 NY Islanders Scott Scissons C Saskatoon Blades [WHL] 2 0 0 0 0
1 7 Los Angeles Darryl Sydor D Kamloops Blazers [WHL] 1291 98 409 507 755
1 8 Minnesota Derian Hatcher D North Bay Centennials [OHL] 1045 80 251 331 1581

Many unintelligent Quebec, Vancouver, Detroit, and Philadelphia fans would say something retarded like we should have drafted Jagr. Canuck fans especially would say Nedved is a weak pick, but they would be completely ignoring the two huge variables involved. One, the Canuck organization was horrible and Nedved could have very well been awesome too if he played for a better organization. Two, and this one is major, Jagr played with Mario Freaking Lemiux, probably the most gifted professional hockey player ever. Jagr could have been drafted 29th and still would have ended up as the best player in the draft regardless of what his actually ceiling was because he played with Lemiux.

I am not saying Sampras fans are wrong, this could very well be a weak era. I am just saying that I have yet to see a real well put together argument that factors in everything to support that this era was indeed weak rather than certain great players just making these other players look worse than they actually are. Discuss.

Last edited by Tomatoes11; 07-21-2012 at 07:42 PM.
Tomatoes11 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:19 PM
Registered User
 
TigerTim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Bristol, England
Posts: 13,400
                     
Re: Weak era argument is weak

Whats weak is this tea I am drinking, off to make some more, then I will respond

EDIT/RESPONSE: What are Canuck's?!

On Murray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamvol View Post
He probably just hangs about in 2nd place protecting himself with 3 bananas whilst waiting for the person in the lead to get blue shelled.
Nadal 2015

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadmap View Post
Nadull was not injured. The reason he was moving like shit near the end of the third set is because of the depression of knowing your opponent is superior in all departments.


Last edited by TigerTim; 07-21-2012 at 07:32 PM.
TigerTim is offline  
post #3 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:30 PM
Moderator
 
Pratik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 16,174
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Most hater arguments are weak. Get used to it, or you won't last long here(or any other forum, for that matter)

Weak era is just a way for Fed haters to diminish his achievements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomatoes11 View Post
Another example of this fallacy, which happens in a lot of sports, not just in tennis, would be this NHL example.

Take this draft year for example


1 1 Quebec Owen Nolan R Cornwall Royals [OHL] 1200 422 463 885 1793
1 2 Vancouver Petr Nedved L Seattle Thunderbirds [WHL] 982 310 407 717 708
1 3 Detroit Keith Primeau C Niagara Falls Thunder [OHL] 909 266 353 619 1541
1 4 Philadelphia Mike Ricci C Peterborough Petes [OHL] 1099 243 362 605 979
1 5 Pittsburgh Jaromir Jagr R Kladno [Czech] 1346 665 988 1653 937
1 6 NY Islanders Scott Scissons C Saskatoon Blades [WHL] 2 0 0 0 0
1 7 Los Angeles Darryl Sydor D Kamloops Blazers [WHL] 1291 98 409 507 755
1 8 Minnesota Derian Hatcher D North Bay Centennials [OHL] 1045 80 251 331 1581

Many unintelligent Quebec, Vancouver, Detroit, and Philedelphia fans would say something retarded like we should have drafted Jagr. Canuck fans especially would say Nedved is a weak pick, but they would be completely ignoring the two huge variables involved. One, the Canuck organization was horrible and Nedved could have very well been awesome too if he played for a better organization. Two, and this one is major, Jagr played with Mario Freaking Lemiux. He could have been drafted 29th and still would have ended up as the best player in the draft regardless of what his actually ceiling was.

There would be hardly anyone outside Canada/USA who understand a word of this.
Pratik is offline  
post #4 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:31 PM
Registered User
 
Burrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,051
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomatoes11 View Post
I have noticed a trend where certain fans and haters always mention that the Pete Sampras era was so strong and the Federer era so weak. I think these people forget to factor in some important and fundamental variables when they say one era is weak and another is strong. These people tend to just look at the players and their careers and judge how strong the era is strictly based on this.

However, that would be totally ignoring scientific method and other variables. For example, if Federer didn't exist, you would probably be looking at something like this. While, this is just pure guess work because no one knows how the ATP would be without Federer but this doesn't need to be accurate to prove my point.

Roddick 3 slams
Safin 4 slams
Hewitt 5 slams

So that would most likely be sort of accurate if Federer didn't exist. So according to some Sampras fans, this would fit the criteria for a "strong and competitive" era where everyone has a few slams and battle hard for them.

So what is my point? You can't look at one players dominance and say he dominated because the era was weak. That dominatpnt player could have very well ruined some promising careers by being so dominant, which makes the weak era argument totally weak.

Another example of this fallacy, which happens in a lot of sports, not just in tennis, would be this NHL example.

Take this draft year for example


1 1 Quebec Owen Nolan R Cornwall Royals [OHL] 1200 422 463 885 1793
1 2 Vancouver Petr Nedved L Seattle Thunderbirds [WHL] 982 310 407 717 708
1 3 Detroit Keith Primeau C Niagara Falls Thunder [OHL] 909 266 353 619 1541
1 4 Philadelphia Mike Ricci C Peterborough Petes [OHL] 1099 243 362 605 979
1 5 Pittsburgh Jaromir Jagr R Kladno [Czech] 1346 665 988 1653 937
1 6 NY Islanders Scott Scissons C Saskatoon Blades [WHL] 2 0 0 0 0
1 7 Los Angeles Darryl Sydor D Kamloops Blazers [WHL] 1291 98 409 507 755
1 8 Minnesota Derian Hatcher D North Bay Centennials [OHL] 1045 80 251 331 1581

Many unintelligent Quebec, Vancouver, Detroit, and Philedelphia fans would say something retarded like we should have drafted Jagr. Canuck fans especially would say Nedved is a weak pick, but they would be completely ignoring the two huge variables involved. One, the Canuck organization was horrible and Nedved could have very well been awesome too if he played for a better organization. Two, and this one is major, Jagr played with Mario Freaking Lemiux. He could have been drafted 29th and still would have ended up as the best player in the draft regardless of what his actually ceiling was.

I am not saying Sampras fans are wrong, this could very well be a weak era. I am just saying that I have yet to see a real well put together argument that factors in everything to support that this era was indeed weak rather than certain great players just making these other players look worse than they actually are. Discuss.
Why would Safin have 4 slams without Federer? That's nonsense.
Burrow is offline  
post #5 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:32 PM
Registered User
 
finishingmove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 22,756
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

weak thread is weak
finishingmove is offline  
post #6 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:32 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 172
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

I'll try to make it more relevant to places outside of North America. My bad.
Tomatoes11 is offline  
post #7 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:33 PM
Registered User
 
samanosuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,955
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

only thing which I know about weak/strong era is that plenty of guys from "weak Fed's era" making/made a break though in this "nole/rafa strong era"

La Décima
samanosuke is offline  
post #8 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:35 PM
When You're On The Poster
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Age: 26
Posts: 40,913
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

MTF, where trolls and haters reign and logic goes to die.

OP, pay not attention to stupid arguments like "era strength".

Follow my Youtube Channel for all my matches
Follow me on IG for the latest news, vids, pics, and memes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novak Djokovic
Obviously, you play a lot of mind games with yourself, but it is important to always believe that you can play your best, perform your best, and in the end, your convictions are stronger than your doubts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
If I took the time to respond to every criticism that came across my desk, there would be no time for constructive work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humphrey Bogart
The only thing you owe the audience is a good performance
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niccolo Machiavelli
There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.
Johnny Groove is offline  
post #9 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:40 PM
Registered User
 
samanosuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,955
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
MTF, where trolls and haters reign and logic goes to die.
Fish, Melzer, Lopez, Mayer, Monaco, Kohlscreiber... All these "oldies" reached carrier high in this strong era

La Décima
samanosuke is offline  
post #10 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:40 PM
Banned!
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,672
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

The weak era argument is truly pathetic. It's a total myth that clowns use to discredit the achievements of players they don't like. Like the argument that 2004-2007 was weak for instance just because the GOAT dominated. Did it ever occur to them that he dominated because he was good? If he wasn't that good guys like Safin, Nalbandian, Roddick, Hewitt, etc would have more slams and all of a sudden by their argument it becomes a strong era. And here Fed is in 2012 still winning slams and #1. Clowns will never learn I guess.
Honestly is offline  
post #11 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:47 PM
country flag HKz
Hakeem
 
HKz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mesa
Posts: 5,234
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Quote:
Originally Posted by samanosuke View Post
only thing which I know about weak/strong era is that plenty of guys from "weak Fed's era" making/made a break though in this "nole/rafa strong era"
And Rafa only started making GS finals outside of Wimbledon/RG after Federer's era/prime years the discussion is all hypothetical and based on whatever biases you have. There is absolutely no real way to measure an era's strength. Sure you can say there are more slam winners in a particular period of time, but if slams are being divided amongst more players, can't one also hypothetically claim that the top player is not that great?

I mean so many retards at MTF are quite hypocritical. Suppose Federer lost a lot more slams in his dominant years. Instead of the "weak era" discussion, many people would instead complain how bad Federer is. Again, all bullshit and all based on your biases.

Federer / Haas / Safin / Gaudio / Kuerten / Youzhny / Nadal / Gonzalez / Ljubicic / Hewitt / Soderling / Wawrinka / Coria / Nalbandian / Kohlschreiber
HKz is offline  
post #12 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:53 PM
the pirate queen.
 
Pirata.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: usa
Age: 27
Posts: 13,370
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Quote:
Originally Posted by samanosuke View Post
only thing which I know about weak/strong era is that plenty of guys from "weak Fed's era" making/made a break though in this "nole/rafa strong era"
Yep.

Rafael Nadal & Novak Djokovic: The Evoulution of a Handshake
federer ferrer wawrinka raonic flopez istomin mannarino pospisil
verdasco

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuitYerWhining View Post
Ever trolled, ever failed, no matter.
Post again, troll again, troll harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clay Death View Post
mods drag this thread outside and have several spotted hyenas shit on it for 4 straight days. you may have to bribe the hyenas but they will shit on it.
Pirata. is offline  
post #13 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:53 PM
Registered User
 
Alex999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kanata
Posts: 11,453
                     
Re: Weak era argument is weak

Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerTim View Post
Whats weak is this tea I am drinking, off to make some more, then I will respond

EDIT/RESPONSE: What are Canuck's?!
It's a hockey team from Vancouver. I guess you Brits don't play hockey
http://canucks.nhl.com/

I prefer Calgary Flames ... ooops didn't mean to derail this thread
Alex999 is offline  
post #14 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:55 PM
Registered User
 
nole_no1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Romania
Age: 22
Posts: 17,774
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Nobody is mentioning the weak era besides Fedtards when their idol is losing. When Federer is winning a major title (see Wimbledon this year) everybody is like "another GS in this strong era". When Nadal is winning a GS or Nole is winning a GS they're like "pff weak era. They would've never won so many titles in a strong era like that when Federer peaked"
nole_no1 is offline  
post #15 of 111 (permalink) Old 07-21-2012, 07:58 PM
country flag HKz
Hakeem
 
HKz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mesa
Posts: 5,234
                     
Re: The weak era argument is weak

Quote:
Originally Posted by nole_no1 View Post
Nobody is mentioning the weak era besides Fedtards when their idol is losing. When Federer is winning a major title (see Wimbledon this year) everybody is like "another GS in this strong era". When Nadal is winning a GS or Nole is winning a GS they're like "pff weak era. They would've never won so many titles in a strong era like that when Federer peaked"
Quite the contrary. Saw a lot of fools pointing out how can this "strong era of Rafa/Novak" allow an old crippled man to still rack up another title.

Federer / Haas / Safin / Gaudio / Kuerten / Youzhny / Nadal / Gonzalez / Ljubicic / Hewitt / Soderling / Wawrinka / Coria / Nalbandian / Kohlschreiber
HKz is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome