Mens Tennis Forums banner

The inevitability of declining at age 29/30

8K views 63 replies 38 participants last post by  Boss 
#1 ·
We have all seen it happen. This has nothing to do with injury, field of competition etc. The body just slows down and everything catches up with you. And it happens when you expected it the least. Federer AO 2010, Nadal USO 2013....didn't we all think they were on course to shatter every record?
I believe Djokovic is experiencing the same thing...blame it on injury or personal issues etc., but I believe the reason these things have caught up with him is age-related. If you look at the big picture Djokovic has not been able to replicate the success he's had in 2014 and 2015. Nadal had a comeback year in 2013. Roger had one in 2009. And after that they are in decline steadily. I would argue that Djokovic's 2014 and 2015 are his comeback years already. Remember Roger was at 16 and Nadal at 13 before they were in decline. Djokovic might win one or two more, probably the AO but there's no way he'll win multiple slams in a year again. The outliers are of course Wawrinka and Agassi but I very much doubt Djokovic would be able to do the same since he's had a lot success before 29 already. Even Jimmy Connors only won 2 more slams after turning 30.

I welcome anyone to prove me wrong in the near future.
 
#60 ·
Its just that you get tired from doing the same thing, it gets boring, I am sure Nadal and Federer didnt decline only physically, it just gets tiring to grind it after 20 years professional tennis.
At 29/30 a player will only have played at most 11/12 years of pro.
 
#7 · (Edited)
Novak lost early on one (yes one, after winning 4 in a row) slam and meaningless Olympics, due to private issues and injury, and haters are burying him alive already.

:facepalm:

Sure Novak hit 80mph first serves yesterday because he declined to being 50+ overnight. :banghead:
 
  • Like
Reactions: leng jai
#12 ·
Wawrinka was (almost) 29 when he won his 1st slam and 30 when he won his 2nd slam. Playing the best tennis of his life.

I guess it's different for everyone and has to do with mileage on the body (total matches played) and your playing style too.
 
#14 ·
OP, thanks for opening the topic. It's an interesting discussion and one which I have thought about a lot. For a while it seemed like players today won't be stopped by age that early. Players like Agassi, Federer and Ferrer showed that it's possible to compete at a very high level at a more advanced age. And still - despite their unprecedented longevity (in modern times, not counting Rosewall) Agassi managed to win only 2 major titles after age 30, Federer only 1. Both fell just short competing with the best of the next generations, but amazed everyone that they got so far in the first place.

With the Djokodal generation now approaching the magical barrier of 30 years, we will see just how they deal with the increasing fragility of their bodies. I disagree, that it's age-related alone though. Generally 29/30 isn't old. It must be "mileage" even more so. The wear and tear piles up on them as the years go by and seems to lead to increasing physical troubles even when they weren't formerly injury-prone. A case in point is Berdych who is now 30, soon to be 31, and currently missing the first major since 2003 because of injury.

We also had to watch Gasquet struggling this year with injuries and unable to repeat the success of his 2015. Wawrinka couldn't follow up his success of the two previous years. He's the poster child of players "now peaking later". But how old was he really, when he won his 2 slams? 28 at the AO, just turned 30 when he surprised everyone with that great performance at the FO. That's indeed late for a first-time win. But it's not really late in absolute terms. And this year his level has dropped, he didn't even perform great in majors and was said to struggle with injuries.

Now obviously this doesn't mean that these players won't be able to pick themselves up and stage a comeback/ play at a very high level. They're not old in absolute terms. But it's an uphill battle for them now, one that they will lose eventually.

I'm afraid that's where we currently are with the previous generation. They have almost lost the battle and are close to being finally overcome. Ferrer has dropped off considerably this year, it was frankly sad to watch him at the Rio Olympic games. Federer had to finally succumb to injury, the nature of which might sadly prevent him of competing at the highest level again. 2016 will be the first year since 1999 (!) without a player from this generation in the top 10.

The Djokodal generation is still a little removed from such a dramatic decline. They will likely still win big titles for a while. But the clock is ticking...
 
  • Like
Reactions: alypen
#21 ·
Nice post.

Yes, more players are maintaining word class level for longer.

You have many 30 plus in the top 10, 20, 50, etc.

But, as you say, it is still very difficult for guys over 30 yrs. old to win majors.

The physicality and focus required to win 7 best of 3 set matches probably is a factor.
 
#15 ·
From another thread:

...As Rafa lately reminded us, his pro career started over 14 years ago in April 2002, before he turned 16.
He has played 972 matches. 33 more puts him in the top 10 of Open Era only players and the second Spaniard to top 1000 matches after David Ferrer.

For comparison's sake, this amount of matches is where Roger Federer was during the 2011 US Open before beating Marin Cilic, or where Andre Agassi was shortly after winning the 2003 Australian Open, or not long after Ivan Lendl lost the 1989 US Open Final to The Boris Becker, or where Jimmy Connors was a couple of tournaments after beating John McEnroe for the 1982 Wimbledon Championships title.

Agassi would never win another major after his 972 matches, though he had two semis and a final.
Connors won 2 more at the 82-83 USO, and another final, Lendl 1 more at the 1990 AO and another final the following year, and so far, Federer 1 more at 2012 Wimbledon and 3 more finals.

Guillermo Vilas' (Bull of the Pampas) last major win at the 1979 Australian Open came at about 720 matches, last final - 936.
snip

Rafael Nadal's (Spanish Bull/King of Clay) last major win at the 2014 French Open at Roland Garros (so far) - 834, last final - 834.
snip

Andre Agassi's (The Punisher) last major win at the 2003 Australian Open - 970, last final - 1119.
snip

Jimmy Connors' (Brash Basher of Belleville) last major win at the 1983 US Open - 984 matches, last final 1044.
snip

Ivan Lendl's (The Terminator) last major win at the 1990 Australian Open - 997, last final 1061.
snip

Roger Federer's (Maestro/FedEx) last major win (so far) at 2012 Wimbledon - 1045, last final - 1282 matches.
snip


Respectfully,
masterclass


Novak Djokovic has now played 889 tour level matches and won his last major (so far) in his 879th match.

A look at those stalwarts mentioned above tell us he is getting in the neighborhood where others have stopped, but he still has room to go before Roger's number.

A guess is that he'll win at least once more through next year, but who knows? There are just too many factors.
As we have seen, one solid top player like del Potro returning to the tour can influence the results of top players and the outcome of tournaments.

Wawrinka has only played 670 matches, no doubt less because of his inconsistency during the years.
His second and last major win (so far) at RG was at match 590.
Maybe he didn't have the wear and tear compared to others his age, and that allowed him to reach the heights later than most others. Still, age alone might limit him without having high matches played numbers.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 
#16 ·
Djokovic's playing style will continue to be a nightmare for all his opponents. That won't change. Of course, he won't be winning titles as frequently, but given the state of the field we can be seeing a Serena Williams in the ATP.
 
#17 ·
Statistically there used to be a steep decline in the chances of winning a slam from age 27. Nadal's career has been consistent with this, but Federer and Djokovic have shifted the goal posts.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Nadal was a very early bloomer as were successful teenagers Borg and Willander, so, he followed their trajectory rather than those of young slam/masters winners like Sampras, Djokovic, Federer who were not as physically overloaded & successful as very young teenagers.

With some luck 30+ Nadal is still capable of winning RG or making another slam finals next season to make it 13 seasons between the first and the last slam finals like Sampras & Federer, and fit Federer is capable of making it 15 after he missed his chance for 14 in Wimb'16 SF.

Agassi is at 16 seasons but he can't really be compared with those Goat candidates in terms of sustained continuous wear&tear.
 
#25 ·
Age is just a number, Body management (and Will) is the key.
Case in point. Watch Rod Laver at his peak:



Age is just a number, right? If only... Unfortunately aging and death are a reality of life, you'll feel every passing "number" in your bones. No body management and "Will" can change it.
 
#30 ·
The decline is primarily mental. Biological brain development ends at 24-26, plateaus until the early 30s and then the neuronal loss speeds up. Surplus iron in the blood accumulated over time also damages brain cells, but rich athletes can afford to buy teenage blood transfusions to reinvigorate themselves so this is not an issue for guys like the Big 4. Djokovic is also a sort of fitness guru and his decline will be further postponed in comparison to the rest of the field.

Someone mentioned that lack of purpose is also an issue...that is very true, no motivation means an average brain chemistry and average does not win slams. So biological and social factors combine and strike around the same age which is why the decline can seem so sudden. But if you are aware of what is going on you can partially reduce the effects by doing some things differently and consciously seek new purposes to keep on winning.

Only one guy has so far showed signs of this awareness. His name is Djokovic.
 
#31 ·
Someone mentioned that lack of purpose is also an issue...that is very true, no motivation means an average brain chemistry and average does not win slams. So biological and social factors combine and strike around the same age which is why the decline can seem so sudden. But if you are aware of what is going on you can partially reduce the effects by doing some things differently and consciously seek new purposes to keep on winning.

Only one guy has so far showed signs of this awareness. His name is Djokovic.
And because Federer and Nadal failed to show it, their fans cannot know what it really means. That's so obvious even from this thread and OP.
 
#35 ·
Laver won 4 slams at 30-31 and one at 29. Rosewall won 4 slams ages 33-37 and reached another 4 slam finals, 2 of them at 39. In the sixties and seventies they did not have the medical techniques to heal injuries as they do today. Also, there were NO times out during a match, for Any reason back then.
 
#36 ·
Djokovic won 6 big titles (2 Slams + 4 M1000) until the end of August 2016. Show me a player who had more in the first 8 months of any season.
 
#41 ·
Did you really wait for Nole to get injured and miss Beijing to bump this complete nonsense of a thread?

Nole had an injury. It's not the first injury he ever had. He also was injured in 2011 and was awful for the final few months of the season. Nole also had wrist injuries in 2014. Etc. etc.

He recovered then, just like he will now.

Nole will be back. You can be sure of this. And he will dominate again.
 
#44 ·
These threads are self-soothing therapy for Fed and Rafa fanboys... They use it as a pacifier in lieu of thumb-sucking.
It all ends up with some hex-throwing, gipsy-like rituals about Djoker "declining, free fall, not being able to win more..." etc, etc.

If you guys could just see how desperate and silly this makes you look.

Times have changed, players play longer and continue improving way into their 30-ties. Look at Fed's game in 2014-2015 for example. I mean... avg age in top 10 is 29 for Pete's sake.

I want to turn your attention to this educational thread: http://www.menstennisforums.com/2-general-messages/834402-djokovics-goat-plan.html . It gives a quick peek into the next couple of years. :)
 
#45 ·
The one who'll prove you wrong in the near future is a certain player based in Monaco.I know you won't be thrilled about it due to a simple fact the legacy of your favorite will be in jeopardy.

Sadly for you neither you nor your favorite player can do nothing about it.Feel free to bump this post in 2018.
 
#47 ·
This talk of Djokovic declining is utter garbage. He's had a few injuries and I think the release of completing the Career Grand Slam at RG has added to his "poor" results. He'll be back to his invincible self soon enough, much to the annoyance of my man Murray. I think we may start to see a decline by Murray and Djoko when they reach the 30/31 mark but 2017 will be business as usual.
 
#48 ·
It's not about the age, it's about years played. 29/30 is just the normal decline time for people with a standard career trajectory.
 
#49 ·
Some people are so stupid :(

Newsflash, dummies: Nole was on pace to have an even better year in 2016 than 2015 before he got injured and had personal issues (the cheating thing is a lie). Add to the fact that Nole was completely mentally exhausted after winning FO and that is what can happen.

Nole will be back in 2017 dominating and winning everything again, and the haters will be in ruins yet again.
 
#52 ·
Using Federer and Nadal as a precedent for Nole to follow is hardly the best idea.

Federer's decline is overrated. His best years were obviously 2006/2007, but the pattern since has been a pretty gradual decline (besides the obvious outliers, 2008 where he had mono, 2013 with the back injuries, and 2016). Considering how good he was in 2015 (clearly better than Agassi at the age he last won a slam), saying that the pattern shows Djokovic will soon stop winning slams is clearly erroneous.

Nadal on the other hand does have an incredibly physical style of play, which matches Djokovic. However, Nole's style is more flexible, fluid, and technically clean. It wouldn't surprise me at all if his late career was closer to Federer's or Serena's than that of Nadal.
 
#53 · (Edited)
It might not happen to Djokovic of course. But I find it revealing to see that both Nadal and Fed stopped winning slams when it was the least expected. What's more, both of them had a below par year before coming back to have one last fruitful year. Surely Fed is consistent for the recent few years but he could never find that winning factor again. AO 2010 was his last consistent slam win, and he had a brilliant 2009, after a disappointing year of 2008. Same goes with Nadal, after USO 2013 and that AO 2014. Their differences in styles has an effect on their longevity, but seemingly no impact on their slam winning ability.
 
#54 · (Edited)
It's not hard to see what Nadal's problem is. After he "disappeared" for a while during 2014 he came back and looked like a balloon that just got deflated. He lost a lot of muscle mass when he returned and thus he lost his strength and the effectiveness of his shots. Why that happened is anyone's guess
but yes indeed, that's exactly what happened.

As for Federer, he didn't decline. Not winning anymore doesn't mean that someone declined. It could mean other things, too. Like how he entered the modern game. Courts, playing styles, the physicality of tennis, competition all changed. Why else do you think he stopped winning almost entirely? Zero USO since 2008, 1 AO in 10 years almost...? Federer got exposed and hard.
 
#59 · (Edited)
I would rather not engage in an argument with you but it's hard to see how he got "exposed". He was facing the same guys in 2010, 2011 as he had faced in 2009. He had no business losing to Tsonga on grass. When he is beaten by players that he used to beat, that to me is a sign of decline rather than being exposed.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top