What do you consider "a generation" in terms of tennis? - MensTennisForums.com
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 4 (permalink) Old 10-03-2006, 10:09 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 2,672
                     
What do you consider "a generation" in terms of tennis?

This is a spin-off thread of CmonAussie's thread on "the current generation of players", in which he listed Nadal and Rusedski in the same generation.

For me, a "generation of players" spans roughly 5 years. In that way, a player with normal-length career of ca 10 years will get to play opponents from two generations before as well as two generations after. And he will probably play at his highest level for five years, say from 23 to 27 years.

With my definition of generation, Agassi's (*1970) generation spans from Becker (*1967) to Rafter (*1972), but it doesn't include Edberg or Rios. Fed (*1981) and Nadal (*1986) are one generation apart.

Any opinions on this?


I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.
oz_boz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 4 (permalink) Old 10-03-2006, 10:55 AM
Registered User
 
Nathaliia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 94,686
                     
Re: What do you consider "a generation" in terms of tennis?

I agree with what you said, but it also depends on "who was successful" at which time. I guess there would be people putting Nadal and Gasquet to era of Federer, Nalbandian, Roddick and Hewitt, while the 1988ers are like something brand new - with JMDP, Korolev and Cilic (and maybe de Bakker).

Comedy is a drama that happens to other people

my old Polish blog www.tenislove.pl
Nathaliia is offline  
post #3 of 4 (permalink) Old 10-03-2006, 02:22 PM
Registered User
 
Vass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Age: 28
Posts: 6,031
                     
Re: What do you consider "a generation" in terms of tennis?

For me, "generation" is determined by how well the players are playing, not their age.
"New Balls Please" was my favourite generation...

Riding the 3AM Rollercoaster

Anastasia Myskina, Marat Safin thank you.
Vass is offline  
post #4 of 4 (permalink) Old 10-03-2006, 04:18 PM
Registered User
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 347
                     
Re: What do you consider "a generation" in terms of tennis?

IMO, 5 years represent a cohort, and you can use cohorts to compare one generation to the next. When discussing Roger or Pete, each has a cohort equal to his age +/- 2 years.

I consider 10 years a generation, about equal to the peak years of a player's career. Pete and Roger are separated by one generation.
mongo 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