[Avon]

Out Partying with Gasguet?

[Ouragan]

Definitely don't see any guy from 1992 winning a grand slam this year like Chang, Wilander or Becker did at 17

[marcRD]

There seems to often be lapses in generations. We had the Federer, Safin, Roddick, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Ferrero, Davydenko generation born 81-82 then we had the 86-87 pack of talent with Djokovic, Nadal, Murray, Tsonga, Gasquet, Monfils and so on..

In between there seems to be almost nothing, players born in between generations like Ancic and Verdasco. I expect the next "new generation" of players to be born 91-92 or something like that, it seems they come every 5 years out of their cavern.

[its.like.that]

Originally Posted by Burrow

I don't think someone of 19 is a child, you are pretty close to being fully developed when you are 19.

Not at all.

I know that sprinters in running and swimming, are at their physical peak in their mid-late 20's.

Not that tennis players have the same build, but I still believe that a lot of players develop strength in their mid 20's that they did not previously have.

[Dougie]

If you consider Becker, Wilander and Chang who won GS`s at a very young age, they were professionally trained since they were kids and started playing the sport seriously at a very young age. That made it possible for them to challenge guys that were older than they but who had been considerably older when they starded training professionally.
So why doesn´t this work nowadays? Because everybody starts young and plays at some Bollettieri academy or something since 10 years old. Because of this, the level of play has improved substantially, not to mention the physical aspect of the game. Top players today are so much better and stronger than before, that no 17 year old can beat them. Eventually they will, it just takes longer to get there, because the gap between top juniors and top pros is so much wider than 10-20 years ago.
Let´s face it; a 17-year old Becker wouldn´t win Wimbledon today, just as a 17-year old Chang would struggle to make it past the 2nd round at RG.

[TheBoiledEgg]

when Mugs like Verdasco can break top 10 and look threatening at 26 when most of his career he's look like a complete non-entity you know somethings gone wrong

[martinatreue]

Originally Posted by marcRD

There seems to often be lapses in generations. We had the Federer, Safin, Roddick, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Ferrero, Davydenko generation born 81-82 then we had the 86-87 pack of talent with Djokovic, Nadal, Murray, Tsonga, Gasquet, Monfils and so on..

In between there seems to be almost nothing, players born in between generations like Ancic and Verdasco. I expect the next "new generation" of players to be born 91-92 or something like that, it seems they come every 5 years out of their cavern.

The graphic seems to suggest quite a long-term trend so I am not so sure that it's an issue of "generations." I think the older players are stronger physically, MORE EMOTIONALLY MATURE! during matches, MORE DISCIPLINED in SHOT SELECTION and have MORE VERSATILITY and VARIETY in their games. The young guns these days seem to come out and have somewhat one-dimensional, ball-bashing or flashy games but not enough tactical awareness, physical endurance, strength or discipline in matches. The older players play the match and not just the ball basically. The younger ones need more time to learn how to play smarter and get stronger. Andy Murray went out and got himself stronger but he already had the tactical intelliegence. The Gulbises, Monfilses, Cilices of the tour still have a lot to learn about tactics, versatility and conditioning IMO.

[JoshDragon]

Originally Posted by Ilovetheblues_86

The 89-90 generation has not created future champions, the 91-92 will be better (Tomic, Dmitrov, Krajinovic).

That's not necessarily true. Nishikori and Young are both in that age range. Young, will probably never be a champion but I'm not sure about Nishikori. He's still got a lot of time to improve his game and his prime years will be post Nadal/Federer rivalry. It's very possible that he could be a top 10 player and maybe win a couple majors.

[penzias]

91-93 looks really promising with Dimitrov, Tomic, Bhambri, Boluda, maybe Harrison...

[DartMarcus]

I am breaking ATP top 1000 in 2015. Mark my words.
2015 = The year of M.

[Horatio Caine]

Thought I'd read this somewhere...you made Neil Harman's 'The Net Post' for this week: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...fset=12&page=2

[Renaud]

Originally Posted by El Burro

Thought I'd read this somewhere...you made Neil Harman's 'The Net Post' for this week: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...fset=12&page=2

I wonder why he did not copy something from the Magic JR thread, it was much more interesting.

[Norrage]

Pretty interesting actually, cause the top 10 I think is one of the youngest ever? The last years we had really young players getting very high up the rankings, Nadal, Gasquet, Del Potro, Murray, Djokovic...And now they have settled this rush seems to have stopped....What's the reason? I dont believe in the reasons given in this topic, sinds not that much has changed since the aforementioned player have surged up the rankings...Was this a unique group of youngsters? Or indeed a lack of competition back then?

[CooCooCachoo]

Harrison already holds a win over Cuevas in Houston last year, and just defeated Taylor Dent in Sarasota.

[Navratil]

Not sure what Thomas Muster's comeback will be like and I don't know if he will break into the Top 50 next year like 40-year-old Kimiko Date Krumm did this year on the WTA-tour but it's obvious that players are getting older and older.

There are no teen-sensations at all. Yes, Filip Krajcinovic reached a semifinal at an ATP-event this year and looks like the next big thing from Serbia but it was not that sensationell that an 18-year-old reaches a semi at a small event. Grigor Dimitrov and Bernard Tomic struggle. Ryan Harris is not there yet.

Fact is, that there is no teen in the Top 100 right now!
The best teen is Federico del Bonis from Argentina - # 148.

Back in the 80ties Chang won his first Slam when he was 17, Becker did too, so Mats Wilander. Sampras at Edberg won their first Slams when they were teens. Then Hewitt was the youngest # 1 ever in the 90ties...

More and more players (like Melzer this year) have their breakthrough when they are almost 30. Most of the successful doubles players are way over 30 (although they still look like college-teens - e.g. the Bryan-brothers).*

This is definitly part of the demographic change.

But also I think that the very young players can't compete with the twens because the game got more and more physical. And the body needs time to develop.

The same on the women's side where players at 14 or 15 used to have their breakthrough in the 80ties and 90ties: Austin, Capriati, Hingis, ...


*By the way: I made a similar thread here a year ago:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=147308