Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

Just come across this article yesterday. Basically, the issue lies in their bot-style standardized training and development based on polystrings and modern light racquets, not a lack of talent or athleticism.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,899 Posts
The analysis is pretty spot-on for most the players, but it's not really fair to criticize these players for their weaknesses: similar stuff can be said for the other players outside the big 4 of the last generation. 90-94 generation was indeed pretty poor, but NextGen players of 95-99 are as good as they can be, just not at the ridiculously high bar the big 4 set yet. Someone may get to that level someday, maybe not, it's far from a given someone can reach that level even with all the right training and equipment. Guys like Raonic and Dimitrov never should have become generation leaders with their teenage results, it was just a strange dip in talent level for the entire generation, and the 95-99 gen is back to normal if you compare them with players like Roddick, Berdych, Tsonga....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meddy Bär

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,848 Posts
A very interesting article, thanks for linking it. It seems like the current youth training culture will persist for a long while, at least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
846 Posts
Pure idiocy.
Big 3 are the 3 ATGs, and constantly comparing others to them and finding them lacking is idiocy.
There are all kinds of great young players now.
The generation after the best tennis generation in the history of the sports will always look weak to the subjective eye.
The mental wall these new players have to overcome is gigantic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
740 Posts
Castrated, emasculated western men with no conqueror's mentality.

Rafa is a conquisador, Novak a Serbian warrior.

New guys have none of that spirit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
846 Posts
Castrated, emasculated western men with no conqueror's mentality.

Rafa is a conquisador, Novak a Serbian warrior.

New guys have none of that spirit.
One could argue there is the Terminator Dominator, the Greek god and a russian bear around. All those titles are screaming mentality and spirit to me! And what is a serbian warrior lol - Serbia not particulary well know for strong soldiers apart from starting WW1 with an indidious assassination.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
740 Posts
One could argue there is the Terminator Dominator, the Greek god and a russian bear around. All those titles are screaming mentality and spirit to me! And what is a serbian warrior lol - Serbia not particulary well know for strong soldiers apart from starting WW1 with an indidious assassination.
Balkan men are very old fashioned and tough. I used to be good friends with a lot of Serbs and Croats in Australia.

Tsitsipas may look like a Greek God but his mentality is only like Narcissis!

Medvedev and Thiem I like though. Zverev too. Those 3 guys have the potential to become very tough, if they grow up a bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,675 Posts
While i lack the tennis knowledge to assert how much truth is in this (interesting) article, i think there are some contradictions clearly.. some players are critizised for their lack of technical imput while at the same time they are all spoiled by the same technical coaching?!

there is a lot of variation in the style and attributes of the young players. yes most have emphasis on baseline game simply bc you cannot succeed without one... duuuhhh!

where i agree is that a big difference of the Big3 and Nextgeners is in their ability to know when to come to the net and what to do there. this seems like a key to reach the next level as a player (for many players maybe not all). only Tsits seems to do it naturally.

biggest difference if you ask me is the champions mentality, which comes from being at the top of the game and winning nearly everything for 10-15 years, on top of being exceptionally gifted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Henrik and IBM

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
Pure idiocy.
Big 3 are the 3 ATGs, and constantly comparing others to them and finding them lacking is idiocy.
There are all kinds of great young players now.
Forget the Big 3, none of them have yet to approached Murray and pre-injury Del Potro's tennis level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,954 Posts
Good article, although I dislike bunching everyone into nextgen category and some player description should be revised (Zverev's serve, Thiem's game deserves more thorough explanation, Edmund's is bad, Paire's FH not mentioned). I like the idea of players being required to deal with imperfect equipment/conditions to distinguish himself from the mainstream method, just not sure if it's the reason for big three dominance. Agree on players lacking in serve and variety, return is also a great issue.

One obvious mistake to fix:

Alexander Zverev. Think of a Euro Todd Martin. Tall, well-drilled, and moderately athletic, he has developed his game into the most cliché modern baseliner I’ve ever seen. A purist’s worst nightmarehe crushes pushes the ball without a trace of flair or strategy
But "Kind of like watching a crane swing slowly around—not exciting" is GOAT level metaphor, there are quite a few in there. Tennis really needs good writers to engage the audience, there's no accident that every Fedtard has his mommy to read him few paragraphs of the Foster Wallace article in the bed. Where do you think those hyperbolic adjectives describing his game come from?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
"But…the conditions you experienced as a junior—your formative years of stroke development, point strategy, were fundamentally different from days of old. The Big Three grew up with heavier racquets, smaller racquet heads, synthetic/gut strings that danced around the string bed like spaghetti. They had to watch the ball that little bit harder, move your feet that little bit more, and prepare the racquet that little bit earlier. In essence, the Big Three were forged in sterner times—they were like Goku in the gravity chamber. In contrast, when a child starts their tennis career today, they will be given a chopped down racquet and a ball like a grapefruit that’s as soft as a pillow, and taught to hit over a knee-high net. As juniors they will have the latest polyester string that allows them to mindlessly rip the ball without much care".

I really like this part.

return is also a great issue
I think growing up with polystrings like light oversized racquets has a lot to do with this. I mean, with such equipment, even some mediocre returners would be able return Sampras serve at his feet with just a racquet swing - which means many of them would not have to actually develop return skills like chipping or blocking.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,370 Posts
Forget the Big 3, none of them have yet to approached Murray and pre-injury Del Potro's tennis level.
Murray is about as close to all time great as you can be without being considered one. I honestly think people very much underrate how good he was. He was by far the biggest victim of playing with the big 3 as there is.

Murray made it the SF stage or later of 21 slams (11 finals). He won the tournament in only 3 of those 21 SF appearances, but in the remaining 18 tournaments that he didn't win 16 were to a member of the big 3 (also had 3 losses in the QF to the big 3). A strong argument could be made that he would have 12+ slams in another era.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
Forget the Big 3, none of them have yet to approached Murray and pre-injury Del Potro's tennis level.
I think Medvedev last summer(up to his Shanghai victory even) and thiem a few times displayed tennis similar level to this, albeit different from them but extremly high level on their own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,082 Posts

Just come across this article yesterday. Basically, the issue lies in their bot-style standardized training and development based on polystrings and modern light racquets, not a lack of talent or athleticism.
String and racket technology has not advanced since the mid 90's. They are either using pro-stock models based on classics like a Pro Staff original variation (or Hyper Pro Staff), Prestige Classic, or a Babolat that is basically the same old Babolat's that have existed for around 20 years.

The comment regarding light rackets is particularly perplexing. Who exactly is using a "light racket"? It certainly is nobody near the top.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
I really like the article's central thesis, namely that we should be nurturing and encouraging the natural style of young players rather than moulding them into cookie-cutter baseliners. Every tennis player has different biomechanics and a more intuitive feel for some kinds of movement than others, and having an unusual style can cause all kinds of problems for an opponent. The difficulty is in finding the right coach who's prepared to go down this path.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,217 Posts
What?

The NextGen is also called The Golden Gen.

Its one of the best Gens ever.

Its the GenU that sucked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,729 Posts
Murray is about as close to all time great as you can be without being considered one. I honestly think people very much underrate how good he was. He was by far the biggest victim of playing with the big 3 as there is.

Murray made it the SF stage or later of 21 slams (11 finals). He won the tournament in only 3 of those 21 SF appearances, but in the remaining 18 tournaments that he didn't win 16 were to a member of the big 3 (also had 3 losses in the QF to the big 3). A strong argument could be made that he would have 12+ slams in another era.
Murray is the Olympic singles tennis goat. The most important tennis tournament anybody can play as the Olympics transcends tennis. He's clearly an all time great purely based on the Olympic wins = even if he didn't win another match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
784 Posts
Fed called Nadal a one dimensional player but he praised Roddick, a hypocrite that couldn’t break serve and strained so hard on every shot, until he injured himself repeatedly.
Compare Nadal with the phoney players from the last 10 years.
It doesn’t matter if your coaches gave robotic limited training techniques. If you‘re severely overrated and you get treated like a golden boy on tour, you can’t blame everyone else for failing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,729 Posts
In answer to the opening post: we are now in the servebot pusher era./servebot ballbasher era.There is a phenomenal lack of nuance. It was the conditions at 90% of the tournaments (including three slams) that made the big 3/4 adapt their game to play on the surfaces. Murray, Federer and to a lesser extent Djokovic (attacking baseliner to servebot pusher) all adapted their games and bodies radically to fit in with the requirements of the surfaces in this era. Their contemporaries all did the same to the best of their abilities.Next gen are being taught this stuff as juniors.These players are basically the tennis progeny of Djokovic and the ATP.
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top