Mens Tennis Forums banner

The Big 3 have completely screwed up the vision regarding the longevity of a tennis player's career.

4 reading
797 views 42 replies 23 participants last post by  Litotes  
#1 ·
I hear people talking about Sinner and Alcaraz needing to win 20 slams.
Lol, tennis is a sport where a player has a very short lifespan! By 27, many are already old(Medvedev Zverev Tsitsipas Roddick even Sampras Nalbandian Safin: all fallen after turning 27), and over 30, the only players in the top 30 are Dimitrov and Djokovic, and both are no longer competitive for a slam.

For me, it would be a miracle if Alcaraz and Sinner remained competitive for slams until they're 30.

You have to forget about having long careers like Federer's especially with tennis nowadays which is an incredibly physical sport where even a 10% drop in power and speed is like being screwed.
 
#4 ·
It is all about mindset and will and hard work

Some players are happy with top 20, top 30, and that's enough

Other players win slam after slam and still want more

That's what separates the good from the great
 
#5 ·
Zverev, Medvedev and Tsitsipas are just rubbish and have been surpassed by Alcaraz and Sinner.

Science and conditioning have improved tenfold, and Sinner and Alcaraz will benefit from that too, will add years onto their prime, that those before the big 3 never had.

Peak performance and longevity becoming the standard across the board in all sports. Tsitsipas, Medvedev and Zverev being rubbish generally, doesn't disprove this. They were never good enough, in any era!
 
#21 ·
Peak performance is still around 25 years old. This includes the big 3. These guys play an individual sport where there is no hiding or resting. Modern practices can get you near that peak till 30, but even the best start breaking down after that if isolated the same way.

It will always be harder for a tennis player to have the same type of success at say 30-35 due to that individual sport aspect.
 
#6 ·
Yet another poster who believes that the big 3 are 'freaks of nature'. Nay, they aren't. They have only benefited from advances in medicine and nutrition. Look at Serena, look at Messi, Ronaldo, Usyk and Kipchuge.

Wait for another decade - unless Sincaraz succumb to career threatening injuries, you will see them winning slams in their mid-30s.

And then some new revisionist stories will pop up.
 
#40 ·
Yet another poster who believes that the big 3 are 'freaks of nature'. Nay, they aren't. They have only benefited from advances in medicine and nutrition. Look at Serena, look at Messi, Ronaldo, Usyk and Kipchuge.

Wait for another decade - unless Sincaraz succumb to career threatening injuries, you will see them winning slams in their mid-30s.

And then some new revisionist stories will pop up.
Messi is in MLS. Ronaldo in Saudi. They are past their prime. Usyk is obviously still no.1. Never heard of Kip huge.

I really don’t see mid 30’s guys winning slams becoming the norm in tennis. With the big 3 it required a perfect storm of being GOAT level tennis players, no major injuries and a very poor standard of emerging player.
 
#10 ·
I hear people talking about Sinner and Alcaraz needing to win 20 slams.
Lol, tennis is a sport where a player has a very short lifespan! By 27, many are already old(Medvedev Zverev Tsitsipas Roddick even Sampras Nalbandian Safin: all fallen after turning 27), and over 30, the only players in the top 30 are Dimitrov and Djokovic, and both are no longer competitive for a slam.
Not sure those are the best examples - Sampras had health issues, Nalby and Safin never tried hard enough, plus they had ton of injuries too. Tsitsipas is just stupid, Zverev mentally weak (plus diabetes?) and Medvedev's struggles too likely more mental than physical.
 
#11 ·
I dont like when people says X player tries not hard enough, as it depended of them voluntarily to change it and push a button and immediately become a much better version of themselves. At least the tone in how it is often discussed: Lets take for example Kyrgios: oh he just doesnt try hard enough, what "If" he even "cared"?…. Again a lot of those players appear as If they dont care not Because they "do not want" to not care about his profession and biggest souce of income (which is Tennis), but because they find it very hard and nearly impossible to Care, to really try hard, to wake up and be dialed up 100% from the start, be disciplined, focused about keep learning, executing and as consequence improving... It shouldn't treated differently as players who find hard to serve well or have problems at the net or backhand, it should be seen as what it is, a learned skill, a talent and a trained capacity to frustration, pain and discomfort, and its tolerance to go through something isnt naturally for you to pick up or engage to, it is actually VERY hard to be able to focus,be concentrated and disciplined 100% towards specific short ,middle and long term objectives in order to constantly improve, in anything not just Tennis.
 
#14 ·
It depends on the gap between them and others...all of the Big3 declined in their 30´s (Djokovic probably the least), but it was still enough to dominate as no younger prime ATGs showed up until 2024. Barring injury, I expect Sincaraz to be at a pretty good level in their early 30´s at least. But the peak level is now and the next few years.
 
#23 ·
The Big 3 are an "anomaly" and very hard to replicate. However, we are now seeing in sports that longevity is increasing. Tom Brady was winning Super Bowls in his 40s, Messi and C. Ronaldo will become the only players in history to play 6 World Cups next year. And we saw other players aside from the Big 3 play well into their 30s like Isner, Monfils, Gasquet, etc.
 
#25 ·
With regards to Medvedev and Tsitsipas, this seems like a motivation thing. I don't think they are training as hard as they used to when they were younger. They have been broken down over and over and over again. It stands to reason to think about how Sinner and Alcaraz would have fared if their 2024 selves were transported into 2011. They wouldn't have had the success they had and the question is would it have stopped their momentum? I imagine they would have won a slam here and there and been ready to capitalize in some of the later periods, but those losses would have hurt.
 
#34 ·
Tennis is clearly closer to athletics than to boxing, MMA or weight lifting - in those sports it´s common to peak in your 30´s, but it´s very rare in athletics. Usain Bolt was considered a veteran when he won his last 100m Olympic gold at the age of 29. And he retired the year after. His peak was the age of 22-23 years old. And he´s from the same generation as Nadal or Djokovic, so you can´t say he didn´t have access to "advanced medicine".
 
#36 ·
And even Bolt had a cheat code with all those long legs/strides of his. Alcaraz/Sinner don't have cheat code. Fedal had a cheat code. Their Forehands. Djokovic (no real cheat code just more fortunate than anything due to the rotten 2018-2013 field. I doubt the future gen coming up is a bad as the Med/Zverev/Tstsipas one)
 
#35 ·
People thinking Sinner/Alcaraz will match Big 3 longevity are INSANE. They are the very rare exception to the rule. I bet Sinner/Alcaraz are done in 4 years and we will have a completely new top 2-5 guys. . they're already breaking down physically and they're only 22/24. Not to mention sinner is 6'4 and weighs 98 pounds. Alcaraz's limbs are already starting to take the brunt of his playing styles

for anyone to match Big 3 status requires dominance into your 30's. Not happening with anyone. Not like they did it. If it does happen it definitely won't be 6 feet 12 inch, 64 pound Sinner and Carlos "I have to run 200 miles a day and slide all over to win a tennis match sprained ankles " Alcaraz
 
#37 ·
The Big Three were extraordinary in terms of managing to stay at the top for so long. But it seems fairly clear that many other players of their generation have been able to have extended careers, compared to previous generations.

If you look at the list of Y/E top 20 players from 2014, it was made up mostly of '80s-born players. Even taking the Big Three out of the equation, there are quite a number of players in that list with 20+ year careers (Wawrinka, Cilic, Feli Lopez, RBA, Robredo, Monfils, Fognini). And even the players who had the shortest careers in that list still played for 16 or 17 years (Berdych, Kevin Anderson, Isner). I'm not saying that they didn't decline with age, because it's obvious that they all did, but they still carried on, or are carrying on, with life on the tour.

There are examples of players from earlier eras who also had very long and successful careers (e.g. Rosewall and Connors), but it definitely seems to be have become more common for players to extend their careers in recent times, both 'great' players and 'good' players. It seems likely, at least in part, to be due to advances in sports medicine, although there may be other factors as well (e.g. more financial rewards, easier to travel and have multiple homes and fly families out to tournaments, and group mentality).

Going back to that list of top 20 players from 2014, the three youngest on the list are Nishikori, Raonic and Dimitrov. And I know there's a pitfall in drawing conclusions from too small a data set, but it is interesting that all three have been laid low by injuries. Possibly going forwards, we might see the average length of player careers get shorter again if modern baseline-dominated power tennis is too wearing on the body.