Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,014 Posts
Big 2 just make it look weak to untrained eye because they are so brilliant and dominant.
If you accept this you must also accept the fact that there was no weak era during 2004-07, as Federer was so brilliant and so dominant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,560 Posts
Well, I suppose there are no grass court specialists left - and who among players would you describe as a clay court specialist these days? What do they "specialise" in - hard courts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,924 Posts
Well, I suppose there are no grass court specialists left - and who among players would you describe as a clay court specialist these days? What do they "specialise" in - hard courts?
There's literally tonnes of clay court specialists... the problem is their strengths are usually not the type of things that trouble Novak or Rafa.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,161 Posts
and who among players would you describe as a clay court specialist these days? What do they "specialise" in - hard courts?
Those are usually the Spanish and Italian players, by default and their basic surface they grow up on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,180 Posts
Grass, maybe. But definitely not a weak clay era. Of course you have Nadal, Djokovic, and Thiem, who are all great on clay.
Then, most next-gen players either have clay as their best surface or at least a surface they're very competitive on:

Tsitsipas, Zverev, Berrettini, Rublev, Khachanov, Coric, Kecmanovic, FAA, Sinner: they all seem to be very strong on the surface.
Even Shapovalov seems to be doing well enough on clay.
The only glaring exception is Medvedev, who clearly is not comfortable on the surface.

Then, you have some specialists, such as Garin and Casper Ruud.

It's kind of a strong clay era...
On grass, the next-gen are struggling, except Berrettini. So it's just the Big 3 (even there, Nadal has not been consistent).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Clay and grass courts haven't been played the way they should for almost 20 years.

Clay should be slow and grass fast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
If you accept this you must also accept the fact that there was no weak era during 2004-07, as Federer was so brilliant and so dominant.
In 2023 when at least one of the 2 (likely) have more slams than Federer, I think the haters will be willing to give you Federer's "brilliance" between 04-07. They might even concede that Roddick should have been a 12-slam player...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,488 Posts
If you accept this you must also accept the fact that there was no weak era during 2004-07, as Federer was so brilliant and so dominant.
The fallacy in your argument is what would be known as a false equivalence. One does not necessitate the other. Would you agree @Unbiased?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unbiased

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,383 Posts
If you accept this you must also accept the fact that there was no weak era during 2004-07, as Federer was so brilliant and so dominant.
One does not equal the other. The issue with 04-07 for Federer isn't that their weren't good players around, but that he had no truly great players around to contend with him. This is obvious when you consider the fact that guys like Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro and Tsonga all started to catch up to him and beat him before he even turned 30 and they started to reach their primes.
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top