Mens Tennis Forums banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

What is prime and what is peak when we talk about players.

Jump to Latest
4K views 60 replies 39 participants last post by  Fairplay  
#1 ·
First off I really mean this question. I never use them as it confuses me and I don't understand them. So I want to know what the definition is. But seriously don't make this a big three war. If possible talk about player X etc and approach this a bit scientifically. I'm just curious if it's an age thing, a surface thing or whatever. Does it start after a player wins a slam end when does it end. I think we can do this without bringing a war into this. Lets see if MTF can live up to my hope. Again I'm serious about this question. The phrases are thrown around so much I don't know what's what.

@mods monitor this and if it goes to shit just ruins the thread
 
X
#2 ·
I look at it as:

Prime is the best extended period of a player’s career
Peak is the best period within a player’s prime

obviously with modern GOAT level athletes with insane longevity like the Big 3, Lebron, Messi etc it gets a bit more difficult to pin it down and you have “multiple primes” and traditionally prime-length peaks and so on

but generally it’s just a performance curve over time that most athletes fall into i think
 
#7 ·
Well that's why I added the last sentence for the mods. I'm genuinly interested. But if it can't be discussed properly bin the thread. Already people are not talking about it in terms like player X/Y over period etc. But are taking big three examples. So properly short lived. I tried.
 
#21 ·
This is solid.


Think of prime as the overall period of success for a player and peak as the period when they played their absolute best.

PEAK would be part of a players prime.


If we talk about general prime level for players... big 4 in particular..



PRIME YEARS

Federer 2003 to 2019
Nadal 2005 to 2020
Murray 2007 to 2016
Djokovic 2007 to 2023 (maybe current... to be determined)


If I had to pick one particular PEAK YEAR that falls within their prime...
Federer 2005
Nadal 2010
Murray 2016 (some say he may have pushed himself beyond his limit and broke down his body)
Djokovic 2011



As for Alcaraz... PRIME 2021 to current... PEAK? To Be Determined.
 
#12 ·
I define prime as the period when a player has the ideal mixture between maturity (techniques, tactics, experience) and physicality (swiftness, endurance). Peak is the perfect prime.
Age of prime/peak period vary between players, so it's impossible to apply an exact age of prime for every players.
But in general a player is unlikely to be in his prime before age 20-22 (not matured enough), or after 30-32 (declining physicality).
There can be also different prime/peak on different surfaces because different surfaces require different skill sets.
 
#37 · (Edited)
It's a beginning of a peaking IMO, for me a prime starts with the first slam title for the goats, or a slam final for ATG, and usually ends with the last slam title and multiple slam finals.

For Fedalovic we could consider a peaking period to have lasted around 7-9 seasons, for an average ATG it would be a whole prime period with only 3-4 peaking seasons.

IMO, Peakdal 2008-14 (7 seasons), Peakerer 2004-11/12 (8-9 seasons), Peakovic 2011-18/19 (8-9 seasons), Peakpras 1993-99 (seven seasons).

Fedalovicpras ten-season period since the first multiple slam season and arguably their first peaking season (attachment):
 

Attachments

#18 ·
according to fedaltards: fed peak til 2008, prime til 2011
rafa peak/prime til 2013
everything else after that should be discarded as it paved the way for novak to vulture. at least fedaltards say so... 😂
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#26 ·
I tend to use 3 definitions.
There is a priming point for a player and once he once it happens the player is primed.
There is also an absolute prime period, a period that usually takes a few years (a 6-year period is common, sometimes a bit more and sometimes a bit less). During this period a player can consistently play and his high level or close to it. A player's peak is focusing on even shorter periods of time, on which the player can plan at his best level or close to in almost every tournament he plays, at least as long as it's played on a surface the player is hood at.
If I were to take Djokovic I'd say he primed in 2011, his absolute prime period was between 2011-2016 and he was at his peak during the first 8 months of 2011 (between the Australian Open and the US Open) and during 2015 and the first half of 2016 (up until the French Open).
Of course, sometimes a player can peak for a match or for a tournament outside his peak or even outside his absolute prime period. Federer was capable if doing something like this at the 2015 Cincinnati masters, Djokovic was capable of doing so at the SF and final of the 2019 Australian Open.
Overall, prime should describe a longer time span than peak.
 
#31 · (Edited)
I will now give what I consider as the priming point for Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, the signs and the reasons for picking each of these years:
For Federer it was 2004. His case is the easiest to explain - prior to 2004 Federer only reached 1 Grand Slam SF (at 2003 Wimbledon which he won), he didn't reach a single hard court Slam QF and only won 1 Big hard court title (the 2003 YEC which was just right at the end of his pre-prime). At the French Open, Federer reached 1 QF prior to 2003. Between 2004-2009, on the other hand, Federer reached SF or better in 23 of the 24 Slams he played, won multiple Slams in 5 of these 6 years and won 5 of the 6 hard court titles, 4 of them multiple times. The difference between Federer before 2004 and from 2004-2009 is as clear as it gets. The next time Federer lost before the QF stage of a hard court Slam was at the 2013 US Open, in a poor form year for Federer.
For Nadal it's not as easy to detect, but his priming point is 2008. The key to this definition is Nadal's results outside his favourite surface. Before 2008 Nadal didn't reach a hard court Slam SF, he didn't score a real top 10 win in any of the 3 non-clay Slams. He also had neither a grass court title or a real top 10 win on grass. Between 2008-2013, Nadal won 3 hard court Slams, reached the SF stage or better in 8 hard court Grand Slam editions (out of 10 participations), won 3 grass court titles (among them 2 Wimbledon titles) and scored 7 top 10 wins on grass. In 2008 alone he reached the SF stage of all 4 Slams. Such a drastic improvement on Nadal's non-favourite surfaces can't be overlooked.
For Djokovic it is not that difficult to detect, his priming point is 2011. Prior to 2011 Djokovic couldn't reach multiple Grand Slam finals in the same season, he didn't reach the final of neither the French Open nor Wimbledon, his maximum number of Big finals per season was 5 and he didn't have a single successful Big Title defence. Between 2011-2016, Djokovic averaged 3 Grand Slam finals per season (2014 was the only year in which Djokovic reached less than 3 Grand Slam finals). He reached 4 finals each at the French Open and Wimbledon, won the former once and the latter thrice. He averaged 9 Big finals per season and successfully defended a Big Title on 16 occasions. The difference between Djokovic's results before 2011 and between 2011-2016 is also rather clear.
 
#45 ·
Couldn’t even be bothered to read this thread but yeah this pretty much sums it up. All of the big three factions are obviously going to disagree, add to that perhaps Murray fans and now Sinner and Alcaraz fans and you have another MTF pointless thread. No criticism of the OP though, sadly MTF is just not a place that many people come to to discuss the actual sport of tennis.
 
Mens Tennis Forums
posts
19M
members
108K
Since
2002
A forum community dedicated to male tennis players and enthusiasts. Talk about everything from the ATP, NSMTA, to college Tennis and even everything about equipment. It's all here!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Messages Non-Tennis Challengers threads The Federer Express DjokoLand