FEDERER v NADAL V DJOKOVIC (etc) - MOD NOTE 1ST POST

At least you're not discriminating against any of the 3 and accusing all three equally, which is fair. I think the main reason of their longevity is that they are clearly 3 great players, but, the following generations have proven to be exceptionally poor; Alcaraz looks to be the first genuine challenger to emerge and he is about 15 years younger than Djokovic, in the past, every 7/8 years there was a new generation of players dominating. There hasn't even been a player after Djokovic and before Alcaraz who would be of a similar level to the likes of Wawrinka in his prime. Even now if Federer and Nadal were somehow able to get back to the required fitness level, they would be Djokovic's main challengers, Nadal winning last years AO is proof of this.

Djokovic is not playing as well as he was in his prime, but, be doesn't have to, he will continue to win slams until his body let's him down as the opposition apart from possibly Alcaraz are extremely poor.

.q

A lot depends on the quality of the opposition Alcaraz will face in his career. At the moment he's a long way off, until he gets into double figures I wouldn't even consider him yet. If the standard of player coming through remains similar to the last 10 years, then he has a great chance to rack up the numbers, as outside of Djokovic there really isn't any great threats there and Djokovic is already in decline (still too good for the opposition). So Alcaraz if he really is the real deal has no excuse not to get the numbers as it looks like he will have a clear road once Djokovic departs, which will happen in the next few years. Would like to see Alcaraz overcome Djokovic before Djokovic departs, rather than taking over when Djokovic is gone.

What figure will Djokovic get to?

28 is my guess.

All three have serious question marks hanging over them.

Usain Bolt was the fastest man on earth by some distance but his speed started to wane by the time he reached 28. If you look at the sprinters who went into the mid-thirties they had all been banned for drug use at some stage. So here we have a 36 year old man who hasn't lost his speed. How does that happen?

Why did his speed start to wane at 28? His 3 Jamaican teammates, Powell, Blake and Carter were all banned. So I wouldn't be using him as a benchmark for normal, clean athletes because he has plenty of his own question marks.

Mistake

the debate is over.

i was a Nadal guy. loved how he stopped Federer from being the only guy on a certain level, and then ultimately beat him at Wimbledon. once that Wimbledon victory happened, I was in his corner.

but by any reasonable objective metric, Novak is the best to ever do it. and I would honestly go as far to say he is the greatest athlete the world has ever seen.

i've no doubt he'll get to at least 28. it wouldn't surprise me one jot if he got to 30.

we'll genuinely never see anything like the man again IMO.

Tennis is largely a skill based sport, sprinting isn't. You can't really improve in sprinting if you haven't the raw athleticism that you are born with.Hard work and tactical nous can get you a lot further in tennis than it can in a sport like athletics .Therefore comparing age of decline between the 2 is not relevant at all. Djokovic can compensate for any physical flaws he may have at this age by being technically and tactically proficient, you can't do that in sprinting.We saw this on Sunday when his net play was incredible which is an area he was weak at in the past, he's also massively improved his serve over the past 5 years or so.

Djokovic before 30 had a tougher competition , perhaps if his before 30 competition was the same as it is now he would have won closer to 20 grand slams before 30 and therefore his supposed same level of performance after 30 wouldn't be the case at all.

Also it is ridiculous that you imply Djokovic is doping and then unfavorably compare him with Bolt who's team mates have all been done for doping.Pick a better comparison if you are going to go down that line.

Djokoic was prepared to to forego a couple of grand slams and other major tournaments so as not to have to put any foreign substance in his body. Most people don't agree with his personal no-vac stance, but he's been completely consistent about it. It doesn't seem likely to me that he'd then choose to take performance enhancers.

@eagle eye Have you played tennis or done athletics?

Both but at amateur level. Completely different to being an elite athlete. I played Rugby at a high enough level, completely different and it's a team sport where you can get away with things when you are older because you have young teammates with speed, reactions and stamina that you can only dream about when you go past thirty no matter how hard you try.

Even look at soccer, Cristiano Ronaldo was so fast when he was younger and that speed started to wane as he turned thirty. He was still a great player after that but it was because he had teammates picking up the slack and allowing him to stay forward and not work as hard. By 33 he was no longer wanted at Real Madrid and moved to Juventus in Italy, a lesser league, and did well there. He still scored lots of goals but at that stage he was already depending on his teammates to do the work he couldn't do anymore. He then went to United for a year and was unwanted there after a short spell because he couldn't do the work and ended up on the bench and he wasn't happy about that. He works hard on his fitness and he's still going but he's been nowhere near the player he was at 30 but he's made it work.

In an individual sport there is no place to hide, you have nobody that can do the work for you. This is why I mentioned sprinting and athletics in general. Longer distance runners, 5k and 10k track runners move up to marathons when they get older because there is less speed and you don't have to react quickly to a move. All you need for that is a consistent stride pattern, reasonbable speed and stamina.

You want to talk technical events where speed is not required as much, the triple jump is a very technical event. The oldest winner of that in the last five Olympics was 28. The high jump is another technical event, oldest winner of that in the last five olympics was 30. These events don't require the speed and reaction times a tennis player needs.

Can you explain to me how such a dominant player hasn't won the Olympic singles? Would it having anything to do with the amount of testing thats done in advance and during the event? Or are you just going to tell me it's unimportant for him?

You mention one Olympics, how about all the other ones?

Andy Murray won it twice, same age as Djokovic. And he hasn't been the same player since he turned 30. His last grand slam final was at 29.

I always loved Federer but like you say no Olympic title but even more than that he won one title in 2010 and another in 2012 and then out of nowhere five years later he wins three in twelve months.

Nole is, and has been slowing down. What do folks expect? You get to 31 and suddenly you’re fit for the scrap heap?

Simple: Nole today and recently is not as good/fast/intense as he was 5-6 years ago. If folks can’t see this (with silly comments) like he’s not slowed down (when he clearly has), and then accusing him of doping to explain this silly analysis, well

Nole at 34/35 and 36 is still good enough to be number 1. And if it was Nole from 2014/2015/2016, he’d be winning with one leg and one arm.

and can we stop this nonsense sprinting-triple jumping/tennis comparison. Speed is vital in sprinting/triple jump. Speed is important in tennis, but unlike sprinting, tennis has far more to consider. Huge and varied skill base!

The standard is dirt. Alcarez and Sinner are two that finally stepped up, but for years, the next generation beyond brutal. And mentally weak too.

If Lleyton Hewitt was breaking through a few years ago when Djokovic was 34/35, would have destroyed him. All the players scared to step up, the way younger players did years ago