A Sea Change is Occuring

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,163
Reactions
5,851
Points
113
I think it is clear that we are in the earlyish stages of a major sea change on the ATP tour, which has been utterly dominated by only a few players for over ten years. Consider that Roger Federer won his first Slam 2003, then took the #1 ranking from Andy Roddick in early 2004 and, for the next 12+ years, it has been held by him and only two other players, Rafa Nadal and Novak Djokovic. There is no other span in Open Era history like it--in which three players have so utterly dominated. Of course during that time there have been other players who have vied to be considered in their company, most especially Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka.

Regardless, though, things are changing. As of right now, Federer is 35, Wawrinka 31, Nadal 30, Murray and Djokovic 29. Roger is far from his prime, although still relevant, at least as of Wimbledon; Rafa is two and a half years from a Slam title, even a semifinal, but is still solidly in the top ten, and of course Andy and Novak are the two top players in the sport, and Stan just won the US Open. But while this group, as a whole, maintains their hold on the tour right now and for the near future, cracks are starting to grow. What we can reasonably be certain of is that sometime in the next 3-5 years, the balance of power will substantially shift--even fully.

Let's look at that time span: 2017-21. Here are the age ranges those and other older players will be, from the beginning of 2017 to the end of 2021.

35-40 Roger Federer, Feliciano Lopez
34-39 David Ferrer
32-37 Gilles Simon
31-36 Stan Wawrinka, Tomas Berdych, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
30-35 Rafael Nadal, Gael Monfils, Richard Gasquet
29-34 Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray
28-33 Marin Cilic, Juan Martin del Potro, Roberto Bautista Agut

Then we have the next group, the in-between group that has yet to make a mark - that is, win even a Masters:

27-32 Kei Nishikori, Martin Klizan, Benoit Paire, Steve Johnson
26-31 Milos Raonic, David Goffin, Federico Delbonis, Vasek Pospisil
25-30 Grigor Dimitrov, Pablo Carreno Busta
24-29 Bernard Tomic, Jack Sock, Diego Schwartzman, Denis Kudla

Obviously the clock is ticking for these guys, who are the worst four-year stretch of players since the group born between Rod Laver (1938) and Arthur Ashe (1943). If they are going to win anything, it should probably be before the next group comes of age, so the time is really the next few years.

And then we have the younger generation(s). I'm grouping Thiem with this bunch:
23-28 Dominic Thiem, Jiri Vesely
22-27 Lucas Pouille
21-26 Nick Kyrgios, Kyle Edmund
20-25 Borna Coric, Karen Khachanov, Jared Donaldson, Quentin Halys, Daniil Medvedev, E Escobedo
19-24 Alexander Zverev, Taylor Fritz, Andrey Rublev, Tommy Paul
18-23 Frances Tiafoe, Duckhee Lee, Stefan Kozlov, Casper Ruud, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Michael Mmoh
17-22 Denis Shapovalov
16-21 Felix Auger Aliassime

Who knows which of these guys will become top players, although some are clearly close and others look very promising.

Anyhow, what will be interesting to watch is how and when the baton is passed from the first group to the third group, and to what degree the second group will be involved, or whether they will be entirely passed over. It seems only a matter of time before Raonic or Nishikori, or even Dimitrov, wins a Masters...I mean its gotta happen at some point, right? Maybe the Paris Masters? If not, the year will end with no player age 27 and under with a Masters or Slam title on their mantle. That is just crazy.

But change is happening...slowly, but steadily. And it is going in a certain, inevitable direction. Maybe no one in the second or third group wins a Slam next year, but I think it likely that at least the Masters start breaking up, and who knows, maybe a Slam...

So here is the main point, to sum up: Over the next five years, maybe even less, we are going to see a complete sea change in men's tennis. Many of the stalwart names will have retired, with a new group rising to the top. One would think such a statement to be innocuous, but considering the lengthy reign of the Big Four (or Three or Five, depending upon how you look at it), which really goes back to early 2004, it really feels like--to quote the new Nobel prize winner--"the times they are a changin.'"
 

Riotbeard

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,810
Reactions
12
Points
38
El Dude said:
I think it is clear that we are in the earlyish stages of a major sea change on the ATP tour, which has been utterly dominated by only a few players for over ten years. Consider that Roger Federer won his first Slam 2003, then took the #1 ranking from Andy Roddick in early 2004 and, for the next 12+ years, it has been held by him and only two other players, Rafa Nadal and Novak Djokovic. There is no other span in Open Era history like it--in which three players have so utterly dominated. Of course during that time there have been other players who have vied to be considered in their company, most especially Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka.

Regardless, though, things are changing. As of right now, Federer is 35, Wawrinka 31, Nadal 30, Murray and Djokovic 29. Roger is far from his prime, although still relevant, at least as of Wimbledon; Rafa is two and a half years from a Slam title, even a semifinal, but is still solidly in the top ten, and of course Andy and Novak are the two top players in the sport, and Stan just won the US Open. But while this group, as a whole, maintains their hold on the tour right now and for the near future, cracks are starting to grow. What we can reasonably be certain of is that sometime in the next 3-5 years, the balance of power will substantially shift--even fully.

Let's look at that time span: 2017-21. Here are the age ranges those and other older players will be, from the beginning of 2017 to the end of 2021.

35-40 Roger Federer, Feliciano Lopez
34-39 David Ferrer
32-37 Gilles Simon
31-36 Stan Wawrinka, Tomas Berdych, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
30-35 Rafael Nadal, Gael Monfils, Richard Gasquet
29-34 Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray
28-33 Marin Cilic, Juan Martin del Potro, Roberto Bautista Agut

Then we have the next group, the in-between group that has yet to make a mark - that is, win even a Masters:

27-32 Kei Nishikori, Martin Klizan, Benoit Paire, Steve Johnson
26-31 Milos Raonic, David Goffin, Federico Delbonis, Vasek Pospisil
25-30 Grigor Dimitrov, Pablo Carreno Busta
24-29 Bernard Tomic, Jack Sock, Diego Schwartzman, Denis Kudla

Obviously the clock is ticking for these guys, who are the worst four-year stretch of players since the group born between Rod Laver (1938) and Arthur Ashe (1943). If they are going to win anything, it should probably be before the next group comes of age, so the time is really the next few years.

And then we have the younger generation(s). I'm grouping Thiem with this bunch:
23-28 Dominic Thiem, Jiri Vesely
22-27 Lucas Pouille
21-26 Nick Kyrgios, Kyle Edmund
20-25 Borna Coric, Karen Khachanov, Jared Donaldson, Quentin Halys, Daniil Medvedev, E Escobedo
19-24 Alexander Zverev, Taylor Fritz, Andrey Rublev, Tommy Paul
18-23 Frances Tiafoe, Duckhee Lee, Stefan Kozlov, Casper Ruud, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Michael Mmoh
17-22 Denis Shapovalov
16-21 Felix Auger Aliassime

Who knows which of these guys will become top players, although some are clearly close and others look very promising.

Anyhow, what will be interesting to watch is how and when the baton is passed from the first group to the third group, and to what degree the second group will be involved, or whether they will be entirely passed over. It seems only a matter of time before Raonic or Nishikori, or even Dimitrov, wins a Masters...I mean its gotta happen at some point, right? Maybe the Paris Masters? If not, the year will end with no player age 27 and under with a Masters or Slam title on their mantle. That is just crazy.

But change is happening...slowly, but steadily. And it is going in a certain, inevitable direction. Maybe no one in the second or third group wins a Slam next year, but I think it likely that at least the Masters start breaking up, and who knows, maybe a Slam...

So here is the main point, to sum up: Over the next five years, maybe even less, we are going to see a complete sea change in men's tennis. Many of the stalwart names will have retired, with a new group rising to the top. One would think such a statement to be innocuous, but considering the lengthy reign of the Big Four (or Three or Five, depending upon how you look at it), which really goes back to early 2004, it really feels like--to quote the new Nobel prize winner--"the times they are a changin.'"

It is inevitable. I wonder how this ban will affect kyrgios.
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,163
Reactions
5,851
Points
113
It is inevitable, yes. But why I wrote this, and what gets me excited, is that it is happening now and over the next few years.

Who knows, maybe Kyrgios will find god or something and be reformed. The kid needs something.
 

Riotbeard

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,810
Reactions
12
Points
38
El Dude said:
It is inevitable, yes. But why I wrote this, and what gets me excited, is that it is happening now and over the next few years.

Who knows, maybe Kyrgios will find god or something and be reformed. The kid needs something.

Yeah, I hope it doesn't make him angrier. I think the maverick-ness is good, but only to a degree.
 

Shivashish Sarkar

Major Winner
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
1,407
Reactions
197
Points
63
Location
Bengaluru, India.
I for one won't be very surprised if Novak and Andy continue to dominate through the next 4-5 years. Andy will be there to make the most of his career. If Novak can get himself out of the personal problems he is facing, he can play that long too. 89-93 generation seems like a closed case mostly. At least, none will ever get into the top 4 again. As far as the 94-98 generation goes, Zverev is only good prospect as of now but he needs to arrive at the big scene still. Kyrgios seems unprofessional. Besides will he ever be able to put together his game? A change in the top is still far.


Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
 

herios

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
8,984
Reactions
1,659
Points
113
shivashish said:
I for one won't be very surprised if Novak and Andy continue to dominate through the next 4-5 years. Andy will be there to make the most of his career. If Novak can get himself out of the personal problems he is facing, he can play that long too. 89-93 generation seems like a closed case mostly. At least, none will ever get into the top 4 again. As far as the 94-98 generation goes, Zverev is only good prospect as of now but he needs to arrive at the big scene still. Kyrgios seems unprofessional. Besides will he ever be able to put together his game? A change in the top is still far.


Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
While i agree with the domination of Andy and Novak for a few more years but can you tell me why Kei and Milos will never get into the top 4 again?
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,039
Reactions
7,329
Points
113
shivashish said:
I for one won't be very surprised if Novak and Andy continue to dominate through the next 4-5 years. Andy will be there to make the most of his career. If Novak can get himself out of the personal problems he is facing, he can play that long too. 89-93 generation seems like a closed case mostly. At least, none will ever get into the top 4 again. As far as the 94-98 generation goes, Zverev is only good prospect as of now but he needs to arrive at the big scene still. Kyrgios seems unprofessional. Besides will he ever be able to put together his game? A change in the top is still far.


Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk

Yeah, I don't see Andy and Novak dominating for the "next 4-5 years." If they do, it means the field will be at an all-time low - and it's been fairly toothless for about 15 years now...
 

Shivashish Sarkar

Major Winner
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
1,407
Reactions
197
Points
63
Location
Bengaluru, India.
herios said:
shivashish said:
I for one won't be very surprised if Novak and Andy continue to dominate through the next 4-5 years. Andy will be there to make the most of his career. If Novak can get himself out of the personal problems he is facing, he can play that long too. 89-93 generation seems like a closed case mostly. At least, none will ever get into the top 4 again. As far as the 94-98 generation goes, Zverev is only good prospect as of now but he needs to arrive at the big scene still. Kyrgios seems unprofessional. Besides will he ever be able to put together his game? A change in the top is still far.


Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
While i agree with the domination of Andy and Novak for a few more years but can you tell me why Kei and Milos will never get into the top 4 again?
Perhaps the younger group of players will overtake them. Kei is physically too fragile to be there. Raonic is not good enough on all surfaces. Thiem, Zverev are on the rise.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,163
Reactions
5,851
Points
113
The situation isn't that unlike late 90s. Between Agassi (b. 1970) and Sampras (b. 1971) on one side, and Federer (b. 1981) and Nadal (b. 1986) on the other, there were no great players, just a bunch of very good ones: Kafelnikov, Kuertan, Rios, etc.

Now we have Rafa and Roger fading, but Novak and Andy--both born in 1987--going strong. And then we have a transitional group in Cilic, maybe a resurgent del Potro, Raonic, Nishikori, and Thiem. The next dominant group will be among Kyrgios, Zverev, Fritz, Tiafoe, Shapovalov, Aliassime, etc--players born from 1995-2000.

So I don't agree that Murray and Djokovic will dominate another "4-5 years." Maybe 1-2, and even then I think the cracks are going to grow larger and larger next year; 2017 may still see the tour dominated by those two, but 2018 is going to be a free-for-all and by 2019, the sea change will have occurred. In my opinion, of course.

I also disagree that Zverev is the only prospect in that group. Kyrgios is capable of explosive play and with a tweak in his attitude, he's going to be very dangerous. Hopefully this "break" will help him re-assess his career. I really wouldn't be surprised if he comes back strong in 2017 and goes deep in a Slam or two. And there plenty of other interesting prospects, they're just not poised to break into the top 20...yet. But a "prospect" is someone with strong potential, and there are some very intriguing players out there, from Taylor Fritz to Frances Tiafoe to to Caspar Ruud to Denis Shapovalov to Felix Auger Aliassime.
 

Shivashish Sarkar

Major Winner
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
1,407
Reactions
197
Points
63
Location
Bengaluru, India.
By dominance of Novak and Murray I mean that at any point either Djokovic or Murray would be no. 1 and the other no. 2. I beg to differ in my opinion about the kei generation. They are all good but to make a huge impact in slams for 12 months is not very likely for them. And that will be needed to topple these guys in the rankings. I don't see that happening to them. Its difficult to imagine Thiem very successful outside clay, especially to an extent of beating the new big 2 often at slams. Kyrgios is a head-case. How is anyone to expect him to set right his attitude finally? One can only hope for that.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,163
Reactions
5,851
Points
113
We don't disagree about Kei's group--clearly they're weak. I've often said that they're the weakest generation since the guys born between Rod Laver (b. 1938) and John Newcombe (1944), especially if you add Arthur Ashe (1943) to Newcombe's group. The younger guys, starting with Kyrgios (1995), look stronger, if with no clear future greats among them. Yet. But these guys need another year or two to become serious threats, except for perhaps Kyrgios and Zverev, both of whom are on the cusp of doing serious damage.

But my view is this: the tour is, right now, the weakest it is going to be for years to come. It is only going to get stronger and stronger. Players like Thiem, Pouille, Edmund, Kyrgios, Khachanov, Zverev, Fritz, etc, are still rising; players like Cilic, del Potro, Raonic, Nishikori, and Dimitrov won't get any worse--and will form a kind of threshold separating the elites from everyone else. At some point Novak and Andy will start slipping--it may even be that Novak is already slipping. At some point their inevitable downward turn will meet the upward movement of the young guys...and it could happen right at that threshold where the "transitional generation" is, so that we have a truly Wild West style tour for a year or two.

Now it seems likely that 2017 will be, once more, a year in which Novak and Andy dominate, with flavorings of Stan and maybe hints of Rafa and Roger. I also think that Cilic will surpass the older guys and be right there with Stan--if not in the rankings, then certainly in terms of how dangeorus he is. Novak and Andy will start to be upset more. Maybe Kei or Milos or even Grigor goes on a hot streak and grabs a Masters title. Maybe Kyrgios gets his head straight and Zverev continues his steady rise. But by year's end, it is probably that Novak and Andy will still be at the top of the rankings, but their massive lead will have eroded.

2018 will see further change. I would think that sometime that year someone else will steal the #1 ranking, if only for a time. By that point Andy and Novak might still be elite players, but they'll be first among near-equals. By 2019 their reign will have ended...or at least no later than 2020.
 

sid

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
798
Reactions
10
Points
18
ATM the big 3 are Nole/Andy & Stan.Only Marin & Potty might crash in on winning Slams
 

herios

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
8,984
Reactions
1,659
Points
113
shivashish said:
herios said:
shivashish said:
I for one won't be very surprised if Novak and Andy continue to dominate through the next 4-5 years. Andy will be there to make the most of his career. If Novak can get himself out of the personal problems he is facing, he can play that long too. 89-93 generation seems like a closed case mostly. At least, none will ever get into the top 4 again. As far as the 94-98 generation goes, Zverev is only good prospect as of now but he needs to arrive at the big scene still. Kyrgios seems unprofessional. Besides will he ever be able to put together his game? A change in the top is still far.


Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
While i agree with the domination of Andy and Novak for a few more years but can you tell me why Kei and Milos will never get into the top 4 again?
Perhaps the younger group of players will overtake them. Kei is physically too fragile to be there. Raonic is not good enough on all surfaces. Thiem, Zverev are on the rise.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk
IThe jury is out on that.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,039
Reactions
7,329
Points
113
The field have been sh1t for a long, long time. We can mask it however we like, and say, ugh, The Big 3! Uh, and now! The Big 4!

But really, the Safins and Nalbandians were sh1t when it came to being proper contenders according to their abilities and so they facilitated a simple and routine harvesting of a billion slams by Federer. More or less. And the likes of Kei and Marin and Berdych are relative eunuchs at this level. Yeah, we can nod our heads sagely and say, nah, look at so-and-so's service percentage, against anyone else but [Insert Big 3 Players Name] they'd be Rod Laver, or at least a little Muscles Ken Rosewall - but really, to argue this way is to only highlight the weakness in your argument.

We shouldn't have so many records nowadays, one bloke winning 9 of the same slam, another owning the record for MS titles, another got the record number of slams, etc - and yet we still get to argue that the field is humongously strong?

Impossible.

It's impossible from a mathematical, statistical, theological, philosphical, sci-fi, fiction, and whatever fad Novak is now into since he lost this afternoon, point of view.

Impossible.

And illogical, too.

They're sh1t...
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,163
Reactions
5,851
Points
113
I don't know, Kieran, it may simply be that the talent is simply pooled differently now--it is more "top heavy," that is pooled towards a smaller group of great players. I tend to think that talent fluctuates, that there are periods of greater talent (80s) and lesser talent (late 90s/early 00s), but that it tends to equalize over time.

If by the field being shit you mean the non-elite, than I agree that it has been weakish for awhile. But you could argue that in the late 90s/early 00s, the field was actually quite deep - it is just the elite that was weak. But then you had three of the greatest players of the Open Era all start winning Slams from 2003 to 2008, with another almost-great in Andy Murray (who may, before he's through, end up in the Wilander/Becker/Edberg class).

Federer's generation is a chicken-egg thing: was Federer so dominant because the field was weak, or was the field weak before he was so dominant? Hard to say, isn't it? I think you can say that, to some degree, about the Kei-Milos group: Roger, Rafa, and Novak are a tough act to follow.
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
Predictions and more predictions but the reality is that no one knows what is going to happen in the future like nobody predicted what is happening this year, if Muzz would reach the #1 or Novak went to go through a stormy time (whatever is the reason) also someones predicted that Thiem, Zverv and Kyrgios would win something very important (I don't see any) etc etc
I think something is going to change in 2017 and what? we'll see
As Rafa's fan I think that his smart decision to rest and to heal completely the wrist (but in different way than after he had to retire in the las RG being inactive for more than two months) is going to help him a lot because he is training without any effort (not playing matches) having some time to improve some shots like his serve and his FH which didn't work well because the pain. He was close to play his best before to get the injury, he can do it again this next year and maybe he also could win a couple of GS. Maybe this sounds like one more 'prediction' and I don't know what is going to happen either but it's the way I'm thinking and... why not?
 

herios

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
8,984
Reactions
1,659
Points
113
El Dude said:
We don't disagree about Kei's group--clearly they're weak. I've often said that they're the weakest generation since the guys born between Rod Laver (b. 1938) and John Newcombe (1944), especially if you add Arthur Ashe (1943) to Newcombe's group. The younger guys, starting with Kyrgios (1995), look stronger, if with no clear future greats among them. Yet. But these guys need another year or two to become serious threats, except for perhaps Kyrgios and Zverev, both of whom are on the cusp of doing serious damage.

But my view is this: the tour is, right now, the weakest it is going to be for years to come. It is only going to get stronger and stronger. Players like Thiem, Pouille, Edmund, Kyrgios, Khachanov, Zverev, Fritz, etc, are still rising; players like Cilic, del Potro, Raonic, Nishikori, and Dimitrov won't get any worse--and will form a kind of threshold separating the elites from everyone else. At some point Novak and Andy will start slipping--it may even be that Novak is already slipping. At some point their inevitable downward turn will meet the upward movement of the young guys...and it could happen right at that threshold where the "transitional generation" is, so that we have a truly Wild West style tour for a year or two.

Now it seems likely that 2017 will be, once more, a year in which Novak and Andy dominate, with flavorings of Stan and maybe hints of Rafa and Roger. I also think that Cilic will surpass the older guys and be right there with Stan--if not in the rankings, then certainly in terms of how dangeorus he is. Novak and Andy will start to be upset more. Maybe Kei or Milos or even Grigor goes on a hot streak and grabs a Masters title. Maybe Kyrgios gets his head straight and Zverev continues his steady rise. But by year's end, it is probably that Novak and Andy will still be at the top of the rankings, but their massive lead will have eroded.
El Dude, you must have a Bulgarian background or something of that sort, otherwise why would you keeping overselling Grigor:puzzled
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,163
Reactions
5,851
Points
113
Carol, it goes without saying that no one knows what will happen, but it is fun to think about, no? So what's the problem? Oh, right--you don't like the fact that I see Rafa (and Roger) fading into the night. :cry

That said, I do see a scenario where Rafa wins one more...it is less than likely at this point, but I'd give him a greater chance at winning Roland Garros than I would Roger at winning Wimbledon. But how awesome would it be if they both won their favored Slams next year?

herios said:
El Dude, you must have a Bulgarian background or something of that sort, otherwise why would you keeping overselling Grigor:puzzled

Haha, not Bulgarian. But seriously, the reason I keep Grigor in the mix is that he is a chronic underachiever, a player capable of a very high level of play--at least as high as Kei and Milos--and he's the type of player that could catch fire and win a Masters. I mean, why not? I know he's a disaster, but I don't see why he couldn't not be a disaster for a couple weeks in a row and win a Masters. I'm not saying that it will happen, but that it could.
 

Shivashish Sarkar

Major Winner
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
1,407
Reactions
197
Points
63
Location
Bengaluru, India.
El Dude said:
Carol, it goes without saying that no one knows what will happen, but it is fun to think about, no? So what's the problem? Oh, right--you don't like the fact that I see Rafa (and Roger) fading into the night. :cry

That said, I do see a scenario where Rafa wins one more...it is less than likely at this point, but I'd give him a greater chance at winning Roland Garros than I would Roger at winning Wimbledon. But how awesome would it be if they both won their favored Slams next year?

herios said:
El Dude, you must have a Bulgarian background or something of that sort, otherwise why would you keeping overselling Grigor:puzzled

Haha, not Bulgarian. But seriously, the reason I keep Grigor in the mix is that he is a chronic underachiever, a player capable of a very high level of play--at least as high as Kei and Milos--and he's the type of player that could catch fire and win a Masters. I mean, why not? I know he's a disaster, but I don't see why he couldn't not be a disaster for a couple weeks in a row and win a Masters. I'm not saying that it will happen, but that it could.
Could it happen all of a sudden? Its fun to think of possibilities. But, does we can only hope.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk