It is quite funny to see, yet again, even more evidence that talent overrides age. As I said repeatedly a few years back, there was clearly no one in the younger generation for the Big Four to worry about, and that has proven to be absolutely correct. Wawrinka has been the only challenger and he has done it around age 30. Where is El Dude's age analysis? Is Broken still fretting about the "decline in movement" in Federer and Nadal?
Are Federer and Nadal still too old to compete for Grand Slam titles?
- Thread starter calitennis127
- Start date
britbox
Multiple Major Winner
Yes and no. The way that Federer began the 2nd and 4th sets was a classic UFE breakdown of the sort that Nadal feeds off of. Federer could have won much more decisively without those lapses.
On the other hand, one thing that was missing from Federer's resume was a grind-it-out major win against one of his top rivals (Djokovic and Nadal). He had never won a match like this in a Slam before and most people never thought he could. Beating Nadal in a tight 5th set like that with all of the baggage from previous losses is one of the greatest feats of Federer's career and he must feel absolutely amazing right now because of it.
Also, Nadal's play under pressure (e.g. on breakpoints) is very impressive and his ability to find the court so consistently with his groundstrokes must be credited. But at the end of the day Federer has more firepower and as long as he does not self-destruct his matches with Nadal are there for the taking.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,573
- Reactions
- 5,662
- Points
- 113
B-)
Carol
Grand Slam Champion
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2015
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reactions
- 1,833
- Points
- 113
I know Federer is too old but look what he did today, incredible but true. Rafa 5 years YOUNGER has more probabilities to win than Roger for sure
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,163
- Reactions
- 5,848
- Points
- 113
Cali, I've missed you. And yes, in the case of this group (the Big Four), talent seems to override age...at least for awhile. The Grigor-Milos-Kei group has essentially been bypassed in terms of the passing of the baton of dominance; it will likely skip over those guys almost completely to Zverev and his group, when they are ready to claim it.
That said, things will likely equalize over the next year or two as the old guys inevitably decline, the middle group solidifies as the new second tier, and the young guys get better and better. As I've said at TF, we're likely entering a "Wild West" period in which anything goes. Maybe 2017 will be one more year of Big Four dominance, but I think they are--as a group--more vulnerable now than they were a year or two ago. At the least the gap will continue to narrow.
I've also made the point that while 30-year old Rafa (or 29-year old Novak) can still beat a 25-year old Grigor (or 19-year old Zverev), what will their matches look like in a couple years, when Rafa is 32-going-on-33, and Grigor is 27-28? (or Zverev is 21-22?). In other words, the "lost generation" might still get their chances, as the Big Four inevitably decline and the "GenNext" haven't quite reached their prime.
That said, things will likely equalize over the next year or two as the old guys inevitably decline, the middle group solidifies as the new second tier, and the young guys get better and better. As I've said at TF, we're likely entering a "Wild West" period in which anything goes. Maybe 2017 will be one more year of Big Four dominance, but I think they are--as a group--more vulnerable now than they were a year or two ago. At the least the gap will continue to narrow.
I've also made the point that while 30-year old Rafa (or 29-year old Novak) can still beat a 25-year old Grigor (or 19-year old Zverev), what will their matches look like in a couple years, when Rafa is 32-going-on-33, and Grigor is 27-28? (or Zverev is 21-22?). In other words, the "lost generation" might still get their chances, as the Big Four inevitably decline and the "GenNext" haven't quite reached their prime.
What about Hamburg 2008 or Madrid 2010? Federer should have won both of those matches but didn't.
The point is not about particular matches but that in general Federer has more shotmaking firepower.
Lol.....exactly. The younger generation is so amazing. Raonic will win the next 8 Slams and become an international sports icon.
Hi El Dude, it's nice to talk to you again as well. However, I still don't think you've caught on to my point about talent overriding age as indicated by your comments about the Big Four fading after 2017. If this is going to be the case, strictly speaking, it will only be because Federer retires. But the other three, particularly Djokovic, will be just fine. Barring injury Djokovic has a very clear path to 20 Slams.
There is no reason to think that Djokovic will not be a Slam contender for the next 5-6 years, which gives him a shot in another 25-30 majors if he stays healthy. There is no one in the younger generation that he has to worry about (as of now).
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,163
- Reactions
- 5,848
- Points
- 113
20 Slams for Novak? Really? I Just don't see it. First of all, Roger's aging pattern is unusual. I don't think we can expect that Rafa will still be going strong in a few years, and who knows about Novak and Andy. Players decline - it is inevitable.
On the other side, young players develop. Alex Zverev at 19 almost beat Rafa Nadal. Fast forward 2-3 years and ask how a 21-22 year old Zverev will do against a 32-33 year old Rafa, or a 31-32 year old Novak.
And Novak has bigger problems than potential injury. Like Rafa, his style of play is only sustainable for so long. I'm not convinced that his decline over the last six or seven months is solely mental. He might be physically slipping.
I do think Novak will win more Slams, but probably not more than three or four, and maybe not even that.
Last edited:
isabelle
Multiple Major Winner
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2013
- Messages
- 4,673
- Reactions
- 634
- Points
- 113
injuries are more complicated to heal when a player is "old", that's the main factor
usually, a young player recovers fast, his body is less damaged and reacts faster, hope none of the "old" player or "young" player'll pick up a serious injury in 2017
mrzz
Hater
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 6,184
- Reactions
- 3,024
- Points
- 113
^It is true, Isabelle, but the rhetorical question was if they are too old to compete. They are still not the favorites most of the time (Nadal may well be one in RG), Federer is a bit far from that, but, to compete... c´mon, they are a safe bet to make the quarters in all of them bar Wimbledon for Nadal. They can compete as well as anyone else to say the least. Murray and Djokovic are still #1 and #2, no doubt about that, and nobody will be surprised if they stay there. But those guys are still a factor, in fact they always were. Yes, their risk of injury is there, and their recovery times might be long.
