El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,170
- Reactions
- 5,859
- Points
- 113
I think your last point--that they're "too generationally distant" to matter--is true. Seeing Holger beat Novak or Carlos beat Rafa is more of a novelty than a test of anything.I hear what you're saying, about the notion that if you don't beat him now, it becomes less and less impressive. (See @Front242 and @Kieran's points, above.) @El Dude said something recently about Alcaraz, saying that he should beat Rafa at RG and Novak at either W or AO, to solidify his legacy.
The Big 2-3 have gone run through 2 generations....Lost Gen, Next Gen, and the big 2 are on their third: Gen Z (Not sure Roger played any Gen Z?) I agree that Bo5 is where the men get separated from the boys, but time does run out, and some of these really young guys are very good, and improving fast. However, I do wonder if it matters if they can cap the Big Gun(s?) at the Majors. Are they too generationally distant for it to matter? We still make a fetish for the Big 3, but the guys we're looking at as the future are 16-22 years younger.
I mean, one comparison is obvious: Roger vs Pete. But Roger was 19 and still a few years from his peak form, and Pete was a shadow of himself. Furthermore, they were exactly 10 years apart in age, while Novak and Rafa are 16 and 17 years older than Rune and Alcaraz respectively.
Rune and Alcaraz facing Novak and Rafa in 2023 would have been like Roger in late 2001 or early 2002 facing...Stefan Edberg or Mats Wilander, both of whom were already a decade or more past prime and long retired. Obviously the era is different; both those two started declining after 25 or so, while Rafa and Novak are still elite players, or close to it, in the second of their 30s. But you get my point, which supports yours.
Still, I'd like to see it.