The sport needs it too. There's going to be a huge vacuum when Nadal and Federer hang up their sticks. Djoker and Murray will still be around for a bit, but then we kind of hop over the intermediate generation and hope the young guns fill the void. It's got to be said that the 23-28 age group is pretty uninspiring and haven't stepped up to the plate. These kids need to take the bull by the horns.
quite true about the mid twenties -- we're constantly looking for someone to break that 'big four' in a consistent way - at least by the time they're 25-26 - reasonable time to ''mature".
i don't believe in this current saying that just because the federers nadals are playing ''so well in their late 20's to 30's" and because ''tennis now requires more time" -- that the ones who ARE in their midtwenties should NOT HAVE ALREADY made a real dent -
JUST LIKE roger and nadal DID!!
it's like coming with an excuse .
what roger is doing phenomenally in his 30's is not an excuse for those that are in their midtwenties to already have challenged seriously. but
of them - the most ''talented" for many years is dimitrov -- and has gotten nowhere NEAR what a mature mid20 athlete ought to have been doing. that's a lot of time already to 'grow up'
and the days ''when sampras and chang won in their teens is past" ISN'T an excuse either .
the tennis career may be EXTENDED to beyond 30 - and it MAY take more time ''nowadays against matured veterans in their late 20's like nadal, etc)
but that doesn't address whether or not the MATURE 25-26 year old which would have been LATE in 1990 - is EVEN MAKING A REAL consistent impression against his peers merely in their late 20's.
so - you're absolutely correct. i never even realized that until you pointed it out.