I like Carreno Busta and Thanasi Kokkinikkas. The latter because he took a pic with me .
I might also like Tornado in the WTA side because of her name
I might also like Tornado in the WTA side because of her name
Who is your next favorite?
- Thread starter Moxie
- Start date
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,191
- Reactions
- 5,894
- Points
- 113
This Coric kid is impressive - still only 16 and #1 boy's player in the world? I'll be watching him.
I'm afraid that none of the players currently in their early 20s - Raonic, Janowicz, Dimitrov, Tomic, etc - are going to be truly great players. All four mentioned above might vie for Masters titles, and one or two might win a Slam, but none are the next great player. We can inlude Busta in that mix, as well, although he's less known and has an intriguing story.
Historically, great players don't linger around and then break into the top ten at age 23-24, which is likely the case with all of those mentioned above. Great players are well into their primes by then. Dimitrov, for instance, is already 22 and hasn't yet broken into the top 20. I don't care if older players are more fit these days, and I do buy a slightly later peak for young players, but only to some degree - a truly great player will always be great by age 21-22 and none of these guys have been great.
Rather, I see all of the above being more in the Ferrer/Tsonga/Berdych mold, or maybe not even that and more in the Gasquet/Almagro mold. Nothing to be ashamed of about either level, it just isn't truly great.
The next truly a great player is likely a teenager right now. The players I'm watching are Nick Kyrgios, Borna Coric, Christian Garin, and Gianluigi Quinzi. Others will come up, but those are the ones on my radar. All four will be either 17 or 18 by the end of the year, so 18-19 next year and 19-20 in 2015. So it may not be until 2015 that we see any in the top 50, and not until 2016 until any break the top 20. This fits with the idea that Novak, Rafa, and Andy will have an extended peak due to the lack of young talent, but that the middle generation - Raonic, Janowicz, Dimitrov, Tomic, maybe Busta - will be a transitional era, like the players of the late 90s and early 00s between "Sampragassi" and "Fedal."
2014 will be an interesting year because while I expect to see the Big Three continue to dominate, the cracks might start to show. I suspect we'll see a major upset or two, perhaps wrought by one of the 22-23 year olds mentioned above. So I think we'll see something like this:
2012: Last Year of Big Four
2013: Big Three
2014: Big Three with cracks
2015: Big Three with major challenges
2016: Transitional period - anything goes
2017: Transitional period - rise of new generation
2018: Dominance of new generation
I'm afraid that none of the players currently in their early 20s - Raonic, Janowicz, Dimitrov, Tomic, etc - are going to be truly great players. All four mentioned above might vie for Masters titles, and one or two might win a Slam, but none are the next great player. We can inlude Busta in that mix, as well, although he's less known and has an intriguing story.
Historically, great players don't linger around and then break into the top ten at age 23-24, which is likely the case with all of those mentioned above. Great players are well into their primes by then. Dimitrov, for instance, is already 22 and hasn't yet broken into the top 20. I don't care if older players are more fit these days, and I do buy a slightly later peak for young players, but only to some degree - a truly great player will always be great by age 21-22 and none of these guys have been great.
Rather, I see all of the above being more in the Ferrer/Tsonga/Berdych mold, or maybe not even that and more in the Gasquet/Almagro mold. Nothing to be ashamed of about either level, it just isn't truly great.
The next truly a great player is likely a teenager right now. The players I'm watching are Nick Kyrgios, Borna Coric, Christian Garin, and Gianluigi Quinzi. Others will come up, but those are the ones on my radar. All four will be either 17 or 18 by the end of the year, so 18-19 next year and 19-20 in 2015. So it may not be until 2015 that we see any in the top 50, and not until 2016 until any break the top 20. This fits with the idea that Novak, Rafa, and Andy will have an extended peak due to the lack of young talent, but that the middle generation - Raonic, Janowicz, Dimitrov, Tomic, maybe Busta - will be a transitional era, like the players of the late 90s and early 00s between "Sampragassi" and "Fedal."
2014 will be an interesting year because while I expect to see the Big Three continue to dominate, the cracks might start to show. I suspect we'll see a major upset or two, perhaps wrought by one of the 22-23 year olds mentioned above. So I think we'll see something like this:
2012: Last Year of Big Four
2013: Big Three
2014: Big Three with cracks
2015: Big Three with major challenges
2016: Transitional period - anything goes
2017: Transitional period - rise of new generation
2018: Dominance of new generation
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,191
- Reactions
- 5,894
- Points
- 113
To put those years in context, here's the year-end age for various players:
2013: Federer 32, Nadal 27, Djokovic & Murray 26, Del Potro 25, Raonic & Janowicz 23, Dimitrov 22, Tomic 21, Kyrgios 18, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 17
2014: Federer 33, Nadal 28, Djokovic & Murray 27, Del Potro 26, Raonic & Janowicz 24, Dimitrov 23, Tomic 22, Kyrgios 19, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 18
2015: Federer 34, Nadal 29, Djokovic & Murray 28, Del Potro 27, Raonic & Janowicz 25, Dimitrov 24, Tomic 23, Kyrgios 20, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 19
2016: Federer 35, Nadal 30, Djokovic & Murray 29, Del Potro 28, Raonic & Janowicz 26, Dimitrov 25, Tomic 24, Kyrgios 21, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 20
2017: Federer 36, Nadal 31, Djokovic & Murray 30, Del Potro 29, Raonic & Janowicz 27, Dimitrov 26, Tomic 25, Kyrgios 22, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 21
2018: Federer 37, Nadal 32, Djokovic & Murray 31, Del Potro 30, Raonic & Janowicz 28, Dimitrov 27, Tomic 26, Kyrgios 23, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 22
2017 seems to be the most likely year that the keys to the castle are passed along to the younger generation, with their new reign firmly established by 28. 2016 should be a lot of fun - as I wrote, "anything goes." The current Big Four will likely be in serious decline, the next generation in their primes, and the young pups starting to show up.
2013: Federer 32, Nadal 27, Djokovic & Murray 26, Del Potro 25, Raonic & Janowicz 23, Dimitrov 22, Tomic 21, Kyrgios 18, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 17
2014: Federer 33, Nadal 28, Djokovic & Murray 27, Del Potro 26, Raonic & Janowicz 24, Dimitrov 23, Tomic 22, Kyrgios 19, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 18
2015: Federer 34, Nadal 29, Djokovic & Murray 28, Del Potro 27, Raonic & Janowicz 25, Dimitrov 24, Tomic 23, Kyrgios 20, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 19
2016: Federer 35, Nadal 30, Djokovic & Murray 29, Del Potro 28, Raonic & Janowicz 26, Dimitrov 25, Tomic 24, Kyrgios 21, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 20
2017: Federer 36, Nadal 31, Djokovic & Murray 30, Del Potro 29, Raonic & Janowicz 27, Dimitrov 26, Tomic 25, Kyrgios 22, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 21
2018: Federer 37, Nadal 32, Djokovic & Murray 31, Del Potro 30, Raonic & Janowicz 28, Dimitrov 27, Tomic 26, Kyrgios 23, Coric, Quinzi, Garin 22
2017 seems to be the most likely year that the keys to the castle are passed along to the younger generation, with their new reign firmly established by 28. 2016 should be a lot of fun - as I wrote, "anything goes." The current Big Four will likely be in serious decline, the next generation in their primes, and the young pups starting to show up.
Kieran
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 17,078
- Reactions
- 7,369
- Points
- 113
El Dude, that actually makes depressing reading, if it happens. I know this era is most the promiscuous ever for giving up so many records, but if Nadal et al are in their 30's before the next generation grow a collective pair, then tennis has effectively skipped a generation and all records should be viewed accordingly...
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,191
- Reactions
- 5,894
- Points
- 113
I'm mainly talking about a) dominance and b) all-time greats. My definition of an "all-time great" is loosely any player who has won 5 or more Grand Slams. I just don't see any of the current youngbloods (age 21-25) being an all-time great, unless Grigor Dimitrov has a spiritual awakening or something.
But there are some good players there. Actually, one of the big differences between true all-time greats and merely "near greats" is that the former have almost always established themselves at an elite level by their 22nd birthday - usually before - whereas the latter can take longer to grow into their full ability, or simply never get beyond a certain level.
There's probably a good study and blog article here, but let me offer a few stats. Take any of the current near elites - Ferrer, Tsonga, and Berdych.
Ferrer didn't reach a Slam QF until he was 23, when he first entered the top 20 and then, a few months shy of his 24th birthday, reached #10. His first Slam SF was at age 28.
Tsonga reached his first Slam QF (and Final) at the age of 22, when he also made his first appearance in the top 20. He didn't reach the top 10 until about a month before his 24th birthday.
Berdych reached his first Slam QF at age 21, a couple months before turning 22. He reached his first SF and F at age 24. He first made it to the top 20 at age 20, and briefly to #10 just after turning 22.
I'd really like to do some research to support this notion: all-time greats, #1s, and multi-Slam winners almost always reach an elite level by the time they turn 22, whereas the next tier down - near-elites like Tsonga et al - usually take a couple more years to reach their peak level. Occasionally you see someone like Berdych who looked like he was on an elite path, but veered off. If you look at Berdych as of the Australian Open in 2008, when he was 22 years old, he had just made the 4R or QF of seven of the previous eight Slams, but then stalled out and only made the 4R of two of the next eight, before reaching a SF and F in 2010.
The near-elite - those regularly ranked in the top 10 but rarely in the top 3-4 - is comprised of two general types of players: late-bloomers and failed greats. Late-bloomers include Ferrer and Tsonga - pretty much anyone who doesn't reach their prime until after age 23 or so. Failed greats include players like Berdych, Gasquet, and Del Potro - players who show reach high early on - age 20-21 - but then fail to take it up a notch and either settle in as a near-elite, or fall back to try to rise again; or, in the case of Del Potro, injury derails their career.
So again, it is my view that the current top players in that age 21-24 range - in particular, Raonic, Janowicz, Dimitrov, and Tomic - are all future near-elites who may eventually win Slams simply because none of their peers are true greats. All four should be able to beat the Big Three in another two or three years when they'll all be in their prime - age 24-25 - and the Big Three will be showing clear signs of decline at age 28-30. It will be a similar era to the late 90s and early 00s when some players of near-elite talent won Slams and even made it to #1.
But there are some good players there. Actually, one of the big differences between true all-time greats and merely "near greats" is that the former have almost always established themselves at an elite level by their 22nd birthday - usually before - whereas the latter can take longer to grow into their full ability, or simply never get beyond a certain level.
There's probably a good study and blog article here, but let me offer a few stats. Take any of the current near elites - Ferrer, Tsonga, and Berdych.
Ferrer didn't reach a Slam QF until he was 23, when he first entered the top 20 and then, a few months shy of his 24th birthday, reached #10. His first Slam SF was at age 28.
Tsonga reached his first Slam QF (and Final) at the age of 22, when he also made his first appearance in the top 20. He didn't reach the top 10 until about a month before his 24th birthday.
Berdych reached his first Slam QF at age 21, a couple months before turning 22. He reached his first SF and F at age 24. He first made it to the top 20 at age 20, and briefly to #10 just after turning 22.
I'd really like to do some research to support this notion: all-time greats, #1s, and multi-Slam winners almost always reach an elite level by the time they turn 22, whereas the next tier down - near-elites like Tsonga et al - usually take a couple more years to reach their peak level. Occasionally you see someone like Berdych who looked like he was on an elite path, but veered off. If you look at Berdych as of the Australian Open in 2008, when he was 22 years old, he had just made the 4R or QF of seven of the previous eight Slams, but then stalled out and only made the 4R of two of the next eight, before reaching a SF and F in 2010.
The near-elite - those regularly ranked in the top 10 but rarely in the top 3-4 - is comprised of two general types of players: late-bloomers and failed greats. Late-bloomers include Ferrer and Tsonga - pretty much anyone who doesn't reach their prime until after age 23 or so. Failed greats include players like Berdych, Gasquet, and Del Potro - players who show reach high early on - age 20-21 - but then fail to take it up a notch and either settle in as a near-elite, or fall back to try to rise again; or, in the case of Del Potro, injury derails their career.
So again, it is my view that the current top players in that age 21-24 range - in particular, Raonic, Janowicz, Dimitrov, and Tomic - are all future near-elites who may eventually win Slams simply because none of their peers are true greats. All four should be able to beat the Big Three in another two or three years when they'll all be in their prime - age 24-25 - and the Big Three will be showing clear signs of decline at age 28-30. It will be a similar era to the late 90s and early 00s when some players of near-elite talent won Slams and even made it to #1.
Front242
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 22,992
- Reactions
- 3,924
- Points
- 113
I personally wouldn't count Raonic anywhere even close to elite. Dimitrov and Janowicz definitely have promise though and I like both their games. Plus they're infinitely better movers than Raonic who looks so clumsy and awkward.
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,191
- Reactions
- 5,894
- Points
- 113
Front242 said:
I agree that GD and JJ have higher upside than Raonic because they have more complete games, but while I doubt Milos has the all-around game required to win a Slam he is the only player 24 and younger who has tasted the top 10 and is currently #11, which makes him bordering on the "near-elite." If his movement improves just a little, he could be a fixture on the bottom half of the top 10 and a difficult opponent at most events for the next half decade.
Front242
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 22,992
- Reactions
- 3,924
- Points
- 113
El Dude said:
Imo he only cheated his way to top 10 in the Del Potro match and wouldn't have got there otherwise. He saw the opportunity and seized it, be it for sponsorship deals, the bigger paycheck from moving on to a masters 1000 final or a combination of all 3. He knew his actions were wrong but just went with it anyway. I still have zero respect for him after that.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 43,765
- Reactions
- 14,930
- Points
- 113
That's really good stuff, Dude, and I hope you'll make a blog post out of it. I agree with a lot of it...including what kind of stuff this "transitional" generation has shown. But we are a bit spoiled. Not every era gets so many real "greats." Unlike Kieran, I don't find it depressing so much as a fact of life.
BTW, Carreno Busta is playing in Malaysia, so interested folks might get a chance to check him out. I know you say he's on the "old" side for making a breakthrough, but he's come up fast through the rankings in the last few months.
BTW, Carreno Busta is playing in Malaysia, so interested folks might get a chance to check him out. I know you say he's on the "old" side for making a breakthrough, but he's come up fast through the rankings in the last few months.
JesuslookslikeBorg
Grand Slam Champion
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 6,323
- Reactions
- 1,074
- Points
- 113
Kieran said:I don't have a next favourite. I hope they all equally lose, except Nadal...
That just might happen now onwards without any exception.
El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,191
- Reactions
- 5,894
- Points
- 113
Kieran's a monogamous type - he'll have to wait until Rafa is put out to pasture before moving on.
Moxie, another study I'd like to do is create some rating system to determine which years had the greatest "density" of all time greats. I've already done a bit of it and posted some of it here, but I would like to do a bit more.
Moxie, another study I'd like to do is create some rating system to determine which years had the greatest "density" of all time greats. I've already done a bit of it and posted some of it here, but I would like to do a bit more.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 43,765
- Reactions
- 14,930
- Points
- 113
El Dude said:
I think that's a great idea. It seems like now is thick with all-time greats, and record-smashers, and I'd say late 60s into the late 70s, too. It'll be interesting to see what you come up with.
Iona16 said:Oh dear, I'm not sure I want to contemplate Andy retiring
Waste of time contemplating Nadal's retirement, that is for sure. Nobody will know when Nadal retires....because he's got "comeback" written all over him. Nobody will be sure when he's finished, or when he's plotting a return. Especially if he retires as defending champion of Roland Garros (or runner-up/semi-finalist). When you know you still have game, its very tempting to return (especially when you are the type of person who enjoys/lives for challenges). Also, due to the fact that he took 7 months away from tennis and returned a better hardcourt player than ever, he will believe he can do it again (return from another layoff/retirement) in future. Nadal doesn't play for records. So even after he passes Federer's slam total, he'll remain driven. And the more challenging his career becomes (the older/slower he becomes), the more driven he'll be.
NADAL2005RG said:Iona16 said:Oh dear, I'm not sure I want to contemplate Andy retiring
Waste of time contemplating Nadal's retirement, that is for sure. Nobody will know when Nadal retires....because he's got "comeback" written all over him.
I'm afraid even Rafa can't stop the aging process. At some point he will retire and there will be no comeback. I would hope it's still a few years away though.
I would pick Jerzy Janowicz. I like his fiery personality, and he is not afraid on big moments. If he could just manifest his emotions a little bit, he would be Top 10 in the near future. I hope his back injury doesn't derail his momentum in 2014.
I dunno
I'll go player to be named later but may lose serious interest in the game when Fed hangs it up or gets to the point where he's no threat at all as it's naturally trending with father time.
It happened when Borg shockingly retired.
I'm admittedly OCD(you'd think I'd be a Nadal fan, lol) , so when I pull for a player I"m ALL in. :snigger
I'll put it this way, it's going to take someone really special as I have too many sports interests as it is.
I'll go player to be named later but may lose serious interest in the game when Fed hangs it up or gets to the point where he's no threat at all as it's naturally trending with father time.
It happened when Borg shockingly retired.
I'm admittedly OCD(you'd think I'd be a Nadal fan, lol) , so when I pull for a player I"m ALL in. :snigger
I'll put it this way, it's going to take someone really special as I have too many sports interests as it is.
Iona16 said:NADAL2005RG said:Iona16 said:Oh dear, I'm not sure I want to contemplate Andy retiring
Waste of time contemplating Nadal's retirement, that is for sure. Nobody will know when Nadal retires....because he's got "comeback" written all over him.
I'm afraid even Rafa can't stop the aging process. At some point he will retire and there will be no comeback. I would hope it's still a few years away though.
And when Nadal retires, nobody will be sure he's retired. I bet Nadal will make a comeback from surgery before he retires (if he ever needs surgery on anything). Nadal loves the challenges. He will love the challenge of the aging process too.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Who is your next guy? (poll!) | Pro Tennis (Mens) | 41 | |
|
|
Next/Millenial Gens - and the Problem of Novadal | Pro Tennis (Mens) | 7 | |
|
|
Next & Millenial Gens: Head-to-heads | Pro Tennis (Mens) | 0 | |
|
Next Gen ATP Finals 2022 | Pro Tennis (Mens) | 21 | |
|
Intesa Sanpaolo Next Gen ATP Finals, 2021, Milan, Italy | Pro Tennis (Mens) | 15 |