Tweet
As usual, the forum is a step ahead of the media and even so-called big wigs like Boris Becker...read the link.
Posters on the forum have long been anxious about what will happen once the Big 3 exit the game and the void it will leave. Posters have also often written about the failed Next Generation and how they are now looking to the next Next Generation to do something about the Big 3 stronghold.
The good news is Stephanos and Felix seem to have more in the tank and are seen as less one dimensional than most of their predecessors. Maybe things are going full circle and we may end up with all round tennis again. I have seen very little of Felix but I've heard he's very good.
Time and again the question has been asked: Are the Big 3 so good or is it the rest of the pack so bad? I tend to think it's more to do with the former. A coach playing a set with a student will seldom break into a sweat simply because a coach's perception is so much higher than the student. A similar thing is probably going on when Roger plays a player ranked outside the top 20...or even top 10. Despite being 37, Roger just finds it ridiculously easy to dispatch lower ranked players. He's just so good.
Nadal is 33 and supposedly a grinder. Connors was a grinder, too, and he played a decent game until his late 30's. A grinder can keep going just like a more economical talented player can if the will is there. So there may be no end in sight just yet where the Big 3 are concerned, as Nadal and Novak are doubtless looking to catch Roger's 20 slams.
But the game needs a player to come crashing in and ruin the party. If the Big 3 remain unchallenged and simply exit the game largely undefeated and on their own terms, the game won't recover easily from that.
Roger did a very unique thing when he started out. He beat Sampras on his first attempt, and if you look at Roger's playing history, he floored the entire Sampras generation of players, and he did so well before he reached his own zenith. True, they were getting a little old, but it was very clear he was going to overtake their level of play. Rafa did much the same thing, and even Agassi conceded he had never played anyone like Rafa and could do little to combat him.
So what's the answer to the Big 3? And where does the future lie?
Posters on the forum have long been anxious about what will happen once the Big 3 exit the game and the void it will leave. Posters have also often written about the failed Next Generation and how they are now looking to the next Next Generation to do something about the Big 3 stronghold.
The good news is Stephanos and Felix seem to have more in the tank and are seen as less one dimensional than most of their predecessors. Maybe things are going full circle and we may end up with all round tennis again. I have seen very little of Felix but I've heard he's very good.
Time and again the question has been asked: Are the Big 3 so good or is it the rest of the pack so bad? I tend to think it's more to do with the former. A coach playing a set with a student will seldom break into a sweat simply because a coach's perception is so much higher than the student. A similar thing is probably going on when Roger plays a player ranked outside the top 20...or even top 10. Despite being 37, Roger just finds it ridiculously easy to dispatch lower ranked players. He's just so good.
Nadal is 33 and supposedly a grinder. Connors was a grinder, too, and he played a decent game until his late 30's. A grinder can keep going just like a more economical talented player can if the will is there. So there may be no end in sight just yet where the Big 3 are concerned, as Nadal and Novak are doubtless looking to catch Roger's 20 slams.
But the game needs a player to come crashing in and ruin the party. If the Big 3 remain unchallenged and simply exit the game largely undefeated and on their own terms, the game won't recover easily from that.
Roger did a very unique thing when he started out. He beat Sampras on his first attempt, and if you look at Roger's playing history, he floored the entire Sampras generation of players, and he did so well before he reached his own zenith. True, they were getting a little old, but it was very clear he was going to overtake their level of play. Rafa did much the same thing, and even Agassi conceded he had never played anyone like Rafa and could do little to combat him.
So what's the answer to the Big 3? And where does the future lie?
Comment