posted Feb 25, 2008

I think the fact that players ranked in the top 50 and 100 can rise up and hand higher ranked opposition losses is a strength of the game. In my mind the depth in the men's game particularly goes even further than the top 100. Go down to clubs and watch lower level events and junior events, the way these kids are hitting the ball is sensational. Personally, I think we are entering a new golden age, that really hasn't arrived yet but that is right around the corner. The level of talent right now from 16-22 in the Men's game is very strong, in 12 to 18 months we will see 5 or 6 strong players winning and competing for slams. Like the 80s any major could have legitemately 4 or 5 top contenders at the outset, as opposed to just Rafa and Roger.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

Indeed Socal - the game has never been stronger.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

Stronger perhaps - physical preparation, athleticism, materials and power are better than ever. But more fun to watch? That is a different matter. A golden era for the fan (paying spectator)is not made by these things, but by great rivalries and artistry.
Tennis is not swimming or running (no offence to those sports!).

And no, the great singles players will not revert to playing doubles, ever. The calendar is already overful and the bodies and minds strained. Wasn't the last truly top player that excelled and seriously played both the masterful genius John McEnroe?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

"Indeed Socal - the game has never been stronger."

... and he writes this with no trace of irony in a week when Llightweight LLodra wins his second ATP title of the year.

The only thing a player as poor as LLodra could have possibly hoped to win during the Age of Lions (1993 - 1997) at an ATP Tour event would have been:

Popcorn Seller of the Week.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

'Popcorn Seller of the Week'

Personally I would consider this exalted position to be far beyond Llodra's reach. Oh well i guess he could dream...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

Cocteau/ Jekyll

I ask again - if you find todays game so bad , why do you bother at all.

For a relatively minor event, Rotterdam provided plenty of entertainment, surprise exits of seeds and hard fought matches.

Clearly you dont actually like tennis.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

"For a relatively minor event, Rotterdam provided plenty of entertainment, surprise exits of seeds and hard fought matches."

duggietoo, I've seen matches at my local park which have been entertaining and hard fought. Does this mean that the quality was high? Of course it doesn't. I agree that there are some gripping matches in this era, but they are generally down to the viewer not knowing who is going to choke first. We must always remember that, despite these matches, the overall standard of tennis is what is important - and that, of course, is quite phenomenonally weak.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

and that, of course, is quite phenomenonally weak.
----------------------------------

Guess that's where we beg to differ Lion

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

weak?

there's no way of comparing! unfortunately we can't put Federer back in time to play Connors. the 80's rivalries could have been a "phenomenally weak" era too, the simple fact that it was entertaining doesn't suggest it was a strong time for tennis. like you said impartial lion with your comparative of park tennis to ATP. ha

let's go all philosophical and say maybe we're all terrible at tennis and this is only the beginning blah blah blah.... i know it's all for fun but really there is no leg to stand on when arguing the state of the international game, because all this can be compared to is the last generation of players. entertainment is the way forward! i think that's the best way of distinguishing eras.

the most entertaining matches always seem to come from lower ranked players playing the top seeds nowadays, whereas that wasnt the case in the 80s.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 26, 2008

Just face it Lion, this is all opinion and you cannot prove your opinion. Nobody else seems to agree with you anyway except your split personalities. Stop following tennis if it's that bad for you.

Also, sometimes you say that there is no competition for Federer, that is why it is a weak era, but then when others win tournaments you say that journeymen are winning tournaments so it is a weak era. This contradicts itself.

add comment | complain about this comment