There is definitely a 'lost generation' of wonderful players who never won a slam except by incredible luck. Look at the men's draws pre-covid and the men's draws this week. Look at the scorelines pre-covid and the scattering of really good matches this year. We had dozens of breath-taking matches between the big 3/4/5 with long trails of thrilling tie-breakers where the wonderful players up the other end of the court, the lost generation, who almost always lost on the last point, absolutely made tennis but never won a slam. Look at Gasquet, Monfils, Tsonga, Kyrgios, Thiem (1), Meddy (1), Zverev, Tsitsipas, Delpo, Kokkinakis...fill in the next 20 names of your choice here. Most are retired; many are seriously injured, many are mocked for their failure to meet public expectations. Many are disillusioned with what's happening to tennis now. It is sad that we simply throw away this generation as if they were failures. They were amazing, courageous players. The new guys never played Federer or even Nadal and Djokovic or Stan at his best.
Great interview! The process, all the tiny observations accumulated--this is what ethnographers do. Observe, observe as accurately as possible, transcribe it all and figure out the meaning later. And kudos to Ben too on describing why--although I alway admired Nadal--I never enjoyed watching his matches "It's like he talks over someone in an argument, especially with Federer, kind of shouts over with that topspin." Sinner-Alcaraz have a perfect, well-balanced chemistry. Meddy excerpt hits the nail-on-the-head about why I've always loved him.
“The tedium of the Big Three era” was such a balm to read. Tennis desperately needed new faces and yet there remains so much nostalgia for an extremely uncompetitive two decades. While I worry about Alcaraz-Sinner creating another decade where the rest of the men’s players feel like they have no shot, the past few years have been so refreshing to watch, especially the 1000-level tournaments.
Anisimova is 2-1 vs Sabalenka on hard, one of those being in 2019, which you can discount as Sabalenka is a different player now so it’s a toss up. 6-3 is a meaningless stat.
There is definitely a 'lost generation' of wonderful players who never won a slam except by incredible luck. Look at the men's draws pre-covid and the men's draws this week. Look at the scorelines pre-covid and the scattering of really good matches this year. We had dozens of breath-taking matches between the big 3/4/5 with long trails of thrilling tie-breakers where the wonderful players up the other end of the court, the lost generation, who almost always lost on the last point, absolutely made tennis but never won a slam. Look at Gasquet, Monfils, Tsonga, Kyrgios, Thiem (1), Meddy (1), Zverev, Tsitsipas, Delpo, Kokkinakis...fill in the next 20 names of your choice here. Most are retired; many are seriously injured, many are mocked for their failure to meet public expectations. Many are disillusioned with what's happening to tennis now. It is sad that we simply throw away this generation as if they were failures. They were amazing, courageous players. The new guys never played Federer or even Nadal and Djokovic or Stan at his best.
Great interview! The process, all the tiny observations accumulated--this is what ethnographers do. Observe, observe as accurately as possible, transcribe it all and figure out the meaning later. And kudos to Ben too on describing why--although I alway admired Nadal--I never enjoyed watching his matches "It's like he talks over someone in an argument, especially with Federer, kind of shouts over with that topspin." Sinner-Alcaraz have a perfect, well-balanced chemistry. Meddy excerpt hits the nail-on-the-head about why I've always loved him.
“The tedium of the Big Three era” was such a balm to read. Tennis desperately needed new faces and yet there remains so much nostalgia for an extremely uncompetitive two decades. While I worry about Alcaraz-Sinner creating another decade where the rest of the men’s players feel like they have no shot, the past few years have been so refreshing to watch, especially the 1000-level tournaments.
The big 3 (with a Murray or a Stan thrown into the mix sometimes) at least gave you some variation.
My concern now is that we’ll have the same slam final on all surfaces for the next 5 years.
Niche comment, but that description of Medvedev is perfect and how I always felt watching Chris Waddle play football (Europe version).
is there a printable version of this report too?
Anisimova is 2-1 vs Sabalenka on hard, one of those being in 2019, which you can discount as Sabalenka is a different player now so it’s a toss up. 6-3 is a meaningless stat.