Slams Over 30

With the last 14 slams having now been won by players aged over 30, I thought it was worth a quick look at how unprecedented it is. Here’s a list of slams won by players aged 30+ in the Open era:

Nadal - 5 (2017-2019)
Djokovic - 5 (2018-2020)
Federer - 4 (2012-2018)
Laver - 4 (1969)
Rosewall - 3 (1970-1972)
Wawrinka - 2 (2015-2016)
Agassi - 2 (2001-2003)
Connors - 2 (1982-1983)
Gimeno - 1 (1972)
Newcombe - 1 (1974)
Ashe - 1 (1975)
Gomez - 1 (1990)
Sampras - 1 (2002)

So, the 16 slams won by Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Wawrinka from 2015 to now is the same number of slams won over 30 as in the previous 47 years combined. If we exclude the 10 (including Laver’s CYGS aged 30-31) in the formative years of the tour from 1968-1975, there were only 6 in forty years. 

Is this a one off, caused by the freakish occurrence of having three of the best players ever all over 30 at the same time, or can we expect to see tennis dominated by players 30+ for the foreseeable future?

I suggest a combination of (i) occurrence of three exceptional players (ii) sports science teaching players much more about health preservation than in the past and (iii) no major technology appearing during the course of their careers which they have to adapt to (iv) conditions on different courts getting closer to one another.  Not necessarily in that order.

You should have started your OP by "As Tenez correctly projected 10 years ago......

But I know it is painful to admit for most.

Nevertheless what really was exceptional is that short period 1975-2000 (beginning of open era) where technology changes and huge arrival of youngsters to the sport made it easier to beat older players.
In that Respect Nadal and Djoko got it easy as they started at the beginning of a stable era (no significant technology changes which could have helped a new generation like the bigger frames helped Becker m' Pete and Agassi v MC and Lendl) But even more importantly Nadal and Djoko kept ahead of the field fitness wise being able to challenge much more mature players physically in spite of their younger age.

Fed by his talent beat easily all players of his generation. Those who learnt the game under very different conditions and technology. At 19 He was able to beat Pete with a 85inch racket with Nat gut. How many slams would Nadal and Djoko have won if they have had to adapt in their early 20s to fast grass and carpet playing crafty Serve volleyeurs with a 85inch racquet and Nat gut (no spin) ?

This is why we cannot compare Fed's achievements with the rest.

by barrystar
I suggest a combination of (i) occurrence of three exceptional players (ii) sports science teaching players much more about health preservation than in the past and (iii) no major technology appearing during the course of their careers which they have to adapt to (iv) conditions on different courts getting closer to one another. Not necessarily in that order.
====
Correct Barry. Except that i would not give too much importance to your (i) and (ii). In the same way a 26yo Thiem playing poorly can trouble Djoko much more than Nadal could have.... Those youngsters will get much better than those RRunners but are unlikely to enjoy the same dominance cause they have not the same opportunity (arriving with new tech or playing conds).

barrystar wrote:I suggest a combination of (i) occurrence of three exceptional players (ii) sports science teaching players much more about health preservation than in the past and (iii) no major technology appearing during the course of their careers which they have to adapt to (iv) conditions on different courts getting closer to one another.  Not necessarily in that order.

I’d probably agree with (i) to (iii). Can’t really see (iv) being relevant though. In my view, that favours the youngsters as they don’t need to learn to adapt to different surfaces so, in theory, it should take them less time to be competitive on all surfaces. If anything, what we are seeing is that the big 3 are more adaptable and can replicate their brilliance across all surfaces. The youngsters are less flexible - with Thiem having being a nonentity. off clay previously for example.