Topic of reflexion

https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/pete-sampras-vs-john-mcenroe/S402/M047

Remember McENroe and Pete...that's a long time ago. I was surprised by their H2H. Mostly happened when Mc was 30 or 31 and Pete was 19 or 20 at most.

Things are nowadays noone would expect a multi slams winner of 30 being beaten by a 19 yo future champion.

Why? only one reason I have been talking about for years. The next gen then was benefitting from new technology. It helped them move to the ytop much faster. Sure by the time Mc and Pete met, they were using the same technology but the key here is that Mc learnt to play with a wooden racket and his game was affected by it. Those youngsters learnt how to get the most of that new "mid-frame" technology. Whereas Mc was still having those "controlled" pushy shots turning him into a lame duck while Pete was hitting the ball with less restrain going for more having from youth the confidence of a bigger frame.

This is where Federer is outstanding again cause he not only adapted to new technology (remember he learnt to play with Pete's racket (85inch and nat string)) plus slow courts and had to deal with spinny balls that could not be produced with old court and racquet conditions.

While being far from his top he beat top Pete in 2001 with Pete's racquet and managed to crush Nadal 6 out of 7 times since moving to the larger frame and I am sure would have beaten Nadal even at the FO if it was not for the storm.

One thing for sure is that unless technology evolves, it will be much harder nowadays for youngsters to beat top 30yo players.

Tenez wrote: I am sure would have beaten Nadal even at the FO if it was not for the storm.

Tenez, he is sure.

Well the fact Federer beat Nadal a month later at wimby where the conditions the second week are slower than the French proves the point, isn't it?

Tenez proves his point.