The Young Guns

We will have to agree to disagree here then. 

So tell me when do you think Djokovic will be knocked off that # 1 position and by whom? But don't tell me it will be Raonic.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:We will have to agree to disagree here then. 

That's an easy way out

It's like me saying 2 +3 = 6 and ...let's agree to disagree.

The fact remains. There has not be any significant change in technology in the last 10 years.

That's difficult to disagree.

Whereas this explains or not the difficulty of younsgters to achieve earlier like they did in the past is questionable I agree.

May not be significant, but its definitely there. Just new paint? Not possible. If you don't know what it is, doesn't mean it doesn't exists. It could have been enough to give a talented player some good wins against top ranked players using 10 year old technology. But its not, because there aren't any good players to use those. All young less than 25-26 players struggle so much against the top-10.

If 10 years back produced such a revolutionary technological advantage, how come only it was Nadal and later Djokovic who could take take advantage of it. Why not anyone else. Why not gasquets, Tsonga, Berdych etc who were once thought very highly about.  Because it needs quality of players too.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:May not be significant, but its definitely there. Just new paint? Not possible. If you don't know what it is, doesn't mean it doesn't exists. It could have been enough to give a talented player some good wins against top ranked players using 10 year old technology. But its not, because there aren't any good players to use those. All young less than 25-26 players struggle so much against the top-10.

If 10 years back produced such a revolutionary technological advantage, how come only it was Nadal and later Djokovic who could take take advantage of it. Why not anyone else. Why not gasquets, Tsonga, Berdych etc who were once thought very highly about.  Because it needs quality of players too.

But we do know there is no new technology.

Racquets are no rocket science.  Manufacturers would gladly sell us anything new that is making pros play better if they had something new.

Pros may fiddle with racquet balance a little,  adding weights to different part of racquets like Nadal tried a few years ago...and that's about it.

The only variation really is paint jobs...now, you can even buy strings in pink, blue etc colour!

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:May not be significant, but its definitely there. Just new paint? Not possible. If you don't know what it is, doesn't mean it doesn't exists. It could have been enough to give a talented player some good wins against top ranked players using 10 year old technology. But its not, because there aren't any good players to use those. All young less than 25-26 players struggle so much against the top-10.

Whatever the technological advances, they certainly are not significant. You are going on about it without being able to give me a single technologcal advance which coudl revolutionise the way to play tennis like a bigger frame and/or new strings did. So as neither you, me or anyone reading this thread can come up with a significant technological change in the last 10 years I am not sure why you keep going on about it. I am a bit at a loss here about why we keep having a discussion of something no one mentions, not the players not even their sponsors!

Now I believe that Djoko and Murray 2011 woudl have struggled versus Djoko and Murray 2015. There is no proof against that except that they do play "statistically" faster now than then, but to me it is also pretty clear from the naked eye. In that respect I also think that those who are 25/26 now woudl have been much closer to Murray and Djoko 2011.

There is no tangible proof again but the fact is we keep having more players reaching their peak past 28-32 and that means that the 24-26 have another full 3 years to find their potential....or acquire the knowhow and professionalism of Djoko.

If 10 years back produced such a revolutionary technological advantage, how come only it was Nadal and later Djokovic who could take take advantage of it. Why not anyone else. Why not gasquets, Tsonga, Berdych etc who were once thought very highly about.  Because it needs quality of players too.

Murray also found it, and Stan found it later, Anderson is finding it.

Others will find it soon like Djoko managed to shorten Nadal's career at the very top. It won't be any different.

I was talking about general sports science and technology. You making it too racquet specific. Racquet hasn't found a major change doesn't mean no other sports science parameter have found anything important.

Better training methods, new diets, new recovery and medical aid and even new improved dope... They all can't remain stalled for 10+ years.

At pro level, these all matter even to the last percentage. Then also the new players are stuck in their cocoon.

My thoughts on young players for 2016:

1. Dimitrov.  Not so young anymore, but let's keep him here.  I was very disappointed in his 2015, but I still think that when he plays well, he is just about able to keep up with the big 4 - and is the only youngster to do so.  Unfortunately, he has not been playing well lately.  I think a lot depends on his head.  If he is all-in, he can do well, otherwise he may fall away.  He might benefit from a coach like Lendl.

2.  Kyrgios.  To me, clearly the most dangerous of the youngsters on raw talent.  I am not a huge fan of his game, but I think he has what it takes to win it all, and could get there very quickly - assuming his head is screwed on the right away.  Unfortunately, it is very unclear whether that will happen.

3.  Thiem.  I quite like his personality.  He seems to have the focus, determination and drive.  I really dislike his forehand - as ugly as can be - but he has a SHBH, so I will live with it.  He is strong, so he may perhaps be able to live with the SHBH without too much difficulty, similar to Stan.  I do not necessarily think he is the most talented of the youngsters, but he may be more mature than some others, so he may progress better.

4.  Raonic.  Also not so young anymore.  I do not see him doing well.  Just nowhere nearly mobile enough.  He is tall, has a big serve, so he will always be dangerous, but I do not see him doing much better than what he has done already.  Can he win a slam one day?  Perhaps, but more as a one-off than as a regular slam contender.  Also boring to watch, so I will be happy without him.

5.  Tomic.  I have not seen all that much of him lately, but he is talented, still only 23 (unless 25 ), and his results of late seem to suggest improvement.  From what I remember, his movement always seemed like it would be an insurmountable problem, but he has more overall talent than Raonic, so he has more room to make up for it.  Still, I do not see him as a future #1.

6.  Coric.  I really only saw him properly in one match - the USO against Rafa.  He was very disappointing there - looked very lightweight.  Rafa was playing very poor first set and Coric just had no ability to take advantage.  Yet, he is still a teenager, and I did not see much of him, so maybe there is enough there to do well down the road.

7.  Chung.  I did not see him play yet, but I was following his progress last year - first mostly in challengers and then on the main tour.  People talk more about Coric, but Chung's results I though were comparably - if not more - impressive.  Hopefully he can do well.

The other guys are still too far off the top of the rankings and/or I have not seen enough of them to really have much opinion.

How about Sock at #26 (same age as Tomic), Vesely at #42 (same age as Thiem)?

I know I skipped those (and maybe Kudla too).

I do not see Sock becoming a top flight player.  Maybe top 10 one day, but that is about it.  More like top 11-20, with an occasional top 10 stint.  I think there will be plenty of youngsters overtaking him soon.  He strikes me as being neither athletic enough nor having enough finesse.

I am less certain about Vesely.  I mostly skipped him because I do not really know what to think of him.  When I saw him a couple of years back I thought he would progress better, but so far he has not.  I vaguely seem to remember some losses suggesting mental frailty too (?).  But the bottom line is, with Vesely I just do not know.