Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nadal won his first Grand Slam as a teenager. Are there really no young Nadals/Djokovic at all? Not one?
I was actually thinking about this within the last week, and I think the simple answer is there aren't any guys who in the 18-20 year old range who appear will reach the top 5 by age 21, which is something Nadal (won first Slam and was ranked #2 by age 19), Djokovic (appeared in first Slam final, won first Slam, and was ranked #3 by age 20), and even Andy Murray (appeared in first Slam final and was ranked #4 by age 21) accomplished (and of course Juan Martin del Potro also won a Slam a week before turning 21 years old; he was ranked #6 when he won the 2009 U.S. Open). I think Bernard Tomic, who was born in October 1992 and has hit a high ranking of #27, may be the most likely bet. However, at this point he's only made one Grand Slam quarterfinals and two Grand Slam round of 16 (4th round) appearances.
It seems that the future (near future, in 5 years) will be boring when today's top players retire.
Back when Pete and his top competitors were dominating the game, players like Federer and Roddick were visible. When Federer was at the top, Nadal was visible, and then Djokovic. Now, Nadal/Djokovic are in power, there is no one on the horizon AT ALL.
Back when Pete and his top competitors were dominating the game, players like Federer and Roddick were visible.
Not really. Federer was perhaps the best Juniors player of all time, but who really uses Juniors play as a barometer for Tour success? Ever heard of Mariano Zabaleta? How about Donald Young? Those guys were both ranked No. 1 in Juniors and turned out to be duds. Michael Chang, I think, was undefeated against Pete Sampras as a Junior and we all see how that turned out.
Federer made a name for himself in 2001, but it was not clear that he would turn into a 17-time Grand Slam winner back then. It took him a few years to really put things together.
Not really. Federer was perhaps the best Juniors player of all time, but who really uses Juniors play as a barometer for Tour success? Ever heard of Mariano Zabaleta? How about Donald Young? Those guys were both ranked No. 1 in Juniors and turned out to be duds. Michael Chang, I think, was undefeated against Pete Sampras as a Junior and we all see how that turned out.
Federer made a name for himself in 2001, but it was not clear that he would turn into a 17-time Grand Slam winner back then. It took him a few years to really put things together.
The teenager (19) Nadal was not really "junior" when he won his first Grand Slam.
We're not talking about junior players, but young players ages 19-21 who will take over Federer/Nadal/Djokovic's spots in 5 years. There are none who are promising and exciting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
