Oldest Top 15 ever?

Dkojo - 24
Nadal - 25
Fed - 30
Murray - 24
Ferrer -29
Sod - 27
Monfils - 25
Fish - 29
Berdych - 26 (in 3 days)
Tsonga - 26
Simon - 26
Almagro - 26
Janko - 27
Roddick - 29
Gasquet - 25

There are 11 non-slam winners. It is very rare to win your first slam after reaching 25.
There are 4 slam winners, although 2 (Roddick, Fed are 29+). Very rare to win a slam after the age of 28.
It is also very rare to win a slam if not in the Top 15.

Conclusion - No real competition to Djoko or Nadal for slams in the near future, although vaguely possibly Murray or Fed might get one, or JMDP as a younger previous slam winner ranked at 17. Wouldn't bet on it though.

And this is the "Golden Era".

What a joke.

In 10-15 yrs time no one will remember half the names on that list.

The fear is they will, because they'll still be playing because nobody has replaced them.

That top 15 is a hideous situation. I can't recall any time in my life when there was simply ZERO young talent in the game.

Yes, for the moment, except for the very top, it's a pretty average top ten. Let's hope for Dimitrov and JMDP to shake things up a little

JM it is odd that there are so fel youngsters challenging even the top 20.

Tomic is still only 18 (just) and lost at the US Open to a seemingly rejuvenated Cilic still only 22 but Cilic is frustratingly inconsistent.

The great American hope of recent years Donald Young (also 22) finally showed some progress after looking like an American alternative to Bogdanovic. Beat Wawrinka on the way to the 4th round at the US but the way Murray swept him aside makes him a long shot for anything near top 10 status.

Raonic is just outside the top 30 at only 20 but recently underwent hip surgery which must be of a concern given young age.

The other youngster is of course Dolgopolov who gave Novak a good battle in that epic first set tie-break at the US Open. At just 22 he has a game that can still develop and give even the top 4 a run for their money.

JK forgot about delpo

Yes I forgot Dolgo, surely one to watch!

ps why should I forget Delpo? I think he's a true champ and will do great

Young talents need to buy themselves an adult super body if they want to stand any chance of bothering the top players.

....unless you are a young "physical talent" like Nadal was.

Just shows how great the murray, novak, and nadal generation is that they don't allow younger players to succeed as early until they really work into a complete game. I will say that the generation 18-22 is clearly not as good as the 23-26 year olds that came before the golden generation of Novak, Nadal, and Murray.

socal1976 wrote:Just shows how great the murray, novak, and nadal generation is that they don't allow younger players to succeed as early until they really work into a complete game. I will say that the generation 18-22 is clearly not as good as the 23-26 year olds that came before the golden generation of Novak, Nadal, and Murray.

Surely it's Almagro, Fish, Roddick etc that are preventing the younger players succeeding. It would only be Murray, Novak and Nadal if the younger players were ranked 5 - 10.

Yes, monfils, berdy, Tsonga and almagro are all pretty young at 26 as well julius. But I do agree the generation of players from 18-22 so far has been disappointing. The game has become such a grind and very physical it is harder for the younger guys to break in. On this point I do agree that the emphasis on fitness has hurt the development so far of younger talent as they can't make their break through until they get fitter and grow into their bodies.

Happened to come across this thread whilst looking for something else. Given the SFists at Wimbledon, we are now guaranteed an 8th straight slam being won by a player aged 31+. Rather than “it being very rare to win a slam after 28”, I think the last slam won by a player under 28 was Novak at Oz15. It feels like matters have moved on significantly over the last 7 years.

Does anyone have a theory as to why this might be? Is it just the older guys bring an exceptional cohort or will we see this trend of older winners continue?

Born Slippy wrote:Does anyone have a theory as to why this might be? Is it just the older guys bring an exceptional cohort or will we see this trend of older winners continue?

The trend towards physical training started by Borg/Lendl is beginning to reflect on the current generation, which is pushing the physical limits much further. There have also been Rosewalls/Panchos in the past, so this is more of a cyclic nature. Nadal pushed Federer, Djokovic, Murray (almost to the breaking point) to get fitter.