No male player born in the 90s will ever win a grand slam

the addict · Tennis legend

No player born in the 90s will ever win a grand slam

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Job done? A player born in the 90's WILL win a Slam??!

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

JonH comes home wrote:
Job done? A player born in the 90's WILL win a Slam??!

Tomorrow's headline.

Due to rising infection rates, the US Open has been cancelled wink

It's not over until the fat lady sings.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Marin Cilic is the youngest living mens slam champion at age 31. No living champ is younger.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Do people think that the mods should close this thread now wink

indiana · Tennis legend

Bob in Spain wrote:
Do people think that the mods should close this thread now

No, it should exist as an interesting documentation of sins of the past. It's like why statues should not be torn down.

Vandenburg · Futures level

indiana wrote:
Bob in Spain wrote:
Do people think that the mods should close this thread now
No, it should exist as an interesting documentation of sins of the past. It's like why statues should not be torn down.

Well lets see. If a no other man wins a slam born in the 90s, (doubt this will happen), Thiem's slam win will always have a * next to it. No Big 3, and not to mention so many others missing, the Fogmister, Clownfils etc.

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

I have to agree with Vandy to an extent here. COVID absences, no crowds and Djokovic disqualification keeps this open for me.

indiana · Tennis legend

Actually to be fair, I see lots to agree with in Vandy's first post, particularly with regard to the generations and the 'lost generation' is still lost.

He just made himself a hostage to fortune ( and undeniably there was some fortune here ) with his thread title which actually conflicted with him at least giving some chance to the 'current generation' such as Thiem (born 1993) and in particular being much more positive re the 'next generation' such as Zverev (born 1997) and others born in the late 90s.

Vandenburg · Futures level

Also, what if FAA, Sinner and Brazlian Wild, win grand slams soon, they are 00s kids. Still possible that 90s generation will maybe win won or two more slams, which would still be a huge disappointment.

So many dangerous 5 set titans were missing from the draw, these are the kind of players that the young kids are often exposed to over 5 sets. The highest rankings op that Zverev faced on his way to the final was ranked 29??? That would been seen as a weak ATP 250.

Fed
Nadal
Verdasco
Fognini
Monfils
Nishikori
Stan
Kyrios
Tsgona
Pouile
Del Potro

My stance, is that the forum regard this slam results a bit like the Australian Open until the mid 90s. AO was won by some clowns, and the top players simply did not take it sersiouly. Borg never went etc.
We cannot remove Thiem slam win from the record books, but if he retires as a won slam wonder, he will in my book rank lower than Gaudio and Johansson.

-- Edited by Vandenburg on Monday 14th of September 2020 01:37:58 PM

-- Edited by Vandenburg on Monday 14th of September 2020 01:38:22 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Yes, just my tuppence-worth, I'm happy for Thiem, and having a new winner, but definitely a big asterisk next to this win.

Not re Djoko - he was there - he played - he messed up. Part of the game. He was an idiot. End of.

But as per Vandy's list above, there were two major favourites and other serious contenders who didn't even come.

So, yes, it's hardly the normal situation and kudos.

goldfish · Futures qualifying

DJokovic did play this year. Just because he didn't get to the final or because neither Thiem nor Zverev had to beat him, doesn't mean he doesn't count and therefore Thiem's win is devalued. Well done to him for winning in difficult circumstances. Just as valid for me.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

As time goes by, the details of who and what and how get lost. AO back in the 70's (Borg did play a few times by the way, before he started winning other slams) included Vilas (won twice, beating players like John Marks in the final), we had finalists like Johan Kriek and Steve Denton, John Sadri etc etc. Never bothered another slams finalists list (John Lloyd is another). Later, players like Korda, Johnansson, Baghdatis etc etc

Thing is ultimately it doesnt matter - if they are really good players, contenders, they will go on to win another Slam somewhere else and not be one slam wonders. Then we can take notice of their performance. SO Thiem won this, it is a slam and well done, and it means a lot to him. His place in history wont be measured by this though. It will be measured if he wins another slam and we can all take notice of him then. One slam is a big deal, personally, and if Kyle or Dan did it, we would be jumping for joy - but it doesnt make them all time greats, that comes with doing it again and again.

Thiem has got a score on the board, but his century is a whole innings away

Vandenburg · Futures level

It has reached the stage that nobody is really taking the Theim win at the US open that seriously. So we must bring back this thread during the AO 2021.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

No male player born in the 90s will ever win a grand slam