Tennis 2024

Didn’t think Djokovic still had this level in him. Sensationel tennis. And kind of touching how much it meant to him.
 
100% he'll be at LA. Far too of an event to miss even just for his brand, but he'll still be able to compete. Not sure why people still have this belief of retiring sportspeople every year in their 30's.... the best conditioned ones with strong injury luck are all going into their late 30's and early 40's.
 
Sensational. Not much else to say about Djokovic. What an incredible career.

And hats off to Alcaraz, too. Wasn’t sure if we’d see anyone good enough to take on the mantle, but he looks brilliant at such a young age.
 
George Owen said:
Since when they only play best of 3 sets olympic final?

Bit shitty. No real test of hearts.
Click to expand...

Looks like 2020...

"In a change from previous Olympics editions, the men’s final was played over three rather than five sets, for compensation to players who are competing in the later stages in all three categories: singles, doubles and mixed."

Probably for the best, maybe? Loads didn't take it overly seriously for ages, especially coming off the back of two slams.
 
Zen said:
100% he'll be at LA. Far too of an event to miss even just for his brand, but he'll still be able to compete. Not sure why people still have this belief of retiring sportspeople every year in their 30's.... the best conditioned ones with strong injury luck are all going into their late 30's and early 40's.
Click to expand...
I think for Djokovic it's the motivation and wanting to spend more time with his family. He's playing on the tour less and less that it wouldn't be a shock for him to call it a day within the next year or two.

He's already in late 30s and this was the last major thing missing from his CV.

If he starts losing in grand slams to players outside the top 5 or 10 on regular basis then I think he might call it quits but I think he continues while he thinks he has a shot. If he makes another SF/F but gets duffed up by Sinner or Alcaraz, he'll probably be fancy his chances by being better than the rest of the field.
 
Zen said:
Looks like 2020...

"In a change from previous Olympics editions, the men’s final was played over three rather than five sets, for compensation to players who are competing in the later stages in all three categories: singles, doubles and mixed."

Probably for the best, maybe? Loads didn't take it overly seriously for ages, especially coming off the back of two slams.
Click to expand...

A shame to be fair. This tournament happens only every 4 years.

On the other hand, the triple gold from Massú in 2004 (Singles gold + Doubles gold + Salma Hayek) gets cemented as the greatest of olympic tennis achievements.
 
Skills said:
It's not a good look for tennis imo.
Click to expand...
Why not? Carlos and Sinner are 21/22. This version of Djokovic is levels above any other player ever bar peak Nadal/Federer. Sinner and Alcaraz are yet to reach theirs
 
saivet said:
I think for Djokovic it's the motivation and wanting to spend more time with his family. He's playing on the tour less and less that it wouldn't be a shock for him to call it a day within the next year or two.

He's already in late 30s and this was the last major thing missing from his CV.

If he starts losing in grand slams to players outside the top 5 or 10 on regular basis then I think he might call it quits but I think he continues while he thinks he has a shot. If he makes another SF/F but gets duffed up by Sinner or Alcaraz, he'll probably be fancy his chances by being better than the rest of the field.
Click to expand...

I just can't imagine him being this close to 40, and not genuinely wanting to be that guy who at the absolute worst, had a strong run in his 40's.... just to outdo Connors and Roger doing decent stuff at 39. But the thing is pushing boundaries too, being the first, it's one of the key reasons Brady, LeBron, Woods, Ronaldo, Messi, Lewis all continue to go, and with the exception of Lewis, they all had families too. By the time he's 40... LA is only a year away, and it's where all these people want their brand to be driven more than anywhere, one of the key reasons I would have told you 8 years ago Messi and Ronaldo will push heavily to be at 2026, forget in 2022.

These guys all breaking barriers for age, good on them. I hope he defends the medal in LA and retires at Flushing...
 
giorno said:
Why not? Carlos and Sinner are 21/22. This version of Djokovic is levels above any other player ever bar peak Nadal/Federer. Sinner and Alcaraz are yet to reach theirs
Click to expand...
It may not be a bad look but given Carlos gets compared to Rafa at the same age, he ideally should not be losing to a 37 year old Novak. If you're going to draw those comparisons to Rafa at 21/22, you're going to be held to extremely high standards.
 
wr8_utd said:
A fit and motivated Djokovic is still levels above Carlos.
Click to expand...
Not really. He lost to him at last year’s Wimbledon in addition to the recent one. An Olympic medal (not a GS which is far more important) doesn’t change that.
 
wr8_utd said:
It may not be a bad look but given Carlos gets compared to Rafa at the same age, he ideally should not be losing to a 37 year old Novak. If you're going to draw those comparisons to Rafa at 21/22, you're going to be held to extremely high standards.
Click to expand...
Rafa peaked early though, and Alcaraz is quite clearly better than him at the same age on every surface other than clay
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Not really. He lost to him at last year’s Wimbledon in addition to the recent one. An Olympic medal (not a GS which is far more important) doesn’t change that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a big wild strike and a miss. Both Alcaraz and to a lesser degree Sinner would do damage in 2010 forget now. I'm not here saying they'd crack the top 3 at any point between say 2008-2018, but they'd almost certainly come out better than Stan and DelPo on a consistent basis, and very potentially, Murray too, that's me basing them on the level they show up to now, not the potential they could get to with their game management.
 
giorno said:
Rafa peaked early though, and Alcaraz is quite clearly better than him at the same age on every surface other than clay
Click to expand...
You've kind of made my point but, no? Firstly, we don't know if Carlos has peaked or not and its something we'll find out several years from now. But, if you believe Alcaraz is quite clearly better than Rafa was at the same age, you'd think he should be beating a 37 year old and just recovered from surgery Novak.

Also, I do find the debate about Carlos at the age being better than Rafa at the same an interesting one. Rafa, shortly after turning 23, already had won 6 Grand Slams across 3 surfaces, a David Cup, and an Olympic Gold on a hard/indoor court as well. And you have to bear in mind he was playing a peak or close to peak Federer at the time and even beat him at Wimbledon and on the way to 3 (I think?) of his other Slam wins as well. As amazing as Carlos is, he's only really beating a 36+ year old Novak (who is still amazing, ofcourse), Sinner and a bunch of clowns.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Not really. He lost to him at last year’s Wimbledon in addition to the recent one. An Olympic medal (not a GS which is far more important) doesn’t change that.
Click to expand...
I'd not really count the recent Wimbledon tbh given Novak had just come back from knee surgery around 3-4 weeks prior to that. And that's why I did mention the fit and motivated bit. I'm sure Carlos will probably beat Novak at the USO, if they do meet. This was pretty much the only week this whole season that Novak has looked really really motivated and he swept past the competition.
 
wr8_utd said:
You've kind of made my point but, no? Firstly, we don't know if Carlos has peaked or not and its something we'll find out several years from now. But, if you believe Alcaraz is quite clearly better than Rafa was at the same age, you'd think he should be beating a 37 year old and just recovered from surgery Novak.
Click to expand...
Game was on clay. Alcaraz is quite clearly worse than Rafa on clay. Better on hard/grass. Talking about 21 year old Rafa
wr8_utd said:
Also, I do find the debate about Carlos at the age being better than Rafa at the same an interesting one. Rafa, shortly after turning 23, already had won 6 Grand Slams across 3 surfaces, a David Cup, and an Olympic Gold on a hard/indoor court as well. And you have to bear in mind he was playing a peak or close to peak Federer at the time and even beat him at Wimbledon. As amazing as Carlos is, he's only really beating a 36+ year old Novak (who is still amazing, ofcourse), Sinner and a bunch of clowns.
Click to expand...
Carlos is 21, not 23. He has 4 GS across 3 surfaces, beat Djokovic in a Wimbledon final twice and had to beat post-puke Sinner at RG
 
wr8_utd said:
I'd not really count the recent Wimbledon tbh given Novak had just come back from knee surgery around 3-4 weeks prior to that. And that's why I did mention the fit and motivated bit. I'm sure Carlos will probably beat Novak at the USO, if they do meet. This was pretty much the only week this whole season that Novak has looked really really motivated and he swept past the competition.
Click to expand...
Yeah it’s just convenient to feign a lack of “motivation”
 
wr8_utd said:
You've kind of made my point but, no? Firstly, we don't know if Carlos has peaked or not and its something we'll find out several years from now. But, if you believe Alcaraz is quite clearly better than Rafa was at the same age, you'd think he should be beating a 37 year old and just recovered from surgery Novak.

Also, I do find the debate about Carlos at the age being better than Rafa at the same an interesting one. Rafa, shortly after turning 23, already had won 6 Grand Slams across 3 surfaces, a David Cup, and an Olympic Gold on a hard/indoor court as well. And you have to bear in mind he was playing a peak or close to peak Federer at the time and even beat him at Wimbledon and on the way to 3 (I think?) of his other Slam wins as well. As amazing as Carlos is, he's only really beating a 36+ year old Novak (who is still amazing, ofcourse), Sinner and a bunch of clowns.
Click to expand...

Tennis fans and sports fans in general are super reactionary. Alcaraz is absolutely amazing, but now with the US Open and a little down the line the AO coming up people are going to gas up Sinner again and shit on Carlitos if he doesn't win (which is a big probability with Medvedev being a HC beast as well). Wouldn't be surprised if come February the consencus will be that Rafa was indeed better at that age.
 
There's legit no case for Nadal being a better 21 year old than Carlos. Novak said it himself after the Wimbledon final, Carlos is the greatest up to his age... doesn't mean it'll continue in that trajectory.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Yeah it’s just convenient to feign a lack of “motivation”
Click to expand...
I don't think he's been faking it, tbf. His body language here in Paris was very different from anything else this entire year. There's times he's looked visibly disinterest on court this season. I think his level will again fall back to pre-Olympics in the US hardcourt swing now that he again really has nothing to play for.
giorno said:
Game was on clay. Alcaraz is quite clearly worse than Rafa on clay. Better on hard/grass. Talking about 21 year old Rafa

Carlos is 21, not 23. He has 4 GS across 3 surfaces, beat Djokovic in a Wimbledon final twice and had to beat post-puke Sinner at RG
Click to expand...
Fair enough but even on clay, where Carlos is the current RG champion and also clearly the best player in the world at the moment, he really should be beating a 37 year-old Novak. Going back to the original post, while I don't think its a bad look for tennis, I also agree that there's no way Novak should be winning this at his age, fitness, and level this year.
 
wr8_utd said:
Fair enough but even on clay, where Carlos is the current RG champion and also clearly the best player in the world at the moment, he really should be beating a 37 year-old Novak.
Click to expand...
Don't really get this notion. Do you think the 37-year-old played poorly today? It was a sublime tennis match, one of the best Ḯ've seen in a while, and Djokovic proved that he can still reach a level that is close to his best. No shame in losing to that.
 
wr8_utd said:
Fair enough but even on clay, where Carlos is the current RG champion and also clearly the best player in the world at the moment, he really should be beating a 37 year-old Novak. Going back to the original post, while I don't think its a bad look for tennis, I also agree that there's no way Novak should be winning this at his age, fitness, and level this year.
Click to expand...
Based on his level of performance at these Olympics, the only player in history that would have beaten him is Nadal
 
Jev said:
Don't really get this notion. Do you think the 37-year-old played poorly today? It was a sublime tennis match, one of the best Ḯ've seen in a while, and Djokovic proved that he can still reach a level that is close to his best. No shame in losing to that.
Click to expand...
There's no shame in it and I'd had a feeling he's going to win even prior to the match because Novak has been absolutely dialed in all week and was a man on a mission. That being said, Carlos was in quite good form himself, coming off back to back Slams, including on clay, and clearly the better player than Novak this year so you'd expect him to win really.
 
wr8_utd said:
There's no shame in it and I'd had a feeling he's going to win even prior to the match because Novak has been absolutely dialed in all week and was a man on a mission. That being said, Carlos was in quite good form himself, coming off back to back Slams, including on clay, and clearly the better player than Novak this year so you'd expect him to win really.
Click to expand...

The pre match odds reflected that. Alcaraz was 1.4 and Djokovic 3.0 to win. You keep ignoring the quality of the match though. Alcaraz played superbly, Djokovic ( who is the goat) just played better. Absolutely no shame in it at all for the young Spaniard.
 
Desert Eagle said:
The pre match odds reflected that. Alcaraz was 1.4 and Djokovic 3.0 to win. You keep ignoring the quality of the match though. Alcaraz played superbly, Djokovic ( who is the goat) just played better. Absolutely no shame in it at all for the young Spaniard.
Click to expand...
I haven't said its a shame though. I was replying and sort of disagreeing with someone else who said its not a good look for tennis. That being said, as the match odds and the form indicate, Carlos should have won. Also, I disagree that Alcaraz played superbly. Novak was brilliant but I don't think this was quite the best Carlos has played, tbh.
 
World #1 Jannik Sinner was found doping, seems like a pretty big news? Tennis world seems to be divided on this.
 
Caught on two separate occasions whilst working with a physio who was already involved in some dodgy basketball stuff. Should absolutely be banned imo.
 
RobinLFC said:
Caught on two separate occasions whilst working with a physio who was already involved in some dodgy basketball stuff. Should absolutely be banned imo.
Click to expand...
I'm on the other side of fence. It's seems that the amounts he had were so minimal they would have made no difference. A higher dose and even if he wasn't aware, he should be banned for negligence, even if it's not his fault
His reasons seem plausible, so no issues with him serving no ban.

There does seem to be an issue with the general management and communication of such incidents though. Perhaps there's good reason why we're only finding out now but the whole process seems cloudy.
 
saivet said:
I'm on the other side of fence. It's seems that the amounts he had were so minimal they would have made no difference. A higher dose and even if he wasn't aware, he should be banned for negligence, even if it's not his fault
His reasons seem plausible, so no issues with him serving no ban.

There does seem to be an issue with the general management and communication of such incidents though. Perhaps there's good reason why we're only finding out now but the whole process seems cloudy.
Click to expand...
I agree that it's likely they weren't actually performance enhancing, but wasn't that the same for the likes of Sjarapova, Halep, ... who were punished with quite severe bans in the past? Were is the consistency in those decisions? Of course you have to go case by case and I don't remember exactly anymore how their cases went, so might've been completely different stuff, not sure.

And the whole process seems incredibly dodgy. Was reading up on it yesterday so don't know by heart anymore but apparently he was suspended right after winning Miami but already cleared before his first game in Madrid right after that, after filing an appeal? How can they come to a decision in only a few days, and why don't we know about it right up until now?

I dunno, I'd feel aggrieved if I was one of his closest opponents as well.
 
RobinLFC said:
Caught on two separate occasions
Click to expand...
They were stated to be part of the same incident. So two tests that related to the same intake from a cream his physio had used.

Was also stated that the amount in his bloodstream was far too little to have any actual effect on performance.

The only one who has had it unfair has been Halep, but that is not Sinner's fault. Bad process for Halep should not mean bad process for Sinner. Also, Sharapova's case is different and doesn't apply. She was caught using a banned substance, and her argument was she didn't know it was banned.

Nevertheless, the witch hunt has started.
 
According to the link I posted above they found 1 of a billionth of a gram of the substance. From the article:
"Three independent experts also concluded Sinner's explanation was plausible, with one stating the amount administered "would not have had... any relevant doping, or performance enhancing, effect on the player".

Also, the two tests were only a week apart.

In general, it makes no sense that it was intentional for a player who was already at the top of his game.

Even negligence is problematic, since Sinner wasn't even given the substance by mistake. It was present on the hands of his physiotherapist as he massaged him (which is consistent with the ultra-small dose).

I don't know about other cases like Halep, so I can't reach an opinion about the consistent application of the law, but some Tennis players' statements since suggest there is a problem with that. That's not on Sinner though.
 
MattofManchester said:
They were stated to be part of the same incident. So two tests that related to the same intake from a cream his physio had used.

Was also stated that the amount in his bloodstream was far too little to have any actual effect on performance.

The only one who has had it unfair has been Halep, but that is not Sinner's fault. Bad process for Halep should not mean bad process for Sinner. Also, Sharapova's case is different and doesn't apply. She was caught using a banned substance, and her argument was she didn't know it was banned.

Nevertheless, the witch hunt has started.
Click to expand...
Was it a cream that the physio used on himself which indirectly got on Sinner, or directly applied to Sinner?

Either way, I'm still not convinced, a banned substance is a banned substance and an athlete is responsible for surrounding himself with the right people who can be trusted. Plenty of examples in the past of athletes who involuntarily got into contact with minimal doses yet still were suspended (mostly in cycling that I know of, but still). I can understand why there's a lot of outrage from other tennis players (see Kyrgios for example).

And even if someone would want to give him the benefit of the doubt here, fair enough, but how the whole affair was dealth with still seems incredibly dogy and feels like he was protected by the people higher up, given his stance as the men's world number one.
 
RobinLFC said:
Was it a cream that the physio used on himself which indirectly got on Sinner, or directly applied to Sinner?

Either way, I'm still not convinced, a banned substance is a banned substance and an athlete is responsible for surrounding himself with the right people who can be trusted. Plenty of examples in the past of athletes who involuntarily got into contact with minimal doses yet still were suspended (mostly in cycling that I know of, but still). I can understand why there's a lot of outrage from other tennis players (see Kyrgios for example).

And even if someone would want to give him the benefit of the doubt here, fair enough, but how the whole affair was dealth with still seems incredibly dogy and feels like he was protected by the people higher up, given his stance as the men's world number one.
Click to expand...

The bolded part.

Nothing is dodgy. May be only the "consistent" application of the law. But we need to know what the other cases were about.
 
Avatar said:
According to the link I posted above they found 1 of a billionth of a gram of the substance. From the article:
"Three independent experts also concluded Sinner's explanation was plausible, with one stating the amount administered "would not have had... any relevant doping, or performance enhancing, effect on the player".

Also, the two tests were only a week apart.

In general, it makes no sense that it was intentional for a player who was already at the top of his game.

Even negligence is problematic, since Sinner wasn't even given the substance by mistake. It was present on the hands of his physiotherapist as he massaged him (which is consistent with the ultra-small dose).

I don't know about other cases like Halep, so I can't reach an opinion about the consistent application of the law, but some Tennis players' statements since suggest there is a problem with that. That's not on Sinner though.
Click to expand...

The billionth of a gram was a metabolite that was found in his system. This could imply that the original amount in his system was larger but had mostly faded from his system by the time the test was taken.
 
The Trofodermin also has "DOPING" written on the box it comes in. Wether it was uninentional or not, the double standards are crazy. When others get popped, unintentional or not, it goes public immediately. Some players need to wait months for their hearing. This case? Everything was kept privately for 5 months. He even won Miami and became world #1 during this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.