PDA

View Full Version : Underrated Generation????


I <3 Serena
Dec 19th, 2012, 06:40 PM
Does the fact that 9 out 10 members of the WTA top ten have either won or made it to a final of a grand slam change your outlook on this generation of wta tennis?

Sammo
Dec 19th, 2012, 06:53 PM
They're equally as bad.

coolfish1103
Dec 19th, 2012, 07:02 PM
With Serena, Sharapova, Li part of the Top 10 in this generation tells you a lot about the new generation of sucks these days. If the likes of Bartoli, Petrova returns to the Top 10 (or even Jankovic, Venus, Hantuchova), we can say a lot more about this useless generation.

saint2
Dec 19th, 2012, 07:04 PM
1. No. Slams means very little for me. Especially since Schiavone-Li-Stosur thing.
2. Anyway, if the rest of the field is even worse than them....Someone HAS to win those slams, right ?
3. Wich generation excatly ? Serena generation (1981) or Wozniacki generation (1990) ?

JarkaFish
Dec 19th, 2012, 07:17 PM
As saint2 said, someone has to make it to the final/win it.

iWill
Dec 19th, 2012, 07:55 PM
With Serena, Sharapova, Li part of the Top 10 in this generation tells you a lot about the new generation of sucks these days. If the likes of Bartoli, Petrova returns to the Top 10 (or even Jankovic, Venus, Hantuchova), we can say a lot more about this useless generation.

Take 7x Grand Slam champ Venus out of that comment and you're spot on.

iWill
Dec 19th, 2012, 07:59 PM
The fact that many of the top 10 have won a slam or played in a slam final illustrates 2 things in my admittedly bias opinion.

1. Serena Williams's time away from tennis over the past decade has produced too many 1 slam wonders for this generation.
2. This generation of players is much stronger than their counterparts 15-20 years ago. Sure we still had 1 slam wonders but you knew the final was going to feature Graf, Navratilova, Seles, or Evert for a very long time.

The same could only be said from 2000-2010 about Serena, Venus, Justine, and Clijsters. You could add Davenport to this list as well.

JarkaFish
Dec 19th, 2012, 08:01 PM
The fact that many of the top 10 have won a slam or played in a slam final illustrates 2 things in my admittedly bias opinion.

1. Serena Williams's time away from tennis over the past decade has produced too many 1 slam wonders for this generation.
2. This generation of players is much stronger than their counterparts 15-20 years ago. Sure we still had 1 slam wonders but you knew the final was going to feature Graf, Navratilova, Seles, or Evert for a very long time.

The same could only be said from 2000-2010 about Serena, Venus, Justine, and Clijsters. You could add Davenport to this list as well.

Not really, parity doesn't necessarily mean quality.

The top level of this generation is nothing compared to the top level of generations past.

iWill
Dec 19th, 2012, 08:19 PM
Not really, parity doesn't necessarily mean quality.

The top level of this generation is nothing compared to the top level of generations past.

I think you're right but that is why I made my point about Serena 1st. Also I don't think the top level of the past (Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Seles) Would consistently beat the likes of Serena, Venus, Sharapova, and even Azarenka. The level today is much higher, quality may not be, but in terms of player's assets or weapons I don't think the past greats match up well at all.

iWill
Feb 1st, 2013, 05:38 PM
Why not BUMP.

Womp Up The Jamz
Feb 1st, 2013, 06:01 PM
The problem is this top 10 spans a couple generations. So, it doesn't count aa fact toward the young guns..


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App (http://www.verticalsports.com/mobile)

doujyr
Feb 1st, 2013, 08:40 PM
not quite sure where you draw the like between the generations. kerber is only a few months younger than Maria Sharapova, yet most would place kerber in generation suck, though no one would put Maria in there. the age range of players is so compressed now.