Marcelo Rios, the man who many believe to be the best player never to win a slam title, has finally ended his silence over the issue of men's tennis being in a weak era. The talented Chilean has been rumoured to make a full return to the ATP tour next year, as he is already confirmed to play at Vina Del Mar in January, so it is no suprise that Rios had this to say about the Sampras era (in which he had to fight a whole host of champions):

"It was harder then. Look at the draws, playing against Muster, Courier, Bruguera, Becker, Stich, Ivanisevic. It is easier now. I did as much as I could, played as well as I could and that was it".

Rios is just the latest in the ever increasing line of former champions who have gone public with their views on the level of men's tennis at the moment. Many will say Rios is too outspoken and he should keep such views to himself, but others will counter that with the names Davydenko, Blake and Ljubicic (three top ten players who haven't even made one slam final between them).

There is no doubt that previous greats will continue to add fuel to the 'weak era' fire as long as the likes of Tommy Robredo linger in the upper-echelons of the game.

Source: http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2006-12-05/d.php

If he thinks this is a weak era, why is he shakin in his boots at the thought of playing the current top 100, so much so that he has deiced instead to on Jeremy Bated and Paul Harhuis? :shrug:

roflmao . I could not have said it better.

(though I like Rios and defend his participation on the senior tour on the other thread).

Yawn, why not change the record once in a while? Come on, I know you can do it!!

Another pearl of wisdom from the Dr with which I thoroughly concur. I was watching the Ivanisevic Pioline match earlier and was amazed by the quality of the Croat's serve. A real dose of reality for people who claim the likes of Roddick and Ljubicic are great servers, and furthermore those who believe Goran was a one-trick pony - his groundstrokes were incredible. Watching the Seniors this week has further convinced me that the only real disadvantage they'd face on the current tour is fitness. Respected tennis pundit John Lloyd went on to say that if he played like that, Ivanisevic would beat almost everyone in the current era on a fast court over 3 sets.

Rios's uncertainty over returning to the main tour on a permanent basis is based on worries over his long-term fitness, but after he wins the Vino del Mar tournament in straight sets, I'm sure he'll reconsider, since he could always cherry pick his tournaments. He doesn't have to play every tournament in a calendar year to accentuate his ranking like Federer and Davydenko. Watching players like Rios and Goran strut their stuff really makes me despair about the state of current tennis. If only it were possible to watch more Seniors tennis.

He can hardly slag!

He is the one playing OAP's! :yikes: :yikes:

For "almost everyone", Lloyd actually said a good number from 50-100 in the world. Slight difference, but I don't suppose you'll mind being corrected.

If you wanted to comment on the weak era debate Dr&Wise,why don't you search back and comment on the thread that dealt with this,instead of rehashing an argument based on the words of a retired pro,lacks imagination I'm afraid.

I'm sorry I watched the tennis today,it was quick and decisive,but Goran staying in a rally,I don't think so.Yes the best serve I have seen when in full flight,but get some balls back and it could be a different story.

Anyway I'm bored now.

Adios Amigos.

This continual rehash of the 'weak era' debate is tantamount to spamming.

Very Boring.

The "weak era" debate really is a tired and boring one.

Come up with some different arguments and people may sit up and listen. But I won't hold my breath.

An interesting statistic would be to determine how many of Wise, etc.'s posts do not include the word "Federer"... can't be many I wouldn't have thought. They talk about him more than the Federer "worshippers", so what does that tell you?!!

Yeah. You guys are not spamming as much as you did on the Beeb, but even so, it's getting a bit tired. So Rios thinks this is a weaker bunch than he faced before . . . Let's see him prove it, instead of beating up on the forty-somethings.

Federer played fewer tournaments than anyone except Nadal (who missed the first two months of the season) last year. Everyone knows this. Including Wise Analyst. We don't need BBC style cynical nonsense like this.

He should go and tell guys like Hewitt , Roddick and Blake that.
They probably think that it they were in any other era they would have definitely been more sucessful.
Didn't Nadal say this as well.How he would be no1 if he wasn't in this era.

Besides, tim is the best player never to have won a slam ;)

Federer h2h v Goran

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/head...yer2=ivanisevic


Federer h2h v Rios

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/head...playernum2=R286


roflmao

It's also worth noting that if you took all of Federer's points from the four biggest events of the year out of his total (3700 from the slams) he'd still be #1 by some 200 points - his entire total would then come from 13 events actually played.

..And Rios v Courier H2H

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/head...player2=courier


Rios v Bruguera H2H

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/head...playernum2=B350

Rios v Ivanisevic H2H

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/head...yer2=ivanisevic

roflmao

Wise.....you were starting to actually post some good stuff....why let it slide?

Dr_Sincere, well I sincerely hope you see a Doctor....

Talking of H2H's , theres Federer 1-0 Sampras . During the 'stronger' Sampras era too , when Federer was only 19 .

To be fair, this is not uncommon in any walk of life - that people assume that what they were doing was harder than it is now. I'm sure there's a few older members of this board who would happily tell people that O levels were harder than GCSEs, and that as kids can get 10 A levels a time, they're obviously not as hard as they used to be.

So for someone to turn around and say that what they did was harder then what people are doing now, is not really unheard of. And especially if you weren't as successful as you wanted to be at what you did, perhaps it's human nature to be convinced that you were obviously having to work harder or compete against tougher oppoenents or whatever.

Thats very true DJ . I think its fair to say that standards of teaching, training, equiipment etc. have gone up generally in many walks of life, which makes it easier for people of ''average'' ability to compete with more talented ones.
When I did O and A levels only the top 70 % or so could get an A , Im not sure if thats still the case ?

I'd have thought the views of a respected former world number 1 would have interested members of a tennis board, but obviously not. The Dr didn't just rehash the weak era argument - Marcelo Rios, someone likely to be extremely knowledgeable about such things, became the latest player to slam the weakness of the current tour. His words, not the Dr's.

Rios hit his peak towards the end of the Sampras era, but unfortunately got seriously injured. Therefore the various head-to-heads were all during a crossover between eras and aren't particularly relevant here. I understand Jo's point, but the examples aren't fitting (from what I understand, O Levels really were much harder than A Levels). I don't think there's ever been a case of someone claiming a previous sporting era was weak, apart from the plentiful examples of tennis players from the Sampras era criticising the lack of talent in the current one.

Wise, I have always viewed you and your friends on the beeb as being Sampras fans terribly jealous of the records Federer is setting. In my opinion, and it can only be opinion, the Era now is slightly weaker than that which has come before, but Federer is every bit as good as Sampras. I think if you swapped them around both would get similar-ish results as the other in the other Era. One area I think most would say Federer has the edge is his clay game, but I also think Sampras had the edge with his serving game. I guess that turned into a bit of a Sampras v. Federer rant again, but it's sometimes the only way to get over how I think the Era now may be weaker, once again in my own opinion, but it doesn't mean Federer is a worse player.

That's just my opinion. I was a big Sampras fan, but Federer is a fantastic player too. I can accept that.

I'm sure that many CC posters are interested in hearing what former champions say about the game.

But... Rios made his comments about eras months ago. It's old news, and was discussed at the time..

That's why so many posters aren't that interested. Also I doubt that the likes of Sincere will mention other opiions that contrast his one-eyed view of events.

For example, Rod Laver said that it was impossible to compare eras. So does that trump what Rios said?

So you will have to excuse the apparent lack of interest. This topic has been done to death.

This is the same Rios that said that Federer was miles better than Sampras, right??

Greatest of all time: Sampras or Federer?

Federer by far. At the time when I was retiring from the ATP circuit he was only playing serve and volley. He didn't play that well from the baseline back then. Now he just won Wimbledon from the baseline and that shows that he is a really complete player.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/4790323.stm

With that in mind, I am surprised that any Sampras fanatic (fanatic, not fan) would take any notice of what Rios says.. :whistle:

Another quote from this interview:


What do you think of the young guns at the moment- Berdych, Monfils, Gasguet, and what do you think of Andy Murray?

I don't know the youngsters that much. I know them by name but I haven't been following the ATP circuit that closely lately. But from what I hear they are pretty good and hopefully more young guys will come up.


So, if he hasn't been following the ATP tour that closely lately, then what gives him the right to comment on it?! :doh:

So, all in all, a load of bunkum.. and sadly the srouce of yet more spamming on this board about this wretched topic..

A debate doesn't end until there is a clear, correct answer that is logical and supported with facts. There are many experts who are saying that the current era of men's tennis is weaker than that seen ten years ago. It would be biased to ignore these views, as an impartial tennis analyst should take all matters into consideration. The argument of a 'weak era' is ongoing due to more and more former champions putting their chips on the table. A debate is not a court case, you don't find one answer and then forget about it. In tennis discussions, cases continue as more and more evidence is brought forward. If another former champion/world number one says the same thing a week from now, then that reopens the discussion as all evidence must be taken into account.

I notice you dodged the issue of Rios rating Federer as better than Sampras... :whistle:

If the players that he does compete against are supposedly "weaker" than previous years, it's hardly Federer's fault is it? He just has to deal with the players that are put in front of him.

Of course this is not an issue that should be closed.

But you go on and on and on about it, without adding any fact. It's boring, quite frankly.

For example. Rios has expressed an opinion. Not fact.

And also he has stated that he hasn't been following the ATP tour recently. Or did you not bother reading what I said?? :doh:

So, you're latching onto a lazy soundbite from a guy who has admitted that he isn't even paying attention to what's currently going on in the men's game.

Sorry. Doesn't add anything to the 'weak era' argument.

'Weak era' argument? Its becoming more like the 'Weak argument' era ;)

Moderator, why are these trolls resurrected from BBC boards allowed in here? I thought this site was "free from havoc". I call for a BAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

roflmao roflmao roflmao Great post Al

Ta. :ok: