OT: So "not even top 10" peak Sampras lost to a 19 year old Federrer.

[koriwhat]

Can you imagine this trying to win against Peak Djoker, Nadal, Fed, Wawarinka, Murray etc

i can't imagine any dude watching tennis to begin with...

[DAF86]

How is there more compe ion than ever?

Because the number of professional tennis players is at an all-time high right now.

The sport is becoming prohibitively expensive to enter and barriers of entry is high. One of my previous staffs daughter is on her way to turning pro and he admitted that there’s little chance because the costs of training is extremely high and the time commitments from the parents is ridiculous. And Even if she did make it she won’t make a decent living unless she makes it to top 50 in the world. There’s little chance she’d make it that high.

An unkown 100 player makes a better living than the average working folk.

[ambchang]

Because the number of professional tennis players is at an all-time high right now.





An unkown 100 player makes a better living than the average working folk.

High number doesn’t mean high quality. The barrier of entry is getting higher and higher with more advanced training and nutrition as less and less people can afford it. Those who made it in aren’t necessarily of the best quality.

And making an Average living for a few years is a lot worse than making an average living for a few decades.

Btw, a friend of mine was a pro in the 90s and ranked in the hundreds for two years. The only reason he can get there is because his family is loaded which allowed him to practice everyday or hours and not do anything else.

[DAF86]

High number doesn’t mean high quality. The barrier of entry is getting higher and higher with more advanced training and nutrition as less and less people can afford it. Those who made it in aren’t necessarily of the best quality.

A totally subjective and unproven argument.

And making an Average living for a few years is a lot worse than making an average living for a few decades.

Btw, a friend of mine was a pro in the 90s and ranked in the hundreds for two years. The only reason he can get there is because his family is loaded which allowed him to practice everyday or hours and not do anything else.

If you made it to the top 100 in professional tennis you aren't going poor any time soon, tbh. Many of those players get jobs in the tennis academies of their country, or as coaches, or as tennis commentators, etc.

[spurraider21]

Then the Celtics is the greatest team ever.

in a league with 8 times. when there are more teams, it gets more difficult. and iirc on the previous page he argued the talent pool is deeper now as there are more players on the circuit. so its not an exact parallel

[ambchang]

A totally subjective and unproven argument.



If you made it to the top 100 in professional tennis you aren't going poor any time soon, tbh. Many of those players get jobs in the tennis academies of their country, or as coaches, or as tennis commentators, etc.

Of course these are subjective measures. If you want to count the number of grand slams (and pros) one, then Djoker isn't in the top 5. If he is, then it becomes curiously odd that three of the top 5 players ever would all play together when one of them was clearly not the best player even in his own time.

[ambchang]

in a league with 8 times. when there are more teams, it gets more difficult. and iirc on the previous page he argued the talent pool is deeper now as there are more players on the circuit. so its not an exact parallel

Which is not the case. The barrier of entry is higher. There are more centers in the NBA today, doesn't mean that there are better centers than the NBA had in the 90s.