Could The Mount Olympus Of Tennis Finally Crumble At The US Open?

I think it is fair to say that since 2005 Federer and Nadal have been the gods of the tennis world. Federer as Zeus and Nadal as Poseidon. Many upon challengers have laid siege to the Mount, some have even gone as far as to win the battle, but not the war. This year however has been very different. Mount Olympus is no longer looking the fortress it has been for the last 6 years. Djokovic as Hades has now got some power behind him and is looking to conquer Mount Olympus and evict Zeus and Poseidon.

Should Nadal and Federer not win at Flushing Meadows, we shall see 2 Slams in a row not won by either Federer or Nadal since 2003. There is no doubt that the mens game is in a transition. Djokovic is certainly being consistent. May not be winning with the same flare, but he is still winning. Murray has the best opportunity yet to break his Grand Slam duck. This past month has been scrappy, no doubt. I am hoping the US Open will ignite a flurry of great tennis to help draw the tennis season to a grand finale culminating in London in November.

Will Djokovic or Murray conquer US Open and Mount Olympus?

Or will it end for them like a Greek Tradegy?

I can't see Nadal ever returning to the point in his rivalry with Djokovic where he dominates it as he did in the past. I am not saying that Djoko will continue to win every match but at best I think Nadal can get to a more competitive footing with Novak but I think Novak will maintain a consistent edge. As for Federer, well he is only going to get worse with the passage of time. Its just the natural cycle of life type stuff. Tennis is not a game that is usually dominated by 30 somethings. Murray can stand to benefit if he gets his game and his head on right but we have now been saying that for quite sometime. But Novak definetly looks like the lead dog of this group of players and doesn't look like he wants to relinquish his stranglehold anytime soon.

The game is in transition, but what to I cannot see as the only up and coming players are old.

As socal says, tennis is not normally dominated by 30 somethings, and the fact that so many of the top players have been around for ages (in fact, make that ALL the top players have been around for ages) tells us that the drift of the game to slow courts and equipment benefiting the retrievers is going to kill it.

Once Federer and to only a slightly lesser extent, Nadal, fade this sport is going to go into a difficult period.
They have to change the game; Lydians era (3) won't keep people watching without the epic Federer/Nadal rivalry to market it .

Tha's weird! I didn't put the "cry" emoticon in! I detect the unseeable hand of the administrator!!

It's not inappropriate though.

you are waiting for that since you were born, don't you LK?! Not so soon , I don't think this will happen next year rather than in the USO. Clearly, for the time being, is difficoult to image Nadal winning something big outside the clay season, while fed might well be able to make isolated great runs in any of the slams.

bogbrush wrote:Once Federer and to only a slightly lesser extent, Nadal, fade this sport is going to go into a difficult period.

The Women's side is also going through the same set of issues with Serena, Venus and Kim getting older.

bogbrush wrote:They have to change the game; Lydians era (3) won't keep people watching without the epic Federer/Nadal rivalry to market it.

Should S&V come back?

Should 'mixed' surfaces be considered (clay+hard/clay+grass/hard+grass)?

Perhaps a Murray/Djokovic rivalry could supplant a Fedal one?

Will Socal write about two transitional eras sandwiching the Fedal one and the so called 'weak' #1s?

Mt. Olympus has ALREADY cracked.

LF - the game will change, I think the future of tennis is a more attacking game to the forecourt. Players like Fish are showing it can work...they just need to be solid at the back then get in. I think they should speed up SW19 and USO again, slow down FO and make the balls a little smaller. It adds more excitement to the tour, takes away the homogeniety and creates specialism again.

I think there are two transitional eras...2000-2003 and now who knows 2011-2014 until the next Nadal/Federer's arrive. Who that is we dont even know yet.

Fair points lydian but if, say Novak Djokovic dominates through until 2014 then it will become known as the Djokovic era so I think it is too soon to tag this era as transitional.

lydian wrote:
LF - the game will change, I think the future of tennis is a more attacking game to the forecourt. Players like Fish are showing it can work...they just need to be solid at the back then get in. I think they should speed up SW19 and USO again, slow down FO and make the balls a little smaller. It adds more excitement to the tour, takes away the homogeniety and creates specialism again.

To encourage versatility and development of a Fedal type game, I would posit, that surface differences, are good for the game and would bring out the virtuosity of players. Fedal (no matter how much their fanatic fans deny it), pushed each other to greater heights.

lydian wrote:
I think there are two transitional eras...2000-2003 and now who knows 2011-2014 until the next Nadal/Federer's arrive. Who that is we dont even know yet.

Djokovic should be given more credit for what he is doing now. And for Socal's benefit, what Djokovic is doing in this type of 'transitional' era, should help him realise what happened in earlier time spans when similar situations arose. It is not an attempt at belittling any specific player's achievements.

I have never seen such a build up to US open. The whole ATP looks tired. Who will come up triumphs? We might be heading for a sureprise winner? Soderling or Melzer anyone?

Laverfan, we have to see how Novak's run at #1 and the rest of his career pan out. I still have a lot of faith in murray I think he will get a slam or two, and Delpo doesn't look like a one slam wonder. People want to talk about Nadal like he is done and dusted, he won a slam and has played in the finals of wimbeldon, and in 8 finals out the 11 or 12 tournaments he is entered. If a near peak Nadal, a peak Djokovic at the top equals weak era than what do you call an era topped off by Juan Carlos Ferrero, Andy Roddick, Marcelo Rios?

Not old?

socal1976 wrote:If a near peak Nadal, a peak Djokovic at the top equals weak era than what do you call an era topped off by Juan Carlos Ferrero, Andy Roddick, Marcelo Rios?

Fedal were jointly at peak. . Not having yet another era debate on this thread.

As BB pointed out, Top Tennis thrives on a 'marketable' rivalry, if it happens to be Djokurray, or DjokPorray, so be it, for the sake of Tennis.

The mention of Mount Olympus has Toto's Africa stuck in my head.

Lets gets away from the era stuff, its been done to death. The fact is if you take out the 2 stand out players - Nadal and Fdeerer - from the 2000s, the rest of the decade would look pretty average across it in terms of players.

Agreed, Lydian. We, as fans, have been spoilt.

ryan86 wrote:The mention of Mount Olympus has Toto's Africa stuck in my head.

Should it be Mt. Kilimanjaro?

Sure as Kilimanjaro rises like Olympus above the Serengeti