One way that this IS a Golden Generation?

Keith Richards once told Paul McCartney that part of the reason for the Beatles' success was that they had "four frontmen".

I think there is truth in that. Although it wasn't as clear cut as The Witty One, The Cute One, The Quiet One, The One With The Inferiority Complex, there were definitely 4 distinct personalities for people to get behind.

I believe the men's game today also has 4 frontmen.

And again, The Elegant One, The Powerful One, The Funny One and The Grumpy One is a bit simplistic but we do have 4 very distinct characters at the top of the game. There is something for almost everyone to feel drawn toward or have an affinity with.

We can debate the quality of tennis of different eras until the cows come home. But do you think there has ever been a period where there have been 4 players at the top of the game who are so identifiable and can individually draw such a following?

The Borg/McEnroe/Connors era is the closest I can think but I don't think they had a 4th member to stand out as much as Murray.

What do you think?

I like this article

Bogbrush won't though

Bit harsh on Murray though

To be a "frontman" for a sport first and foremost you have to be clearly at the front and separated from the rest. Your descriptions hint at the truth. Being described as "Elegant" or "Powerful" is clearly a cut above being described as "funny" or "grumpy". IMO Djokovic deserves a better description.

However if you want a Beatles comparison. I would say Federer is McCartney. Does everything beautifully, pleases the establishment and smells of roses. Nadal is Lennon. Plays in an unorthodox way, moves the sport in a different direction, inspires the younger fans. Also perhaps the more talented. Djokovic is so George! If he didn't have to share the stage with Federer and Nadal he would look like a genius. And obviously Murray is Ringo. Put in by the record company to make up the numbers. What did McCartney say when he was asked if Ringo was the best drummer in the world? He said "He's not even the best drummer in the Beatles". (Federer please don't be that honest!)

I have had so much fun writing this description that I am now late.....



Sorry Caladonian Craig. But you should still feel very happy that Murray made it into the Beatles at all....

Oh I get by with a little help from my friends,
Mmm,I get high with a little help from my friends,

No everything is terrible in tennis we must start banning equipment and juicing balls till we can resurrect a playing style that has been slowly losing ground for 30 years and dying for the last 15. Tennis today fails as entertainment due its failure on the average shots per point metric. No longer do we measure matches by how competive they are, or how many great shots are hit during said matches, and especially not by their duration. Instead we measure great tennis matches by counting the number of shots and dividing it by the number of points. If a tennis match regardless of how uncompetive it is (IE dubai borefest 2011) averages less than 5.5 shots per point that is a great tennis match. It could be 6-4 and 6-2 at the Dubai snoozefest but if the points were wrapped up 5.3 shots per point that is a great match. Now the AO final that was decided by a few points at the end of 5 sets that was the most horrible match in the history of tennis I mean we are talking 8 shots a point. The heresy, the horror, the death of tennis. Waaaaaaa, waaaaaa, waaaa!!!! From now on with out a shot counter and calculator no one is allowed to call any old 5 setter entertaining.

Problem is: in tennis right now what you find is a handful of Ringos and a sure McCartney. I don't see many Lennons , let alone Rolling Stones and Pink Floyds around.......

HM Murdoch wrote:Keith Richards once told Paul McCartney that part of the reason for the Beatles' success was that they had "four frontmen".

What's the reason for Michael Jackson's success?

It Must Be Love wrote:I like this article

Bogbrush won't though

It's the most compelling argument to call this Golden I've seen. Beats lauding endless matches of left-right baseline bashing and record numbers of 5 set matches as evidence of great quality, that's for sure.

Must have been the Moonwalking, JHM

That, and oh ..... some good toons .....

Just blame it on the boogie.

Thats one difference in the comparison, moonwalking - good, moonballing - not so good.

bogbrush wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:I like this article

Bogbrush won't though

It's the most compelling argument to call this Golden I've seen. Beats lauding endless matches of left-right baseline bashing and record numbers of 5 set matches as evidence of great quality, that's for sure.

You should hear what Mirka has to say about the golden era
30 minutes away from official press release of Roger and Mirka exposed in TWS 8.

WTF is TWS 8?

hawkeye wrote:Being described as "Elegant" or "Powerful" is clearly a cut above being described as "funny" or "grumpy". IMO Djokovic deserves a better description.

In my opinion too! But I'm talking about their identifiable characteristics. I don't think the wider public think of Djokovic as "the guy with the amazing return of serve". I reckon they think of him as "the funny one".

Likewise with Murray. How many of the wider public could give a proper critique of his game. But I bet everyone knows he has strops on court and barely-concealed disdain for the media!

When you compare the top 4 to others in the top ten, don't they appear to have more distinctive characters? In what way do the personalities of Ferrer, Berdych, Tipsarevic and Isner stand out from the crowd? If the ATP were fiction, I think you could tell from the character sketches alone who the stars are and who is the supporting cast,

bogbrush wrote:WTF is TWS 8?

You'll see.

It Must Be Love wrote:

bogbrush wrote:WTF is TWS 8?

You'll see.

Not likely if I don't know where to look.

I have just had a great thought... Roddick would make an excellent Ringo. Is it too late?

socal1976

You didn't say. What do you think of Djokovic as George?

Personality wise he is more like Paul and John with a bit of mischievous attitude hawkeye. It is a creative way to look at the differing personalities they bring to the game. Poor Andy I guess he gets stuck with being Ringo.

Well Ringo certainly was the last to join the group of course, when he was brought in to replace Pete Best. (you can't help wonder just how many times the unfortunate Pete Best must have asked himself how very different his life could have been ... )

Similarly Andy M. was the last to join The Big Four, who have been a permanent fixture on the top four ranking spots pretty much every week now since this month way back in 2008, albeit with the occasional change of order, but with the names staying the same. Just another four years or so and they will have been there about as long as the Beatles were recording artists......

Is David Ferrer the Pete Best of tennis....??

I personally prefer the Travelling Wilburys.

laverfan wrote:I personally prefer the Travelling Wilburys.

Have you been beat up and battered around?
Been sent up and been shot down?

laverfan wrote:I personally prefer the Travelling Wilburys.

Interesting. By that measure, I'd say Roy Orbison = Gasquet (one great feature but not really a great overall), Tom Petty = Del Potro (the occasional smash hit but generally short of the top of the charts), Jeff Lynne = Ljubicic (respected by his peers but not too well known to the public at large).

It Must Be Love wrote:Bit harsh on Murray though

Why? He can be quite funny

laverfan wrote:I personally prefer the Travelling Wilburys.

A bit young for you, aren't they?

Thanfully, I'm off these boards for a couple of days, so I'll take my ban during then

HM Murdoch wrote:

laverfan wrote:I personally prefer the Travelling Wilburys.

Interesting. By that measure, I'd say Roy Orbison = Gasquet (one great feature but not really a great overall), Tom Petty = Del Potro (the occasional smash hit but generally short of the top of the charts), Jeff Lynne = Ljubicic (respected by his peers but not too well known to the public at large).

Yes, and you very obviously missed 'Lucky Wilbury' aka Bob Dylan? Is he Nadal (should I go back a bit Laver, McEnroe?)

You also seem to mix current and past players.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Have you been beat up and battered around?
Been sent up and been shot down?

She loves your sexy body,
She loves your 'dirty' mind,
She loves when you hold her,
grab her from behind
...

(Variations on a 'Dirty World').

banbrotam wrote:

laverfan wrote:I personally prefer the Travelling Wilburys.

A bit young for you, aren't they?

Thanfully, I'm off these boards for a couple of days, so I'll take my ban during then

BanBro, good to see you come and hang out, if only for a bit.