true, in theory it could be so.
However, we would have to go and see whether these hypothetical ‘second-tier players so strong that they regularly stop top players’ lose only from the top players themselves or from other players of their rank, or instead lose from third- and fourth-tier players.
In real world, it is the latter. You cannot “easily prove” here.
You can go and try to demonstrate that the n.45 or 28 or n. 17 of 1998 was better player than the n. 45 or 28 or 17 of 2015, and this would explain why the top5 performed so differently in 1998 compared to 2015.
You will find very little differences.
fluctuations in terms of performance, consistency, dangerousness, etc. begin to become evident from the top10, and very evident from the top5.
To be consistent, strong, dangerous, is almost always a “merit” of the top player, rather than a merit of his 2nd-3rd-4th tier opponents.
true, in theory it could be so.
However, we would have to go and see whether these hypothetical ‘second-tier players so strong that they regularly stop top players’ lose only from the top players themselves or from other players of their rank, or instead lose from third- and fourth-tier players.
In real world, it is the latter. You cannot “easily prove” here.
You can go and try to demonstrate that the n.45 or 28 or n. 17 of 1998 was better player than the n. 45 or 28 or 17 of 2015, and this would explain why the top5 performed so differently in 1998 compared to 2015.
You will find very little differences.
fluctuations in terms of performance, consistency, dangerousness, etc. begin to become evident from the top10, and very evident from the top5.
To be consistent, strong, dangerous, is almost always a “merit” of the top player, rather than a merit of his 2nd-3rd-4th tier opponents.