defo better than the transition period where we had the hewitts/safins/ferreros filling in the top spots before Federer's dominance.
I've been speaking about this with a lot of people, some are Tennis coaches who've seen some of our british prospects and even foreign prospects train. When it comes to overall depth this era is much stronger, since anyone in the top 100 can realistically beat anyone.
Though I think at the top its not as deep as the era when america sent in a lot of great talent, i mean we've basically got a bit of a void, if America had some legit stars to send out this era would incredible. Isner and Querrey sure they're competent, but for years, it was pretty much just Blake and Roddick.
I can't talk too much about older eras, since i only saw the classics like say the 4 setter between borg and mcenroe which put the swede into retirement basically.
So yeah, for depth I'd say we are set, but right now i wouldn't say its the most competitive, since Nadal's era is in full swing and he himself is too dominant right now.
One thing I will say though, is from what I've seen in the late 90s/early 2000s compared to now is that the personalities in tennis just flat out aren't as interesting. Sure Sampras and Henman weren't exactly interesting characters, but other guys on the tour more than made up for it.
--
nyaaaark~