Wimbledon reminded us what we love about tennis, what makes it so compelling and why we'll tune in again this time next year — if not earlier for the US, Australian and French Opens.
At the same time, the past two weeks at the All England Club also exposed what the sport is missing.
The dominance of the Big Three on the men's side — Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal — has again led to questions about where the next generation of superstars is coming from. Right now, they're questions nobody can answer.
Djokovic defeated Federer in a historic final that will go down as one of the best matches ever and Nadal was in scintillating form until coming up short against the Swiss star in the semis.
That the sport's biggest names were all in contention come the final few days of the tournament is no surprise — even if Federer is 37 — but the abject failure of those players supposedly representing Gen Next was.
Top-10 ranked stars Dominic Thiem (25), Stefanos Tsitsipas (20) and Alexander Zverev (22) all bombed out in the first round, as did Denis Shapovalov (20), and by the time we got to the quarter-finals the youngest player left in the draw was 28-year-old David Goffin.
Tennis has always been defined by rivalries. McEnroe vs Borg, Sampras vs Agassi, Evert vs Navratilova. It's what keeps casual observers engaged and why the Big Three are so integral to the sport's success.
People turn on the TV to watch the high-profile trio but when they're gone, will those same people be changing the channel? Given the lack of emerging talent threatening to establish a new wave of must-watch tennis, there's every chance they will.
Now, Tsitsipas went on a brilliant run at Melbourne Park this year and Thiem lost to Nadal in the recent French Open final, while Shapovalov and fellow Canadian Felix Auger Aliassime are full of potential, so it's not all doom and gloom. But the young brigade isn't climbing its way to the top, it's waiting for the Big Three to fall down — and that only looks like happening when they retire.
Roger Federer. Photo / Photosport
Federer, Djokovic and Nadal were all asked repeatedly during their Wimbledon campaigns why they're not facing stiff challenges from younger rivals. At times they were diplomatic, saying that day will come, but given what we witnessed at the year's third grand slam, fans were given no reason to expect a serious challenge anytime soon.
"As awesome are the Big Three are, the absence of challengers — willing to splatter paint on this triptych — is worrying," Sports Illustrated tennis journalist Jon Wertheim wrote.
There's nothing better than cheering on a fresh new face. Just look at Cori "Coco" Gauff in London, the 15-year-old American who stunned Venus Williams in round one and whose brilliant run was only ended in the fourth round when she came up against eventual champion Simona Halep.
The hype surrounding Gauff was so mesmerising she played on Centre Court and topped the BBC TV ratings. Henman Hill went wild whenever the teenager was playing and she gave everyone a reason to watch Wimbledon. It was awesome.
The longer the Big Three play the better for fans, but worryingly, men's tennis may find itself with a grim lack of pulling power and star attraction when they walk away. Gauff's giant-killing spree was a highlight of the grand slam, but it also shone a light on the concerning lack of excitement being generated by young guns on the men's side.
FIVE-SET THRILLER OUTWEIGHS TWO-SET BLITZ
Both the men's and women's finals were amazing but for very different reasons.
Federer and Djokovic made history by combining for the longest ever men's final at the All England Club, duelling it out for three minutes shy of five hours.
The day before, Halep destroyed Serena Williams 6-2 6-2 in less than an hour in what she described as the best performance of her career.
While it was impossible not to appreciate the stunning brutality of Halep's demolition job on a living legend, there was a sense of being left wanting more after the most important match of the tournament came and went as quickly as it did.
When you fork out hundreds or even thousands of pounds for a seat on Centre Court, surely you're hoping for a lengthier contest than what we witnessed on the weekend.
Federer and Djokovic's battle, on the other hand, was engrossing for its mind-boggling momentum shifts and acted as a reminder five sets of tennis can produce some of the most dramatic sport imaginable — a point that probably would have been hammered home further had the match not clashed with the barely-believable Cricket World Cup final.
It's just a shame women don't get the same opportunity to showcase the same sort of drama. How good would it have been to see Williams fight back in the third set and push Halep to stay at her elite level for longer? Sadly, we'll never know.
Don't misunderstand us here, three-set matches are able to develop into epics in their own right and men's finals can be over disappointingly quickly too. For example, Naomi Osaka's 7-6 5-7 6-4 win over Petra Kvitova in this year's Australian Open final was a corker while the corresponding event on the men's side was a one-sided affair as Djokovic destroyed Nadal, losing just eight games across three sets.
But a five-set thriller is the most entertaining prospect in tennis, as Federer and Djokovic proved, and while that remains a tantalising possibility with the men, it's a shame the same can't be said for the women.
