Please tell us about weak 80's.. Golden tennis age can be brought up to weak on MTF, just want to know how
It always is done from someone`s position I guess, but we can go with all possible variants.
Mcenroe - whom the hell did this guy beat to win his titles? Past his prime Borg who was going to retire at 26 and despite being burnt-out remained his biggest threat? Or maybe Gerulaitis who was bye for top players back then, was one-slam-wonder with fluke victory at AO-77 where best players even didn`t take part. Yep, this John was really scary man - he had to beat Chris Lewis to win the most prestigious tournament in tennis in the final.
Give me a break, this guy was just playing in weak era. When new competition appeard since 1985 his results were joke.
Lendl - how can this vulture be considered as one of the greatest in history? Murray of his time who was owned by any decent player and would never touch GS trophy if only he didn`t play in weak era as his 4 final losses in a row show. He was Mecir`s master - Miroslav eated from his hands on court, won 12 games in two GS final against him. What an era, imagine Troicki against Djokovic here and you get it.
He sucked on real spartan surface (grass) with kid from Germany, was gifted his last Slam with retirement. Lendl peaked for autumn, period after Slams when all players are resting after great season for new pinnacle at Slams this guy vultured at now-called WTF joke. He was the only fresh player there and no surprise Ivan was in the final there for 8 times in a row only to be owned at Slams later.
Wilander - you must be kidding.
Guy had one strong season and we should consider him to be one of all-time greats.
He was lucky not to play in time with really great clay court player (Borg) around, in stead of him he was "fighting" with MM king Vilas and home lucky pal Lecont for his whole career was lesser thread than kitty for real tops at Slams. Or victory over Curren at Slam final made him a legend, guy had 5 ATP titles in his career - yep, what a rival
If he was that good, why he disapeared from top fight when great wave of players (Agassi, Sampras, Courier) appeared? Luckder, Lendl`s and Becker`s pigeon, never knew how to play on quick surfaces (see - grass, Wimbledon) and still won so many titles. It only shows what a mug era that was, Murray would be a king back then.
Becker, another legend, who for all his career never succeeded to win at least something on not-for-serve-bots court - on clay where real heroes got their glory. This all serve guy was Wimbledon legend? Where he was when Sampras appeared, wasn`t even good enough to beat that fluke Stich there.
Then what we have in fact - nothing on clay, nothing against decent players on grass (could beat there only past his prime old Lendl and great Curren remembered higher). It remains only indoor, servebots territory where he really was the best for years - though can we really consider this
to be tennis, for real? Due to this guy and others like him surfaces where changed for a chance for spectators finally to watch some true art. Something like AO-12 final.
And so on. I know I`m not very good in sarcasm in english, I`m not native speaker though. But you can get my point. It`s easy to write rubbish about any player, any time. And if you think that my one was bigger than others - well, I wouldn`t think so. Simply plenty of people got used
to consider 80-th and 90-th like strong era because it was before Federer and his time like weak one. Both things are wrong and stupid.