What makes somebody the greatest of all time? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What makes somebody the greatest of all time?

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:06 PM
I think there are a lot of things that you have to have achieved in order to be the greatest.

Winning al the tournaments, all of them, make sure nobody has won as much tournaments as you do.

Winning at a young age, that shows your one of the biggest talents


Defeating legendary opponents.
Dont just defeat nobodies, win against any kind of player, every player has a differend style (way of playing), you have to defeat them all.


Consistency is the key to succes, without Consistency you will never be an all time greatest.
You can have a short and very powerfull prime, but if you cant keep it up, you will never be the all time greatest.




Which tennis player matches this profile?

scarecrows
04-29-2009, 11:12 PM
being called Rafael

Garson007
04-29-2009, 11:13 PM
When MTF officially crowns you as a goat.

Pfloyd
04-29-2009, 11:14 PM
Opinion.

Joao
04-29-2009, 11:22 PM
Winning at a young age, that shows your one of the biggest talents



Clearly winning at a young age is not "must do" to be called greatest of all times. Players are different, some peak at a young age, some need more time to develop ... achievements are the most important thing; not the age you start playing well, or the age you stop playing well.

And what is your definition of consistency? Some players stay in the top 10 for many years (which shows consistency) but will never be GOAT.

And what is a short and powerfull prime? 5 years? Where do you draw the line?



If you need all your criteria, then no-one will ever be the greatest of all time.

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:24 PM
Clearly winning at a young age is not "must do" to be called greatest of all times. Players are different, some peak at a young age, some need more time to develop ... achievements are the most important thing; not the age you start playing well, or the age you stop playing well.

And what is your definition of consistency? Some players stay in the top 10 for many years (which shows consistency) but will never be GOAT.

And what is a short and powerfull prime? 5 years? Where do you draw the line?



If you need all your criteria, then no-one will ever be the greatest of all time.

Well if you peak to late, you can never be the greatest of all time.
Staying number 1 for years is consistency.

A short prime can be 5 years yes.

ORGASMATRON
04-29-2009, 11:31 PM
Mike Tyson is the GOAT.

BIGMARAT
04-29-2009, 11:36 PM
For now, the only debate is between Federer and Sampras.

EOD.....

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:38 PM
Mike Tyson is the GOAT.

No that is not true
Prime Mike tyson (his prime only lasted 5 years) is the best boxer in boxing history
But he did not have consistency.
A lack of motivation has destroyed his career

Thats why Muhammed Ali is the greatest of all time.

Cresswekk
04-29-2009, 11:42 PM
No that is not true
Prime Mike tyson (his prime only lasted 5 years) is the best boxer in boxing history
But he did not have consistency.
A lack of motivation has destroyed his career

Thats why Muhammed Ali is the greatest of all time.

Mike Tyson is not the best boxer in boxing history.
Ali is not the greatest of all time.

Joe Louis is the best boxer in boxing history.
Sugar Ray Robinson is the greatest of all time.

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:46 PM
Mike Tyson is not the best boxer in boxing history.
Ali is not the greatest of all time.

Joe Louis is the best boxer in boxing history.
Sugar Ray Robinson is the greatest of all time.

You are completely out of your mind
Louis was a great boxer, but he hasnt been tested as much as Ali.
The only good fighter he ever defeated (and it wasnt easy) was Joe Walcott.

ORGASMATRON
04-29-2009, 11:46 PM
No that is not true
Prime Mike tyson (his prime only lasted 5 years) is the best boxer in boxing history
But he did not have consistency.
A lack of motivation has destroyed his career

Thats why Muhammed Ali is the greatest of all time.

:lol: True. But Tyson would probably have won the h2h. Still that doesnt make him better then Ali, which is the same that can be said for Nadal and Fed. People here dont get that.

octatennis
04-29-2009, 11:50 PM
oscar de la hoya is the greatest of all time, he and 'kid' pambele.

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:52 PM
:lol: True. But Tyson would probably have won the h2h. Still that doesnt make him better then Ali, which is the same that can be said for Nadal and Fed. People here dont get that.

True maybe Federer is going to have a better career then Nadal, its soon to say right now.
But a peak nadal, a nadal at his best, will win head to head against Federer.
With other words Nadal is the better player, but that doesnt mean Nadal is going to be one of the best tennis players ever

Cresswekk
04-29-2009, 11:53 PM
You are completely out of your mind
Louis was a great boxer, but he hasnt been tested as much as Ali.
The only good fighter he ever defeated (and it wasnt easy) was Joe Walcott.

Joe Louis is the most correct (greatest technically) boxer ever.

Sugar Ray Robinson is the greatest.

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:54 PM
I am very suprised that tennis fans are watching boxing.
Huge difference between the 2 sports.

Mike Tyson
04-29-2009, 11:55 PM
No wait Muhammed Ali is the best heavyweight boxer of all time.
But the best pound to pound boxer is Robinson, even Ali said it.

ORGASMATRON
04-29-2009, 11:55 PM
True maybe Federer is going to have a better career then Nadal, its soon to say right now.
But a peak nadal, a nadal at his best, will win head to head against Federer.
With other words Nadal is the better player, but that doesnt mean Nadal is going to be one of the best tennis players ever

Peak Fed is by far the better player. But they played most of their mathces on clay. Its like making Ali and Tyson fight in the street. Tyson would win every time.

Mike Tyson
04-30-2009, 12:03 AM
Hmm maybe.
Im actually more interested in finding out who would win if they play against each other at there peakes.

ORGASMATRON
04-30-2009, 12:06 AM
Hmm maybe.
Im actually more interested in finding out who would win if they play against each other at there peakes.

On hard and grass its Fed id say. On clay Nadal.

Arkulari
04-30-2009, 12:41 AM
MTF fans do :rolleyes:
there's no way to tell that someone is the greatest of all times since the biotype of the players, the courts, the racquets, the balls, EVERYTHING has changed and evolved during the story of tennis, so there's no point of comparison between players of different eras :shrug:

Henry Chinaski
04-30-2009, 12:46 AM
I am very suprised that tennis fans are watching boxing.
Huge difference between the 2 sports.

and some huge similarities.

like fast clay says; tennis is boxing without the blood

Arkulari
04-30-2009, 12:47 AM
I like tons of different sports, heck, I even watch UFC :lol:
that has nothing to do on whether I like tennis or not ;)

fred perry
04-30-2009, 01:06 AM
someone who wears pirate pants and bright yellow sleeveless jerseys.

thrust
04-30-2009, 03:08 AM
For now, the only debate is between Federer and Sampras.

EOD.....

When it comes to accomplishments, Laver is the GOAT. In just the Open era Sampras is, so far.