Open-Era Slams: *RAFA 4th [>Agassi, Borg, Sampras..]~? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Open-Era Slams: *RAFA 4th [>Agassi, Borg, Sampras..]~?

CmonAussie
06-07-2010, 05:18 PM
<<<(())>>>
...
OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*9 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

mashamaniac
06-07-2010, 07:24 PM
<<<(())>>>
...
OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 1x Wimby]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]


Interesting stats.

It's also nice to see when and where will rafa get to the likes of agassi,connors and lendl as 8-GS winners...

TennisOnWood
06-07-2010, 07:28 PM
Yeah.. Ivan and Andre are my two favorite players from past and its really fantastic to have Rafa so close to them,at the age of just 24

1/4's/1/2's/Finals/Titles

Rafa : 15 // 12 // 9 // 7
Mats : 20 // 14 // 11 // 7
John : 26 // 19 // 11 // 7

Very good!!!!

Lopez
06-07-2010, 08:14 PM
I'd say Nadal hasn't passed McEnroe yet. Wilander, perhaps. Becker, definitely. Edberg, perhaps.

Sophocles
06-07-2010, 08:33 PM
I'd say Nadal hasn't passed McEnroe yet.

No, & nor is it close. Wilander & Becker, probably, yes.

Ariel
06-07-2010, 08:44 PM
Very interesting thread. He's got a ways to go to match McEnroe but he'll be truly level with Wilander perhaps this year.

Billups85
06-07-2010, 09:40 PM
I'd say Nadal hasn't passed McEnroe yet. Wilander, perhaps. Becker, definitely. Edberg, perhaps.


I agree about McEnroe but clearly Nadal has passed Becker, Edberg and Wilander.

What did Wilander do to be ahead of Rafa?

Nadal has more weeks as a #1, more titles (olympic gold and Wimbledon), majors on all possible surfaces, he regained #1 unlike Wilander. No need to mention his clay greatness or his 1.000.000 records.

Lopez
06-07-2010, 10:12 PM
I agree about McEnroe but clearly Nadal has passed Becker, Edberg and Wilander.

What did Wilander do to be ahead of Rafa?

Nadal has more weeks as a #1, more titles (olympic gold and Wimbledon), majors on all possible surfaces, he regained #1 unlike Wilander. No need to mention his clay greatness or his 1.000.000 records.

Nadal has 5 RG out of his 7 GSs, so predominantly clay. That's why Wilander's 7 Slams are more impressive.

Wilander also has GS on all surfaces plus he had a year where he won 3/4 Grand Slams. He also has a Wimbledon doubles title.

Edberg also has 6 GS in singles with 2 in AO/USO/W and a RG final with a few QFs. He also has 3 doubles GS titles and was ranked nr1 in both doubles and singles. He also won the Olympics "showcase" event in 1984. Still, Olympics is such a new addition to open era tennis, it isn't fair to compare that achievement when estimating the greatness of past players.

Har-Tru
06-07-2010, 10:35 PM
Above Becker and Edberg, no doubt.

Above Wilander, arguably.

Above McEnroe, not yet, but he's getting there.

TennisOnWood
06-07-2010, 10:44 PM
At the risk of M4RC giving me the 'mark of the hatas' or whatever I have to say that the fact that this Nadal has so many Grand Slams speaks volumes about the muggginess of this era.

For sure.. not as strongest era as before but event then its not easy to be 3rd fastest player with 7 Grand Slam titles and (I think) 4th youngest with 40 ATP crowns.. after all,he beaten best and most complete player of this generation so many times in such a big occasions

Rafa deserved all this with his work and attitude for the game. He is the true tennis champion

careergrandslam
06-08-2010, 03:49 AM
nadal is clearly ahead of becker and edberg.
nadal is just ahead of wilander.
nadal is bit behind mcenroe.

what my criteria is:
- slam titles
- slam finals
- slam semifinals
- winning slams on all surfaces
- total weeks at #1
- consecutive weeks at #1
- years at year-end #1
- dominating a surface

jenanun
06-08-2010, 04:22 AM
Wilander also has GS on all surfaces plus he had a year where he won 3/4 Grand Slams. He also has a Wimbledon doubles title.



Nadal held 3 GS at the same time on 3 different surfaces + olympics gold was as impressive

Lopez
06-08-2010, 06:21 AM
Above Becker and Edberg, no doubt.

Above Wilander, arguably.

Above McEnroe, not yet, but he's getting there.

Should someone win 10 GSs on the same surface, would they be over Agassi or Lendl for example? IMO no since variety is important. Nadal does have other titles than the French but 5/7 is a pretty large fraction.

DuMa
06-08-2010, 06:44 AM
i think his dominant h2h with federer in his prime years says a lot about how much better he is than Jmac and Mats

TennisOnWood
06-08-2010, 01:51 PM
i think his dominant h2h with federer in his prime years says a lot about how much better he is than Jmac and Mats

Not sure.. of course,it was great to beat Federer so many times but Mats and John played against a lot of great players,not just one (even he is the greatest)

Sophocles
06-08-2010, 02:08 PM
i think his dominant h2h with federer in his prime years says a lot about how much better he is than Jmac and Mats

Why? Mac has a leading H2H against Connors.

rafa_maniac
06-08-2010, 03:10 PM
I consider him top of tier 3 now.

Tier 1: Federer, Laver, Sampras etc...
Tier 2: McEnroe, Agassi, Lendl etc...
Tier 3: Nadal, Wilander, Edberg etc...

Har-Tru
06-08-2010, 03:17 PM
Should someone win 10 GSs on the same surface, would they be over Agassi or Lendl for example? IMO no since variety is important. Nadal does have other titles than the French but 5/7 is a pretty large fraction.

Is that an argument against Nadal vs McEnroe? McEnroe won slams on two of the three surfaces, Nadal on all three.

I maintain McEnroe is still above Nadal due to a better competition, more surface diversity and longer and (above all) more dominant number one periods.

rocketassist
06-08-2010, 03:22 PM
JMac is still ahead of Nadal.

Lopez
06-08-2010, 03:32 PM
Is that an argument against Nadal vs McEnroe? McEnroe won slams on two of the three surfaces, Nadal on all three.

I maintain McEnroe is still above Nadal due to a better competition, more surface diversity and longer and (above all) more dominant number one periods.

No no, just an illustration what I mean when I rate Nadal on the same level as Edberg and Wilander.

IMO it's not fair to call AO and USO the "same" surface: it's quite different. Same if USO were super fast clay and someone won AO, USO and W, then claim they won GS on "all" surfaces. Connors won USO on clay right? Still it isn't said he won on all surfaces, since red clay is quite different.

Mac is over Nadal IMO because of domination, 4 YE nr 1 finishes and a bunch of GS doubles titles in addition to the singles ones.

Rafa maniac said it quite well: Rafa is IMO on the third "tier".
1. Federer, Sampras, Borg (Laver)
2. McEnroe, Lendl, Agassi
3. Wilander, Nadal, Edberg, Becker

NADALbULLS
06-08-2010, 03:42 PM
Australian Open and US Open are very similar courts, hence Nadal keeps making the semis of US Open even with an abdominal strain. He's one easy semi away from winning it.

rocketassist
06-08-2010, 03:44 PM
Australian Open and US Open are very similar courts, hence Nadal keeps making the semis of US Open even with an abdominal strain. He's one easy semi away from winning it.

When did he have that? Last year?

JolánGagó
06-08-2010, 03:44 PM
Above Becker and Edberg, pretty obvious for anyone with eyesight and a minimum of two and half braincells.

Above Wilander, arguably yes.

Above McEnroe, arguably not quite yet.

Har-Tru
06-08-2010, 03:59 PM
No no, just an illustration what I mean when I rate Nadal on the same level as Edberg and Wilander.

IMO it's not fair to call AO and USO the "same" surface: it's quite different. Same if USO were super fast clay and someone won AO, USO and W, then claim they won GS on "all" surfaces. Connors won USO on clay right? Still it isn't said he won on all surfaces, since red clay is quite different.

Mac is over Nadal IMO because of domination, 4 YE nr 1 finishes and a bunch of GS doubles titles in addition to the singles ones.

Rafa maniac said it quite well: Rafa is IMO on the third "tier".
1. Federer, Sampras, Borg (Laver)
2. McEnroe, Lendl, Agassi
3. Wilander, Nadal, Edberg, Becker

It is indeed said Connors won on all three surfaces.

How is Edberg ahead of Nadal?

Wilander is debatable. I'd put Nadal over him today, but tomorrow I might change my mind.

Ivo#1Fan
06-08-2010, 04:16 PM
Nadal has won his 7 grand slams in the Federer Era. Has anyone else been able to squeeze out even 2 slams during this era? That makes Nadal's accomplishment particularly amazing, that in addition to the fact that he reached 7 at a younger age than any of his predecessors. Soon noone will even consider Mac's accomplishments being anywhere near Nadal's.

Pfloyd
06-08-2010, 04:56 PM
Well I agree with what most have said here, he's still behind McEnroe.

The biggets problem in the comparisson is that back then, Master Series did not exist, Nadal has the all time record.

Granted, he won most of them on clay, but this is still an amazing achievement, but one that McEnroe did not participate in.

Sophocles
06-08-2010, 05:05 PM
Well I agree with what most have said here, he's still behind McEnroe.

The biggets problem in the comparisson is that back then, Master Series did not exist, Nadal has the all time record.

Granted, he won most of them on clay, but this is still an amazing achievement, but one that McEnroe did not participate in.

McEnroe won over 20 of the equivalent tournaments (WCT & that sort of stuff).

marcRD
06-08-2010, 05:12 PM
Nadal is getting there, I think he needs one more slam outside clay to be tier 2 kind of player. He certanly passed Wilander a long time ago, Wilander won 3 Australian opens where the best didnt even play.

peribsen
06-08-2010, 05:19 PM
I know it's difficult to compare ages that are separated by too many years, but completely ignoring masters from the pre-open era always gets me nervous.

Arguments on whether a given player should be ranked 6th or 7th of all times are always pretty pointless and obsessive, I prefer to speak of groups of players. Imagine the history of tennis was a cycling race: Fed would be leader, with only Sampras and Laver anywhere close, then would come a small group with Borg, Emerson & Tilden, several hundred yards back would come Lendl (8 slams + 5 masters cups) and Rosewall (8 slams + many pro-tournaments), followed by a pack with all other winners of 8 slams (Perry, Connors, Agassi), with another pack in hot pursuit and pretty close (McEnroe, Wilander, Nadal, Becker, Edberg), probably still headed by Budge ('only' 6 slams, but a GS and the record of 6 majors on a row). Then, hundreds of yards behind, you would have other groups, all of them several miles ahead of the 'peloton', which wouldn´t include regular players but most of those splendid, first-rate players who have ever made top-5 in all generations without ever having really struck gold (the Davydenko, Djoko, Murray, Roddick, of this era; Delpo would still be in the 'peloton', but with a good chance of sprinting out and joining one or other of the small groups that are ahead of the bunch).

For me, it's far more exciting to see tennis history in that view than to argue for ages on the precise comparison between Nadal and Wilander, when there are so many reasons why you can't really measure their comparative worth in such a precise way.

Rafatards and Fedtards will insist on comparing Nadal with Fed. Fact is, their timeframes largely overlap, so the comparison is up to a point unavoidable. But that implies a big risk of allowing the trees to keep you from seeing the forest: Fed is very clearly heading the race and Nadal has fought his way to one of the top groups of racers, is already among the top 15, and we should all be able to enjoy both achievements.

Another example I'm particularly fond of: imagine tennis history as one huge major tournament. Only the top 128 of all times are accepted, meaning about 99% of players are left out. Fed would be playing the final while Nadal would be fighting the likes of Edberg, McEnroe, Willander, Agassi, etc, on 4th round, still with a good chance of making the QF.

One hell of an achievement, even if he got no further than this!!

Tutu
06-08-2010, 05:34 PM
Keep on moving up, Rafa!

NADALbULLS
06-09-2010, 04:56 AM
When did he have that? Last year?

Yes. It was a miracle he made it through to semis. And after the semis he said he couldn't serve into the corners of the box because of the pain, he was just getting the ball in play. He said he got that abdominal strain because of not training for many weeks after Wimbledon withdrawal, and then got back into training quickly after inactivity caused the strain and it was apparent throughout the American summer.

allpro
06-09-2010, 04:59 AM
Mac > Nadal > Wilander

Priam
06-09-2010, 05:03 AM
Mac should really have had more slams. That being said he's still higher than Rafa in terms of overall achievements.

Mimi
06-09-2010, 05:06 AM
<<<(())>>>
...
OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 1x Wimby]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

hi friend, didn't Bill Tiden won 10 slams:wavey:

CmonAussie
06-09-2010, 05:15 AM
hi friend, didn't Bill Tiden won 10 slams:wavey:

:wavey:
Hi Mimi, you must be happy to see Rafa back as the FO champ & #1:cool:
...
I didn`t include Tilden or Emerson etc. because their achievements were all in the Amateur Era..
This thread was dedicated to the Open Era only, so post 1968->
However some champs like Laver & Rosewall won half their slams in the Open Era [the other half as amateurs], so they were included;)

Mimi
06-09-2010, 05:16 AM
...
...
<^^>
Just my 2 Bob(:
Agree with the TIER SYSTEM of ranking the greats:


TIER 1: Federer, Laver, Sampras, Borg..
TIER 2: Rosewall, Agassi, Lendl, Connors..
TIER 3: Nadal, McEnroe, Newcombe..
TIER 4: Wilander, Edberg, Becker..
TIER 5: Vilas, Courier, Kuerten, Ashe, Smith, Rafter, Hewitt..

Agassi belongs to Tier 3 for me:wavey:

Mimi
06-09-2010, 05:17 AM
:wavey:
Hi Mimi, you must be happy to see Rafa back as the FO champ & #1:cool:
...
I didn`t include Tilden or Emerson etc. because their achievements were all in the Amateur Era..
This thread was dedicated to the Open Era only, so post 1968->
However some champs like Laver & Rosewall won half their slams in the Open Era [the other half as amateurs], so they were included;)

winning fo = happy, return no.1 = just so so, he got there before, no.1 or no.2 is the same for me:cool:
I see, great statistics :D:angel:

CmonAussie
06-09-2010, 05:20 AM
Agassi belongs to Tier 3 for me:wavey:

:wavey:
Agassi gets special props for several reasons:
*Won All-4 slams [only 3 men in Open Era: Laver, Federer, Agassi]
*15 Slam Finals [won 8, lost 7 (many against Sampras)]
*Longevity: oldest ever #1, won 5 slams after 29yrs+
>>1988 FO & USO SFs--2005 USO Finals = nearly 20 years near the top:worship:

Mimi
06-09-2010, 05:24 AM
:wavey:
Agassi gets special props for several reasons:
*Won All-4 slams [only 3 men in Open Era: Laver, Federer, Agassi]
*15 Slam Finals [won 8, lost 7 (many against Sampras)]
*Longevity: oldest ever #1, won 5 slams after 29yrs+
>>1988 FO & USO SFs--2005 USO Finals = nearly 20 years near the top:worship:

your tennis knowledge is amazing:worship:

well, you know, may be I am biased, i am not very fond of Agassi:p

CmonAussie
06-09-2010, 05:32 AM
your tennis knowledge is amazing:worship:

well, you know, may be I am biased, i am not very fond of Agassi:p


...
Yeah its hard not to be biased isn`t it:devil:
Honestly, I am not fond of Borg~ so i would rather not put him TIER-1, but i have to admit his achievements were crazy good:worship::sad:

Agassi is sometimes a jerk, and his display at the Haiti exhibition this year [with Sampras, Nadal & Federer] was ridiculous:eek: Andre really was shameful this time.. Though all the great stars have a flaw [e.g. Tiger Woods is a sexaholic, Sampras was stingey with fans].. So i`ll forgive Andre this time:p

Mimi
06-09-2010, 05:35 AM
...
Yeah its hard not to be biased isn`t it:devil:
Honestly, I am not fond of Borg~ so i would rather not put him TIER-1, but i have to admit his achievements were crazy good:worship::sad:

Agassi is sometimes a jerk, and his display at the Haiti exhibition this year [with Sampras, Nadal & Federer] was ridiculous:eek: Andre really was shameful this time.. Though all the great stars have a flaw [e.g. Tiger Woods is a sexaholic, Sampras was stingey with fans].. So i`ll forgive Andre this time:p

yeah Sampras was stingy with fans, I met him once at Marboro Open 1996, he was standing in front of me, but only wiling to sign 2 autographs:mad:, but not warming with fans cannot be worse than lying and snorting drugs as agassi:devil:

Mimi
06-09-2010, 05:56 AM
out for lunch, bye :D:wavey:

careergrandslam
06-09-2010, 06:36 AM
...
...
<^^>
Just my 2 Bob(:
Agree with the TIER SYSTEM of ranking the greats:


TIER 1: Federer, Laver, Sampras, Borg..
TIER 2: Rosewall, Agassi, Lendl, Connors..
TIER 3: Nadal, McEnroe, Newcombe..
TIER 4: Wilander, Edberg, Becker..
TIER 5: Vilas, Courier, Kuerten, Ashe, Smith, Rafter, Hewitt..


yea i agree with the tier system aswell.

i agree with ur tier 1,2,3 and 4.
i dont agree with ur tier 5.

there should be a tier between tier 2 and tier 3, like a tier 2.5
because mcenroe was dominant in being number 1 ranked more than agassi but agassi won the French.

HKz
06-09-2010, 06:44 AM
i think his dominant h2h with federer in his prime years says a lot about how much better he is than Jmac and Mats

H2H doesn't mean anything regarding one's place in individual history. You play against the ATP not one player.

NADALbULLS
06-09-2010, 07:24 AM
I wonder what the all-time rankings are if we adapt each player to their achievements at age 24.

careergrandslam
06-09-2010, 07:57 AM
I wonder what the all-time rankings are if we adapt each player to their achievements at age 24.

borg won his 7th slam after 19 slams played, he was the fastest.
mcenroe was 2nd fastest with 22 slams played when he won his 7th slam.
rafa is 3rd fastest with 24.

if u want age record comparison, go to this site, u can find out.
http://www.tennis28.com/slams/wins_age.html

raahaat7
06-09-2010, 12:35 PM
...
...
<^^>
Just my 2 Bob(:
Agree with the TIER SYSTEM of ranking the greats:


TIER 1: Federer, Laver, Sampras, Borg..
TIER 2: Rosewall, Agassi, Lendl, Connors..
TIER 3: Nadal, McEnroe, Newcombe..
TIER 4: Wilander, Edberg, Becker..
TIER 5: Vilas, Courier, Kuerten, Ashe, Smith, Rafter, Hewitt..


Great, this tier system! Just one reservation. Nadal, McEnroe and newcomb belong to tier-2. 4-tier system works well.

CmonAussie
06-09-2010, 03:42 PM
Great, this tier system! Just one reservation. Nadal, McEnroe and newcomb belong to tier-2. 4-tier system works well.
...
mm:wavey:
You might be right raahaat, but i went with my gut feeling & considering things like longevity, impact on the sport etc. not just slams won;)
Though i guess there is a good argument for McEnroe to be Tier II, considering his talent, the legendary wins & losses [80 Wimby loss to Borg, 84 FO loss to Lendl], and him also being one of the greatest ever doubles players.. McEnroe indeed is still a step above Nadal, Newcombe, Wilander etc.;)

CmonAussie
06-09-2010, 03:45 PM
***
Updated list [after further thought]
***

TIER 1: Federer, Laver, Sampras, Borg..
TIER 2: Rosewall, Agassi, Lendl, Connors, McEnroe..
TIER 3: Nadal, Wilander, Newcombe..
TIER 4: Edberg, Becker..
TIER 5: Vilas, Courier, Kuerten, Ashe, Smith, Rafter, Hewitt..

Persimmon
06-09-2010, 06:11 PM
Nadal has won his 7 grand slams in the Federer Era. Has anyone else been able to squeeze out even 2 slams during this era? That makes Nadal's accomplishment particularly amazing.

This. Winning them in the Fed era is special. Coz Fed is a monster at the slams:wavey:

rocketassist
06-09-2010, 06:25 PM
no way Nadal in a tier above Becker/Edberg. Same tier yeah, but not above...

Michael Bluth
06-09-2010, 06:33 PM
I would consider Nadal above Becker. One more slam, way more weeks at no.1, a year-end no.1 (and probably at least one more in the future).

He's about equal with Edberg and Wilander, but McEnroe is still clearly better than Rafa. They have an equal amount of slams, but Mac breaks the tie with his 170 weeks at number 1 and his 4 year end no.1s.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 06:40 PM
Nadal's resume is too clay-heavy imo. Now that may be a plus for some of you - dominating a surface - but I tend to prefer a more balanced resume. Besides, he has done nothing at all indoors (won Madrid, I know :rolleyes:) which for some reason is totally overlooked by most people.

raahaat7
06-09-2010, 06:49 PM
Nadal has age on his side. 2 G.S titles + one U.S.open puts him into the tier-1. Rosewell in tier-2 is hard to digest.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 06:53 PM
Tiers of open era greatness:

#1: Borg, Federer
#2: Sampras
#3: McEnroe, Lendl, Connors
#4: Edberg, Wilander, Becker, Nadal
#5: Courier, Kuerten, Vilas
#6: Lots of ordinary 1-2 slam winners.

Pre-Borg players were not considered.

Agassi was disqualified for doping.

rocketassist
06-09-2010, 06:55 PM
Swedish nationalist.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 07:00 PM
Swedish nationalist.

I fail to see how I'm putting the swedes in a tier they do not deserve to be in. :confused:

rafa_maniac
06-09-2010, 07:18 PM
Nadal's resume is too clay-heavy imo. Now that may be a plus for some of you - dominating a surface - but I tend to prefer a more balanced resume. Besides, he has done nothing at all indoors (won Madrid, I know :rolleyes:) which for some reason is totally overlooked by most people.

Agassi's resume is remarkably HC heavy. Noone seems to ever hold this against him though, I wonder why. Is dominating clay seen as inherantly inferior than dominating other surfaces? Nadal is no Muster, he has proven himself time and time again off of clay, but it's clearly his preferred surface and like it or not it's a huge part of tennis. An important title is an important title regardless.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 07:22 PM
Besides, he has done nothing at all indoors (won Madrid, I know :rolleyes:) which for some reason is totally overlooked by most people.

This is true. Nadal is arguably weaker indoors than Sampras was on clay.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 07:23 PM
That's true about Agassi, but he does hold the career slam plus the YEC on carpet which is very rare.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 07:25 PM
He's about equal with Edberg and Wilander, but McEnroe is still clearly better than Rafa. They have an equal amount of slams, but Mac breaks the tie with his 170 weeks at number 1 and his 4 year end no.1s.

Plus 77 titles, the finest Davis Cup record of the Open Era, an incredible doubles record, 3 Masters Cups (if I remember correctly), & competition from great players who weren't easy match-ups.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 07:28 PM
This is true. Nadal is arguably weaker indoors than Sampras was on clay.

Yes, and just compare him with Becker who has similar achievements outdoors but is also a true great indoors with 3 YEC on his CV. Yet most people think Nadal is greater than Becker. It's as if indoor titles doesn't matter to most fans. :shrug:

rafa_maniac
06-09-2010, 07:28 PM
That's true about Agassi, but he does hold the career slam plus the YEC on carpet which is very rare.

I agree, I think the career Slam issue is what places Agassi in a tier above Nadal, that and longevity. Nadal would probably move up to that tier if he were to win the US Open this year (unlikely).

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 07:32 PM
Yes, and just compare him with Becker who has similar achievements outdoors but is also a true great indoors with 3 YEC on his CV. Yet most people think Nadal is greater than Becker. It's as if indoor titles doesn't matter to most fans. :shrug:

No indoor slams, is the trouble. But in the highly unlikely event Nadal achieved a Borg-like slam record, his poor record indoors ought to count against his claims to GOAThood. Unless he improves it, of course.

As regards Becker & Nadal, Nadal has many more weeks at No. 1, which counts for something.

Matt01
06-09-2010, 08:39 PM
Tiers of open era greatness:

#1: Borg, Federer
#2: Sampras
#3: McEnroe, Lendl, Connors
#4: Edberg, Wilander, Becker, Nadal
#5: Courier, Kuerten, Vilas
#6: Lots of ordinary 1-2 slam winners.


Hmmmm...no. Just no :lol:

Jimnik
06-09-2010, 08:53 PM
McEnroe and Wilander had those outstanding years in 84 and 88 respectively. Not sure Nadal will ever match that but it won't matter if he finishes with a much higher slam count.

Billups85
06-09-2010, 09:58 PM
Yes, and just compare him with Becker who has similar achievements outdoors but is also a true great indoors with 3 YEC on his CV. Yet most people think Nadal is greater than Becker. It's as if indoor titles doesn't matter to most fans. :shrug:

Well, it seems that clay titles and 7 > 6 means nothing to you.

5 F0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 YEC

clay greatness >>>>>>>>> indoor greatness

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 10:03 PM
Hmmmm...no. Just no :lol:

What zeems to be ze problem, officer?

DrJules
06-09-2010, 10:06 PM
By retirement expect Nadal to be ahead of McEnroe and Wilander.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 10:07 PM
McEnroe and Wilander had those outstanding years in 84 and 88 respectively.

Yes, I forgot to add to my list of Mac's achievements, the best win-loss percentage in a season, & arguably the finest single performance of the Open Era (Wimbledon final, 1984).

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 10:09 PM
Well, it seems that clay titles and 7 > 6 means nothing to you.

5 F0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 YEC

clay greatness >>>>>>>>> indoor greatness

What makes you think I don't take Nadal's clay court greatness into account at all???? I said I think Becker is greater because their achievements outdoors are comparable while Becker is far greater indoors.

6 slams outdoors and 3 YEC > 7 slams outdoors and jack squat indoors.

Nadal's trumph card is his ~50 weeks at no 1 and gazillion weeks at no 2.

peribsen
06-09-2010, 10:11 PM
Tiers of open era greatness:
#1: Borg, Federer
#2: Sampras
#3: McEnroe, Lendl, Connors
#4: Edberg, Wilander, Becker, Nadal
#5: Courier, Kuerten, Vilas
#6: Lots of ordinary 1-2 slam winners.


How can Borg share the first tier with Federer when he never won anything outside clay/grass? I'd place Borg all by his own in a tier between Sampras and Lendl (not sure McEnroe deserves to share position with Lendl, but I guess the whole idea behind tiers is that it is an aproximation).

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 10:35 PM
How can Borg share the first tier with Federer when he never won anything outside clay/grass? I'd place Borg all by his own in a tier between Sampras and Lendl (not sure McEnroe deserves to share position with Lendl, but I guess the whole idea behind tiers is that it is an aproximation).

Yes, he did and he was clearly far better than Sampras on his weakest surface. A clay mug like Petros has no business being in the top echelon. You have to be more well-rounded than that, which Björn was, dominating on surfaces that were polar opposites, winning big titles on HC and carpet and reaching several US open finals.

Matt01
06-09-2010, 10:40 PM
What zeems to be ze problem, officer?


I could even live with Nadal being in the same Tier as Edberg and Becker for now, but there's no way that Borg is in the same Tier as Federer and higher than Sampras. :scratch:

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 12:39 AM
Take away the AO which wasn't really a slam in Björn's era and he's not far behind Federer. Certainly close enough to be in the same tier. As I explained, Petros is too weak on clay to be on par with Borderer. I think Björn and Roger are the only GOAT-candidates who'd be GOAT-candidates in any era. Petros would not handle the modern game that renders S&V useless. The wee aussie would be blown off the court.

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 12:40 AM
Actually, Borg would probably be more succesful in the modern era than Federer would be in the wood era, therefore, Björn is the GOAT, no?

rocketassist
06-10-2010, 12:59 AM
Borg couldn't win the big ones on HC just as Petey couldn't win the big one on clay.

286 weeks, still unsurpassed. Sampras is greater, no doubts.

allpro
06-10-2010, 01:01 AM
Federer > Sampras > Laver > Borg

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 01:02 AM
Borg couldn't win the big ones on HC just as Petey couldn't win the big one on clay.

286 weeks, still unsurpassed. Sampras is greater, no doubts.

Borg won many greta tournaments on hard and came close to winning the USO. He was a top 3 player on hard ccourts whereas Pete's record on clay is laughably bad for a supposed GOAT contender.

rocketassist
06-10-2010, 01:03 AM
Borg won many greta tournaments on hard and came close to winning the USO. He was a top 3 player on hard ccourts whereas Pete's record on clay is laughably bad for a supposed GOAT contender.

What, an RG semi finalist and a Rome title? Yeah what a clay mug. See his RG draw when he actually made the 1996 semis as well.

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 01:04 AM
...for a supposed GOAT contender.

Har-Tru
06-10-2010, 01:07 AM
McEnroe and Wilander had those outstanding years in 84 and 88 respectively. Not sure Nadal will ever match that but it won't matter if he finishes with a much higher slam count.

Those years were indeed outstanding, but Nadal's 2008 isn't too far behind, especially in Wilander's case.

rocketassist
06-10-2010, 01:07 AM
...for a supposed GOAT contender.

Well yeah, that's why Federer's ahead of him. But Borg isn't. 14 > 11 and three different GS is better than two different GS. Not to mention 286 > 101.

Har-Tru
06-10-2010, 01:08 AM
You have to bear in mind the AO situation when comparing Borg's number of slams though. Basically Sampras played 4 slams and Borg 3.

star
06-10-2010, 01:10 AM
During the broadcast of the RG final they showed a stat of winning percentage in Grand Slams. It was kind of interesting. Borg's was the best and then next, I think, was Federer, and after that my memory is fuzzy. Nadal was right up there. I think that's an interesting way to think about things too. I don't think that's the only measurement because obviously, Federer's longevity at the top rates and number of slams ranks him higher than Borg just statistically speaking. If some one has that data handy, it would be interesting to discuss.

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 01:14 AM
Yes, and the AO wasn o grass which would have suited Björn quite well.

The ranking system was a joke back then obviously.

Also, Borg was more dominant than Sampras and ruled both the fastest and slowest surface. Petros was more or less an extremely succesful fast court speicalist while Borg was a truely versatile champion.

Har-Tru
06-10-2010, 01:15 AM
I'm going to agree with the Swedish cuckoo for once.

allpro
06-10-2010, 01:15 AM
McEnroe and Wilander had those outstanding years in 84 and 88 respectively.

Truly magical years indeed! :worship: ......

and I think Wilander would fare much better in the present era, and Mac much worse.

luie
06-10-2010, 01:25 AM
Borg > samprass. Borg played 3/4 slams. Samprass 4/4.
Borg made 3 Finals on his weakest tourny/surface USO. Samprass 0 slam finals on his weakest surface. Borg won slams on 2 extreme different surfaces (in his time) back to back a # of times. Samprass predominately a FAST court player.
Borg had real competion his maybe his greatest rival Mc enroe among other 7-7. 0 matches on CLAY ,while borg is the clay GOAT.
Samprass main RIVAL his lap dog druggassi was MIA from 93-98 making a brief appearance in 95. PETE samprass DIDN"T have a MAIN RIVAL in his prime.

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 01:28 AM
Borg > samprass. Borg played 3/4 slams. Samprass 4/4.
Borg made 3 Finals on his weakest tourny/surface USO. Samprass 0 slam finals on his weakest surface. Borg won slams on 2 extreme different surfaces (in his time) back to back a # of times. Samprass predominately a FAST court player.
Borg had real competion his maybe his greatest rival Mc enroe among other 7-7. 0 matches on CLAY ,while borg is the clay GOAT.
Samprass main RIVAL his lap dog druggassi was MIA from 93-98 making a brief appearance in 95. PETE samprass DIDN"T have a MAIN RIVAL in his prime.

To be fair, Borg didn't face McEnroe at Wimbledon until 1980.

luie
06-10-2010, 01:35 AM
To be fair, Borg didn't face McEnroe at Wimbledon until 1980.
Well Mc.enroe stopped Borg @ wimbly 81 & USO 2 times I believe which I considerer a GREAT rival than druggassi who didn't play much from 93-98.During Pete "quit clay" samprass so-called prime, with Todd "the choke" martin a more predominant rival than druggassi.:sad:

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 05:04 AM
Rafael Nadal:

- 7 slams won.
- 9 slam finals.
- 47 weeks at #1.
- 1 year end #1.
- 0 YEC won.
- 40 titles won.


Boris Becker:

- 6 slams won.
- 11 slam finals.
- 12 weeks at #1.
- 0 year end #1.
- 3 YEC won.
- 49 titles won.


Stefan Edberg:

- 6 slams won.
- 11 slam finals.
- 72 weeks at #1.
- 2 year end #1.
- 1 YEC won.
- 42 titles won.


Mats Wilander:

- 7 slams won.
- 11 slam finals.
- 20 weeks at #1.
- 1 year end #1.
- 0 YEC won.
- 33 titles won.


John McEnroe:

- 7 slams won.
- 11 slam finals.
- 170 weeks at #1.
- 4 year end #1.
- 3 YEC won.
- 77 titles won.

Lopez
06-10-2010, 06:59 AM
Nice summary above.

It should also be noted that Edberg and McEnroe made nr1 in doubles and won doubles Slams. It should count for something IMO.

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 07:06 AM
Nice summary above.

It should also be noted that Edberg and McEnroe made nr1 in doubles and won doubles Slams. It should count for something IMO.

for me doubles is separate to singles.
i dont want to mix the 2 of them together.
singles is that one person's achievement, doubles is with another guy as a team.

Bazooka
06-10-2010, 08:26 AM
Well, for me right now Nadal's career is above that of Wilander and Becker, probably tied to Edberg or slightly passing him, but still far from Mac, no matter the slams. After all Nadal has had just 1 year of domination, he needs an "era" of 2-3 years or other big wins that compensate for it. He will achieve all that soon enough...

Billups85
06-10-2010, 08:32 AM
Nice summary above.

It should also be noted that Edberg and McEnroe made nr1 in doubles and won doubles Slams. It should count for something IMO.

Top players only play doubles as a practice.

Sophocles
06-10-2010, 11:00 AM
Top players only play doubles as a practice.

Now. Not then. (Although that was how McEnroe practised.)

It would be interesting to see the players' Davis Cup records as well (singles matches won in all ties).

raahaat7
06-10-2010, 12:45 PM
Well, for me right now Nadal's career is above that of Wilander and Becker, probably tied to Edberg or slightly passing him, but still far from Mac, no matter the slams. After all Nadal has had just 1 year of domination, he needs an "era" of 2-3 years or other big wins that compensate for it. He will achieve all that soon enough...

same here.

Lopez
06-12-2010, 11:49 AM
Top players only play doubles as a practice.

Some do, some don't. In the past doubles was played more. That doesn't mean that the achievements count for nothing :shrug:. It's still not easy to win a doubles GS.

It's pretty impressive if you manage to go deep, not to mention win, a GS in both singles and doubles.

When you have a player like McEnroe who has 7 doubles GS titles I think it deserves a bigger mention than "He has 7 Slams, and oh he did some doubles as well".

rocketassist
06-12-2010, 11:58 AM
Mac >>>> Nadal.

joplin
06-12-2010, 01:22 PM
Mac >>>> Nadal.

you can´t be serious

careergrandslam
06-12-2010, 01:52 PM
for me, nadal is greater than becker and wilander because rafa has won on all surfaces.
i think in that group, only edberg challenges rafa because of his 2 year end 1, 72 weeks number 1 and winning 2 wimby, 2 US and 2 aussie and 1 french final.
but rafa is greater due to having won on all surfaces.

rafa is still behind mcenroe due to mac having more year end #1, more weeks at #1 and having dominated on 2 surfaces(hard and grass).
rafa can overtake agassi if he wins a US open, since agassi wasnt all that dominant and the only thing going for him is winning on all surfaces and completing the career slam.

but to overtake lendl and connors, rafa might need more year end number 1, more weeks at number 1 and a few more slams outside of clay.

if he can overtake lendl and connors, then he will be approaching the top tier of borg,sampras,laver and federer.

well this is just my thinking anyway.

aulus
06-12-2010, 08:53 PM
***
Updated list [after further thought]
***

TIER 1: Federer, Laver, Sampras, Borg..
TIER 2: Rosewall, Agassi, Lendl, Connors, McEnroe..
TIER 3: Nadal, Wilander, Newcombe..
TIER 4: Edberg, Becker..
TIER 5: Vilas, Courier, Kuerten, Ashe, Smith, Rafter, Hewitt..

i would combine tier 4 with tier 3 and probably put Agassi in tier 3. tiers 2 and 3 are close, though.

Plus 77 titles, the finest Davis Cup record of the Open Era, an incredible doubles record, 3 Masters Cups (if I remember correctly), & competition from great players who weren't easy match-ups.
i think Borg may have a better DC singles record, but McEnroe also dominated doubles.

Borg couldn't win the big ones on HC just as Petey couldn't win the big one on clay.

286 weeks, still unsurpassed. Sampras is greater, no doubts.
ranking system in Borg's era was bad. i don't know how much time he would have had under a better ranking system, but it would be more than was recorded.

Connor's consecutive weeks at #1 was a bogus record, imo.

for me, nadal is greater than becker and wilander because rafa has won on all surfaces.
i think in that group, only edberg challenges rafa because of his 2 year end 1, 72 weeks number 1 and winning 2 wimby, 2 US and 2 aussie and 1 french final.
but rafa is greater due to having won on all surfaces.

rafa is still behind mcenroe due to mac having more year end #1, more weeks at #1 and having dominated on 2 surfaces(hard and grass).
rafa can overtake agassi if he wins a US open, since agassi wasnt all that dominant and the only thing going for him is winning on all surfaces and completing the career slam.

but to overtake lendl and connors, rafa might need more year end number 1, more weeks at number 1 and a few more slams outside of clay.

if he can overtake lendl and connors, then he will be approaching the top tier of borg,sampras,laver and federer.

well this is just my thinking anyway.
Wilander won on all surfaces. He won AO on grass 3 times.

AO was the weakest of the majors, and i think not all the best players played it when Wilander won, but he did beat Lendl, Curren and Edberg in the finals.

Echoes
06-12-2010, 10:25 PM
It would be interesting to see the players' Davis Cup records as well (singles matches won in all ties).

Davis Cup match wins record is held by Nicola Pietrangeli: 120 wins.

If I'm not mistaken, the All Time top10 should be (stats I made back in 2007:p):


Nicola Pietrangeli (Ita) 120
Ilie Nastase (Rom) 109
Manuel Santana (Spa) 92
Gottfried von Cramm (Ger) 82
Leander Paes (Ind) 81
Alex Metreveli (Cze) 80
Esam ABDUL-A'AL (Bahr) 77
Balasz Taroczy (Hun) 76
Thomas Koch (Bra) 74
Jacky Brichant (Bel) 71


Other players:
Orantes has 60
McEnroe has 59
Vilas has 57
Becker has 54
Ivanisevic has 48
Edberg has 47
Borg has 45
Cochet & Kafelnikov have 44
Wilander has 43
Leconte has 41
Lacoste has 40

Federer has 37
Lendl has 22
Sampras has 19
Nadal has 16
Connors has 10 :lol:

(Not all these matches were in the World Group, of course)

By the way, Borg was not that much screwed over by the ATP ranking system in the 70's. Maybe a bit for 1978 but between 1974 and 1977, Connors was the greater player of the two. Only Vilas can say he was screwed over by the system in 1977.

And don't ever ever ever compare Nadal to Mac, please. :(

Persimmon
06-13-2010, 03:04 AM
...


You need to update your siggie. It's 15 months and counting since Nadal last won a title off clay...:wavey:

Sophocles
06-13-2010, 03:14 AM
Davis Cup match wins record is held by Nicola Pietrangeli: 120 wins.

If I'm not mistaken, the All Time top10 should be (stats I made back in 2007:p):


Nicola Pietrangeli (Ita) 120
Ilie Nastase (Rom) 109
Manuel Santana (Spa) 92
Gottfried von Cramm (Ger) 82
Leander Paes (Ind) 81
Alex Metreveli (Cze) 80
Esam ABDUL-A'AL (Bahr) 77
Balasz Taroczy (Hun) 76
Thomas Koch (Bra) 74
Jacky Brichant (Bel) 71


Other players:
Orantes has 60
McEnroe has 59
Vilas has 57
Becker has 54
Ivanisevic has 48
Edberg has 47
Borg has 45
Cochet & Kafelnikov have 44
Wilander has 43
Leconte has 41
Lacoste has 40

Federer has 37
Lendl has 22
Sampras has 19
Nadal has 16
Connors has 10 :lol:

(Not all these matches were in the World Group, of course)

Great, thank you.

sco
06-13-2010, 07:51 AM
McEnroe dominated as Nadal never has. Nadal has done well against Federer but I didn't get the feeling that he dominated the rest of the tour as McEnroe did. On hard courts, there are/were any number of players that can beat Nadal.

There was a time when I felt McEnroe's serve was so strong that he was even at 15-40. It seemed to me that when Borg retired, McEnroe just didn't have that incentive anymore. Or maybe it was Tatum. For me, Nadal is on the same tier as Wilander, Becker, Edberg and a tier below McEnroe.

Start da Game
06-13-2010, 09:00 AM
5 french opens, 1 australian open, 1 wimbledon = 7 slams, 18 masters titles, 2 davis cup titles, 1 olympic singles gold, turning one of the greatest evers into his turkey.......all at just 24.......

better than wilander and mcenroe? he is already better than federer, wilander, mcenroe, edberg, becker etc. and will close in on the likes of borg, sampras, laver once he crosses 10 slams.......

justsumma
06-13-2010, 09:08 AM
5 french opens, 1 australian open, 1 wimbledon = 7 slams, 18 masters titles, 2 davis cup titles, 1 olympic singles gold, turning one of the greatest evers into his turkey.......all at just 24.......

better than wilander and mcenroe? he is already better than federer, wilander, mcenroe, edberg, becker etc. and will close in on the likes of borg, sampras, laver once he crosses 10 slams.......

oh don't start da shit!

TennisOnWood
07-03-2010, 09:05 AM
...
***
RAFA now just one match away from reaching 8 SLAMS~~ which would tie him with Agassi, Connors & Lendl..!!

Triumvirate of great players will be broken.. from Sunday there will be big 4!!

CmonAussie
07-04-2010, 04:49 PM
<<<(())>>>
...
OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*8 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 2x Wimby]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

CmonAussie
07-04-2010, 05:19 PM
>>>
In the last month RAFA has passed: Edberg & Becker & McEnroe & Wilander~~ then equalled: Agassi & Lendl & Connors..!! Fair to say Nadal is on a great run, can he carry it through to the USO [career slam awaits?]

Billups85
07-04-2010, 05:50 PM
5 french opens, 1 australian open, 1 wimbledon = 7 slams, 18 masters titles, 2 davis cup titles, 1 olympic singles gold, turning one of the greatest evers into his turkey.......all at just 24.......

better than wilander and mcenroe? he is already better than federer, wilander, mcenroe, edberg, becker etc. and will close in on the likes of borg, sampras, laver once he crosses 10 slams.......

Nadal has 3 DC :) (2004, 2008, 2009)

Persimmon
07-04-2010, 06:17 PM
Connors, Lendl and Agassi won their 8th slam at 29/early 30s.

Impressive for Rafa to do this at only 24.

HarryMan
07-04-2010, 06:18 PM
Accomplishing this at such a young age, quite remarkable.

Start da Game
07-04-2010, 06:28 PM
Nadal has 3 DC :) (2004, 2008, 2009)

he could not go to argentina to play the finals in december 2008 but we may count it if we like as he took part in the round of 16, quarters and semis.......

M4RC
07-04-2010, 07:10 PM
he could not go to argentina to play the finals in december 2008 but we may count it if we like as he took part in the round of 16, quarters and semis.......

Every player that is part of any of the teams during the DC is considered winner of the Cup if his team wins the whole thing.

Rafa has won 3 DC.

CmonAussie
07-04-2010, 11:11 PM
Connors, Lendl and Agassi won their 8th slam at 29/early 30s.

Impressive for Rafa to do this at only 24.

...
Yeah Rafa keeps us guessing with his injuries~~ after the Rd.3 win (second successive 5 set win) with Rafa talking about his knees again, thought he might not be able to finish the tournament.!! >>and here he his holding the trophy again:worship:(: but will Nadal still be playing tennis at age 29, unlikely me thinks:sad:

careergrandslam
07-04-2010, 11:45 PM
...
Yeah Rafa keeps us guessing with his injuries~~ after the Rd.3 win (second successive 5 set win) with Rafa talking about his knees again, thought he might not be able to finish the tournament.!! >>and here he his holding the trophy again:worship:(: but will Nadal still be playing tennis at age 29, unlikely me thinks:sad:

he dont need to play till 29 if he can go on a great run the next 3 or 4 years.
by 29yrs players are past their peak.

agassi played till 36 yet is still below borg who retired at 25.

TennisOnWood
07-04-2010, 11:59 PM
At Slams he done beeter then this 3 guys (they played in stronger eras but his kudos can be youth and achieving all this in era of greatest Slams player ever). They missed so many chances to go to +10 Slams (5 consecutive Wimbledon 1/2's for Lendl with no luck)

Grand Slam 1/4 :

Connors - 41
Agassi - 36
Lendl - 34
Nadal - 16

Grand Slam 1/2 :

Connors - 31
Lendl - 28
Agassi - 26
Nadal - 13

Grand Slam Finals :

Lendl - 19
Connors - 15
Agassi - 15
Nadal - 10

Grand Slam victories :

Connors - 233
Agassi - 224
Lendl - 222
Nadal - 113

Youngest to 8 Grand Slams :

Nadal - Wimbledon 2010 (25) 24 - 8785
Lendl - Australian 1990 (41) 29 - 10907
Connors - US Open 1983 (36) 31 - 11320
Agassi - Australian 2003 (50) 32 - 11948

He needed half of Agassi's Slams to achieve this and he is 6 years younger then thier average years

allpro
07-05-2010, 12:04 AM
He needed half of Agassi's Slams to achieve this and he is 6 years younger then their average years

but his knees are 6 years older :awww: :sad:

TennisOnWood
07-05-2010, 12:08 AM
but his knees are 6 years older :awww: :sad:

Everything in this bloody world have its price

I'm just saying he is very young and consistance... 6 years with at least one Slam isn't small thing

CmonAussie
07-05-2010, 01:55 AM
At Slams he done beeter then this 3 guys (they played in stronger eras but his kudos can be youth and achieving all this in era of greatest Slams player ever). They missed so many chances to go to +10 Slams (5 consecutive Wimbledon 1/2's for Lendl with no luck)

Grand Slam 1/4 :

Connors - 41
Agassi - 36
Lendl - 34
Nadal - 16

Grand Slam 1/2 :

Connors - 31
Lendl - 28
Agassi - 26
Nadal - 13

Grand Slam Finals :

Lendl - 19
Connors - 15
Agassi - 15
Nadal - 10

Grand Slam victories :

Connors - 233
Agassi - 224
Lendl - 222
Nadal - 113

Youngest to 8 Grand Slams :

Nadal - Wimbledon 2010 (25) 24 - 8785
Lendl - Australian 1990 (41) 29 - 10907
Connors - US Open 1983 (36) 31 - 11320
Agassi - Australian 2003 (50) 32 - 11948

He needed half of Agassi's Slams to achieve this and he is 6 years younger then thier average years

:wavey::cool:
Great stats Nadal Power!!
~~~
What this demonstrates most clearly is that RAFA is almost unstopable when he gets a sniff of winning a slam:devil:
Rafa`s only missed 2 opportunities that i can think of~ 2007 Wimbledon final [Rafa was the better player for most of the match], and the 2008 USO SFs [where he had huge momentum and a good chance to defeat Murray in the SFs].
So Nadal`s strike rate is 80% [ie. he`s won 8/10 slams he had a chance to win]:cool::worship:

Mimi
07-05-2010, 04:48 AM
thanks, I think he will win 2 more:cool:

bokehlicious
09-06-2010, 01:08 PM
...
...
Is NADAL about to pass Lendl, Connors, Agassi~~~ by winning his 9th slam [and Career Grand Slam]!?

Next RG is not exactly just around the corner is it? :shrug: he'll do it then ;)

Persimmon
09-06-2010, 01:38 PM
Next RG is not exactly just around the corner is it? :shrug: he'll do it then ;)

This.

born_on_clay
09-06-2010, 01:43 PM
I hope he will do it next Sunday :)

born_on_clay
09-11-2010, 08:48 PM
...
...
Looking very likely now;)

at least he'll have the possibility to play on Sunday :cool: :)

CmonAussie
09-13-2010, 12:29 PM
...
...
Will DJOKO join Hewitt, Safin, Rafter, Kafenikov~~ as a 2-time Slam winner, or will RAFA take his 9th slam [passing Agassi, Connors, Lendl]~~ later today!!??

born_on_clay
09-13-2010, 12:39 PM
...
...
Will DJOKO join Hewitt, Safin, Rafter, Kafenikov~~ as a 2-time Slam winner, or will RAFA take his 9th slam [passing Agassi, Connors, Lendl]~~ later today!!??

I hope it will be Rafa :D

CmonAussie
09-13-2010, 12:41 PM
I hope it will be Rafa :D
...
I hope Rafa can do it too:cool:
But Novak is also worthy of a 2nd slam;)
>>
May the best man win:angel::devil:

born_on_clay
09-14-2010, 01:30 PM
Rafa has won
9 Slams and counting :)
Career Golden Grand Slam :hatoff:

JolánGagó
09-14-2010, 02:10 PM
Next RG is not exactly just around the corner is it? :shrug: he'll do it then ;)

This.

:haha:

JolánGagó
09-14-2010, 02:25 PM
OP needs updating:

OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*9 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

Sorry to inform the hordes of mouthfoaming hatas but question on the title has been now conclusively answered.

At this point, still comparing 7-slams JMc and Wilander with Nadal in overall Greatness would be a joke. Ditto for 8-slams Connors and Lendl, neither of which could play to save their lives on clay and grass respectively. Agassi was an equal level as Rafa till yesterday, now he's one notch below.

Hi Björn :wavey:

Billups85
09-14-2010, 02:27 PM
Goat top 10: (only open era)

1- Federer
2- Sampras
3- Borg
4- Nadal
5- Lendl
6- McEnroe
7- Agassi
8- Wilander
9- Edberg
10- Becker

star
09-14-2010, 02:29 PM
OP needs updating:

OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*9 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

Sorry to inform the hordes of mouthfoaming hatas but question on the title has been now conclusively answered.

At this point, still comparing 7-slams JMc and Wilander with Nadal in overall Greatness would be a joke. Ditto for 8-slams Connors and Lendl, neither of which could play to save their lives on clay and grass respectively. Agassi was an equal level as Rafa till yesterday, now he's one notch below.

Hi Björn :wavey:


In my mind (and Björn is my all time favorite) Nadal surpassed Borg by winning the USO. It's something Borg could never do. Winning RG, Wimby, and the USO hasn't been done since Laver, and Laver won Wimby and the USO both on grass and not on different surfaces as Nadal has done. I don't put Nadal in Laver's class, but mention it only to put Nadal's amazing achievement in perspective.

TennisOnWood
09-14-2010, 02:30 PM
Goat top 10: (only open era)

1- Federer
2- Sampras
3- Borg
4- Nadal
5- Lendl
6- McEnroe
7- Agassi
8- Wilander
9- Edberg
10- Becker

And maybe you can find some space for legendary Connors instead of Edberg or Becker :confused:

TennisOnWood
09-14-2010, 02:33 PM
In my mind (and Björn is my all time favorite) Nadal surpassed Borg by winning the USO. It's something Borg could never do. Winning RG, Wimby, and the USO hasn't been done since Laver, and Laver won Wimby and the USO both on grass and not on different surfaces as Nadal has done. I don't put Nadal in Laver's class, but mention it only to put Nadal's amazing achievement in perspective.

And Borg had chances to win US Open on clay and grass

star
09-14-2010, 02:34 PM
And Borg had chances to win US Open on clay and grass

Yes. But, I think that it was only on hard after the first time he won Wimby. But, I could be wrong about that.

Shirogane
09-14-2010, 02:35 PM
wasn't red clay.

TennisOnWood
09-14-2010, 02:37 PM
Yes. But, I think that it was only on hard after the first time he won Wimby. But, I could be wrong about that.

He played on grass in '73 and '74,on clay in 75-77 and after that 4 times on hard

CmonAussie
09-14-2010, 02:38 PM
OP needs updating:

OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*9 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

Sorry to inform the hordes of mouthfoaming hatas but question on the title has been now conclusively answered.

At this point, still comparing 7-slams JMc and Wilander with Nadal in overall Greatness would be a joke. Ditto for 8-slams Connors and Lendl, neither of which could play to save their lives on clay and grass respectively. Agassi was an equal level as Rafa till yesterday, now he's one notch below.

Hi Björn :wavey:

Thanks for updating for me:cool:
...
I agree that Nadal has now surpassed McEnroe, Wilander, Lendl & Connors;)
Agassi though is still Nadal`s equal! They`ve both completed the Career Slam, but Agassi has also been a multiple finalist at all Slams, and he won the YE championships~ and Nadal has one more Slam.. So they`re about equal at the moment, though Rafa will surely win more slams and clearly pass Agassi, and hopefully pass Borg too:devil:

TennisOnWood
09-14-2010, 02:40 PM
Thanks for updating for me:cool:
...
I agree that Nadal has now surpassed McEnroe, Wilander, Lendl & Connors;)
Agassi though is still Nadal`s equal though! They`ve both completed the Career Slam, but Agassi has also been a multiple finalist at all Slams, and he won the YE championships~ and Nadal has one more Slam.. So they`re about equal at the moment, though Rafa will surely win more slams and clearly pass Agassi, and hopefully pass Borg too:devil:

In this moment,I have no doubts he will go ahead of Bjorn's 11

CmonAussie
09-14-2010, 02:43 PM
...
OPEN ERA SLAMS WON
...
BLUE denotes Career Slam holders(:...
...
...
*16 slams: Federer [4x AO, 1x FO, 6x Wimby, 5x USO]
*14 slams: Sampras [2x AO, 7x Wimby, 5x USO]
*11 slams: Borg [6x FO, 5x Wimby]
*9 slams: Nadal [1x AO, 5x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO]
*8 slams: Agassi [4x AO, 1x FO, 1x Wimby, 2x USO]
*8 slams: Lendl [2x AO, 3x FO, 3x USO]
*8 slams: Connors [1x AO, 2x Wimby, 5x USO]
*7 slams: Wilander [3x AO, 3x FO, 1x USO]
*7 slams: McEnroe [3x Wimby, 4x USO]
*6 slams: Edberg [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 2x USO]
*6 slams: Becker [2x AO, 3x Wimby, 1x USO]
*5 slams: Laver [1x AO, 1x FO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 6 slams in pre-Open Era!
*5 slams: Newcombe [2x AO, 2x Wimby, 1x USO].#also won 2 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Rosewall [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO].#also won 4 slams in pre-Open Era!
*4 slams: Vilas [2x AO, 1x FO, 1x USO]
*4 slams: Courier [2x AO, 2x FO]
*3 slams: Kuerten [3x FO]

Billups85
09-14-2010, 02:49 PM
And maybe you can find some space for legendary Connors instead of Edberg or Becker :confused:

Forgot about him :smash:

1- Federer
2- Sampras
3- Borg
4- Nadal
5- Connors
6- Lendl
7- McEnroe
8- Agassi
9- Wilander
10- Edberg