Which do you think is weighed more for mens tennis immortality? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Which do you think is weighed more for mens tennis immortality?

BAMJ6
08-16-2005, 06:08 AM
10+ grand slams but not winning all 4 slams, or winning all 4 slams but not getting 10 of them or more

El Legenda
08-16-2005, 06:09 AM
10+

oneandonlyhsn
08-16-2005, 06:12 AM
Different strokes for different folks, most people consider Sampras 1 of if not the greatest player ever because he won the most GS. Some people say Andre is the greatest ever because he won the career GS and the olympics, so who knows. I have equal respect for both but I think what Andre did was just incredible. However when most commentators mention the great ones they most often talk about Sampras :shrug:

megadeth
08-16-2005, 06:16 AM
it all depends on how you look at it i guess. both are great records, but both men have their asses kicked by steffi graf. :p

20+ singles slams, the only person in the planet to win the "golden slam", and won all four majors at least 4 times.

oneandonlyhsn
08-16-2005, 06:29 AM
it all depends on how you look at it i guess. both are great records, but both men have their asses kicked by steffi graf. :p

20+ singles slams, the only person in the planet to win the "golden slam", and won all four majors at least 4 times.

Yeah but we all know that the WTA is a joke, and was an even bigger joke when she was on top :lol:

megadeth
08-16-2005, 06:36 AM
nah, the WTA is a joke nowadays, but during graf's time, it was awesome.

of course, the atp has greater depth which makes it hard for an individual to dominate.

alfonsojose
08-16-2005, 06:40 AM
Spadea's losing streak :bowdown:

BD006
08-16-2005, 06:56 AM
Personally, I'd say 10+, just because the person either had to have great longevity or be fairly dominant, or both.

sports freak
08-16-2005, 07:13 AM
4 Slams for me!!!!!!One of the most arguable questions in tennis!!!!Compare it wit golf and the big 4!!!I would say the ultimate challenge would be winning the 4 big ones in different
places is more of a consilation than winning 10+!!!Theres alot more hype aswell been able to accomplish a feat that is regard by many as the hardest thing in tennis especially guys who have achieved a few Grands slams themselves or have the chance to!!!Lookin at the Fed i would say the French would be his ultimate dream no doubt!!!!O.K he wins a few more on the way but still it won be as much thrill for him then claiming the French Open title,unless he goes and wins another 4 Wimledons including the 3 he has achieved already!!!peace

jacobhiggins
08-16-2005, 07:35 AM
Well having the most slams is considered greater, RIGHT NOW, but that could change years from now, hindsight is 20/20. I personally think the greatest should be based on who would win in a one on one match, but, how can you judge that????? You can't really, so we have to settle for, who has accomplished the most in there own career!

TheMightyFed
08-16-2005, 07:39 AM
For me 4 different slams are better than, say, 10 AO, but this is just my opinion.
By the way, didn't Laver win 4 GS AND 10+ ?
A third immortality stuff is multiple RG/W like Borg did, one of the most difficult feat to achive...

skel1983
08-16-2005, 10:23 AM
Without a doubt in my mind 10+ grand slams, If you win all 4 you are obviously a great player, but if you win 10+ GS your greatness has got to be recognised more even though you have not won on all surfaces, your major record has gone on and on and you have obviously preformed at the top of your game for years and years. I respect them both.

But for instance whio was the better player Sampras or Agassi, Sampras 100% no doubt, he was a machine.

jenanun
08-16-2005, 12:14 PM
sampras or agassi?

agassi.... (plus olympics gold!)

its like collecting things, i would like to have a complete set, rather than have many of 1 type but missing a piece....

or like a jigsaw,i dont like to have a hole in the pic...

skel1983
08-16-2005, 12:21 PM
Have a look at there head to head record my friend!!!

skel1983
08-16-2005, 12:24 PM
I would rarher have Sampras's record any day of the week. Sampras on a whole would be regarded as a better player by most i would guess.

its.like.that
08-16-2005, 12:26 PM
10+ grand slams but not winning all 4 slams, or winning all 4 slams but not getting 10 of them or more

The one that counts Sampras, but not Agassi...

:lol:

jenanun
08-16-2005, 12:31 PM
yes sampras may be a better player than agassi,
but he may still have a regret of not able to win RG, ever, in his life
agassi, on the other hand, has no regrets as he has won all of them already...

anyway, anyone has a different view on this matter..

but i will be really frustrated if there is only one missing.... (esp wimbledon or RG, like sampras and lendl)

if i were sampras, i am willing to give up 3 wimbledon titles, or maybe 4 (coz i still want to keep at least 3!!!) for 1 RG......

skel1983
08-16-2005, 01:30 PM
I don't think Sampras would be thought of any differently if he had won the FO, he is still one of the all time great's, take US OPEN 2002, what a preformance the guy was let's face it, playing terrible and should of been knocked out by Rusedski 2nd round, and like the true player he is raised his game for one final Major preformance, now that was the sign of such a great player, one of the greats of all time in my view.

Taking nothing away from Agassi another great of the game, but personally i regard Sampras a little higher.

LoveFifteen
08-16-2005, 01:34 PM
The WTA is not a joke. How rude and sexist! :mad:

oneandonlyhsn
08-16-2005, 01:49 PM
The WTA is not a joke. How rude and sexist! :mad:

You are preaching to the wrong choir, compared to the ATP it is a joke, and no I'm not male.

ys
08-16-2005, 01:51 PM
4 Wimbledons alone are more than career Grand Slam..

Skyward
08-16-2005, 03:33 PM
agassi, on the other hand, has no regrets as he has won all of them already...



I'm sure he regrets about ignoring AO and Wimbledon early in his career.

Lalitha
08-16-2005, 04:22 PM
For me, 10+ slams.

BlackSilver
08-16-2005, 04:53 PM
4 Wimbledons alone are more than career Grand Slam..


:worship: :worship: :worship:

lilfairyprincess
08-16-2005, 05:00 PM
personally i think a career slam is more impressive..shows u can play on all different types of surface. IMO a truely great player should be able to play and win on all types of surface.

Auscon
08-17-2005, 01:32 AM
its tough to be completely decided on either longevity/consistancy or diversity

but I think 10+

drf716
08-17-2005, 01:47 AM
i think agassi gains a bit more respect than sampras becauses he was able to win grand slams in all surfaces. so i think winning in all surfaces counts more because in sampras' case, there will always be something missing.