Tennis Week: all time greatest ever 32 in fantasty draw [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Tennis Week: all time greatest ever 32 in fantasty draw

TheBoiledEgg
10-23-2006, 05:48 PM
http://www.sportsmediainc.net/tennisweek/index.cfm?func=showarticle&newsid=16097&bannerregion=

http://www.sportsmediainc.net/tennisweek/Greatest%20Copy.jpg

Lendl at his best is better than Andre :devil:

TheBoiledEgg
10-23-2006, 05:50 PM
Lendl and Wilander should have been seeded
McEnroe seeded ahead of those 2 :rolleyes:

alfonsojose
10-23-2006, 05:54 PM
Where is Nadal ;) ?

CmonAussie
10-23-2006, 05:59 PM
Newcombe would cause a huge upset by beating Federer, Rosewell, Budge, Borg & Laver to take the title!!

TheBoiledEgg
10-23-2006, 05:59 PM
Where is Nadal ;) ?

running away from the Birdshit thats about to hit him in the face :devil: :devil:

TheBoiledEgg
10-23-2006, 06:01 PM
Lew Hoad would double-Bagel McEnroe
he was better than Laver.

BlakeJamitis
10-23-2006, 06:06 PM
Well, I predict that Ashe will upset Kramer. No way Ashe is losing in the 1st round in his home stadium.

DrJules
10-23-2006, 06:08 PM
Pancho Gonzalez unseeded. Why?

neme6
10-23-2006, 06:17 PM
with every players playing at their best. Federer wins this easily without losing a set, imagine him playing all the way on his Federerexpress mode, that's just unstoppable!

Naranoc
10-23-2006, 06:21 PM
Which surface is it on? :)

MisterQ
10-23-2006, 06:25 PM
Never say again that Andre doesn't get tough draws. :lol: ;)

BlueSwan
10-23-2006, 06:26 PM
Fed probably wouldn't even lose a set with that cakewalk draw! ;)

MisterQ
10-23-2006, 06:32 PM
Poor Willie Renshaw again fails to make the draw. His form has really dropped since 1890. :sad:

Checho
10-23-2006, 06:43 PM
Federer the first seed? It's a joke, right?

The first seed must be Laver or Sampras

stebs
10-23-2006, 06:44 PM
Sampras draw is tough. Federer has cakewalk. Must be Uncle Toni hoping to credit Nadal by having his rival win the tournament showing him to be #2 only to the greatest ever :) ;)

Andre♥
10-23-2006, 07:16 PM
If this was played on a fast surface, nobody but nobody would break Pancho's serve.

BlakeJamitis
10-23-2006, 07:23 PM
THe site says that it's being played at the US Open. So it's hard-court. That's why I'm predicting a 1st round upset by Arthur Ashe.

Macbrother
10-23-2006, 07:25 PM
I agree Federer really has no business being seeded first; yet, anyways. But, cool idea.

Andre♥
10-23-2006, 07:25 PM
THe site says that it's being played at the US Open. So it's hard-court. That's why I'm predicting a 1st round upset by Arthur Ashe.

So, Pancho would win.

If I had to select someone to serve to save my life, I would pick him without thinking.

its.like.that
10-23-2006, 07:31 PM
wtf is Agassi doing on the list?

:confused:

That tennis kid
10-23-2006, 07:56 PM
For all those with issues about seeding and players not deserving to be on the list the selection policy was as follows:

A panel of seven former players and journalists, including such great players as Fred Stolle, Pancho Segura and Gardnar Mulloy, were asked to select their top 32 male players. Votes were totaled, and those 32 players with the highest point totals qualified for the 32-player singles event. The top eight point-getters were accorded seeded slots in the draw, with the remaining players drawn for their positions at an official draw ceremony conducted at Tennis Week's offices in Rye, N.Y. under the supervision of Brian Earley, tournament referee of the U.S. Open.

MisterQ
10-23-2006, 09:51 PM
For players before the Open Era, there's a certain amount of subjectivity to the selection. Because of the constantly shifting state of the tennis establishment, we have to rely more on heresay and testimonials from fellow players. (Also, prior to 1968 we must be careful of putting too much importance on Grand Slam wins, because the best players were usually on the pro tour and didn't play them: see Pancho Gonzalez, for example).

In light of this, I'll bet the older players on the panel used the same sort of evaluation for more recent players. So it doesn't surprise me that McEnroe made it into the seeded 8--- he get a lot of "style points," even outside of his accomplishments (like Federer does today).

Fedex
10-23-2006, 10:02 PM
Sampras draw is tough. Federer has cakewalk. Must be Uncle Toni hoping to credit Nadal by having his rival win the tournament showing him to be #2 only to the greatest ever :) ;)

I wouldent consider having a draw that consists of Newcombe, Rosewall, Emerson, Becker and Budge 'easy'. ;)

Fedex
10-23-2006, 10:03 PM
Never say again that Andre doesn't get tough draws. :lol: ;)

:lol:

Havok
10-23-2006, 10:24 PM
THose seedings are retarded. Fed is awesome, but so far doesn't warrant the top seed out of all of them :o. Will likely become the best player ever though :snore:.

Jlee
10-23-2006, 11:16 PM
It's almost impossible to compare players of different eras. Each of them was the best because they were able to distance themselves significantly from the rest of the talented players during their careers. Reigning in tennis is about the ability to counter the gamestyles that the best players are using in that time period, and gamestyles have changed drastically since the beginning of tennis.

Interesting idea though, it would be an amazing tournament to watch.

NyGeL
10-23-2006, 11:50 PM
Federer, Borg, Becker, Mac Enroe and Sampras are fav. :)

disturb3d
10-24-2006, 04:25 AM
Where's Ljubicic. This is bullshit.

World Beater
10-24-2006, 04:50 AM
Where's Ljubicic. This is bullshit.

:haha:

World Beater
10-24-2006, 04:51 AM
lew hoad is someone ive heard about, and some people say he was even better than laver...why did he not win as much?

Checho
10-24-2006, 04:54 AM
Where's Ljubicic. This is bullshit.

Maybe you misunderstood the idea, it isn't about the worst 32 top ten players of all time, the thread is about the best 32 players ever.

MisterQ
10-24-2006, 05:21 AM
If this was played on a fast surface, nobody but nobody would break Pancho's serve.

I would love to see how his serve would hold up in today's game. By all accounts, it was extraordinary. And he almost never lost serve when serving for a set. :cool:

MisterQ
10-24-2006, 05:30 AM
lew hoad is someone ive heard about, and some people say he was even better than laver...why did he not win as much?

In 1956 Hoad won the first three legs of the Grand Slam and then lost in the U.S. finals to Rosewall. The year after that he won Wimbledon and then turned pro, which meant he couldn't play the GS tournaments anymore. (The majors can't be considered quite as significant back then, even if they were an excellent accomplishment, because many of the greatest players weren't participating in them).

Hoad had recurring back problems which also hurt his results.

He sounds a bit like Safin. :rolls: Brilliant, but inconsistent, and sometimes lacking a game plan.

According to Jack Kramer:

"...when you sum Hoad up, you have to say that he was overrated. He might have been the best, but day-to-day, week-to-week, he was the most inconsistent of all the top players."

AND Kramer also writes:

"Hoad had the loosest game of any good kid I ever saw. There was absolutely no pattern to his game.... He was the only player I ever saw who could stand six or seven feet behind the baseline and snap the ball back hard, crosscourt. He'd try for winners off everything, off great serves, off tricky short balls, off low volleys. He hit hard overspin drives, and there was no way you could ever get him to temporize on important points."

Pancho Gonzales had nothing but praise, calling Hoad "the only guy who, if I was playing my best tennis, could still beat me." "... I think his game was the best game ever. Better than mine. He was capable of making more shots than anybody. His two volleys were great. His overhead was enormous. He had the most natural tennis mind with the most natural tennis physique."

BlueSwan
10-24-2006, 05:56 AM
To those who complain about Federer being seeded first, can you honestly tell me that you think anyone could take out Federer if he's playing at his best?

For sure, Federer has yet to equal the career accomplishments of Laver or Sampras, but no one has been able to play tennis at his level before.

World Beater
10-24-2006, 06:06 AM
To those who complain about Federer being seeded first, can you honestly tell me that you think anyone could take out Federer if he's playing at his best?

For sure, Federer has yet to equal the career accomplishments of Laver or Sampras, but no one has been able to play tennis at his level before.

:tape:

dont feed the haters...dont do it...:eek:

World Beater
10-24-2006, 06:07 AM
Maybe you misunderstood the idea, it isn't about the worst 32 top ten players of all time, the thread is about the best 32 players ever.

no my friend...he is sarcastic...;)

DrJules
10-24-2006, 06:57 AM
THose seedings are retarded. Fed is awesome, but so far doesn't warrant the top seed out of all of them :o. Will likely become the best player ever though :snore:.

Agreed.

Seems that they have ignored that Laver won the grand slam twice, admittedly once during the era when most of the best were professional. However, his 1969 grand slam is the only grand slam achieved when all players were eligible. Budge 1938 and Laver 1962 were achieved with many players not allowed to play in the grand slams.

Action Jackson
10-24-2006, 07:04 AM
Agassi wouldn't get past the 1st round.

Magical Trevor
10-24-2006, 08:07 AM
In 1956 Hoad won the first three legs of the Grand Slam and then lost in the U.S. finals to Rosewall. The year after that he won Wimbledon and then turned pro, which meant he couldn't play the GS tournaments anymore. (The majors can't be considered quite as significant back then, even if they were an excellent accomplishment, because many of the greatest players weren't participating in them).

Hoad had recurring back problems which also hurt his results.

He sounds a bit like Safin. :rolls: Brilliant, but inconsistent, and sometimes lacking a game plan.

According to Jack Kramer:

"...when you sum Hoad up, you have to say that he was overrated. He might have been the best, but day-to-day, week-to-week, he was the most inconsistent of all the top players."

AND Kramer also writes:

"Hoad had the loosest game of any good kid I ever saw. There was absolutely no pattern to his game.... He was the only player I ever saw who could stand six or seven feet behind the baseline and snap the ball back hard, crosscourt. He'd try for winners off everything, off great serves, off tricky short balls, off low volleys. He hit hard overspin drives, and there was no way you could ever get him to temporize on important points."

Pancho Gonzales had nothing but praise, calling Hoad "the only guy who, if I was playing my best tennis, could still beat me." "... I think his game was the best game ever. Better than mine. He was capable of making more shots than anybody. His two volleys were great. His overhead was enormous. He had the most natural tennis mind with the most natural tennis physique."

I see you've read Kramer's autobiography. Great book :)

But yeah, Hoad had unlimited potential. But there were some days where he just didn't really show up. But then he was put on a tour with Pancho Gonzales and suddenly he was caught up in the challenge and something clicked. I remember Kramer saying that on that tour Pancho played some of his greatest ever tennis and was still losing to Lew. Unfortunately, Lew's back eventually did him in, and that was the end of that.

thrust
10-24-2006, 01:24 PM
When Laver first joined the pro tour, his first match was against Hoad. After the match Laver said that Hoad was the best he had ever played. His next match was against Rosewall afterwhich he said, I though Hoad was the greatest but Rosewall is even better. A few years later, however, Rod was a better player than when he joined the tour and was certainly better than Hoad as was Rosewall.

TennisGrandSlam
10-24-2006, 01:29 PM
Pancho Gonzalez unseeded. Why?

Because of less Grand Slam (He turned to Professional player and cannot not attended to Grand Slam in 1950s)

That tennis kid
10-24-2006, 03:27 PM
Xristos should get a wildcard.