MensTennisForums.com - View Single Post - Johnny Groove's Top 69 Players Ever (Nadal up to #7 of all time)

View Single Post

Old 09-28-2012, 11:22 AM   #1120
country flag UnderhandSmash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Age: 31
Posts: 53
UnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond reputeUnderhandSmash has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 players ever (Murray one slam away from making l

Quote:
Originally Posted by duong View Post
I also put Borg higher than Sampras for being more "multi-surface" and facing tougher competition imo, but I can understand that the opposite is more commonly accepted, esp. because of longevity which is a factor I give less importance than many people, esp. about Borg because in my eyes, the fact that he "just wanted to benefit more from life" mostly explains his retiring (but I'm not sure how he would have performed with the change of the rackets comparing to what you suggested in your posts which I remember now : I have in memory his poor come-backs but maybe I give them too much importance as for him like for Nadal without any "fire of motivation" nothing is left).
I know a few things about Borg, I watched some of his matches on youtube, but you obviously know more. Where would you rank him? Would you put him above Laver or Federer? (as a Federer fan, I would consider that blasphemous )

One of the things that I think should have major importance in ranking these greats should be their ability to excel in different eras.

When were talking about the greatest tennis player of all time, we have to first think about what "tennis" is. In different eras there were different surfaces (even if they call them by the same name), different skills that were more valuable, and more suitable for that era, than others. This is one of the reasons why I consider Federer to be the undisputed GOAT. I think if he played in any era he would be considered as one of the greatest players, if not the greatest. He would have succeeded in the 90's, we all saw how good his serve volley was in the early 2000's, and how complete his offensive arsenal is. I believe he would have dominated if he played at the beginning of the open era. Back then tennis required a player to have a "feel" of the game, and there was more reliance on pure tennis skills than power and fitness. This era has more of an emphasis on defensive skills and fitness/strength/speed, but Federer, as of now, is number 1 at age 31. So that was my Federer is peRFection rant, I hope you enjoyed it .
UnderhandSmash is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote