Johnny Groove's Top 69 Players Ever (Djokovic #21 of all time) - Page 18 - MensTennisForums.com

MensTennisForums.com

MenstennisForums.com is the premier Men's Tennis forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.Please Register - It's Free!

View Poll Results: How accurate was I?

5/5- Almost 100% spot on, Mr. Groove. I may switch a few around here or there, but good work 62 18.02%
4/5- More or less. I disagree with a few, but not bad at all 146 42.44%
3/5- Hmmmm, I dunno. Some look a bit dicey, mate 49 14.24%
2/5- Are you nuts? Why is X player in Y position? You are completely dissing Z player! 19 5.52%
1/5- Are you high and or drunk? WTF?!?!?! 68 19.77%
Voters: 344. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Old 09-24-2011, 02:02 PM   #256
country flag swisht4u
Registered User
 
swisht4u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,367
swisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Action Jackson View Post
Got to look at the calibre of players he was playing against, then they were the Pro years, considering he did it 7 years apart. There are a lot of factors that need to be taken into account, it's never always about numbers when there is no application to the data.
The main problem is the field, it was so small. No way to tell if his competition was that good. There's no way to say how good was the competition, they only played each other. The other way is to look at films, I have and it's not anywhere near modern tennis.

You take the best player in the state(a small field) and a player looks good, but open up all the players in the world and then results will be not so good.
Even with this small field he had 6 losses, great numbers but not for a #1 ranking.

Tennis was at it's infancy back then, a long way from where it's moved now.
Laver may have been the best back then but compared to todays players and the skills they have today, well it's just another sport that is completely different.
__________________

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXÈ


Federer

Del Potro

Gulbis

Janowicz
swisht4u is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 09-24-2011, 02:04 PM   #257
country flag Henry Kaspar
Registered User
 
Henry Kaspar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Age: 46
Posts: 1,099
Henry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond reputeHenry Kaspar has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

When assessing active players, to me the question is "how would we assess X's career if he would fail to produce results from now on". Given what Djokovic has achieved to dagte, he is in the ball park of Jim Courier. He has of course the potential to achieve more, but first has to bring home the results.
__________________
www.yokozunatennis.blogspot.com

Current sanyaku ranked players:
Yokozuna: Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer (Dai-Y), Rafael Nadal (Dai-Y)
Ozeki: Andy Murray, Stanislas Wawrinka, David Ferrer (kadoban)
Sekiwake: Milos Raonic
Komusubi: Tomas Berdych (ex-Ozeki), Grigor Dimitrov

Active players that held sanyaku rank in the past: Ozeki: Del Potro, Hewitt. Sekiwake: Cilic, Davydenko, Baghdatis, Haas. Komusubi: Robredo, Ginepri, Gasquet, Verdasco, Melzer, Youzhny, Monfils, Gulbis
Henry Kaspar is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:05 PM   #258
country flag sexybeast
Registered User
 
sexybeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,258
sexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swisht4u View Post
I wouldn't put Laver as #1.
He did have 2 CYGS's but that is only a streak and shouldn't count too much as that's two years and 8 slams, just 3 more slams for his other years.
Many sports have streaks by players and it's just how it turns out but doesn't count much.
Laver also had 6 losses, for a 11-6 slam record, very nice numbers but too many losses.
The field was small, which counts a lot.
The slams didn't have big fields, certainly not 128.
There's other problems, only 2 surfaces back then is one of them.

I wouldn't put #1 on someone who had these kind of deficiencies.
Laver's8 pro slams probably counted much more than his 6 amateur slams. So take them into consideration when meassuring his greatness. Sure the pro slams lacked the slam credibility of 128 draws slams of open era , but the very elite played there and they played each other constantly in almost every SF/F (much like Djokovic, Nadal and Federer in this era when I think about it). It is debatable who is the best player between Laver and Federer, but my opinion is that Laver is the nr1 because I think he was mentaly stronger than Federer. The gap between these 2 and the rest is quite large, no one gets close to their skills in all surfaces. Laver also had 5 finals in the French Open if you count pro slams. Both had atleast 5 slam finals in every surface if the pro slams are counted, no other player even comes close to have achieved something like that.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
sexybeast is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:09 PM   #259
country flag sexybeast
Registered User
 
sexybeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,258
sexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swisht4u View Post
The main problem is the field, it was so small. No way to tell if his competition was that good. There's no way to say how good was the competition, they only played each other. The other way is to look at films, I have and it's not anywhere near modern tennis.

You take the best player in the state(a small field) and a player looks good, but open up all the players in the world and then results will be not so good.
Even with this small field he had 6 losses, great numbers but not for a #1 ranking.

Tennis was at it's infancy back then, a long way from where it's moved now.
Laver may have been the best back then but compared to todays players and the skills they have today, well it's just another sport that is completely different.
Ok, I would count the pro slams as 3/4rds of a slam and the amateur slams like half a slam. Even then Laver gets 14 slams, but take into account that only 3 pro slams were played every year and he would probably win a bunch in Australia aswell. His numbers are pretty equal to Federer, but he showed more mental strength against his main rivals than Federer. Give him the bonus having acheved a real pro slam, amateur slam and open era slam and he definetly takes the edge against Federer, so far...
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
sexybeast is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:11 PM   #260
country flag Action Jackson
Forum Umpire:
Gaston Gaudio
 
Action Jackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 124,469
Action Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond reputeAction Jackson has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swisht4u View Post
The main problem is the field, it was so small. No way to tell if his competition was that good. There's no way to say how good was the competition, they only played each other. The other way is to look at films, I have and it's not anywhere near modern tennis.

You take the best player in the state(a small field) and a player looks good, but open up all the players in the world and then results will be not so good.
Even with this small field he had 6 losses, great numbers but not for a #1 ranking.

Tennis was at it's infancy back then, a long way from where it's moved now.
Laver may have been the best back then but compared to todays players and the skills they have today, well it's just another sport that is completely different.
The top tier were very good, it's different and you can't judge tennis then on what you see now. It's garbage and impossible to do with any accuracy.

Just like you can't put Nadal and Federer back in the 80s yet have them with the equipment you have now.
__________________
On Nadal bumping him on the changeover, Rosol said: "It's ok, he wanted to take my concentration; I knew he would try something".


Wilander on Dimitrov - "He has mind set on imitating Federer and yes it looks good. But he has no idea what to do on the court".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filo V. View Post
I definitely would have preferred Gaba winning as he needs the points much more, but Jan would have beaten him anyway. I expect Hajek to destroy Machado, like 6-1 6-2.
Machado wins 6-2 6-1
Action Jackson is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:14 PM   #261
country flag swisht4u
Registered User
 
swisht4u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,367
swisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Action Jackson View Post
The top tier were very good, it's different and you can't judge tennis then on what you see now. It's garbage and impossible to do with any accuracy.

Just like you can't put Nadal and Federer back in the 80s yet have them with the equipment you have now.
I know this is difference of opinion that can't be resolved.
I put in my two cents anyway.
__________________

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXÈ


Federer

Del Potro

Gulbis

Janowicz
swisht4u is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:15 PM   #262
country flag sexybeast
Registered User
 
sexybeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,258
sexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

While I dont think the skills of modern players are above Laver's era, it is pretty much undeniable that modern tennis players are way better athletes.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
sexybeast is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:21 PM   #263
country flag swisht4u
Registered User
 
swisht4u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,367
swisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sexybeast View Post
While I dont think the skills of modern players are above Laver's era, it is pretty much undeniable that modern tennis players are way better athletes.
I agree with that.
If you can't compare ERA's then how can one be rated #1?
It's an old argument that will not die, but in the process you pick up a few things here and there about tennis so it's not a waste of time.
__________________

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXÈ


Federer

Del Potro

Gulbis

Janowicz
swisht4u is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 02:32 PM   #264
country flag sexybeast
Registered User
 
sexybeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,258
sexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swisht4u View Post
I agree with that.
If you can't compare ERA's then how can one be rated #1?
It's an old argument that will not die, but in the process you pick up a few things here and there about tennis so it's not a waste of time.
Thing is we are comparing achievments and not really who is the best tennis player of all time. If we ask the question about the BEST, we need to ask more questions like the best for a day, a year or a career? Mcenroe 84 might be the best tennis ever played but he couldnt sustain that for more than 1 year. Best tennis I have seen is probably Federer 2006 but Laver 69 with wooden raquet might be the best you can play with wooden raquets. Anyway, it is good to seperate personal opinions from an objective criteria to find a "GOAT", personal opinions can be an interesting part of another discussion but this list is very objective and very fair to players of different eras and that makes it very easy to compare and keep track on where modern players are ranked in terms of achievment.

Certanly you can still claim Federer has achieved more than Laver back in his days, but it should not be in terms like "players back then were not as good" and therefor every slam today is worth more than back in Laver's day. You can question if an amateur slam and pro slam should be counted the same as an open era slam, that is a fair critisism to the criteria of the list.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
sexybeast is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 06:29 PM   #265
country flag pray-for-palestine-and-israel
Registered User
 
pray-for-palestine-and-israel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: uk, north
Age: 32
Posts: 3,495
pray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond reputepray-for-palestine-and-israel has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

regardless of whatever anyone thinks- no one can really know

we can however have top GOAT tiers on every surface- with potential greatest

Laurence Doherty in 1902-03 is the only player who belongs in every top tier.

Sampras on grass and hard/carpet/indoor courts is a top tier- but sadly no where near top tier on clay

nadal and borg on clay are absolute top tiers- but no way is either top tier on a hard court- borg's grass is a possible top tier

Laver is arguably top tier on almost all surfaces- shame they only played (amateur) slams on grass and clay

federer on grass and hardcourts- not enough experience indoors to even consider him there- or carpets- federer isn't top tier on clay but is very very good on the surface-

rosewall was/is top tier (by far) of indoor woods- indoor carpet- anything fast- and (surprisingly) top tier on super slow clay- the great injustice of his career being that he was denied the wimbledon slam during his prime- and some use that against him as a mark against his grass court ability- terrible shame really

richard gonzalez- the 50s sampras- exactly the same as sampras- but bettter on clay
__________________
God is Love. To know Love is to know God. So ask yourself if you hold any hate for another in your heart how can you have room for Love, room for God
pray-for-palestine-and-israel is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2011, 12:05 AM   #266
country flag Mr.Michael
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Age: 34
Posts: 435
Mr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond reputeMr.Michael has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Great discussion going on. It's almost impossible to compare different eras. I still claim that any great player would have been at least to some extend great during the other eras. It's of course difficult to say how it would have affected results in Slam titles etc. But one thing is certain. Tilden would have been a sick SOB and a dangerous player to the ball kids during any period or era.
Mr.Michael is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2011, 03:05 AM   #267
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,930
Sophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Laurie Doherty belongs on the list but we have to remember his results were achieved at a time when many tournaments played the "challenge round" system. He still though deserves credit for doing better under that system than anybody else.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2011, 03:11 AM   #268
country flag sexybeast
Registered User
 
sexybeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,258
sexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Michael View Post
Great discussion going on. It's almost impossible to compare different eras. I still claim that any great player would have been at least to some extend great during the other eras. It's of course difficult to say how it would have affected results in Slam titles etc. But one thing is certain. Tilden would have been a sick SOB and a dangerous player to the ball kids during any period or era.
I am of the opposite opinion that circumstance takes a huge part in the creation of greatness, greatness might even be an accident in most cases. I dont think it is written under the stars that someone is going to find his way, circumstances have to be precisely right for most players to dominate the tennis world, right opponents, right surfaces, right raquets. I can see very extreme scenarios like Sampras born 10 years later beeing unable to adapt to slow conditions and struggling with matchups against Federer and Nadal, not even reaching legendary status. I can see Rosewall born today to be a small Santoro-like character with a tricky slice backhand and beautiful touch beeing destroyed by the sheer power of modern tennis. I can also envision Nadal and Djokovic with no idea how to play serve and volley in the 50s and unable to adapt to the wooden raquets and fast surfaces and a game almost entirely based on touch. Federer and Laver are in my opinion the most adaptable players that would probably find a way in most eras, that is why they are the goat (besides having achieved more than anyone else).
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
sexybeast is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2011, 04:25 AM   #269
country flag SetSampras
Registered User
 
SetSampras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 31
Posts: 3,173
SetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond reputeSetSampras has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

Well.. I don't think you can say any one guy is top tier on every surface other then say Laver. But it does hurt (no fault of his own) the slams were on clay and grass. But Fed, Pete, Nadal, Djokovic, Borg, Mac, connors etc.. all fail to be considered top tier on every surface. So that does hurt their credibility I guess.
SetSampras is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2011, 04:36 AM   #270
country flag atennisfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,952
atennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond reputeatennisfan has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (Djokovic up to #31)

I think Federer is a top tier in clay. He only lost in clay to the greatest claycourter.
atennisfan is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios