Johnny Groove's Top 69 Players Ever (Djokovic #21 of all time) - Page 8 - 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 63 18.21%
4/5- More or less. I disagree with a few, but not bad at all 146 42.20%
3/5- Hmmmm, I dunno. Some look a bit dicey, mate 50 14.45%
2/5- Are you nuts? Why is X player in Y position? You are completely dissing Z player! 19 5.49%
1/5- Are you high and or drunk? WTF?!?!?! 68 19.65%
Voters: 346. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Old 07-08-2011, 01:43 AM   #106
country flag fast_clay
Registered User
 
fast_clay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ₫ṿﻁᶫỉᾔﺍᶏ
Posts: 15,730
fast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond reputefast_clay has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

yeah... edberg becker tough one... like, so many levers and switches in that comparison that can be used for counter argument upon counter argument and repeat...

becker had more influence on how the game was played in the generation immediately following them (sampras) then edberg and becker was still very much relevant for part of that era... edberg faded as the tour took it's physical cost on the hardened edberg... becker had guns that allowed him to live outside that...

some time ago now i did develop a sure fire way decide though, so often i had encountered this argument...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fast_clay View Post
it is extremely close between these two... almost impossible to sepearte them... both employed a game based around the potential to attack... very proactive games... so, as results are extremely close, it also often requires more effort when their games are both aethetically appealing...

it is exactly the reason why i have developed a foolproof method of seperating greats of this era, for various tennis forums... its called The Wally Factor...

The Wally Factor:


Both players in question have their careers compared and broken down via the tried and tested Wally Masur Head-To-Head Measurement Schema. We can derive from this many things as Masur was considered one of the greatest players never to win Casablanca. Wally Masur possessed an all court game, the type of all court game that enables us to sit back and really get an idea of how good Becker and Edberg really were.

Edberg vs Masur: 7-0

1994 - World Team Cup
Clay
RR Edberg 6-2 7-6(8)

1992 - London / Queen's Club
Grass
R16 Edberg 6-4 6-7(5) 6-4

1992 - Tokyo Outdoor
Hard
R16 Edberg 6-3 6-4

1992 - AUS V SWE QF
Carpet
RR Edberg 6-4 7-6

1987 - London / Queen's Club
Grass
R16 Edberg 6-7 7-6 6-4

1987 - Australian Open
Grass
S Edberg 6-2 6-4 7-6

1985 - Australian Open
Grass
R16 Edberg 6-7 2-6 7-6 6-4 6-2 **



Becker vs Masur: 5-1

1993 - Milan
Carpet
S Becker 6-4 7-6(2)

1991 - Roland Garros
Clay
R32 Becker 6-3 6-3 6-2

1990 - Wimbledon
Grass
R64 Becker 6-7 6-2 6-3 6-2

1990 - Sydney Outdoor
Hard
R16 Becker 6-3 6-3

1989 - Paris Indoor
Carpet
Q Becker 6-7 6-4 7-6

1987 - Australian Open
Grass
R16 Masur 4-6 7-6 6-4 6-7 6-2 *



The first definitive suggestion we can make about this evaluation is that Wally was having him arse handed to him with alarming regularity whenever he drew Edberg or Becker.

The second suggestion we can firmly make is that Wally, at one point in his career held a positive head-to-head record over Becker at 1-0 Masur. This was a stunning upset on grass at Kooyong with Masur abusing Becker 6-2 in the fifth set* - Becker being the then double reigning Wimbledon Champion. Many Australian media outlets far and wide proclaimed that Australia had found its next Ken Rosewall. However, in a severe blow to Masur and his family, it was later found that Masur was not very good at tennis.

DEFINING WAL vs BECKER/EDBERG MOMENT: At the very same tournament Masur had beaten Becker - the Australian Open 1987 - two matches beyond this event, Edberg would go on to beat Masur in the semi finals in straight sets. The 5th set scoreline of 6-2** Edberg defeated Masur in 1985 is exactly the same scoreline as the one that Masur would go on to absolutely crucify Becker with 2 years later - AT EXACTLY THE SAME STAGE: R16 - and thus, adding the necessary 'freaky x-factor co-incidence' value that most valid comparisons require. Futhermore, Edberg never lost to Masur on grass, yet Edberg faced Masur on grass double the amount of times (4) that Becker did (2). Becker also lost to Jeremy Bates 7-5 7-6(8) at Queens in '94 which history considers a roundly fukt result and generally unforgivable.

CONCLUSION: Edberg wins.

Edberg never played Alan Mackin.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SelvenluvJo View Post
why are you so seriously
fast_clay is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 07-08-2011, 01:58 AM   #107
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 (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophocles View Post
I actually have a problem with this point in the Edberg/Becker debate.

Again, they're both from the same generation, hence they can be compared (and not "artistically"). But I fail to see how Edberg was better. And yet I was a hardcore Edberg fan, so I'm really trying to be objective.

Becker had a far better serve, more varied and more powerful. In a way he paved the way for Sampras, just like Lendl. I've seen both players in the 90's and Becker was a consistent top10 player, while Edberg was top20/30. His serve got really week. Courier was waiting for him, well inside the baseline (I remember well).

Becker has more tournament wins overall (49-42)
A better GS record, I'd say. 6-all but the Australian had a way better field when he won it.
4 Masters to 1 (I'm talking about the former Nabisco Masters, or Year End if you prefer).
And I'd say more "series" events + 1 win at the WCT Finals.

All good points but you're missing the crucial thing that in most people's eyes puts Edberg on at least the same level as Becker, that it was Edberg rather than Becker who took over from Lendl as No. 1 for a sustained period. Edberg did indeed fade more quickly thereafter, but he had that period on top.

I am a huge Edberg fan and tried to find any angle were Edberg could be put ahead of Becker but it is not possible, Becker's resume is just a little bit better on every level.

I still rank both ahead of Wilander, I think 2 of Wilander's 3 Australian opens are just barely grand slams at all. Master cups should be worth every bit as much as those pseudo grandslams.

Becker's 4 master cups in 10 finals is simply incredibly good. What an indoor player he was! But no grand slam can give credit to his great indoor tennis, still master cup was at the time or atleast until 87 worth alot more than Australian open. Clearly Becker should be ahead of Wilander.
__________________
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 07-08-2011, 02:20 AM   #108
country flag Johnny Groove
Future ATP Star
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Age: 24
Posts: 36,386
Johnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCtennisfan View Post
Lost in today's constant hullabaloo about current head-to-head stats is Becker's extraordinary record against Edberg, especially since almost all of their meetings took place on surfaces favored by both players i.e., indoor carpet although Becker is recognized as and is clearly one of the greatest indoor and indoor carpet players ever.

Edberg won two out of three meetings at Wimbledon and their sole meeting at Roland Garros so that weighs in his favor although many if not all of those Grand Slam matches matches could have gone either way, even the '89 Wimbledon F that Becker won in straight sets because Edberg was serving for the second set and had he won that set, things might have changed drastically.. Chang would most likely not have won RG had Becker won that '89 RG SF against Edberg because Chang simply could not handle Becker's power.

Becker handed out bagels to Edberg on both carpet and grass and beat Edberg in straight sets 15 times including 7 straight sets win in best of 5 matches on clay, grass, carpet, and hard. Edberg never beat Becker in straight sets in a best of 5 match and was 4-11 against Becker in best of 5 matches.

None of this, however, seems to differentiate the two when you see all-time ranking lists.
Hmm, interesting points here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Chinaski View Post
good effort Jonathan
Cheers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophocles View Post
Just goes to show how unimportant H2Hs are in the grand scheme of things (apart from the pro tours of the 1950s & '60s), which I assume was your point.

Becker's an interesting case, having good records against most of his rivals (Agassi & Sampras excepted, if I remember correctly), but being more vulnerable to ludicrous early losses to hacks than pretty much any other great player. At Oxbridge, he'd be an "alpha-gamma man". Edberg, being more consistent, achieved just as much if not more, in spite of his problems with Becker.
These two are very tough to separate. Becker's lack of any kind of prowess on clay and his penchant for losing to mugs hurts him in my eyes. Edberg was more consistent, but Becker was a beast indoors and in Masters. Where to place them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballbasher101 View Post
Roger at 2 . Bullshit. I like the list but Roger should be at 1. Yes Nadal owns him but his records are amazing.
Federer is amazing, but Laver is the GOAT. Maybe co-GOATs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountaindewslave View Post
TOP 20 would be difficult to think of at this moment given I have limited time BUT I think your list could have been much worse I just do not agree that (for example) Pancho deserves the #5 (the same goes with EVEN Tilden) and it's not to say they were not immensely talented, it is to say that there is no real way to gauge them given the fact that the sport was just not competitive like it is today! Esspecially in Pancho's era, the incentive for players was SO MUCH LESS.

Nadal should not be behind Llendl that's for sure! Agassi may have been overshadowed but that return is hard not to notice and Agassi would have accomplished a lot more had he not had so many internal issues.

My top 20 I'm not sure at this moment, I would have to think about but top 10 would come off as rather cliche' with something like, #1 Federer (Never in doubt, look at that technique!) #2 Laver (At least had some action in the OPEN era), #3 Borg (One of the most raw talent and raw athletic players ever seen,do not agree that it is so much that he burned out as much as that he lost interest, imagine the possibilities if Borg had not retired so young!) #4 Conners (simply because of the miraculous nature of his career, incredibly feat winning so much and for so long at such old ages! not to mention I believe? he has the record number of overall TITLES) #5 Sampras (Amazing on grass and that serve! BUT I think the conditions of the 90's really helped him and the clay issue prevents Sampras from being a few ranks higher), #6, Rafael Nadal (best player on clay of all time and possibly the greatest adapter the game has ever seen... arguably a better 'fighter' than Borg, #7 Agassi (best returner of all time and could of done so much more if not for internal struggles/ brilliant handling of the second half of his career), #8 Mcenroe (Beautiful on the grass, one of the best tennis touches ever), #9, Llendl (8 US OPEN finals in a row! Very worthy given his resume of titles and GS finals, but quite depressing when one looks at his record of losses at the GS level and what could have been), #10 Budge (just for being so consistant and for being the first to accomplish such sick runs at Grand Slams simultaneously, 6 in a row starting in '37)

would be very hard to manage a top 20 let alone 55
Well I can see you are favoring the open era over pre open era guys, which is understandable. But guys like Tilden, Gonzales, and Rosewall, their sheer numbers simply can't be ignored. And Connors at 4 is massively overrating him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mega DC View Post
Why is Federer number two? Laver got the calendar slam twice because more slams were on grass back in those days. Federer also has five slams than him, so why is he ahead of Roger? Sampras should also be way ahead of him. Roger and Pete are the two best players of all time and they aren't the top two? That's wrong. 1/5 just for that massive error.
Read a history book, kid. Tennis did not start in 1990.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macbrother View Post
"more slams than Laver" is a very suspect phrase, and forgets the fact that when Laver was at his absolute peak, he was barred from playing them since the slams were strictly amateur only. If you include the pro "majors" of that era, then Laver is still well ahead in slam counts; which admittedly isn't exactly fair either. It's a combination of factors in regards to Laver which create his almost universal consideration as, if not the greatest, then at the very top echelon.
Or read this post, he points everything out clearly.

Quote:
Johnny, I think your placement of Agassi is pretty much spot on, perhaps one or two spots higher but overall good. It's hard for someone with 8 slams to be overrated, but if anyone could, it's Agassi, for the very fact that he's constantly considered by many to be among the greatest when he's really not. One of the greatest pure ball strikers ever, sure, but still with glaring weaknesses in his game: mediocre serve, less than mediocre volley, mediocre movement/defense. Add to that a suspect work ethic and you get a player with great talent but who's career is about where it should be: second fiddle to the Sampras/Borg/Federer's of the world and behind Lendl.
Yep, pretty much. Agassi could have achieved more, but if he did, maybe he would not have lasted as long

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Kaspar View Post
Pea >>>>>>>> your brain. End of discussion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sexybeast View Post
I didnt say they were identical, Australian open was probably a bit slower from the matches I have seen. Lendl moved very bad on grass, he was pretty bad on any kind of grasscourts. As I said maybe he could win Wimbledon 2010, he would never beat Federer and if you think he could do something like Nadal did 2008 against Federer you are beeing delusional.

Overall I do agree with the statement that Nadal would not win slams on fast grasscourts but Lendl beeing a multiple Wimbledon champion on slow grass in Federer's era is just plain silly and you can pick any grasscourt in the world and Federer would still straight set Lendl. Lendl would not even beat Nadal on slow grasscourts, he was straight setted by young Wilander on the Australian ultraslow grasscourts and I consider Nadal much better on slower grasscourts than both Wilander and Lendl. Lendl's onehanded backhand would not matchup great against Nadal's topspin, but then we go into a discussion if Lendl would play completely different in this era and with a twohanded backhand and here the whole discussion becomes so speculative it becomes plain ridiculous to continue.

Comparing eras belong to a different kind of discussion, more subjective reasoning from empirical evidence but in lists like Johnny's you have to take aside personal opinions about players and try to objectively meassure what players actually acomplished in their career.

Lendl-Nadal is a battle for the ages, they are very, very close in achievments and this is coming from someone who hates Nadal's game and really enjoyed Lendl's game.

Overall the list is pretty much spot on, I dont know if I disagree with anything at all. I would probably have Pancho and Ken Rosewall ahead of Bill Tilden.
Hmmm, I'm not sure about that. Tilden was a total beast in his time, and even played at a top 10 level into his mid 40's! Tilden, Gonzales, and Rosewall are all pretty close.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Echoes View Post
Yup but in my system, every tournament was included. And he's won 94 sanctioned by the ATP + several high regarded unofficial tournaments like Antwerp x5 or Jericho x5, etc (so it's rather logical, very personal and endlessly arguable. Making up a point system as such is subjective of course). Connors is a close second (because less consistent in the bigger events, I think). I'm rather 'happy' with that because I read so much about Lendl's revolutionary and influential game that I think it does him justice.

I actually have a problem with this point in the Edberg/Becker debate.

Again, they're both from the same generation, hence they can be compared (and not "artistically"). But I fail to see how Edberg was better. And yet I was a hardcore Edberg fan, so I'm really trying to be objective.

Becker had a far better serve, more varied and more powerful. In a way he paved the way for Sampras, just like Lendl. I've seen both players in the 90's and Becker was a consistent top10 player, while Edberg was top20/30. His serve got really week. Courier was waiting for him, well inside the baseline (I remember well).

Becker has more tournament wins overall (49-42)
A better GS record, I'd say. 6-all but the Australian had a way better field when he won it.
4 Masters to 1 (I'm talking about the former Nabisco Masters, or Year End if you prefer).
And I'd say more "series" events + 1 win at the WCT Finals.

Here's what I've recorded for both:

Code:
Boris Becker		
		
Munich D 	1984	0,5
QF Australian Open 	1984	2
SF Rome 	1985	2
Queen's 	1985	2
Wimbledon 	1985	12
Cincinnati 	1985	2
SF Tokyo ind. 	1985	2
F Wembley 	1985	2
F Masters 	1985	3
Chicago 	1986	2
Brussels D 	1986	0,5
F WCT Finals 	1986	3
QF Roland Garros 	1986	3
Wimbledon 	1986	12
F Stratton Mountain 	1986	1
Toronto 	1986	4
SF US Open 	1986	6
Sydney ind. 	1986	2
Sydney ind. D	1986	0,5
Tokyo ind. 	1986	4
Challenge of Champions 	1986	2
F Masters	1986	3
Indian Wells	1987	4
Milan 	1987	2
Milan D 	1987	0,5
Brussels D 	1987	0,5
SF Roland Garros 	1987	4
Queen's 	1987	2
SF Montreal 	1987	2
F Cincinnati 	1987	1
Frankfurt D 	1987	0,5
Milan D 	1988	0,5
Indian Wells 	1988	4
Indian Wells D 	1988	0,5
WCT Finals 	1988	6
SF Hamburg 	1988	2
Queen's 	1988	2
F Wimbledon	1988	6
Indianapolis 	1988	2
Tokyo ind. 	1988	2
Stockholm	1988	4
Masters 	1988	6
Milan	1989	2
Philadelphia 	1989	2
Indian Wells D 	1989	0,5
F Monte Carlo 	1989	2
SF Hamburg 	1989	2
SF Roland Garros 	1989	4
Wirral 	1989	2
Wimbledon 	1989	12
US Open	1989	12
Bercy 	1989	4
F Masters 	1989	3
QF Australian Open 	1990	3
Brussels 	1990	2
Stuttgart ind. 	1990	2
SF Indian Wells 	1990	2
Indian Wells D	1990	0,5
F Hamburg 	1990	2
F Queen's 	1990	1
F Wimbledon	1990	6
Indianapolis 	1990	2
SF US Open 	1990	4
Tokyo ind. 	1990	2
Sydney ind. 	1990	2
Stockholm	1990	4
F Bercy 	1990	2
Australian Open 	1991	12
F Monte Carlo 	1991	2
SF Roland Garros 	1991	4
F Wimbledon	1991	6
SF Cincinnati 	1991	2
F Indianapolis 	1991	1
Stockholm	1991	4
F Antwerp	1991	1
Brussels	1992	2
Brussels D	1992	0,5
Rotterdam	1992	2
Monte Carlo D 	1992	0,5
SF Hamburg 	1992	2
QF Wimbledon	1992	3
Olympics D 	1992	0,5
Basel 	1992	2
Bercy 	1992	4
Masters	1992	6
Doha 	1993	2
Doha D	1993	0,5
Milan 	1993	2
SF Wimbledon 	1993	4
F Indianapolis 	1993	1
Milan	1994	2
F Rome 	1994	2
SF Wimbledon 	1994	4
Los Angeles 	1994	2
New Haven	1994	2
Sydney ind. 	1994	2
Stockholm	1994	4
F Masters 	1994	3
Marseille 	1995	2
F Milan	1995	1
Milan D 	1995	0,5
SF Indian Wells 	1995	2
F Monte Carlo 	1995	2
F Wimbledon	1995	6
SF US Open 	1995	4
F Bercy 	1995	2
Masters	1995	6
Australian Open	1996	12
Queen's 	1996	2
Vienna	1996	2
Stuttgart ind. 	1996	4
F Masters 	1996	3
Grand Slam Cup	1996	2
QF Wimbledon	1997	3
F Gstaad 	1998	1
F Hong Kong 	1999	1
Total Boris Becker		342,5
Code:
Stefan Edberg		
		
Milan 	1984	2
Hamburg D	1984	0,5
QF Australian Open 	1984	2
Memphis 	1985	2
Brussels D 	1985	0,5
QF Roland Garros 	1985	3
F Bastad 	1985	1
Bastad D 	1985	0,5
F Los Angeles 	1985	1
Cincinnati D	1985	0,5
San Francisco 	1985	2
Basel 	1985	2
SF Stockholm 	1985	2
Australian Open	1985	10
Masters Doubles 	1985	0,5
F Memphis 	1986	1
SF Boca West 	1986	2
Rotterdam D 	1986	0,5
SF Monte Carlo 	1986	2
F Ede 	1986	1
Gstaad 	1986	2
F Toronto 	1986	2
SF US Open 	1986	4
F Los Angeles 	1986	1
Los Angeles D	1986	0,5
Basel 	1986	2
F Tokyo ind. 	1986	2
Stockholm	1986	4
Masters Doubles 	1986	0,5
Australian Open 	1987	10
Australian Open D  	1987	1
Memphis   	1987	2
F Indian Wells 	1987	2
Rotterdam 	1987	2
Rotterdam D	1987	0,5
Tokyo out. 	1987	2
SF Wimbledon 	1987	4
F Bastad 	1987	1
Bastad D 	1987	0,5
F Montreal 	1987	2
Montreal D 	1987	0,5
Cincinnati 	1987	2
SF US Open 	1987	4
US Open D 	1987	1
F Los Angeles 	1987	1
Tokyo ind. 	1987	4
Stockholm	1987	4
Stockholm D	1987	0,5
SF Australian Open 	1988	4
Rotterdam 	1988	2
F WCT Finals 	1988	3
F Tokyo out.	1988	1
F Challenge of Champions	1988	1
F Queen's 	1988	1
Wimbledon 	1988	12
F Cincinnati 	1988	1
Basel 	1988	2
QF Australian Open 	1989	3
F Scottsdale 	1989	1
Tokyo out. 	1989	2
F Roland Garros 	1989	6
F Wimbledon 	1989	6
F Cincinnati 	1989	1
F Basel 	1989	1
F Bercy 	1989	2
SF Stockholm 	1989	2
Masters 	1989	6
F Australian Open 	1990	6
Indian Wells 	1990	4
F Key Biscayne 	1990	2
Tokyo out. 	1990	2
Wimbledon 	1990	12
Los Angeles 	1990	2
Cincinnati 	1990	4
Long Island 	1990	2
F Sydney 	1990	1
F Stockholm	1990	2
Bercy 	1990	4
F Masters 	1990	3
SF Australian Open 	1991	4
Stuttgart ind. 	1991	2
SF Indian Wells 	1991	2
SF Key Biscayne 	1991	2
Tokyo out. 	1991	2
Tokyo out. D	1991	0,5
QF Roland Garros	1991	3
Queen's 	1991	2
SF Wimbledon 	1991	4
F Long Island 	1991	1
US Open 91	1991	12
Sydney ind. 	1991	2
Tokyo ind. 	1991	2
F Stockholm	1991	2
F Australian Open 	1992	6
F Stuttgart ind. 	1992	1
Hamburg 	1992	4
QF Wimbledon 	1992	3
SF Cincinnati 	1992	2
New Haven 	1992	2
US Open 	1992	12
F Sydney ind.	1992	1
SF Stockholm 	1992	2
F Australian Open 	1993	6
SF Hamburg 	1993	2
Madrid 	1993	2
Monte Carlo D 	1993	0,5
QF Roland Garros	1993	3
SF Wimbledon 	1993	4
F Cincinnati 	1993	2
F Hong Kong 	1993	1
F Basel 	1993	1
SF Bercy 	1993	2
Doha 	1994	2
SF Australian Open 	1994	4
Stuttgart ind. 	1994	2
SF Indian Wells 	1994	2
SF Monte Carlo 	1994	2
Washington 	1994	2
F Cincinnati 	1994	2
Hong Kong 	1994	2
Doha  	1995	2
Doha D 	1995	0,5
SF Indian Wells 	1995	2
F Washington 	1995	1
Hong Kong 	1995	2
Australian Open D 	1996	1
F Queen's 	1996	1
QF US Open 	1996	3
Total	Stefan Edberg	326,5
This Becker/Edberg thing is really causing my mind to turn over in circles

Thanks for the stats, Echoes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophocles View Post
All good points but you're missing the crucial thing that in most people's eyes puts Edberg on at least the same level as Becker, that it was Edberg rather than Becker who took over from Lendl as No. 1 for a sustained period. Edberg did indeed fade more quickly thereafter, but he had that period on top.
Yes, Becker only had 12 weeks as #1 compared to Edberg's 70+. Edberg was far more consistent as opposed to Becker's boom and bust style results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketassist View Post
Edberg won the bigger matches and that cancels out Becker's 25-10 H 2 H. He also reached the final of RG and actually won a clay court tournament, Becker never won one.

Edberg for me.
Good points as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sexybeast View Post
I am a huge Edberg fan and tried to find any angle were Edberg could be put ahead of Becker but it is not possible, Becker's resume is just a little bit better on every level.

I still rank both ahead of Wilander, I think 2 of Wilander's 3 Australian opens are just barely grand slams at all. Master cups should be worth every bit as much as those pseudo grandslams.

Becker's 4 master cups in 10 finals is simply incredibly good. What an indoor player he was! But no grand slam can give credit to his great indoor tennis, still master cup was at the time or atleast until 87 worth alot more than Australian open. Clearly Becker should be ahead of Wilander.
Well I am going to put Wilander back to #25, Edberg at #24, and Becker at #23.
__________________
Respect the Laws of MTF
Brush up on your tennis history, people- Top 101 Tennis Players of all Time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathaliia View Post
What do you like doing on MTF most?
Reading Johnny Groove threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tripwires View Post
Johnny blurs the line between grandeur and grandiose
Johnny Groove is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 02:24 AM   #109
country flag Johnny Groove
Future ATP Star
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Age: 24
Posts: 36,386
Johnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Now I wonder the place of Wilander at #25 amongst guys like Reggie Doherty, John Newcombe, Rene Lacoste, Wilfred Baddeley, Guillermo Vilas, Ilie Nastase, and Roy Emerson from 26-32
__________________
Respect the Laws of MTF
Brush up on your tennis history, people- Top 101 Tennis Players of all Time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathaliia View Post
What do you like doing on MTF most?
Reading Johnny Groove threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tripwires View Post
Johnny blurs the line between grandeur and grandiose
Johnny Groove is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 03:02 AM   #110
country flag fran70
Registered User
 
fran70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 2,952
fran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond reputefran70 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
25- Mats Wilander: http://sportsthenandnow.com/wp/wp-co...ander-1988.jpg

Career Resume- Won 3 Australian Opens from 4 finals, won 3 French Opens from 5 finals, never won Wimbledon, 3 times a quarterfinalist, won 1 US Open from 2 finals. 7 total slams from 11 finals, at least one on hard, grass, and clay. 1 Year end Masters final appearance and 8 Tennis Championship Series titles from 8 finals. Wilander had a career year in 1988, winning 3 of the 4 slams, losing in the quarters of Wimbledon that year.

Wilander had a 72% career winning percentage, won 33 total titles from 59 finals, and was world #1 for a total of 20 weeks. Wilander was the undisputed world #1 in 1988, and was the world #2 in 1983 and 1985. 3 years as #1 or #2 in the world. Compiled a 36-16 career Davis Cup record and led the Swedes to 3 titles in 1984, 1985, and 1987.

Career Blemishes- Never won Wimbledon, very short time as the #1 player in the world, lost all kinds of motivation understandably after his awesome 1988 year. Wilander played pretty much in the shadow of other players in the 80’s, the likes of Connors, McEnroe, Lendl.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mats_Wilander

24- Stefan Edberg: http://sportige.com/wp-content/uploa...and-volley.jpg

Career Resume- Won 2 Australian Opens from 5 finals, 1 French Open final, won 2 Wimbledons from 3 finals, won 2 US Opens. 6 slams from 11 total finals. Edberg also won the 1984 Olympic Gold Medal in singles. Edberg won 1 Year End Championship from 3 finals. Made at least one slam final 7 years in a row.

42 total titles from 78 finals and a 74.9% career winning percentage. 8 Tennis Championship Series/Masters Series titles from 18 finals. Edberg was undisputed year end world #1 in 1990 and 1991. He was also year end world #2 in 1987 and 1992. 4 years as #1 or #2 in the world. 72 total weeks as the world #1. Edberg had a 35-15 career record in Davis Cup singles and won the Swedes 4 titles in 1984, 1985, 1987, and 1994.

Career Blemishes- Never won the French Open, only 6 slams, only world #1 for a short time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Edberg

23- Boris Becker: http://www.mentalfloss.com/wp-conten...ris-becker.jpg

Career Resume- Won 2 Australian Opens, never won the French, but had 3 semifinals, won 3 Wimbledons from 7 finals, won 1 US Open. 6 slams from 10 finals. Won 4 Year End Championships from 10 finals. Won 10 Championship Series/Masters Series titles from 17 finals. Won 49 titles from 79 total finals.

Becker was the undisputed year end world #1 in 1989 and #2 in 1986. Just 2 years as #1 or #2 in the world and 12 total weeks as world #1. Becker was perhaps the greatest indoor player ever. He had a 76.91% career winning percentage. In Davis Cup, Becker had an insane 38-3 reord in singles, leading the Germans to the title in 1988 and 1989.

Career Blemishes- Weak on clay courts, never won French Open, very short time as world #1, only 6 slams, only 2 years as #1 or #2 in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Becker

22- Anthony Wilding: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ny_Wilding.jpg

Career Resume- A New Zealander who played on the Australasian Davis Cup team in the first two decades of the 1900’s. Helped them to win 4 Davis Cup titles in 1907, 1908, 1909, and 1914, a 15-6 career singles record in Davis Cup. Won 2 Australian Opens, Won 4 Wimbledons from 5 finals, never won the US Open. 6 total slams from 7 finals.

Won at least 112 total titles on grass, clay, and indoor wood surfaces on all continents including the Australian and Wimbledon titles, as well as the big tournaments like the World Hard Court Championships and the World Covered Court Championships. He won a unique triple in 1913, winning Wimbledon, the World Covered Court Championships, and the World Hard Court Championships. A Grand Slam of his day.

Wilding was the undisputed year end world #1 for 2 years in 1912, 1913. Wilding was the year end co #1 in 1911, and #2 in 1909, 1910, 1914. 6 years as #1 or #2 in the world.

Career Blemishes- Played in an early era without an open French championship nor as many tournaments as streamlined as today. Just 6 slams. Wilding was a great champion in his time, but he was taken from us too soon. He enlisted into the Royal Marines and was killed in action in 1915 at the age of just 31. Another champion who I wish will rest in peace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Wilding

21- Jack Kramer: http://www.tennismirror.com/wp-conte...ucla-1949s.jpg

Career Resume- Won Wimbledon once in 1947, 2 US Opens in 1946 and 1947 while losing in the final in 1943. Kramer had his first 4 years of his early 20’s interrupted by World War 2. Kramer went into the Coast Guard and after the war won his 3 grand slams. He then turned pro in late 1947 and played for only 7 years, having to retire in 1954 with back problems at 33 years old. Kramer is more known these days as a great tennis promoter, commentator, and historian of the game.

1 Wembley Pro in 1949, beating Segura and Riggs to the title, 1 US Pro in 1948, beating Budge and Riggs en route to the title, for 5 total slams as well as a 5 set loss to Pancho Gonzales in the final of the 1952 Wembley Pro. 5 slams from 7 finals. Jack Kramer was the undisputed year end World #1 for 4 years in 1948, 1949, 1951, and 1953. He was the also the year end co #1 in 1947 and 1950. 6 years as #1 or co #1. Kramer also helped lead the Americans to 2 Davis Cup titles in 1946 and 1947.

Career Blemishes- Never played the Aussie or French Open, only 5 total slams, and, like Perry and Budge, was unfortunate to have World War 2 coincide with his career.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kramer

20- William Larned: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rned,_1910.jpg

Career Resume- William Larned was a relatively late bloomer, went to Cornell University and served in the Spanish-American war in 1898 at 26 years old. He contracted rheumatism during the war, which eventually led him to develop rheumatoid arthritis and forced him to retire in 1911 at the age of 39.

Larned won the US Open (then called the US National Championships) 7 times from 9 finals from 1900 to 1911. Of course he only had to play one match to defend his title in many of those years, but he was also a champion in other big tournaments of the time such as the Boston tournament. Larned was the undisputed year end world #1 for 3 years in 1908, 1909, and 1910, was the year end co #1 in 1901 and 1902, and year end world #2 in 1903 and 1907. 7 years as either #1 or #2 in the world.

Larned was also 9-5 in his career in the early years of Davis Cup, helping the Americans win 4 titles in 1902, 1908, 1909, and 1911.

Career Blemishes- Played in the early days, one of the original GOATs, unfortunately had to retire after losing the finals of the 1911 Davis Cup, his health detiorating. Even more unfortunately, Larned eventually became partially paralyzed by spinal meningitis and was depressed by not being able to play sports or do anything he used to love to do. At 53, in December of 1926, William Larned committed suicide with a .45 caliber pistol shot to the head. Rest in peace, William Larned, you are one of the greats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Larned

19- Laurence Doherty: http://www.tennistheme.com/images/wi...istory0006.jpg

Career Resume- Laurence Doherty was the absolute king of tennis in the early 1900’s. He was the undisputed year end world #1 for 4 years in a row in 1903, 1904, 1905, and 1906. Those 4 years he shat on the field Federer style, and then retired in 1906 with a bang Sampras style. He retired as world #1 and winning the Davis Cup. Doherty was also year end world #2 in 1898, and the co #1 in 1902. 6 years as #1 or #2 in the world.

Doherty also won the Olympic Gold Medal in 1900, won Wimbledon 5 years in a row from 1902 to 1905, and the US Open in 1903 in an era when players didn’t really travel overseas. Doherty had 6 total slams in 7 finals. Doherty was 7-0, undefeated in singles in Davis Cup, winning the title in 1903, 1904, 1905, and 1906. Laurence and his brother Reginald both had respiratory problems and Laurence served in World War I in the Royal Navy Reserves, but was released due to poor health and died in 1919 at just 43 years old.

Doherty also won the Queens Indoor 6 years in a row from 1901 to 1906 and the South of France Championships 7 years in a row from 1900 to 1906, both big tournaments at the time. Doherty was the king of his time.

Career Blemishes- Not much, really. He didn’t play in an era when he needed to play through the draw to defend his Wimbledon title, he didn’t play in an era when the French was open to non-French players, and the Australian Open only started in 1905. Doherty would have been a champion in any era. Doherty also died early, at just 43.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Doherty

18- William Renshaw: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/...76_224x423.jpg

Career Resume- 7 Wimbledon titles from 8 finals including 6 straight from 1881 to 1886. Mind you, this was before 1922 when the defending champion had to play only one match in order to defend his title. Renshaw basically invented the serve and volley, perfected the overhead and invented the overhead serve. Before Renshaw, most serves were underhanded. Renshaw was a revolutionary with his aggressive play. Even after his 6 straight titles, the last in 1886, Renshaw came back to win the title in 1889 and lost the final in 1890. Renshaw was also the Irish champion in 1881 and 1882. After Renshaw won 6 straight, he was injured in 1887 and couldn’t compete. Renshaw returned in 1888, but lost in the quarterfinals before reclaiming his title in 1889 coming back from 2 sets to love down to win 8-6 in the 5th and win his 7th Wimbledon title.

William Renshaw initiated the “Renshaw Rush”, a rush of people to take up the game of tennis in the late 1800’s. Renshaw was the undisputed year end world #1 for 6 years from 1881 to 1886, year end #2 in 1880, and was co year end #1 in 1889. 8 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. Renshaw was the original GOAT.

Career Blemishes- Played in the early days, before the French, Aussie, US, any pro slams, or any legitimate tour had been established, and thus his achievements are not really recognized. I gotta give him some love here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Renshaw

17- Bobby Riggs: http://chaognosis.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/riggs.jpg

Career Resume- Bobby Riggs played in the late 30’s, 40’s, and early 50’s. His first slam was the 1938 US championships. As a 20 year old, he helped the American Davis Cup win the title in 1938, but lost in the finals in 1939. Riggs was only 2-2 in his Davis Cup career. In 1939, he made the finals of the French Open, but lost to Don McNeill. Later in 1939, Riggs won Wimbledon and the US. He lost in the finals of the US in 1940, but rebounded to win it in 1941 and turned pro. In his amateur career, Riggs never played the Australian, lost once in the finals of the French, won 1 Wimbledon, and 2 US Opens from 3 finals. 3 slams from 5 finals.

But then came World War 2. Riggs was the undisputed year end world #1 in 1945 and 1946, year end co #1 in 1941, 1943, 1944, and 1947, year end world #2 in 1942 and 1948, 8 years as #1 or #2 in the world. Riggs played into the early 1950’s as a top 10 level player in the world.

On the pro tour, Riggs won 3 US Pros in 5 finals, and lost the Wembley Pro finals in 1949. Riggs won a total of 6 slams from 11 finals. Riggs also is famous for his Battle of the Sexes match with Billie Jean King, an awesome promotion event.

Career Blemishes- Never won the French Open or the Australian, but never played it, was unfortunate to have World War 2 coincide with his peak years, “only” 6 slams.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Riggs

16- Henri Cochet: http://aeltc2011.wimbledon.com/Conte...125-cochet.jpg

Career Resume- Never played the Australian Open, Won 4 French Open from 5 finals, won 2 Wimbledons from 3 finals, 1 US Open from 2 finals, won 1 French Pro from 2 finals, never played the US Pro, only played one Wembley Pro. 8 total slams from 12 finals. Cochet played at an interesting time in tennis. He turned pro before the pro slams had really become huge, and played as an amateur before the Australian Open had much respect.

Part of the 4 French Musketeers who dominated tennis in the late 20’s and early 30’s. He played as an amateur for most of his career before turning pro in 1933 at the age of 31. He mixed it up with the best pros of the day, Tilden, Nusslein, Vinny Richards, Kozeluh, etc. for a few years afterwards. 34-8 career Davis Cup singles record, helped the French team to the title in 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931, and 1932. 6 titles in a row.

Cochet was the undisputed year end world #1 for 3 years in 1928, 1929, and 1930. Year end world #2 in 1931. 4 years as either #1 or #2 in the world.

Career Blemishes- Only 8 total slams, never played the Australian Open or the US Pro, and obviously never won them, nor the Wembley Pro, though admittedly they did not have the same status as they would in the 40’s, 50’s, and 60’s. Only 4 years as the world #1 or 2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Cochet

15- John McEnroe: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/...93_468x395.jpg

Career Resume- Never won the Australian Open, furthest was a semifinal in 1983. Never won the French Open after that heartbreaking 1984 loss to Lendl in the finals. Won 3 Wimbledons from 5 finals including the 1980 and 1981 finals, which changed the course of tennis history. Won 4 US Opens from 5 finals. 7 total slams in 11 total finals. Played in at least 1 slam final for 7 years in a row. Was never the same after his break from the game in 1986. Known for his antics and temper as much as his mercurial game. An 81.55% career winning percentage.

McEnroe won 8 of 12 Masters Finals tournaments, whether WCT finals or Grand Prix Masters finals. McEnroe also won 19 Tennis Championship Series titles from 25 finals. McEnroe won at least 63 titles from at least 95 total finals. Possibly the greatest year of all time in 1984, recording an 82-3 Win-Loss record, 2 slams, and a slam final. Compiled a 41-8 career singles Davis Cup record, aiding the USA in winning 5 titles in 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982, and 1992.

McEnroe was the undisputed year end World #1 in 1981, 1983, 1984, year end world #2 in 1979, and 1980. 5 total years as #1 or #2 and 170 total weeks as the world #1.

Career Blemishes- Never won the Australian, but more importantly, never won the French Open. Was never the same after his 1986 6 month sabbatical from the game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McEnroe

14- Andre Agassi: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image..._longevity.jpg

Career Resume- Won 4 Australian Opens, 1 French Open from 3 finals, 1 Wimbledon from 2 finals, 2 US Opens from 6 finals. 8 slams from 15 finals. Took “taking the ball early” to a new level in his career and perhaps the greatest returner of the 2nd serve of all time. Another candidate for longevity GOAT, playing over 20 years. Agassi was the undisputed year end world #1 in 1999, the year end world #2 in 1990, 1994, 1995, and 2002. 5 total years as #1 or #2. 101 total weeks as World #1. Won all 4 slams.

Agassi had a 76% career winning percentage and 60 career titles in 90 total finals. Agassi won the gold medal at the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. Won 1 Year End Championship from 4 finals. Won from 17 tennis Masters Series titles from 23 finals. 30-6 career singles Davis Cup record and helped the Americans to the 1990, 1992, and 1995 titles.

Career Blemishes- Consistently the 2nd fiddle to Sampras his entire career, only 1 Wimbledon and 1 French, up and down career on account of drugs and wives, not enough time as world #1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Agassi

13- Jimmy Connors: http://www.swotti.com/tmp/swotti/cac...20connors2.jpg

Career Resume- Won 3 slams in 1974. Won 1 Australian Open from 2 finals, no French Opens but 4 semifinals, won 2 Wimbledons from 6 finals, won 5 US Opens from 6 finals. 8 slams total from 15 finals. Won the Year End Masters in 1977. Won 19 Tennis Championship Series titles, and won at least 109 total titles from 163 finals.

Connors was World #1 for 160 straight weeks, 268 total weeks. Connors was the undisputed year end World #1 for 3 years in 1974, 1976, and 1982, and world #2 in 1975 and 1978. 5 years as either #1 or #2. 10-3 career Davis Cup singles record, never won a Davis Cup. Was the “official” year end #1 from 1974 to 1978, but the rankings were pretty screwy back then.

Played until he was 44, finally retiring in 1996, and made the US Open finals at age 39 in 1991. Another candidate for longevity GOAT. Made countless slam semifinals and was a consistent top 10 player into his 30’s.

Career Blemishes- Never won the French Open, only 8 total slams, only 3 true years as world #1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Connors

12- Fred Perry: http://www.antennamag.com/online/wp-.../fredperry.jpg

Career Resume- Won 1 Australian Open from 2 finals, 1 French Open from 2 finals, 3 Wimbledons in a row from 1934 to 1936, and 3 US Opens for 8 total amateur slams and the career slam. He then turned pro in 1937 and won 2 US Pros from 4 finals for 10 total slams from 14 finals. Perry competed with Budge and Vines on the pro tour in the late 30’s. He led the British to 4 straight Davis Cups from 1933 to 1936 and was 34-4 in his career in Davis Cup singles rubbers. Made at least one slam final 8 straight years.

He was the undisputed year end World #1 in 1934, co year end #1 in 1935, 1936, 1937, and 1941, and was year end #2 in the world in 1933, 1940. So 7 straight years as either #1 or #2 in the world. Perry’s career, like Budge’s, was interrupted by World War 2 as Perry enlisted into the American Air Force, having emigrated from Britain by that time. At the end of the war, Perry was 36 years old and returned to the game with limited success.

Career Belmishes- Was only the undisputed world #1 for one year, and was consistently battling greats like Budge and Vines for most of his career. Mostly though, Perry took a slight second seat behind those two. Also was unlucky to have World War 2 coincide with his career like Budge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Perry

11- Ellsworth Vines: http://www.estadium.ya.com/daviscup/...orth_Vines.jpg

Career Resume- Played the Australian Open once, losing in the quarterfinals in 1933, never played the French Open, won 1 Wimbledon from 2 finals, and 2 US Opens before turning pro in 1934. Vines won the US Pro in 1939, won 2 Wembley Pros, and won 1 French Pro from 2 finals. 7 total slams from 9 finals. Vines didn’t play many of the pro slams in his time on the pro tour, and played mostly tours with the leading players of the time, Perry, Budge, Tilden, etc.

Vines was the undisputed year end World #1 in 1932, year end co #1 in 1935, 1936, 1937 year end #2 in 1934, 1938, and 1939. 7 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. 13-3 career Davis Cup record in singles, but never won a Davis Cup.

Jack Kramer the great tennis historian considered Vines to be the best ever when on his game, but Vines suffered from laziness and a lack of passion and/or desire for the game of tennis. He had other interests in his life, golf and his family life being the main two.

Retired in May 1940 at only 28 years old from tennis. Went on to play golf at a pretty damn good level, top 10 in earnings in both golf and tennis.

Career Blemishes- Early retirement, a little bit of inconsistency in his results, described by Kramer as relatively “lazy” in regards to his extreme talent. Only 7 total slams, no Davis Cup.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellsworth_Vines

10- Rafael Nadal: http://worldbestsports.com/wp-conten...fael-Nadal.jpg

Career Resume- Won 1 Australian Open, 6 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons from 5 finals, and 1 US Open for 10 total slams from 13 finals. Also has an Olympic Gold Medal in singles from the 2008 games and led the Spanish to 3 Davis Cup titles in 2004, 2008, and 2009. 46 career titles from 63 finals, an 82.71% career winning percentage, an 81 match clay winning streak, 32 match winning streak on clay, grass, and hard in 2008. A 6-2 record over Roger Federer in grand slam finals, and a positive head to head record over all of his rivals including Djokovic and Federer.

He was the undisputed year end World #1 in 2008 and 2010, and the year end world #2 in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009. 6 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. 7 years winning at least one slam. Career Davis Cup record of 16-1. 19 Tennis Masters Series titles from 29 finals. More to come.

Career Blemishes- Only 1 Year End Championship final, and no titles. Vulnerable indoors and on faster hard courts. Only 1 US Open and 1 Australian Open.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Nadal

9- Ivan Lendl: http://amranfaisal.com/wp-content/up...lendl-1983.jpg

Career Resume- Won 2 Australian Opens from 4 finals, 3 French Opens from 5 finals, lost twice in the finals of Wimbledon, and 3 US Opens from 8 finals. 8 slams from 19 total finals. Lendl won 7 Masters Finals from 12 Finals. Lendl was the undisputed year end World #1 for 3 years in 1985, 1986, and 1987, and year end world #2 in 1982, 1984, 1988, and 1989. 7 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. Lendl was ranked number one for 270 weeks, 3rd in the Open Era behind Sampras and Federer.

Reached at least one slam final for 11 straight years and won 94 total titles from 146 finals. Lendl had an 82% career winning percentage. Won 22 career Tennis Championship series titles. Revolutionized the game with power tennis and uber nutrition. Led the Czech team to the Davis Cup title in 1980, but his career singles Davis Cup record was only 18-11.

Career Blemishes- Never won Wimbledon, though lost twice in the finals. Bad slam finals record.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Lendl

8- Bjorn Borg: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HEvIhdAYFW...s1600/borg.jpg

Career Resume- Bjorn Borg played the Australian Open just once back in 1974, losing in the third round. Borg won 3 year end championships from 6 finals. Borg won 11 of 16 slam finals, had an 82.7% career winning percentage, and nearly an 89.81% grand slam winning percentage. Borg won 6 French Opens, 5 Wimbledons from 6 finals including 3 Channel Slams winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon back to back from 1978 to 1980. Borg also competed in 4 US Open finals.

Borg won 101 titles from 129 total finals. Borg won 15 titles from 19 Grand Prix Tennis Championship Series events, similar to the Masters Series events today. Borg was the undisputed year end world #1 for 3 years in 1978, 1979, and 1980, the co year end #1 in in 1977, and year end #2 in 1975, 1976, and 1981. 7 years in a row as either #1 or #2 in the world. Borg was also a beast in Davis Cup, compiling a 37-3 career record in singles, including a 33 match win streak to end his career, a record that still stands, leading the Swedes to the 1975 Davis Cup.

Career Blemishes- Never won the Australian or the US Open, losing twice in the finals to Connors, and twice to McEnroe. Basically retired after losing the 1981 US Open final at the age of only 25. But he had already achieved nearly all there is to achieve in the game. He was a rock star at the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Borg

7- Don Budge: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2370/...6fb9b60203.jpg

Career Resume- Budge played from the early 1930’s until the mid 1950’s. He won all 4 slams in 1938, the first man ever to do so. ’38 was the only year he played the Australian or the French. He won 9 straight slams pro or amateur from Wimbledon 1937 to the US Pro in 1940. He won also 2 Wimbledons and 2 US Opens from 3 finals. He won the French Pro and Wembley Pro in 1939, and 2 US Pros from 6 finals. 10 total slams from 15 finals. A 92 match win streak in 1937-1938. A 19-2 career singles record in Davis Cup, and led the Americans to 2 Davis Cups in 1937 and 1938.

Budge was the undisputed year end world #1 for 4 years in 1938, 1939, 1940, and 1942. He was also co year end #1 in 1937, 1943, 1944, and year end #2 in the world in 1945 and 1946. 9 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. Unfortunately for Budge, World War 2 interrupted the peak of his career. Budge also suffered a shoulder injury during his time in the service. Budge was in the air force and tore a muscle during an obstacle course that never truly healed. In 1945 at the end of the war, Budge played his rival Bobby Riggs in a series of Pacific Island exhibitions that cemented Budge’s status as #2 in the world as Riggs defeated him in the series. Budge was still a solid top 10 player after the war, and made the finals of the US Pro in 1946, 1947, 1949, and 1953.

Career Blemishes- Bad luck for having his career coincide with World War 2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Budge

6- Pete Sampras: http://topnews.in/sports/files/Pete-Sampras.jpg

Career Resume- Made at least one slam final for 10 years in a row from 1993 to 2002. 2 Australian Opens from 3 finals, 1 semifinal at the French Open, 7 Wimbledons, perhaps the greatest grass courter of all time. 5 US Opens from 8 finals, 14 total slams in a deep 90’s field. 14 slam wins in 18 finals. He also won 5 year end championships from 6 finals. A 15-8 career Davis Cup record and helped the Americans to the 1992 and 1995 Davis Cup titles. Made at least one slam final 11 straight years.

Sampras was the undisputed year end world #1 for 6 years in 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, and year end world #2 in 1999. 7 years as world #1 or #2. 286 total weeks as World #1, an open era record. He had a winning head to head record against all of his contemporaries save for a 4-6 record Richard Krajicek and a 4-5 record vs. Michael Stich. Sampras won 64 total titles, 11 of 19 Masters Series finals.

Career Blemishes- Never won the French Open, furthest he ever reached was the semifinal, and was mediocre on clay for his entire career.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Sampras

5- Pancho Gonzales: http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/505...1E70F2B3269972

Career Resume- Made at least one slam final for 12 straight years, 1948 to 1959. Went pro at age 22, so was unable to play the 4 grand slams from 1950 to 1967, his peak years. Even at the dawn of the open era, at such an advanced age he still was top 10 in the world, won at least 11 titles, and made a SF at the French Open in 1968. He even won the equivalent of a Tennis Masters Series event in 1971, beating Jimmy Connors in the final. He won at least 113 total titles over his 25 year career. He played the Australian just once in 1969, the French Open just twice, and 5 times at Wimbledon, not winning any, but again, was unable to compete during his peak years. He won the US Open in 1948 and 1949 and then went pro. Never won the French Pro, 2 semis and 2 finals in 4 appearances, won 4 Wembley pros from 5 finals, and 8 US pros from 11 finals. 1949 Davis Cup champ as well.

Gonzales was year end #2 in 1949, 1961, the year end undisputed #1 for 6 years in 1954, 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959, and co year end #1 in 1952, 1960. So Gonzales was #1 or #2 in 10 different years. He had a winning record against all of his contemporaries, Hoad, Trabert, Rosewall, Sedgman, Segura, etc.

Career Blemishes- Not as good on clay and was vulnerable on that surface. Never won the French Pro, French Open, Australian Open, or Wimbledon, but mostly due to Gonzales not being able to compete there during his prime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancho_Gonzales

4- Ken Rosewall: http://chaognosis.files.wordpress.co...rosewallbg.jpg

Career Resume- Made at least one slam final from 1953 to 1972. Probably the longevity GOAT. 4 Australian Opens from 5 finals, 2 French Opens from 3 finals, 4 Wimbledon finals, but never won it, 2 US Opens from 4 finals, 8 French Pros including 7 straight, 5 Wembley Pros from 8 finals, 2 US Pros from 3 finals. 23 total slams from 35 slam finals. Rosewall also won 2 Tennis Championship Series titles from 3 finals in the 70’s, the last one all the way in 1976! Not to mention two WCT year end finals in 1971 and 1972. A 17-2 career Davis Cup record and helped the Aussies to win the 1953, 1955, and 1956 Davis Cups.

Rosewall was the year end world #1 in 1961, 1962, and 1963. He was co year end #1 in 1960, 1964, and 1970. He was year end #2 in the world in 1957, 1965, 1966, 1967. Rosewall was either #1 or #2 in 10 different years, 3 undisputed #1 years, 3 co #1 years, and 4 #2 years. He was a part of 4 Davis Cup winning Australia teams, was 7-5 against Rod Laver in slam finals, won at least 132 titles in his career, and won the pro slam in 1963.

Career Blemishes- Never won Wimbledon bu did make 4 finals, negative head to head record with Laver over their careers, and was just 59-101 against Pancho Gonzales in his career, although the age difference can account for some of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Rosewall

3- Bill Tilden: http://weblogs.variety.com/.a/6a00d8...f936970b-320wi

Won 13 slams in 21 finals. 3 Wimbledons, 7 US Opens in 10 finals, 1 French Pros from 2 finals, 2 Wembley Pro finals, 2 US Pros. He led the United States to 7 straight Davis Cup titles from 1920 to 1926 and had a 25-5 career Davis Cup record.

Back in the 20’s and 30’s, Tilden absolutely dominated the game. He did not ever play the Australian Open, and only played Roland Garros 3 times. Most of Tilden’s career was touring the country and playing many series of matches against the best players of the day. Back then, they would transport a court across the country and play matches to crowds at nights. Late in his career, he focused more on management of the game and taking pro tennis to the next level as he played less and less.

Tilden was the undisupted year end World #1 in 1920, 1921, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1931, for 6 years. He was co year end #1 in 1922, and year end World #2 in 1927, 1930, and 1932. So Tilden was #1 or #2 for 10 years. He competed against champions like Little Bill Johnston, Vinny Richards, Henri Cochet, Rene Lacoste, Jean Borotra, Ellsworth Vines, Hans Nusslein, Don Budge, and was in the top 10 even until 1939!!! He had a 93.6% winning percentage during his 18 year amateur career. He won at least 130 tournaments. He also had a 95 match win streak in 1924-1925 and a 50 match win streak in 1930.

Career Blemishes- Never won Roland Garros, lost 11-9 in the 5th to Rene Lacoste in the 1927 final, and to Cochet in the finals in 1930. Never won the Wembley Pro, losing in the finals to Ellsworth Vines in the 1935 final in 5 sets, and to Hans Nusslein in 5 sets in 1937. Not to mention the sexual morals charges he went to jail for in the 1940’s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Tilden

2- Roger Federer: http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...b_1428585c.jpg

Career Resume- 4 Australian Opens from 5 finals, 1 French Open from 5 finals, 6 Wimbledons from 7 finals, 5 US Opens from 6 finals. 5 Year End Championships from 6 finals, 67 total titles on all surfaces from 97 finals, 23 straight slam semifinals, a 41 and 35 match win streak, 65 straight grass court wins, 56 straight hard court wins, 18 of 19 slam finals including 10 straight. 16 total slams from 23 total finals. Federer won 17 Masters titles from 29 finals.

He has dominated the game for years, arguably the most dominant 4 year stretch in the history of the game from 2004 to 2007, and has been pretty damn good since. Federer was the undisputed year end World #1 for 5 years in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009. He was year end #2 in 2003, 2008 and 2010. 8 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. 27-6 career Davis Cup record. 237 straight weeks as world #1, a record, and 285 weeks total as world #1, one week shy of Sampras in the Open Era. More to come.

Career Blemishes- Never won the calendar year grand slam, though was one match away in 2006 and 2007. Never beat Rafael Nadal at Roland Garros and has struggled with Nadal his whole career. No Davis Cup or Olympic Gold Medal in singles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Federer

1- Rod Laver: http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z...rod-laver2.jpg

Career Resume- 3 Australian Opens from 4 finals, 2 French Opens from 3 finals, 4 Wimbledons from 6 finals, 2 US Opens from 4 finals. Also 1 French Pro from 5 finals, 4 Wembley Pros, 3 US Pros from 5 finals, 200 total titles on all surfaces, and 5 Davis Cup titles. 15 straight slam finals from 1963 to 1968, and reached at least the finals in 29 of 32 slams from 1960 to 1969! He won 19 total slams from 31 total slam finals.

He won the Grand Slam as an amateur in 1962, the Pro Slam in 1967, winning all 3, and the Grand Slam again in 1969 as an open era professional. Laver had a 79-63 career head to head with Ken Rosewall, his greatest rival. Laver was year end World #1 undisputed for 5 years in 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969. He was also year end World #2 in 1963 and co #1 in 1964 and 1970. 8 years as either #1 or #2 in the world. Laver’s numbers speak for themselves. Even past his prime in the 70’s he was a top 10 consistent player. From 1970 to 1989, there was a Grand Prix Tennis Championship Series, the precursors to the modern Tennis Masers Series events. Laver also won 8 titles from 12 finals there from 1970 to 1974. Laver had a 79.8% winning percentage in the Open Era. 16-4 career Davis Cup singles record. Helped the Australians to the Davis Cup title in 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, and 1973.

Career Blemishes- 5-7 career record vs. Rosewall in amateur or pro slam finals, and when he won his 2 slams in 62 and 69, 3 of the 4 slams were on grass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Laver
Thanks Strange order especially for the ones ranked between 25/55 but the idea is pretty good. Well done.
__________________
[b]My hall of fame: Roger Federer-Rafael Nadal-Jo Wilfried Tsonga-David Ferrer-Juan Carlos Ferrero-Tommy Haas- Radek Stepanek-Lleyton Hewitt-David Nalbandian-Guillermo Cañas-Carlos Moya-Pete Sampras-Petr Korda- Kent Carlsson-Richard Krajicek-Karol Kucera-Tim Henman-Alex Corretja-Thomas Muster-Michael Stich-Pat Cash-Patrick Rafter-Darren Cahill-Ivan Lendl-Mats Wilander-Miloslav Mecir-Karel Novacek-Joakim Nystrom-Henrik Sundstrom-Hans Simonsson-Anders Jarryd-Jimmy Connors-Bjorn Borg-Guillermo Vilas.
fran70 is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 03:25 AM   #111
country flag Speed of Light
Registered User
 
Speed of Light's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Area 51
Posts: 2,521
Speed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond reputeSpeed of Light has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Before his career is over, Nadal will be Number 1 on this list, IMHO.
Speed of Light is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 07:16 AM   #112
country flag Action Jackson
Forum Umpire:
Gaston Gaudio
 
Action Jackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 124,482
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 (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mega DC View Post
Why is Federer number two? Laver got the calendar slam twice because more slams were on grass back in those days. Federer also has five slams than him, so why is he ahead of Roger? Sampras should also be way ahead of him. Roger and Pete are the two best players of all time and they aren't the top two? That's wrong. 1/5 just for that massive error.
You probably should stay out of threads like this, if you are truly the age you say you are. This is the classic case of this. "I don't know what a woman goes through once a month", so how can I comment or even have a basic understanding of this. The same applies here.

This sport has been going for ages, how can you a clue about what went before Federer without extensive reading, tracking down dvds, videos or archival footage. Once that's done, there has to be an application process of what information you have, there won't be 100% objectivity even doing all this.

Pro and amateur eras can't be understated for the guys who were in that time, this is why Emerson is lower than many others cause he didn't play the strongest guys.
__________________
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 07-08-2011, 08:04 AM   #113
country flag tyruk14
Registered User
 
tyruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,143
tyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond reputetyruk14 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Your top five is fucked up, but I'd agree with most of the top ten at this point. Good list.
__________________
14
tyruk14 is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 08:27 AM   #114
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 (a history lesson)

I cant quite figure out how to meassure the value of amateur slams and pro slams, I have some problems with the pro slams counting as a slam because it was played with a 16 man draw and even if the best 2-4 players played pro, there were many good amateur players who didnt participate (Roche, Ashe, Santana, Emerson, Gimeno, Pietrangeli)...

Amateur slams can at the same time obviously not count as much as a slam because the pros were always somewhere else. You cant have 2 tours with their own slams and value them the same as slams were everyone participates. Anyway to meassure would be unfair to some player, I always prefer counting number of really dominant years, years as nr1 and years as co nr1 aswell as years as top3 for longevity.
__________________
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 07-08-2011, 11:06 PM   #115
country flag oz_boz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 74
Posts: 2,672
oz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond reputeoz_boz has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

I didn' bother with places 26-55, but like the rest of it. I could see Connors below Agassi and McEnroe though, the flawed ranking system and tons of minor events won make a case for that. Becker vs Edberg a tossup for me, depends on if you want to favour either consistency or top level. Nadal vs Lendl: hard to call - Nadal has won on all surfaces yes but that is easier today probably, also he is not even close to being the game's dominant for as long a period as Lendl. OTOH Rafa has more slams.
__________________

I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.
oz_boz is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 11:33 PM   #116
country flag Sapeod
77 years later...
 
Sapeod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 19
Posts: 35,418
Sapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond reputeSapeod has a reputation beyond repute
Post Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Getta View Post
Dani, you can do better.
Please, give me some valid arguments on why Laver is better than Federer? Everyone should know that Federer >>>> Laver.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fast_clay View Post
henry... go easy on the kid... he his a ginger haired scot... he has copped many beatings and will cop many more...
Ginger hair? What makes you say that? Apart from the fact that you stereotype everything, not to mention you are racist, but I won't go into that. You can't "beat me". Trying to "beat me" on here is like to trying to punch the lights out of a wall. You can't do it.

Quote:
you need to steer clear of these thread kiddo... you're limitations are obvious and you are taxing everybody elses sanity...

you're forte is grossly polluting a WWW thread... or something of the like... you are a high performance poster in those... but not here... no...
I see that you don't understand the very simple fact that Federer is indeed better than Laver. It's okay, you have time to realise this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Kaspar View Post
Pea >>>>>>>> your brain. End of discussion.
Clever argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
Read a history book, kid. Tennis did not start in 1990.
I'm guessing you say this because of my thinking Sampras and Federer are the top two. If that's the case, Sampras' career started in the late 80s. 1988 to be exact. . Therefore, you should said "tennis did not start in 1988." Unfortunate, you didn't. A shame, but that's not the argument at hand. I do not need a history book or a history lesson from someone in their early twenties to know that tennis is indeed a very old sport. I know that. I also know a lot about the slams and players that faced each other in the late 60s. Those times aren't the best of my knowledge, to be honest, BUT I do know what I'm talking about. And I know for a fact that Roger Federer is the best player to have ever picked up a racquet. Why do I know this? Slam titles, weeks at number one, titles overall, consecutive slam semi-finals, quarter-finals etc. Boo hoo, Laver wasn't allowed to play some slams. That is tough and very unfortunate for Laver, but just because you think he would've won those slams doesn't mean you can put him infront of Roger, because, for starters, he didn't win them. Those "titles" aren't located in his list of career achievements. Roger's titles are, though, and he has far more than Laver does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action Jackson View Post
You probably should stay out of threads like this, if you are truly the age you say you are. This is the classic case of this. "I don't know what a woman goes through once a month", so how can I comment or even have a basic understanding of this. The same applies here.
I don't really know how this is in any way similar to what women go through once a month. Indeed, I don't know what a woman goes through in that time of the month. Of course, I'm not a woman, so how should I know? As for the tennis, I know a lot more than any of you give me credit for and that's your mistake. And I know what I'm talking about here.
Quote:
This sport has been going for ages, how can you a clue about what went before Federer without extensive reading, tracking down dvds, videos or archival footage. Once that's done, there has to be an application process of what information you have, there won't be 100% objectivity even doing all this.

Pro and amateur eras can't be understated for the guys who were in that time, this is why Emerson is lower than many others cause he didn't play the strongest guys.
I don't need all that to understand that Federer >>> Laver.

As I just told Groove, Laver has less titles than Federer. Federer has won these titles at a harder time in tennis where you have to be fit and strong to stand a chance of getting into the top 100, let alone win 16 slams. Sorry to say this, but the 60s wasn't a hard time to win titles. Laver was indeed a good player and I have enjoyed what I have seen of him, but you can not put him above Roger Federer.
__________________
ANDY MURRAY
WIMBLEDON & US OPEN SLAM CHAMPION!!


SLAMS: 2 WINS, 5 finals, 7 semi-finals, 7 quarter-finals...
MASTERS: 9 WINS, 3 finals, 8 semi-finals, 18 quarter-finals...
WTF: 3 semi-finals...
OLYMPICS: 1 gold, 1 silver...
CAREER PRIZE MONEY: $33,359,256 (5th of all time)
MATCH WIN/LOSS: 481-151...
TITLES: 31 and counting...
Sapeod is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2011, 12:05 AM   #117
country flag rocketassist
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 25,682
rocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond reputerocketassist has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

BTW another blemish on Connors' career is the fact he never won a title on red clay.
rocketassist is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2011, 03:21 AM   #118
country flag Johnny Groove
Future ATP Star
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Age: 24
Posts: 36,386
Johnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond reputeJohnny Groove has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mega DC View Post
As I just told Groove, Laver has less titles than Federer. Federer has won these titles at a harder time in tennis where you have to be fit and strong to stand a chance of getting into the top 100, let alone win 16 slams. Sorry to say this, but the 60s wasn't a hard time to win titles. Laver was indeed a good player and I have enjoyed what I have seen of him, but you can not put him above Roger Federer.
Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Andres Gimeno, late Pancho Gonzales, late Pancho Segura, Butch Buchholz, Lew Hoad, Frank Sedgman, Alex Olmedo, Fred Stolle, Tony Roche, John Newcombe, Roy Emerson, Dennis Ralston, Arthur Ashe, yeah, a real mug era.

Don't diss the 60's when you know nothing of it.

Laver also has more slams than Federer. Yes, Fed was/is great, but Laver was better. Had Fed won just one of those RG finals vs. Nadal, maybe I'd give him #1.
__________________
Respect the Laws of MTF
Brush up on your tennis history, people- Top 101 Tennis Players of all Time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathaliia View Post
What do you like doing on MTF most?
Reading Johnny Groove threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tripwires View Post
Johnny blurs the line between grandeur and grandiose
Johnny Groove is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2011, 04:08 AM   #119
country flag Action Jackson
Forum Umpire:
Gaston Gaudio
 
Action Jackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 124,482
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 (a history lesson)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Andres Gimeno, late Pancho Gonzales, late Pancho Segura, Butch Buchholz, Lew Hoad, Frank Sedgman, Alex Olmedo, Fred Stolle, Tony Roche, John Newcombe, Roy Emerson, Dennis Ralston, Arthur Ashe, yeah, a real mug era.

Don't diss the 60's when you know nothing of it.

Laver also has more slams than Federer. Yes, Fed was/is great, but Laver was better. Had Fed won just one of those RG finals vs. Nadal, maybe I'd give him #1.
First paragraph says it all and yes Laver has more Slams, he even hit topspin on his bh. The pros were playing on surfaces other than grass and clay as well at that time.
__________________
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 07-09-2011, 03:48 PM   #120
country flag mark73
Registered User
 
mark73's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,836
mark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond reputemark73 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Professor Johnny Groove's Top 55 tennis players of all time (a history lesson)

I agree completely except I'd switch 39 and 40 with each other. After years of deliberating who is greater I believe the number 40 guy is better than the number 39 guy.
__________________
Federer: Future number one.
mark73 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