[Mountaindewslave]

virtually no competition in late 1800s when tennis was introduced, not to mention it wasn't really an international sport at that time, you were typically only playing against played from your own country. lack of competition and depth of field obviously kills Renshaw's resume

Federer obviously probably is the much better grass court player, Renshaw's accomplishments could not parallel Roger's any more in the degree of difficulty when comparing respective times. there are definitely multiple other players who technically were 'better grass court players'

[TigerTim]

Note in the first three pics Humblerer has his t shirt on

And then the monstrosity that is cardiganerer arrives

[Serve&Volley01]

Originally Posted by Mountaindewslave

virtually no competition in late 1800s when tennis was introduced, not to mention it wasn't really an international sport at that time, you were typically only playing against played from your own country. lack of competition and depth of field obviously kills Renshaw's resume

Federer obviously probably is the much better grass court player, Renshaw's accomplishments could not parallel Roger's any more in the degree of difficulty when comparing respective times. there are definitely multiple other players who technically were 'better grass court players'

Are you sure about this?

I can't believe everyone here is writing Renshaw off when his record of 6 consecutive Wimbledons will probably be never matched EVER. Tennis was just as competitive back then as it was today, just different people.

[heya]

If you count opponent Roddick's amazing, inspiring volleys and light body & aerodynamic bald head, yes, Rogi is the greatest tactician of all.

[heya]

Originally Posted by End da Game

nah, duck came close to winning in 2004 and obviously the 2009 final went all the way to 15-17 games in the 5th set or something like that

LOLOLOLOL

[buzz]

Originally Posted by Serve&Volley01

Are you sure about this?

I can't believe everyone here is writing Renshaw off when his record of 6 consecutive Wimbledons will probably be never matched EVER. Tennis was just as competitive back then as it was today, just different people.

Thanks for pointing it out. Renshaw is for me the new Wimbledon GOAT. The Federer era is weak anyway, lets not fight for who's are must be the weakest. They both defeated the opponents they got not their fault they sucked.

For the next few days I am going to watch all the videos that I can find of this Renshaw!

[nick the greek]

Originally Posted by GSMnadal

Sampras > Federer on grass

This.Pete "the greek" Sampras.

[TigerTim]

Originally Posted by heya

LOLOLOLOL

truth is the truth hurts.

[Prodigy.]

Originally Posted by GSMnadal

No need to worry then

[Prodigy.]

Originally Posted by Mountaindewslave

virtually no competition in late 1800s when tennis was introduced, not to mention it wasn't really an international sport at that time, you were typically only playing against played from your own country. lack of competition and depth of field obviously kills Renshaw's resume

Federer obviously probably is the much better grass court player, Renshaw's accomplishments could not parallel Roger's any more in the degree of difficulty when comparing respective times. there are definitely multiple other players who technically were 'better grass court players'

Can I take a ride in your time machine please?

[nole_no1]

Originally Posted by viruzzz

Duuuuuuuude, those were really different times, I don't know how you want to compare THOSE eras.
I can understand the same question between Federer and Sampras, or even Perry or those people, but going way long ago to the 1800s... I think it's impossible to even imagine.

This. No offence but this thread is pointless and pretty stupid

[heya]

A bunch of 210 pound players now is better than the magicians of the 1880s LOLOLOL

[legolandbridge]

Renshaw edges Federer here as King of Grass due to his tally of 6 doubles titles and the disadvantage of having to play the finalist as 1st round.

[duarte_a]

Originally Posted by GSMnadal

No need to worry then

Nice one.

But Roger is one of the favourites for Wimbledon so it can happen.

[latso]

Originally Posted by End da Game

nah, duck came close to winning in 2004 and obviously the 2009 final went all the way to 15-17 games in the 5th set or something like that

i know the numbers pretty well, but we have to be honest here - Roddick was nowhere near anytime, except maybe for this 17-15, which was a surprise overall.

Duck was a nice lad, but he was in position to take a Slam final off Federer as much as Ferrer would ever be against Nadal. Too much love.

Fast grass being arguably Fed's bestest surface ever i would imagine him winning it all there.

You never know. Maybe at the said speed some guys like Karlovic and Isner would have been tougher threats than Roddick or Rafa on slowish herb.