Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Here's a thought inspired by the recent "If Borg hadn't retired" thread.

They weren't counting Grand Slams in those days.

But the Final count of the Big Three was:
Borg 11
Connors 8
McEnroe 7

But They almost never went to Australia.
Connors won in '74, lost the final in '75 and never went again.
Borg went once, in '74 and never went again.
McEnroe never went till '83.

Between '76 and '82, there was 8 Aussie Opens (Two in '77), with no Borg, no Connors and no McEnroe.
This was at a time when the AO was played on Grass.
And how many Grand Slams did the Big Three win during that time on the other Grand Slam played on grass (Wimbledon)?
Answer: All of them.

So Had they gone, What would those Grand Slam totals look like?
All three might be in double digits. Borg might be at 15.
Just a thought.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
923 Posts
This is why Djokovic will never be in the same tier as Connors and McEnroe, even with higher slams.

Djokovic needs to reach at least 11 slams to be on the same tier as McEnroe and Connors, and 14 slams to be in Borg, Sampras, Rafa tier.

Federer, of course, is in Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales tier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,624 Posts
This is why Borg, Connors and McEnroe will never be in the same league as Djokovic :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,644 Posts
This is why Djokovic will never be in the same tier as Connors and McEnroe, even with higher slams.

Djokovic needs to reach at least 11 slams to be on the same tier as McEnroe and Connors, and 14 slams to be in Borg, Sampras, Rafa tier.

Federer, of course, is in Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales tier.
Sorry, but you are talking nonsense. What you fail to understand is that the AO back then was not as relevant as it is today. The simple reason is that top players, as the OP pointed out, never showed up at the same time for all kinda different reasons. I can explain in it to you but I just don't want to bother with ignorant people here.

Nowadays, all top players are playing the AO and all majors today are equal because all top players participate.

Djokovic had to beat Federer, Nadal, Murray on his way to win the AO. It is actually very simple. Read some tennis history books. It's all on the net.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,045 Posts
EXACTLY Djokovic is already as great as Connors and Mcenroe. The next door he will be knocking on is Mr Borgs. And then we will see how he goes from there.

He is destined to be top 5 alltime and clear hardcourt goat by the close of 2018. And there aint a thing any hater tards can do about it. Im looking forward to Him winning his third Wimbledon. And giving Federer another beating. If Berdych, Murray/Nadal fail to take him out first...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
923 Posts
Sorry, but you are talking nonsense. What you fail to understand is that the AO back then was not as relevant as it is today. The simple reason is that top players, as the OP pointed out, never showed up at the same time for all kinda different reasons. I can explain in it to you but I just don't want to bother with ignorant people here.

Nowadays, all top players are playing the AO and all majors today are equal because all top players participate.

Djokovic had to beat Federer, Nadal, Murray on his way to win the AO. It is actually very simple. Read some tennis history books. It's all on the net.
You must be mentally challenged. Connors and McEnroe racked up 7-8 slams only showing up to play for 3 of them a year.

Djokovic did the same, however he showed up to play 4 times a year. Logic dictates that the former is more impressive.

No two ways about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alex999

·
Banned
Joined
·
923 Posts
EXACTLY Djokovic is already as great as Connors and Mcenroe. The next door he will be knocking on is Mr Borgs. And then we will see how he goes from there.

He is destined to be top 5 alltime and clear hardcourt goat by the close of 2018. And there aint a thing any hater tards can do about it. Im looking forward to Him winning his third Wimbledon. And giving Federer another beating. If Berdych, Murray/Nadal fail to take him out first...
Djokovic will be losing to either Wawrinka or Murray or Nadal.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
You must be mentally challenged. Connors and McEnroe racked up 7-8 slams only showing up to play for 3 of them a year.

Djokovic did the same, however he showed up to play 4 times a year. Logic dictates that the former is more impressive.

No two ways about it.
Sorry but you are still talking nonsense. Go back to your cave please.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
923 Posts
Sorry but you are still talking nonsense. Go back to your cave please.
You and your Djokofriend trolls only know how to root for your idol. No logic in your brains :haha:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,060 Posts
You must be mentally challenged. Connors and McEnroe racked up 7-8 slams only showing up to play for 3 of them a year.

Djokovic did the same, however he showed up to play 4 times a year. Logic dictates that the former is more impressive.

No two ways about it.
That is their problem! They chose not to go for various reasons. There are many variable reasons as to why players avoid or do not do as well at some slams than at others. Also, slam count was not as important to most players then, as it is today. Laver lost 5 years of his prime not playing Any slams, Rosewall lost 11, Gonzalez, even more. IMHO, too there is too much importance to slam count which diminishes the game and players other achievements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,909 Posts
Obviously slams carry much more weight in today's game than it did back then. Players like Gonzales and Laver can't be judged by slams simply because slams were not slams back then.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top