Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
IS that because they were less trendy? Because both connors and Lendl were so consistent in the top of the rankings, and winning so many titles, they surely deserve more recognizion than they have.

I think both Lendl and Connors are borderline tier 1 all-time greats.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
They aren't underrated at all.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
They aren't underrated at all.
They are , specially Lendl. A lot of people put Lendl below agassi on all time greats, however he was quite more dominant.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
62,003 Posts
Agassi played more recently, more people remember him. McEnroe got a bigger name because of his antics and high profile while active, and possibly for his commentating afterwards.

Lendl and Connors are both clearly a level above Agassi and McEnroe for merits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
Lendl especially is criminally underrated.

That's because people think he has no personnality, but from what I've seen that's not true at all, he's just ice-cold. Way more charisma than the little whiny brat McEnroe!

And of course, achievements wise he's one of the most dominant players ever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,227 Posts
Good question. As a previous poster said, the passing of time has diminished their achievements somewhat. The cult of "now" means the latest player, team, actor, etc is often heralded as the "greatest ever", essentially so we all feel relevant as we begin to fear for our own mortality. We saw Federer celebrated by commentators and press alike as "the greatest ever" back in the mid 2000s when he had yet to reach double figures in majors. Now experts like McEnroe have jumped that ship and pledged their allegiance to Nadal a few years later before he's really achieved enough to warrant it.

Lendl's records are tainted somewhat by his lack of Wimbledon success, and hi inability to win more majors finals. Connors because he competed in same era as Borg, who overshadowed him in the majors.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,982 Posts
I personally don't think Connors and Lendl are underrated. Those, who understand a bit the history of tennis are well aware of their achievements.

The fact Agassi was playing not long ago caused he is better remembered than the others. He won career golden Slam, which definitely helps his legacy as the universal player. Then, people may consider him as better player because of his rivalry with Sampras and the fact he was capable to beat him many times also at important events. But imo the main reason people rank him higher is his turbulent career. In the 90's he lost some years when being at his physical best when he definitely could win important titles. He came back in his 28-29 and still managed to have very successful career (like Connors or JMac). So there may be an assumption he would have been much more successful if he would have exploited his full potential.

When talking about JMac - his legacy is definitely enhanced by Borg. He may be considered as the one who stopped him, something like "Borg's nemesis", which definitely helps his resume.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top