[luvbadboys]

I just realized that Hewitt played and beat Safin, Federer and Ferrero one after the other.

We now have at least 5 players (Hewitt, Safin, Federer, Ferrero, Gonzalez, Paradorn) who are all in the same age group and they'l be fighting it out for the next 5 years. I believe that whoever dominates in the next 5 years should be more highly regarded than Sampras was in his heyday. because Sampras never had to face that many contemporaries who were as good as he was. Sampras had Becker, Andre and Pat but the four of them were never at their peak together. Becker retired, Andre was in and out of the game because of his love life and Pat came unto the scene late in Sampras's career. I am not saying that Sampras is not the best player of all time. I believe he is. I am simply saying that we would have had a better measure of his greatness had he been forced to meet Boris, Pat and Andre on a regular basis. Should any of the 5 players listed above dominate the game the way Sampras did for 6-7 years, that player in my mind will be a better player than Sampras whether or not he wins 14 slams.

This is a theory in progress but let me know what you think.

 

[Jorge]

what about Carlitos Moyà?? hewitt can't beat him

now, being serious, if Lleyton is the best "right now" is because his mental strength IMO, but technically is not the "very best".
BTW you forgot to mention Nalbandián, Gaudio, Malisse, Roddick, etc.

 

[luvbadboys]

I'm referring to guys in the same age bracket. Moya is 26 which means in 2/3 years while the other are starting to hit their prime Moya wil be on his way out. I was not referring to just Lleyton but 5 other players who I believe can fominate the game. I said if ANY ONE of them does it. I did not mention those others because as of today only Sfain, Hewitt and Ferrero have made to the masters cup morethan once and given that Federer made the semis during his first appearance i'm sure we'll see more of him.

 

[Jorge]

and after to talk about Moyà i said

now, being serious...

Nalbandián has reached a Grand Slam final, Gaudio has had excellent performances, Malisse too, Roddick is top ten, they will be together with the others that you has mentioned and another ones for a long while.

and IMO the best tennis player ever is Bjorn Borg

 

[wongqks]

Men tennis is very exciting right now, with leeydon Marat Juan etc. slugging it out, I think in a couple of years time when those players become household names, we will see a lot of rtivalry and men tennis will hit the all time high, now I just hope women tennis an keep that pace up as well and tennis as a whole will blosoom into even more global sport

 

[luvbadboys]

JorgeI am not dismissing those players ability to win majors, however I don't think they'll be able to CONSISTENTLY reach the last stages of tournements for the next 5/6 years. Malisse in particular is a streaky player. As for Roddick he has a losing record against the guys I listed. Anyway the jury's still out on him.

 

[Jorge]

luvbadboys, i respect your opinion but i prefer to be historian instead a prophet let's see what says the future

 

[Ma. Estefania]

however I don't think they'll be able to CONSISTENTLY reach the last stages of tournements for the next 5/6 years.

Yes, in this moment I agree with you luvbadboys; but I just hope that this can change and there could be more contenders each time, and including these guys that Jorge named before.

 

[Chloe le Bopper]

Yes, watch out for the argies They are coming Along with a certain guy from Chile, who you already mentioned And more I don't know about I'm sure.

BUT, you forgot one HAAS!!! *sputter* *blasphemy*

how dare you :sad:

 

[Ace Tracker]

I wonder if Haas is hungry enough...Sure, the talent is there (one of the most beautiful groundstrokes in the tour), but I havent seen the desire yet....

 

[Chloe le Bopper]

No, but I haven't seen a lot of that from Marat either, and his name is here.



I have faith he will come around, eventually - even if only by accident for a couple weeks

 

[Lee]

I just realized that Hewitt played and beat Safin, Federer and Ferrero one after the other.

We now have at least 5 players (Hewitt, Safin, Federer, Ferrero, Gonzalez, Paradorn) who are all in the same age group and they'l be fighting it out for the next 5 years. I believe that whoever dominates in the next 5 years should be more highly regarded than Sampras was in his heyday. because Sampras never had to face that many contemporaries who were as good as he was. Sampras had Becker, Andre and Pat but the four of them were never at their peak together. Becker retired, Andre was in and out of the game because of his love life and Pat came unto the scene late in Sampras's career. I am not saying that Sampras is not the best player of all time. I believe he is. I am simply saying that we would have had a better measure of his greatness had he been forced to meet Boris, Pat and Andre on a regular basis. Should any of the 5 players listed above dominate the game the way Sampras did for 6-7 years, that player in my mind will be a better player than Sampras whether or not he wins 14 slams.

This is a theory in progress but let me know what you think.

There are also Goran, Courier, Edberg during Sampras peak time and many more. It's just because Sampras was so dominating that ppl didn't notice there are great players during his prime time. I still can't understand why ppl keep on doubting how great Sampras was even he kept winning slams when ppl think he could not do it anymore. If you want to say whoever player on your list is a great player, you are free to do so but please don't try to step on the achievement of other players to make the one you like look good.

Last year's USO, Sampras defeat Rafter, Agassi & Safin to reach the final while all 3 players are still at their peak and all are ex-champion in USO.

 

[luvbadboys]

I know think Edberg retired early in Sampras's career and Courier was at his peak during the 2/3 years after Sampras won his first USO. During that time Sampras was going through his sophomore slump. My point is that At no point during the 90s did you have more than 2 possible rivals to Sampras who were at their peak. I can say that this not the case right now. In deference to the other posters who feel I've left some names out, there are 20 players in the same age bracket who are all healthy talented and fit. If Sampras had to face 20 players regularly on the tour who were his equal in talent and fitness in his age bracket his story would have been different.

 

[Lee]

If everyone kept on ignoring all the other talent players during Sampras era just because Sampras won most of the tourny, I have nothing to say.

Or ppl keep on believing Sampras won because his opponents were in a slump, suddenly their talent was gone or got injuried, I have nothing to say either.

BTW, if Hewitt use the same type of tennis racquet as Sampras or JMac used, I doubt he will have any ace or win as many games.

Also, Sampras fitness was always a problem for him because of the generic disease he had. He actually has a handicap against his opponents.

 

[Ma. Estefania]

Watch out to Feña Gonzalez!

 

[Chloe le Bopper]

The reason Sampras had less close rivals then Hewitt, is because Sampras was simply mentally, and in some ways technically - head and shoulders above the rest.

Thus, the players that were also great during that time, tend to be overlooked.

Unlike right now, when you have a jumble of players who are about the same level, and one who is just a bit mentally tougher atm.

Sampras at his best, made Agassi at his best - look ordinary. Comparisons with him are quite useless.

 

[Lee]

The reason Sampras had less close rivals then Hewitt, is because Sampras was simply mentally, and in some ways technically - head and shoulders above the rest.

Thus, the players that were also great during that time, tend to be overlooked.

Unlike right now, when you have a jumble of players who are about the same level, and one who is just a bit mentally tougher atm.

Sampras at his best, made Agassi at his best - look ordinary. Comparisons with him are quite useless.

Bravo Becca! :bounce:

 

[luvbadboys]

Yes Becca but the point remains Sampras did not have to face 20 Agassis/Beckers in peak form on the tour regularly whereas that is not the case today. Fernando may have to go through Paradorn, Lleyton, Marat and Roger to win a title. Each of the guys in the the top 20 who are the same age have to face each other constantly and they are all superbly talented. I mean if everyone agrees that there is greater depth in men's tennis right now then before doesn't it logically follow that the player (Lleyton for now and whoever else in the future) who dominates now is that much better then the player who dominated over a weak field? If not, why?

 

[Jorge]

and i forgot to mention Haas, Grosjean, Chela, Robredo, Paul-Henri Mathieu, and many more

 

[luvbadboys]

Jorge if you go back a couple of messages you'll see that for that I've enlarged the number of players who may be considered competive mostly because I felt that the discussion was going off-topic. Whether there are 5-10 or 10-20 players who are equally capable of reaching yr-end #1 (although I doubt it) is not relevant to the the point I'm trying to make. which is that there are more equally talented player in the same age bracket playing against each other now then there were in the 90s. As such who ever does get yr-end #1 has got to be better than Sampras.

If you want to start a discussion about which of the players in the 19 to 24 group actually has a realitic chance of reaching yr-end #1 we need to start another thread. Then you and I can go at it there.