PDA

View Full Version : Grass GOAT


gj011
04-11-2008, 10:37 AM
This thread is missing after the other two.

My vote goes to Sampras.

edmondsm
04-11-2008, 10:43 AM
The reason this thread was missing is because most think it is a non-argument. It's Samp without question.

By the way, that is a sweet avatar. Very appropriate for a thread about grass.:)

fastdunn
04-11-2008, 10:49 AM
sampras without a question so far. but i am not sure how good sampras would be on current slower bouncier grass courts.

gj011
04-11-2008, 10:50 AM
The reason this thread was missing is because most think it is a non-argument. It's Samp without question.

By the way, that is a sweet avatar. Very appropriate for a thread about grass.:)

I thought claycourt GOAT is non-argument too.

Thanks :) I hope you can recognize who is on the picture.

edmondsm
04-11-2008, 11:05 AM
I thought claycourt GOAT is non-argument too.

Thanks :) I hope you can recognize who is on the picture.

That's a good point. There is no arguing with 6 FO titles.

Sorry I can't come up with who it is. Maybe a clue?

gj011
04-11-2008, 11:07 AM
Sorry I can't come up with who it is. Maybe a clue?

He was in the QF of the last big tournament.

shwetty[tennis]balls
04-11-2008, 11:10 AM
For now Sampras. We'll see if Federer can outrun him.

yourmom08
04-11-2008, 11:11 AM
tipsarevic im guessing?

edmondsm
04-11-2008, 11:15 AM
Got to be Tipsarevic?

kay87
04-11-2008, 11:15 AM
Who is GOAT, why is he GOAT,........

STOP the discussion, because I got him GOAT!

Here he is - GOAT:

http://www.websophist.com/GoatBoy.jpg

:)

zagor
04-11-2008, 11:15 AM
Sampras in my opinion.I don't think I will change my opinion even if Federer were to somehow win 7 or 8 Wimbledons.

Nadal_Freak
04-11-2008, 11:43 AM
Sampras on the old grass but I think Federer would be better on the modern grass.

93sq.
04-11-2008, 11:54 AM
Sampras...of course

veroniquem
04-11-2008, 12:36 PM
Sampras served like a machine on grass. Agassi was lucky in 91, he would never have beaten Sampras on grass!

ATXtennisaddict
04-11-2008, 12:38 PM
Weren't a lot of older slams played on grass too? So you have to consider those greats who won non-wimby slams on grass.

But of course, Sampras takes the cake.

gj011
04-11-2008, 02:05 PM
Got to be Tipsarevic?

Yes it is Janko :cool:

Vision84
04-11-2008, 02:22 PM
Wimbledon doesn't play like grass anymore so no one in the current generation counts.

Lotto
04-11-2008, 02:25 PM
Well Lads and Lassies. Sampras was a great on the grass no doubt and I believe he is the greatest. The thing is that if Federer wins 6 or 7 straight titles at Wimbledon and wins more Wimbledons then Sampras then he is the GOAT on grass because he beat him in 2001. Sampras has never beaten Fed on grass. But still Sampras is the best unless Federer cracks his record.

ninman
04-11-2008, 02:54 PM
Well Lads and Lassies. Sampras was a great on the grass no doubt and I believe he is the greatest. The thing is that if Federer wins 6 or 7 straight titles at Wimbledon and wins more Wimbledons then Sampras then he is the GOAT on grass because he beat him in 2001. Sampras has never beaten Fed on grass. But still Sampras is the best unless Federer cracks his record.

Yes but Sampras's longest winning streak on grass was around 26 matches I believe, Federer is currently at 54. Sampras only ever managed 1 year unbeaten on grass, Federer has gone 5. Sampras won 3 in a row then 4 in a row at Wimbledon, Federer is at 5 in a row. Sampras was a great grass courter, and a brilliant serve and volleyer, but I think currently Federer's record is better.

I think for Federer to truly surpass Sampras, he needs to win Wimbledon 3 more times, i.e. the same years that Sampras won his last Wimbledon's.

superman1
04-11-2008, 06:06 PM
Yes but Sampras's longest winning streak on grass was around 26 matches I believe, Federer is currently at 54. Sampras only ever managed 1 year unbeaten on grass, Federer has gone 5. Sampras won 3 in a row then 4 in a row at Wimbledon, Federer is at 5 in a row. Sampras was a great grass courter, and a brilliant serve and volleyer, but I think currently Federer's record is better.

I think for Federer to truly surpass Sampras, he needs to win Wimbledon 3 more times, i.e. the same years that Sampras won his last Wimbledon's.

I don't think it's exactly equal. The grass courts were faster when Sampras played, and a lot of his competition served big and volleyed well. Federer's grass court wins are mostly baseline battles against pure baseliners.

crawl4
04-11-2008, 06:07 PM
Yes but Sampras's longest winning streak on grass was around 26 matches I believe, Federer is currently at 54. Sampras only ever managed 1 year unbeaten on grass, Federer has gone 5. Sampras won 3 in a row then 4 in a row at Wimbledon, Federer is at 5 in a row. Sampras was a great grass courter, and a brilliant serve and volleyer, but I think currently Federer's record is better.

I think for Federer to truly surpass Sampras, he needs to win Wimbledon 3 more times, i.e. the same years that Sampras won his last Wimbledon's.

yeh true that

go fed

NLBwell
04-11-2008, 08:10 PM
Laver
When people poke at him being the GOAT, they always say, "Well, 3 of the 4 slams were on grass then." Between 1962 (amateur) and 69 (open) he won 6 straight slam tournaments in a row on grass. He had a pretty impressive record in the intervening pro-only years, also.

He wasn't very big, but like Bobby Riggs, he used the grass to make his serve extremely difficult to return well. He was a better volleyer than Sampras and had better passing shots.

ej
04-11-2008, 08:40 PM
I don't think it's exactly equal. The grass courts were faster when Sampras played, and a lot of his competition served big and volleyed well. Federer's grass court wins are mostly baseline battles against pure baseliners.

With today's slower surface, you also need a ground game. You need, say, a backhand. Pete is lucky he retired when you did.

leonidas1982
04-11-2008, 09:05 PM
Can't really call Federer a grass GOAT since grass courts, especially Wimbledon, have lost their characteristics. Bjorn was great because he was able to change his baseline game to serve and volley for Wimbledon -- a real feat.

chiru
04-11-2008, 09:16 PM
With today's slower surface, you also need a ground game. You need, say, a backhand. Pete is lucky he retired when you did.

its remarkable how many kids these days don't remember that once upon a time ppl thought sampras' one hander may have been the best at that time.

leonidas1982
04-11-2008, 09:39 PM
^^^ Ha, classic. It certainly is true.

flyer
04-11-2008, 09:48 PM
Greatness on grass is measured by Wimbledon trophies, as of now it is absolutely no debate, Fed I highly doubt will catch him either....Its Pete Sampras

vince916
04-11-2008, 10:03 PM
I wonder how the courts are really like these days.

People say Wimbledon is slower. Then when Federer beat Nadal last year at Hamburg people mentioned it wasnt a true clay court since it played fast.

Zimbo
04-11-2008, 10:49 PM
I don't think it's exactly equal. The grass courts were faster when Sampras played, and a lot of his competition served big and volleyed well. Federer's grass court wins are mostly baseline battles against pure baseliners.

I agree with you here but even if the grass didn't change I think Fed would still have won all his Wimbledon tittles. That said my vote would be Sampras. Behind Pete in no particular order would be Mac, Fed, Becker, Borg, and Edberg. I can't add the old timers (Laver etc......) cause I never saw them played.

Eviscerator
04-12-2008, 11:25 PM
Laver.....

superman1
04-12-2008, 11:36 PM
With today's slower surface, you also need a ground game. You need, say, a backhand. Pete is lucky he retired when you did.

Lolz. I'm sure Agassi is kicking himself right now, thinking, "damn, I should have gone to Pete's backhand! Then I would have won every point!"

Sampras won the US Open 5 times. I'd say he was pretty damn good from the baseline.

stormholloway
04-12-2008, 11:47 PM
Sampras served like a machine on grass. Agassi was lucky in 91, he would never have beaten Sampras on grass!

1992.

Nobody gets lucky at Wimbledon, especially not a baseliner on the old grass.

stormholloway
04-12-2008, 11:48 PM
With today's slower surface, you also need a ground game. You need, say, a backhand. Pete is lucky he retired when you did.

Pete worked guys from the baseline. This is the biggest myth in tennis.

leonidas1982
04-13-2008, 12:00 AM
^^^ I presume he never heard of Pete's running forehand, or the fact that he has one of the best forehands.

superman1
04-13-2008, 12:17 AM
I agree with you here but even if the grass didn't change I think Fed would still have won all his Wimbledon tittles. That said my vote would be Sampras. Behind Pete in no particular order would be Mac, Fed, Becker, Borg, and Edberg. I can't add the old timers (Laver etc......) cause I never saw them played.

We'll never know. Wimbledon is a neutral surface now, back then it was a polarizing surface. Even if you were great on the stuff, like Sampras, once in a while you could meet someone who could serve lights out and bring it down to a couple of points here and there.

kaiotic
04-15-2008, 06:24 PM
the fact that Sampras almost won Wimbledon 8 straight, to win 7 in the 8-yr span. I say Pete is the man. pretty F*cking amazing.

Q&M son
04-17-2008, 05:55 PM
Borg or Sampras, fed needs time by now.

Ferrari1190
04-17-2008, 05:57 PM
Pete Sampras

m1stuhxsp4rk5
04-17-2008, 06:06 PM
pete sampras

deme08
04-18-2008, 01:50 AM
Roger Federer

deme08
04-18-2008, 01:53 AM
Federer's 5 straight Wimbledon tiltes and 54 matches (and counting) winning streak on grass are amazing accomplishments.

joeri888
04-18-2008, 04:02 AM
1. Sampras
2. Federer
3. Borg

Federer isn't the GOAT on any surface, but he might very well be the GOAT of tennis, because he's so good on every surface

Wolbo
04-18-2008, 11:51 AM
It's got to be Krajicek because he beat the grass King on his beloved surface and in his prime. :wink:

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:22 PM
8-)[QUOTE=gj011;2244092]This thread is missing after the other two.

My vote goes to Sampras too

My vote goes for Pete, too. I saw part of Philadelphia in 1990...and was totally caught up in his play. Then, saw his first US Open win...that little skinny kid beating MacEnroe, Lendl and Agassi...whoa. I was caught hook line and sinker and have been amazed at what he's done, and still live a decent life. Moms and point to him as a real sportsman for their kids...and that's great, too.:)

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:25 PM
Federer's 5 straight Wimbledon tiltes and 54 matches (and counting) winning streak on grass are amazing accomplishments.

He's terrific, but he's had a hard year so far....wonder if it's cause of Pete, or mono:shock:

Francella

lambielspins
04-18-2008, 09:28 PM
Rod Laver.

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:30 PM
It's got to be Krajicek because he beat the grass King on his beloved surface and in his prime. :wink:


Yeap....I saw the match at Wimby when Krajicek won. boy was he cool that day. you could see it on his face..."ok, Pete, see if you can knock this tree over? So I wasn't happy at the end of that match....since Pete's #1 to me. But I always like Richard........more than Fed. Francella

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:38 PM
With today's slower surface, you also need a ground game. You need, say, a backhand. Pete is lucky he retired when you did.

But Pete's playing again...and he's going to do that round robin in London in December...that's competition, not just expos. But he showed well against Fed even if the overall score is now 3-1. I was at MSG, and Pete was tired that last set....but oh so painfully close to taking it at 5-3. It's still a real pleasure to watch him play; his style is just so so so beautiful on court. Guess you can tell I'm a real fan.:)
Francella

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:41 PM
Greatness on grass is measured by Wimbledon trophies, as of now it is absolutely no debate, Fed I highly doubt will catch him either....Its Pete Sampras

You don'think Fed will surpass Pete? He's still young, and only has to win 3 more? I don't like it, but I've accepted it; I just wish Fed had come along 10 years from now so that Pete could enjoy his GOAT longer.
Francella

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:42 PM
You don'think Fed will surpass Pete? He's still young, and only has to win 3 more? I don't like it, but I've accepted it; I just wish Fed had come along 10 years from now so that Pete could enjoy his GOAT longer.
Francella


p.s. There's still that 6 years#1 to overcome, too

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:47 PM
Pete worked guys from the baseline. This is the biggest myth in tennis.

He sure did! Set up those points. Got to net, or did a down the line, or forehand cross-court. And that leap to smash the ball......beautiful.
Frellanca

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:51 PM
tipsarevic im guessing?

I had a lot of high hopes for Safin, but I guess he's had injurries and his temperment has also held hm back (ha! held him back...all those guy are super to even be there.
Francella

Francella
04-18-2008, 09:53 PM
Who is GOAT, why is he GOAT,........

STOP the discussion, because I got him GOAT!

Here he is - GOAT:

http://www.websophist.com/GoatBoy.jpg

:)

He's adorable...and when he grows up he'll love you for that picture.........no bare baby bottom! Francella

Shabazza
04-19-2008, 02:31 AM
its remarkable how many kids these days don't remember that once upon a time ppl thought sampras' one hander may have been the best at that time.

It was a ridiculous statement during his days.

Shabazza
04-19-2008, 02:37 AM
I wonder how the courts are really like these days.

People say Wimbledon is slower. Then when Federer beat Nadal last year at Hamburg people mentioned it wasnt a true clay court since it played fast.

Those people don't have a clue about the clay courts. Even a dry and, for its standard fast clay court, Hamburg is still one of the slowest and low bouncing clay courts on the tour.
Paris and esp. Rome are way faster, period.

joeri888
04-19-2008, 04:17 AM
Yeap....I saw the match at Wimby when Krajicek won. boy was he cool that day. you could see it on his face..."ok, Pete, see if you can knock this tree over? So I wasn't happy at the end of that match....since Pete's #1 to me. But I always like Richard........ As my fellow countryman I like Krajicek a lot of course. I was just a kid when he won at wimbledon. Only saw highlights of his match with Sampras, but saw the whole thing in the final. He was terrific. I think if it wasn't for his ongoign injuries he could have won another grand slam maybe.

noeledmonds
04-19-2008, 09:46 AM
Looking at male open-era players only I would have to go for Laver, but by a small margin. Grass conditions have varied over time at Wimbledon so comparisons of styles and match ups based on Wimbledon are difficult. However, Laver played on grass more than any other surface and also played on a variety of different grasses also (e.g. the Australian Open grass pre-1988 was rather different from the Wimbledon grass at this time). Laver won 9 grand slams on grass in total. Laver also won Wimbledon 4 consecutive times of entering the tournament. This was in 1961 and 1962, then a gap where he was unable to compete, then he won again in 1968 and 1969. Laver would have almost certainly won many more Wimbledon titles had he been allowed to compete there during his professional years pre-1968.

Sampras is the other particularly strong contender. Sampras's 7 Wimbledon titles stand out as an outstanding display of dominance at the All England Club. Sampras's dominance at Wimbledon is unmatched by any other player in history. Only a handfull of other's have dominated at an indidual grand slam like Sampras did since the abolition of the challanger round (only Borg at the French Open, Tilden at the US Open spring to mind and Emerson at the Australian Open beneffing from the pro/amateur divide).

Federer is the next strongest open-era candidate and could surpass Sampras if he were to match or exceed Sampras's 7 Wimbledon titles. Federer could also catch Laver, although it would be much harder to define where he would have to reach to do so.

kay87
04-19-2008, 01:25 PM
GOAT on Grass?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1266/939233938_07a0f1325c_m.jpg

:D

stormholloway
04-19-2008, 01:28 PM
Pete was up against far more pure grass court players in his time as well. Today's grass doesn't necessarily reward the best grass court players or else there would be far more serve and volleying.

Sampras, regardless of how many titles Federer wins, will always be the best grass court player of all time because the old grass isn't coming back, and the old grass was the real test of a grass court player.

edmondsm
04-19-2008, 01:53 PM
Pete was up against far more pure grass court players in his time as well. Today's grass doesn't necessarily reward the best grass court players or else there would be far more serve and volleying.

Sampras, regardless of how many titles Federer wins, will always be the best grass court player of all time because the old grass isn't coming back, and the old grass was the real test of a grass court player.

Your statement is one big contradiction. Sampras was the best on the old grass, Fed is the best on the new grass. Just because the old grass fulfills some sort of purest ideal doesn't mean that there was more competition. The competion that Samp had was just different competition. Sampras's style would not win him 7 Wimbledon's on the new grass, Federer's would not have won him 5 on the old. You are comparing apples and oranges and saying that apples are better because apples are the "real" fruit.

stormholloway
04-19-2008, 02:02 PM
No, I'm saying that you have two apples. One tastes like an apple, and the other tastes like a banana. The old grass is how grass is supposed to play according to the history of the game. Grass is implicitly supposed to be a volleyer's surface. Measures were taken to intentionally make the grass play slowly. This was a concerted effort. People didn't try to make grass fast historically, it was just that way.

Nadal_Monfils
04-19-2008, 02:09 PM
1. Sampras
2. Laver
3. Borg
4. Federer

miniRafa386
04-19-2008, 03:35 PM
if fed wins 6 in a row, hes the best, even if he never wins 7 like sampras. 6 in a ROW, rather than 7 scattered throughout his career.

edmondsm
04-19-2008, 04:03 PM
No, I'm saying that you have two apples. One tastes like an apple, and the other tastes like a banana. The old grass is how grass is supposed to play according to the history of the game. Grass is implicitly supposed to be a volleyer's surface. Measures were taken to intentionally make the grass play slowly. This was a concerted effort. People didn't try to make grass fast historically, it was just that way.

Still, you can't fault Federer because the All England Club slowed the surface down. Whatever history dictates, that is all it is, history. The surfaces were more varied back then, but all that means is that Samp had a different player to compete against, not a better player, just different.

This thread isn't titled "Old grass GOAT". Grass is grass, and if Fed wins 8 Wimbledons then he is it IMO.

stormholloway
04-19-2008, 05:19 PM
So if Ivan Lendl had grown up to play in this era, and won a couple Wimbledon titles would that have made him a better grass court player? Not in my opinion. It simply means that Lendl's game better suits this new grass.

I hear what you're saying, and I don't fault Federer at all. He beat Sampras serve and volleying on grass. He won Wimbledon serve and volleying in 2003, but Federer is naturally a baseliner, and as soon as the grass slowed down Federer hung back, even more so than many other baseliners.

What I perceive as a great grass court player is someone whose game is so specifically suited to grass and who dominated using that style. Sampras embodies that in my opinion. Federer's style is more adaptable. He's just amazing, so he can play on any service. Sampras is a machine built for grass it seemed. I pick him for this reason.

If, hypothetically, they slowed grass down to the speed of a clay court, would it seem right to call clay courters great grass courters? Technically they would be, but I sure as hell wouldn't recognize it.

In other words I oppose the slowing down of Wimbledon.

edmondsm
04-20-2008, 01:47 PM
You make a great point. In any case, Samp is still currently the greatest player to ever step onto a grass court. That won't be arguable for at least another year.

noeledmonds
04-20-2008, 02:55 PM
if fed wins 6 in a row, hes the best, even if he never wins 7 like sampras. 6 in a ROW, rather than 7 scattered throughout his career.

Sampras won 7 Wimbledon titles in 8 years. This is hardly "scattered" throughout his career.

What I perceive as a great grass court player is someone whose game is so specifically suited to grass and who dominated using that style.

What you percieve as a great grass court player is hardly relevant. Today's Wimbledon surface is still grass. If you perform well on today's grass you are a good grass court player regardless of how you would perform on previous grass surfaces. Your judgment implies that the older grass is the "real grass" but in reality you have to view all grass surfaces equally. The fact you prefer old serve and volley tennis on grass does not make the older surface superior.

In any case, Samp is still currently the greatest player to ever step onto a grass court. That won't be arguable for at least another year.

Laver cannot be ruled out of any grass GOAT argument. If you are viewing all time players than many other pre-open era players should also get a mention. Grass was the major surface well into the early part of the open-era. Sampras is a contender for the grass GOAT but he is by no means undisputably the best. Sampras only won 10 grass tournmaents in his career. Laver probabely won around 100 grass tournaments in his career given that he won over 180 tournaments in his career and grass was the most common surface at this time.

edmondsm
04-20-2008, 07:00 PM
Laver cannot be ruled out of any grass GOAT argument. If you are viewing all time players than many other pre-open era players should also get a mention. Grass was the major surface well into the early part of the open-era. Sampras is a contender for the grass GOAT but he is by no means undisputably the best. Sampras only won 10 grass tournmaents in his career. Laver probabely won around 100 grass tournaments in his career given that he won over 180 tournaments in his career and grass was the most common surface at this time.

Well I don't want to get into another endless discussion about comparing different eras of tennis against each other but..........Laver gets docked points (in my book) for competing in a time when there was less competition and the game was easier on your body. Who knows who he was playing against in most of those 100 grass tournaments. Honestly, who knows, if you can find out please tell me. There is no way I would ever consider a guy who competed in an amature sport better then one who competed against professionals. There were only a handful of players making there livings at tennis in Laver's day. Sampras never played anyone who didn't make their living at tennis. Laver probably played more matches against dentists then professional tennis players.

Vision84
04-20-2008, 07:10 PM
if fed wins 6 in a row, hes the best, even if he never wins 7 like sampras. 6 in a ROW, rather than 7 scattered throughout his career.

Grass was also faster in Pete's era. There were also more grass court specialists to contend with for him than Federer and on such a fast court with serve and volley it is easier for an upset. I think Pete said somethng to this effect in an interview somewhere.

stormholloway
04-20-2008, 11:17 PM
What you percieve as a great grass court player is hardly relevant. Today's Wimbledon surface is still grass. If you perform well on today's grass you are a good grass court player regardless of how you would perform on previous grass surfaces. Your judgment implies that the older grass is the "real grass" but in reality you have to view all grass surfaces equally. The fact you prefer old serve and volley tennis on grass does not make the older surface superior.

Oh my god, you speak as if your word is fact and the opinions of others are merely that: opinions. First of all, what I perceive is ALWAYS relevant because we're talking about an opinionated topic: who is the greatest.

Secondly, you boldly declare that I HAVE to view all grass surfaces equally. I sure as hell don't because they aren't equal. Like I said you could theoretically make a grass court play like a clay court. Would I view that court equally to old Wimbledon grass? No, because they aren't equal, and suddenly clay courters would be king on grass. Does that make them the greatest grass court players? Not in my opinion, and that's what it is, an informed and well thought out opinion.

caulcano
04-21-2008, 05:09 AM
1. Sampras
2. Laver
3. Borg
4. Federer

I agree, though Federer can only go up in the list.

NLBwell
04-29-2008, 10:55 PM
Then when Federer beat Nadal last year at Hamburg people mentioned it wasnt a true clay court since it played fast.

No, Hamburg's court is very slow - maybe the slowest on the tour (and the conditions are usually wet and cold). The slowness and softness of the court caused Nadal's shots to not bounce up as high on Federer's backhand, so he was more able to hit in his comfort zone.

Fries-N-Gravy
04-29-2008, 11:20 PM
if the grass was faster like it was before federer would probably be even more dominant. he certainly wouldn't have been taken to 5 sets by nadal if it were fast. sampras clearly is a contender for greatest and while fed doesnt yet have 7, he does have more consistent results even on slow grass. if anything sampras had the easier surface.

Otherside
04-30-2008, 04:09 AM
Fed dethroned Sampras in his own backyard playing his style of tennis just to show whose THA MAN! Then he chose to stay back the last years to get baseline practice for the french open.

Otherside
04-30-2008, 04:11 AM
U can discuss the speed of the grass all u want. Pete said it best when asked about Feds wins on the so called slower grass. -Hey, grass is grass

Not fulltime player
04-30-2008, 04:36 AM
Sampras won 7 Wimbledon titles in 8 years. This is hardly "scattered" throughout his career.



What you percieve as a great grass court player is hardly relevant. Today's Wimbledon surface is still grass. If you perform well on today's grass you are a good grass court player regardless of how you would perform on previous grass surfaces. Your judgment implies that the older grass is the "real grass" but in reality you have to view all grass surfaces equally. The fact you prefer old serve and volley tennis on grass does not make the older surface superior.



Laver cannot be ruled out of any grass GOAT argument. If you are viewing all time players than many other pre-open era players should also get a mention. Grass was the major surface well into the early part of the open-era. Sampras is a contender for the grass GOAT but he is by no means undisputably the best. Sampras only won 10 grass tournmaents in his career. Laver probabely won around 100 grass tournaments in his career given that he won over 180 tournaments in his career and grass was the most common surface at this time.
Thatīs a key, Which is "real grass"?, nowdays Wimby grass?, eightiees Wimby grass?, pre-1988 Aussie grass, where Wilander and Vilas used to in?

jean pierre
04-30-2008, 06:21 AM
don't forget Vilas ! A great grass player, even if he's considered like a specialist of clay court. He won on grass 3 bigs tournaments : 2 Australian Open and 1 Masters (beating Newcomb, Borg and Nastase !)

Not fulltime player
04-30-2008, 07:26 AM
Iīll say Sampras because de titles, but I enjoyed more watching Big Mac or even Cash.

gj011
04-30-2008, 07:41 AM
Wow this thread is still alive :)

Eviscerator
04-30-2008, 08:32 AM
Well I don't want to get into another endless discussion about comparing different eras of tennis against each other but..........Laver gets docked points (in my book) for competing in a time when there was less competition and the game was easier on your body. Who knows who he was playing against in most of those 100 grass tournaments. Honestly, who knows, if you can find out please tell me. There is no way I would ever consider a guy who competed in an amature sport better then one who competed against professionals. There were only a handful of players making there livings at tennis in Laver's day. Sampras never played anyone who didn't make their living at tennis. Laver probably played more matches against dentists then professional tennis players.

:roll:

First of all, when amateur tennis was still around the best were playing it. There was a transition to the pro tour, but don't forget that Laver also joined the pro tour and won. As to who he played during those years as both an amateur and pro, all it would take is a simple google search rather than assuming he was playing hacks like "dentists".

baseliner
04-30-2008, 08:39 AM
Laver. He won US Open, Wimby and Aussie twice each on grass (I know, it wasn't the US Open when he won is '62) It is funny when GOAT is posed, the posters here only mention recent players.