4th best mens tennis player in history

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by rosewallGOAT, Jun 29, 2013.

?

4th best mens tennis player in history

  1. Sampras

    17.9%
  2. Borg

    7.1%
  3. Federer

    35.7%
  4. Nadal

    14.3%
  5. Connors

    3.6%
  6. Lendl

    3.6%
  7. Tilden

    3.6%
  8. Kramer or Perry

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. Budge or Vines

    3.6%
  10. Agassi or McEnroe

    10.7%
  1. rosewallGOAT

    rosewallGOAT Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    369
    If we accept that Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver are the 3 best mens tennis players in history in whatever order who would be 4th. There seems to be alot of worthy candidates for 4th- Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Tilden, Borg, and I will include as many options as possible.
     
    #1
  2. DolgoSantoro

    DolgoSantoro Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    839
    Location:
    Far away
    And if we don't :p?
     
    #2
  3. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    rosewallGOAT aka nadalagassi aka davey25 ...

    I think a more interesting question is in what position is this profile of yours among your own set of profiles ?

    should we start research on that ? :lol:
     
    #3
  4. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    rosewallGOAT, Fine that you have Gonzalez, Rosewall and Laver as the three best (no order). In my opinion Tilden deserves fourth place (or tied third with Pancho).
     
    #4
  5. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,430
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    It's heights of desperation. NadalAgassi is trying to convince himself what he wants to believe and he knows very well that this will serve as a bait..

    It's funny when you read these kind of topics and I pity the OP
     
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2013
    #5
  6. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,506
    1. Federer
    2. Laver
    3. Sampras
    4. Gonzales
     
    #6
  7. rosewallGOAT

    rosewallGOAT Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    369
    What elevates Tilden above the rest to 4th place in your opinion.
     
    #7
  8. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,050
    I certain don't because most fans believe Federer and Laver is #1 and #2.
     
    #8
  9. rosewallGOAT

    rosewallGOAT Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    369
    One thing to remember is Laver had less longevity at the top than both Gonzales and Rosewall, despite that he played in the same era essentialy as both. Gonzales and Rosewall were dominating in the 50s, yet still competitive until the early 70s when the much younger Laver was. Rosewall was even the last one to make slam finals of those despite being much older than Laver.
     
    #9
  10. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,667
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    It depends on what one means by "at the top."

    If one means at the very top as the world's no. 1 player, then one could conclude that Tilden, Gonzales, and Laver are all tied.

    Tilden--7 years as world no. 1
    Gonzales--7 years as world no. 1
    Rosewall--4 years as world no. 1
    Laver--7 years as world no. 1
     
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2013
    #10
  11. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,333
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Rosewall was able to hang around for a long time and that meant he picked up alot of trophies. But his peak wasn't as good as the other top tier greats.
     
    #11
  12. McLovin

    McLovin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Messages:
    3,150
    Fernando Gonzales was a good player, but I don't think he was that good...
     
    #12
  13. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,667
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Nah, that's Gonzalez.
     
    #13
  14. 1477aces

    1477aces Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,598
    Clown threads. Don't try to compare pre open era players to open era players. If so, then Rosewall should be knocked off the list; at 5'7" 140 he can't compete in the modern era; you can't say for sure that Federer or Sampras would have been incompatible in other eras for sure/
     
    #14
  15. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    We don't.

    Or, at least, I don't.

    Here is my top 5:

    1. Federer
    2. Laver
    3. Sampras
    4. Gonzales
    5. Rosewall

    In answer to the thread's question, then, I would say Pancho Gonzales.
     
    #15
  16. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Ha, I didn't know you had the same top 4 as me! :)
     
    #16
  17. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,050
    His height/weight wasn't a problem in his heyday, but he would suffer in the modern era. Even Serena is heavier than him.
     
    #17
  18. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    rosewallGOAT, What elevates Rosewall, Laver and Gonzalez? The same as Tilden elevates: A huge record, great achievements.

    Tilden won 10 amateur majors and 4 pro majors. He has won at least 160 tournaments, more than Rosewal and Gonzalez. He had an astounding .936 win loss average as an amteur.

    He won Wimbledon at 37, beat Budge at least 3 times in 1939 at 46 and had fine victories after WW2. In 1946 he lead 5-2 in the deciding set against champion,Riggs in a pro tournament when he was 53!
     
    #18
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mighty Federer, Do you really believe Serena would have any chance against Rosewall??
     
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2013
    #19
  20. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,333
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Hypocrisy at it's finest, Tilden is given props by you for an incredible win percentage versus a field of amateurs yet you have the nerve to call the field Federer dominated weak. What a joke.
     
    #20
  21. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,050
    NatF,

    That is like one is trying to argue 1 > 10.
     
    #21
  22. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,050
    No, but that is like asking if I have any chance against a pro player like Chang, which I believe I don't.
     
    #22
  23. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    I would accept Rosewall's own list of the top four players, all-time;

    1) Hoad
    Of course, this concentrates on only those years that Hoad played well, about 1953 to 1964. A brief period of eleven seasons, about the same as Borg or Laver.

    2) Gonzales
    Gonzales had a peak period from about 1949 to 1961, the year in which he won his last pro tour. Twelve years.

    3) Laver
    Laver's mature strong years were 1961 to 1971.
    About ten years.

    4) Federer
    Fed had great years from 2003 to 2012. Nine years.

    I would rank Rosewall, Sedgman, Sampras, Budge, Vines, Borg, McEnroe, Becker in order after this.
    Kramer gets a special category all to himself; the champion of 100-match series. The true entrepreneur of the game.
     
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2013
    #23
  24. Steffi-forever

    Steffi-forever Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    656
    OP # 22. Fed is the G.O.A.T.

    Why are you obsessed with G.O.A.T. debate anyway? It's been like 7-8 years you're talking about it every single day. :/
     
    #24
  25. 1477aces

    1477aces Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,598
    Federer would blow Rosewall off the court in the modern era; 5'7" 140. We can't say definitely that federer wouldn't have beat Rosewall in the pre-open era. Which is why its stupid to compare across the open era and pre-open era; fitness and the like didn't really matter till the 70's.
     
    #25
  26. 6-3 6-0

    6-3 6-0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages:
    1,575
    Location:
    Fedal era
    1. RFederer
    2. RNadal

    ....

    ....

    3.
    4.

    Rest of the lot
     
    #26
  27. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, Gonzalez was much stronger in 1964 and later than in 1949!
     
    #27
  28. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    1477aces,

    I understand: We cannot compare old and new tennis but we know that Federer would beat Rosewall. Fitness did not matter till the 1970? LOL, LOL, LOL...
     
    #28
  29. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    NatF, Or Tilden was that better than the other great players (Johnston, Richards, Borotra, Lacoste, Cochet) because he was awesome.
     
    #29
  30. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,333
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Same could be said for Federer's competition could it not ;)
     
    #30
  31. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,506
    (Slowly gives off a satisfactory grin) Well done, well done!
     
    #31
  32. DolgoSantoro

    DolgoSantoro Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    839
    Location:
    Far away
    This list looks pretty good to me.

    I think you make too much sense to post in this section ;). They're going to ask you to leave. Don't though.
     
    #32
  33. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,667
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    And her posterior would crush him!
     
    #33
  34. 1477aces

    1477aces Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,598
    Rosewall was 5'7" 140. Have you watched tennis over the last 10 years? You need size and strength in today's game. Rosewall would be blown off the court by any top 20 player probably. Yes, fitness and strength didn't matter nearly as much as they do today till the 70's, as evidenced by the short and (relatively) weak Rosewall being the best player (arguably) of the pre-open era; or chain-smoker Gonzales reaching slam quarterfinals in his 40's. Can't happen in today's game. That's why we shouldn't compare people from pre-open era and the early 70's (like John Newcombe) and open-era players (starting with Borg, Connors, and their contemporaries).
     
    #34
  35. Top Jimmy

    Top Jimmy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    455
    I Love the fact that people have these set in stone ideas about players that they most likely have never watched in their lives. I call this the Jim Brown Effect. Whenever anyone talks about RB's in the NFL it's almost sacrilege to suggest anyone else is better. Ignoring the fact someone like Adrian Peterson is faster, stronger and played against much better competition. It's the same way with The Beatles, just because they came first doesn't mean they are the best.

    I don't except the fact that because Tilden won a lot in his time that he should be considered the greatest. Fed and Sampras are playing at a different level than players in the past, it's the evolution of the sport.

    Though Laver was pretty darn good from what I've watched.
     
    #35
  36. NadalDramaQueen

    NadalDramaQueen Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,561
    It works both ways. Many people worship the old greats as gods but others dismiss any player from the past for the reasons you stated above. Neither viewpoint is fair in my opinion.

    I think it is fairly obvious when someone has fallen completely into one of these extremes, and it is a pity that they are usually blind to it.

    This thread is a joke anyway, so don't worry about it too much. :)
     
    #36
  37. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    No, I don't see that.

    Looking at Gonzales' year in 1964, he won the Cleveland "World Pro Championships", the Jack March event, no longer pretending to be the U.S. Pro, over Gimeno.
    A remarkable win at White Plains, the Golden Raquet at Wembley (not the big tournament), Knokke-Le-Zoute in Belgium, the Florida Pro (over Bartzen and Giammalva).

    Gonzales did well enough to finish third overall for the 1964 tour of USA and Europe.

    In 1949, he was 21 years old, and could run all day, outlasting Schroeder in the Forest Hills final and PSW final. He also beat Sedgman in the Davis Cup final.
    These were his first mature wins against a top player.

    Although he started slowly against Kramer on the pro tour, he gradually improved and had a substantial edge on the California portion of the tour, 8 wins to 4.
    Gonzales won his biggest tournament meeting with Kramer in his rookie season in the Philadelphia final, the most important event of the season, 7-5, 6-3, 6-4. A no-doubter.
     
    #37
  38. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,667
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    It is odd and perhaps "funny" that a poster with this moniker should originate such a post--I have Rosewall as fourth on my GOAT-list.
     
    #38
  39. Devilito

    Devilito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,264
    Sampras
    Federer
    Tilden
    Borg
    Laver
    Nadal
     
    #39
  40. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,333
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Sampras has nothing on Federer except the 6 YE #1's...no way is ahead now, especially since Federer has matched or exceeded his achievements on every surface.
     
    #40
  41. Devilito

    Devilito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,264
    comparing stats / numbers between different generations is meaningless. The sport changes so much that what's relevant now in terms of stats may not have been so just 10 years ago. Tennis is not baseball. I know how much American's just loooooove their stupid stats :rolleyes:
     
    #41
  42. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,333
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Sorry but slams, weeks at #1, YEC's etc...were all just as important in Pete's time. Federer is the more rounded player as well.

    P.S...I'm not American.
     
    #42
  43. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, Being third behind Rosewall and Laver is pretty good. Pancho was stronger as a pro than as an amateur.
     
    #43
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    hoodjem, I'm happy with any poster or expert who has Rosewall among the four or five best. Remember Tennis Channel (Rosewall 13) and Limpinhitter (Rosewall not among the 13)...
     
    #44
  45. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    He turned pro in 1949, and quickly raised his game to surpass Kramer.
     
    #45
  46. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Hoad in the early 60´s and Lendl in the early 80´s.
     
    #46
  47. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, he only surpassed Kramer in 1952 but even that is doubtful.
     
    #47
  48. Manus Domini

    Manus Domini Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,853
    Location:
    Jersey
    Since Donald Young wasn't an option, I had to give it to the one of the only ones who could possibly compete with his GOATness today. So, Federer.

    Also, what's up with Agassi/McEnroe being options?
     
    #48
  49. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Besides Gonzalez, Rosewall, and Laver? I'll go with Borg, Federer, and Sampras.
     
    #49
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    borg number one, I would agree totally if you also would mention the great Tilden.
     
    #50

Share This Page