Clay Court GOAT

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by timnz, May 18, 2009.

  1. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    ARFED, It's not a case of convenient or not. It's just a fact that Laver and Rosewall played mostly with wood racquets. Wood was used much longer than poly as you know. Wood shows who really is a genius. With poly one can easier show fine shots even when not being that skilled...

    With wood not only Nadal would lose some of his strength but also GOAT Federer would lose some of his skills. So I think Nadal would again have the edge against Roger.

    Bud Collins is often asked if Federer is the GOAT (he ranks him among the top five). He uses to answer: "He can't beat Nadal"...
     
  2. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I agree. Hoad was possibly the only one who was able to shoot an opponent's racquet off the latter's hand (Cooper and so on). When looking on pictures of Hoad I realize that he had the strongest arm at all, even bigger than mighty Nadal's...
     
  3. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Flash, nevertheless, Safin is in another category than Budge and Kramer: Budge and Kramer realized much, much more than Safin did. We know enough about the two oldies.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2013
  4. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    TMF; Are you an idiot? I never said that I don't watch tennis (or modern tennis)! How can you rank Federer first when not having seen enough of old tennis?
     
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    The-Champ. I agree regarding videos of modern and videos of older players.
     
  6. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    You have said before that you have hardly ever seen Federer play.

    You have also said you base Rosewall's ranking on your imagination.

    No-one should take you seriously.
     
  7. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Phoenix, Are you TMF's brother? In their hate against me Federer fanatics use only lies and insults. Shame on you!!!
     
  8. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562

    This is one problem, certainly. But even if there were more footage, I believe the perception would remain among many people of an inherent “superiority” of the moderns.

    The underlying problem is a reductionist perception of sports where the skills/artistry factor is too tied in with other factors that evolve through time such as equipment and physical conditioning, especially equipment. The tendency is so strong that it affects people even in their assessment of works that are considered strictly “art”, such as music, painting etc. (even the most hideous architectural monstrosities of the 20th century are perceived as architectural progress with respect to the past). There seems to exist this tendency to believe that progress is a universal force imbuing every form of human activity and mental process. It may be some kind of journalistic illusion that is force-fed to us from all angles.
    It’s mostly BS of course, but it seems unstoppable. There are even tons of people convinced that we now understand how the world came to be, how life originated, how existence is possible...just because we are so much more intelligent than our dumb ancestors. It’s a kind of generalized self-delusion.

    The range of human skills to direct a tennis ball with a racquet cannot have changed form an evolution point of view in 100 or in 1000 years. Those skills are the same, and they are just adapted to the available equipment.

    The old equipment allows a more immediate appreciation of skill by itself, if you are able to keep in mind certain limitations the equipment offered. From this, some enthusiasts of the old game derive the mislead conclusion that skill itself has actually decreased. But that's not true either.

    On the other hand, the intoxication with the notion of progress on all fronts among some of the modern followers causes them to believe that not only equipment and (to a degree) physical conditioning have improved, but that skill itself never ceases to increase.

    One poster writes today:
    Athletics never go backward. Today's players are always bigger, faster, stronger, and better than any era in the history of the game of tennis.http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7291916&postcount=7

    And another one:
    Anyone who watches tennis knows the players have been getting faster, stronger, generally more skilled continually for as many years as we've been watching the game. http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7293628&postcount=24

    There isn't much you can do about this. These beliefs in the progress of everything just won’t go away. They are in the air as a kind of continuous bombardment, and some people absorb them very easily. And for those who do, watching old videos of great players would just confirm what they already believe.
     
  9. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,231
    QFT.

    Some people may believe also that today's highschool students are more intelligent than Newton, Einstein, Gauss or Von Neumann.

    As my grandfather used to tell: the masses are stupid.
     
  10. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    2008 Rafa in FO is just....it's a memory I try to not to remember. Unplayable.
     
  11. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Benhur, I agree totally. After having been bombarded by some Federer fanatics, it's a true refreshing change for me to read your intelligent post.

    I have a friend who is a good tennis player (I'm a bad one). He assures me that with the modern racquets he can do now many skilled strokes which he was not able when he was younger but used a wooden racquet. Wood was a tough criterion for skills. Many younger fans never saw Nastase or Rosewall or even McEnroe playing with their extraorinary shots.
     
  12. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    Funny how you have been whining about people insult/attacking you and now you prove yourself as a complete hypocrite. Fact is you claimed you only saw 10 matches of Fed, only a moron would say he knows about modern tennis and commentators/experts's opinion about tennis and Federer. Even ambk have have the pleasure to rip you to pieces for making a fool everytime for your ignorant.
     
  13. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    No, because you're a hypocrite. You can't take a hit after deliver one, but cry foul play.
     
  14. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    He actually said he only saw 10 matches of Federer. But he acts like he knows just as much as anyone who have been watching hundreds of Federer's matches over 10 years. So dense.
     
  15. ARFED

    ARFED Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Austrian expert, i`ve heard Bud Collins more than once saying that Fed is the greatest player of the Open era, so i think that he ranks him pretty high. And again you just showed that the first time you picked up a racqet was 2 weeks ago, when you throw some of them accidentally on the floor in a store.

    Seroiusly Bobby, seriously???? Nadal would have the upper hand against Federer with a wood racquet???

    You know that the truth is not in the books, it is out there. Go, play some tennis, feel the emotion, and then comeback and we can discuss.
     
  16. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    M. FEDERER; I don't think that any of the Federer armada can rip me to pieces, but rather abmk (who is intelligent) than you...
     
  17. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    And you have not even seen 10 Rosewall or Laver matches. Then how can you know that Federer is the GOAT???
     
  18. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,741
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Have you seen 10 Rosewall or Laver matches?
     
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
     
  20. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    At least more than he has seen.

    It was a response to TMF who blamed me for having seen only 10 Federer matches. Stay logical!

    By the way, sometimes I believe I have seen too many Federer matches because I always have seen the same: the same game plan, a defensive backhand and a medium volley...
     
  21. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    Yes, but you still seem to be under the impression that modern racquets allow players to win with less skills. That’s not the case unless you are playing someone with older equipment (and even then, if he is better than you, the difference in skills wouldn’t have to be very significant before it overcomes the equipment advantage). Innate skills at the very top have not decreased or increased; they are just molded and employed a bit differently from a tender age. The current top 20 growing up 60 years ago would still become high ranked players. The opposite would also be true, but maybe a little less -- not because of any progress in innate skills between then and now (an absurd notion), but simply because the pool from which tennis draws its players seems to be much larger today, so it’s reasonable to expect that the decrease in skill between number 1 and number 20 today might be less pronounced than 60 years ago. And even this is not certain.
     
  22. ARFED

    ARFED Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Great post
     
  23. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden
    Great post as usual Benhur.
    And by this we can conclude that most members in this forum are "hypermodernists/supermodernists". It's a shallow world where contextuality does not exist.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2013
  24. ARFED

    ARFED Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    608
     
  25. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden

    This video supports that assumption:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww
     
  26. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Basically his agenda is modern players don't have skills and they are lucky to succeed with superior technology. He also thinks that in todays grinders era people should be able to win like those days after they cross 30.

    Most of his posts are based on assumptions.

    I would also like to add that the globalization of the sport will help to bring more talents from small nations. correct me if I am wrong, would we get a world number one from a small country like Serbia in the 60s?

    Great Post BenHur
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
  27. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Agreed
    Which questions democracy
    Or is it a sweet that inteligent elites invented to entertain the masses and
    keep their dominating position? That is the real question in current recessiom which is the greatest ever GROT
     
  28. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    My view

    I personally believe that to compare players across decades and say that one player is the GOAT is a disservice to all the legends of this glorious game as the players used different equipments, faced different opposition and also played on different conditions. It's impossible to make an objective statement and all the arguments go on subjectivity and personals biases and hatreds.

    Even though I am a die hard fan of Roger Federer, I never called him GOAT. I simply don't believe in a GOAT. I am more than happy with the fact that Roger Federer is one of the greats to have played this game.
     
  29. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    Budge is the creator of the Grand Slam. Before that, nobody had called winning the four slam a Grand Slam. If he had lost in the US, he wouldn't have lost the Grand Slam. It makes a big difference in term of pressure.

    Beside, he won on the amateur tour. Vines, Nusslein, Old Tilden, Perry, the top players were not competing. His Grand Slam has no more value than Laver's amateur one, and Laver is not an all time great for it.

    In an old post, someone (might be the "late" PC1) explained that Budge record wasn't that stellar. Kramer made a fantastic PR work though.
     
  30. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    My point is that the myth around a player can be very disconnected from actual achievements. I agree that both Budge and Hoad have achieved far more than Safin. The "myth" around him is far more greater too.

    Note that I make the hypothesis that the myth around them is disconnected from the reality. I'm not sure about it.
     
  31. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    On the other hand, any videos of Bush, Berlusconi or o gazillion of other politician support the assumption that the elites are stupid too.
     
  32. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    That's not true, the term Grand Slam was coined when Jack Crawford made the final of the US in 1933, having won the Australian, French and Wimbledon titles that year. He couldn't quite complete the job, losing in 5 sets to Fred Perry when exhausted/suffering from some kind of illness. Therefore there will have been some pressure on Budge in the US final in 1938.

    Budge, let's not forget, actually won nine consecutive major tournaments he participated in (six classic Grand Slams in a row from Wimbledon 1937 - still a record - then three pro majors in 1939/1940). He also defeated Von Cramm in what was then considered the greatest match of all time, in the Davis Cup (when that competition was still very important).

    I do think his record qualifies him for all-time great status, maybe not quite GOAT, but lower end of the all-time top 10 (IMHO).
     
  33. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    Thanks for the precision. I still think that the absence of the other best players is a big snag. A single match considered whatever isn't enough either. There has been so many greatest match of all time. And tennis is not about winning a single match anyway.
     
  34. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    The point about the Von Cramm match was the least important of what I wrote, I was just pointing out he did legendary things in Davis Cup as well as at the majors.

    It is fine if you don't consider Budge a true great but I think he has enough credentials to at least be a contender for all-time top ten.
     
  35. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Benhur, I still believe that modern racquets allow a player to make more with the ball than wood did. Partly the racquet "plays for itself" even when the player is not very skilled...
     
  36. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
  37. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Federer fanatic: In the 1940s to 1960s a certain Pancho Segura came from Ecuador. A big country?
     
  38. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Flash, Laver not an all-time great for his 1962 GS? Very interesting aspect which I did not consider before...
     
  39. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Phoenix: I agree!
     
  40. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Yes, we agree on many issues, just not the rankings of Federer and Rosewall...
     
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Phoenix, Thanks for your nice word. I need such words in these times...

    I can live with our discrepancy. It would be fine if you could rank Muscles still at third place...
     
  42. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    I am NOT a Federer fanatic. Except for you, no one has called me a fanatic. I like Roger Federer but I like so many players. I have never said that Roger is a GOAT as I believe that it's an insult to all the legends of the game who played in different conditions.

    The difference is, almost everyone calls you Federer hater..

    Anyway, you are free to call me whatever you like :)
     
  43. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Okay, you are not a Federer fanatic. Then tell me why you and others insult me every time when I critisize a Federer weakness.

    If almost everyone would call me a Federer hater, I would stop to write here. Fortunately there still are some fair posters even though the Federer admirers have already droven away that true gentleman pc1. Note: I mention him NOT only because he has defended me several times against unfair attacs.
     
  44. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Show me one post of mine where I insulted you? just one post. I have never resorted to name calling. I have said that you are biased. That's not an insult. You show bias, so I pointed that
     
  45. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    its because you point out non-existent weaknesses ( like lack of touch ) and exaggerate his "weaknesses"

    I myself have said federer can be defensive with his BH/returning , his volleys can be sloppy at times and that he can be stubborn with his strategy at times ....

    but if you say he can't volley or his BH doesn't work vs any top player (in a baseline-dominated era ) and can't change strategies at all ( when he's done that many times ) ...... reasonable people who've seen much much more of federer than you have are bound to criticize you ...(krosero himself has very politely pointed out the tons of flaws in your arguments)
     
  46. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Aggressive abmk, When did I say that Federer can't volley?????????????
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  47. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,740
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Resurrected for pertinence.
     
  48. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,740
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Here's a good list.
     
  49. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,741
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Based on mostly achievements? Who's your top 10 on peak play?
     
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    A good list, hoodjem, but with a few strange rankings.

    I suggest to increase Laver, Nastase, Nüsslein and Segura and decrease Borotra.
     

Share This Page