greatest player ever?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by illuminati, May 18, 2010.

  1. illuminati

    illuminati Rookie

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    239
    #1
  2. Bryan Swartz

    Bryan Swartz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,778
    No, because you can't compare players from different eras reliably. There's too much difference between them.
     
    #2
  3. Carsomyr

    Carsomyr Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,261
    Location:
    Winesburg, Ohio
    This is an very poorly written Wikipedia article.
     
    #3
  4. Bryan Swartz

    Bryan Swartz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,778
    The previous message was brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Dept.
     
    #4
  5. SoBad

    SoBad Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,082
    Location:
    shiran
    Please quote the relevant text from those links in your post and comment on it, before asking your questions. You should not expect us to do your homework for you.
     
    #5
  6. pjonesy

    pjonesy Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,098
    Absolutely. Last time I checked, time travel is not possible to help set up mythical matchups of players in their primes.
     
    #6
  7. Cup8489

    Cup8489 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    9,269
    Location:
    Silvis, IL
    It's an interesting way to look at it, but like said before, there's too many variables to actively say who's the best. Rosewall and Laver both competed on the Pro tour during the pro/am days, and thus they faced stiffer competition than many of the players today in the open era. that being said, many of the 'grand slams' they won, at australia, wimbledon, roland garros, and the us championships, were played against amateurs, who could hardly be called the best in their generation. so there's a double asterisk next to those titles, since the pro tour wasn't very large and the amateur majors likely had lower quality competition.

    It's too bad the open era didn't always exist, isn't it! Then it would be considerably easier to compare, as all players could play in all 4 majors.
     
    #7

Share This Page