Is Djokovic now in the tier with Becker, Wilander, Edberg?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by 5555, Jan 29, 2012.

  1. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648
    Location:
    London
    "undisputed - generally agreed upon"
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/undisputed
    Do you claim that I form my opinions based on majority opinions?
     
  2. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    I have just explained to you how things can be generally agreed upon and at the same time disputed, regardless of what your free (loose?) dictionary says.
     
  3. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
  4. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
  5. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    Certainly it's not undisputed. I've never said it was.

    How much agreement there is on it is impossible to tell without a proper poll much beyond the scope of these forums. If the results of such a poll were similar to these:
    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=8322

    then there could be a reasonable case for claiming there is some kind of "general agreement". That would still not make it "undisputed", nor would it be a very relevant argument for or against it (general agrement can often be wrong). I happen to think in this case the majority view is right, but not because it's the majority view. There are plenty of things where I disagree with the majority view.
     
  6. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,349
    Polls on this website don't mean anything. The discussion is whether the ranking of Vilas as number one in 1977 was undisputed at the time and it clearly was disputed. It is not like Laver in 1969 or Borg in 1979 for example in which I don't think there was any real logical dispute.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2012
  7. 2kJosh

    2kJosh New User

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2011
    Messages:
    95
    You also have to factor in his competition

    Federer, One of the best of all time.

    Rafa, who was on his way to becoming one of the best

    Murray, who's reign of terror is soon approaching
     
  8. DeShaun

    DeShaun Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,837
    Almost. The game is different, so slam count must be adjusted; while comparative "domination of the field" seems to become more subjective.
     
  9. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648
    Location:
    London
    Your definition of word "undisputed" is irrelevant. What dictionaries say is relevant.
     
  10. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Yes, since you have no serious opinion at all.
     
  11. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648
    Location:
    London
    Serious opinion on what? On the issue who was No. 1 in 1977?
     
  12. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648
    Location:
    London
    Considering that Benhur and jean pierre have not answered, it can be concluded they lost the argument.
     
  13. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Djokovic needs 3 or 4 more majors titles to get at Edberg/Wilander/Becker´s level.
     
  14. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    We answered many times.
     
  15. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648
    Location:
    London
    No, you did not.

    PS This was a humiliating defeat, but you can prevent it from happening again if you engage in arguments only if you are 100% sure that you are right.
     
  16. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    We answered many times. For instance :

    Yes, and french Tennis Magazine received a lot of letters from their readers who didn't understand this ranking. For World Tennis (which was the reference at this era), Tennis de France, Le livre d'or du tennis, Eugene L. Scott (Gros plans sur le tennis), Michel Sutter ... Vilas was n°1. And ATP should recognize today the "mistake".


    Vilas won 2 of the 3 majors, reached the final of the 4 th and the semis of the 5 th (Masters).results wise, he deserved the nº 1 spot.

    This is the mistake : the problem is notn to say who was the "better player", but to say who was the man who do the best season. Borg was maybe the better player, he beated Vilas 3 times this year, but had not the results of Vilas.

    Timnz: Excellent post. While there is and was at the time general agreement that Borg was a greater player, Vilas undoubtedly achieved more in 1977. As such, he should be considered the No. 1 player for the year.

    Borg was the nº 1 in 76 ( Connors being the best player) and Vilas was the nº 1 in 77 (Borg being the best player).Simple as that...Isn´t it easy to get?

    Vilas played 2 major finals (FO and USO) and won both. All top 10 ranked players were at the USO, the only major where this was the case that year.

    58% for Vilas : isn't it "generally agreed" ?

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...ight=poll+1977


    76% for Vilas : isn't it "generally agreed" ?

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...ight=poll+1977
     
  17. Nadal_Power

    Nadal_Power Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    506
    I think there was some word ''Undisputed''.. he will be back to it :)
     
  18. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Jean Pierre is right, as I my self stated in past posts: Borg was nº 1 for 1976 and Vilas for 1977.Even if, reversely, Connors was the best player in the world in 1976 and Borg was the best player in the world in 1977.In 1978, both went along, being nº 1 and being the best player in the world (Borg).

    1979 was close, but still Borg prevailed in both, altough his head to head with Mc Enroe is very disputable
     
  19. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648
    Location:
    London
    This was my question:
    1. TW Forum is not a reliable source
    2. You have not provided a reliable source which says that "it's generally agreed that Vilas is n°1 in 1977"
    3. Bud Collins summarized it this way in his record book of tennis: "But even though World Tennis magazine declared him No. 1 for the year, MOST other authorities disagreed and bestowed that mythical honor on Borg.
     
  20. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,338
    He's close to Becker and Edberg but still definitely behind Wilander currently.*

    (*I rate Edberg and Wilander above Becker... Edberg for his success in doubles and Wilander for having the only 3 slam year in a longer than 20 year period, plus he also had one more overall than Becker or Edberg.)
     
  21. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,459
    Becker

    I'd rate becker the best of those three. He won less grand slam than wilander but he had 5 indoor majors compared to none for wilander. In the 80s and the 90s indoor tennis was still a very significant part of the tennis year.
     
  22. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    He is tied with Vilas, but he´ll surpass him soon.Still a bit far from the WilBeckberg trio.

    Talking about them, certainly they are extremely close but I chose Becker because:

    Becker: 6 GS + 4 Circuit Finals (WCT or/and Masters )

    If each Circuit Finals weights 50% of a GS, then it is the quivalent to 8 majors ( 8 points)

    Wilander: 7 GS+0 Circuit Finals (7 points)

    Edberg: 6 GS+ 1 Circuit FInals ( 6,5 points)

    Boris indoor dominance makes him the best of the trio that ranks just behind Lendl and Mc Enroe as the best 1980´s players ( and a bit ahead of 1980´s Connors and Borg, that come just next)
     
  23. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    510
    Djokovic is almost in the Becker/Edberg/Wilander tier. Some people may say he's there already. I find it hard to pick between Becker, Edberg and Wilander, they had their differing strengths and weaknesses. Wilander preferred clay surfaces, but won Slams on hard courts and grass, beating McEnroe and Lendl in several Slams, not as good on indoor carpet. Becker preferred faster courts, especially indoor carpet too, and heavily won the head to head with Edberg, beating Wilander and Edberg in Davis Cup, but Edberg had the edge in many big matches in the Slam events v Becker.
    They're all above Vilas in my opinion too. Vilas never beat Borg in a Slam event and won the French the year Borg didn't compete. Connors beat Borg in 3 US Opens, including 2 finals and he beat Borg in a Masters final indoors.
     
  24. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,338
    Not disagreeing outright with this but I look at historical achievements and often wonder how much more respect they'd attract if they were done now or 5 years ago.

    That's the thing about the distant past - achievements sometimes aren't given the kudos they deserve. Take Djokovic for example... He's won 5 slams. But the main reason he's rated so highly now is because he won 3 last year - a year of almost unheard of dominance at slams. His win/loss ratio was amazing but slams are what really hit the history charts for all time.

    Going back past Nadal and Federer who each achieved it (Federer three times)... you can go all the way back to the late 1970s and the only person in that entire time who also did it was Wilander.

    Doing 3 in one year is a far, far bigger achievement than doing 3 over a career imo. To me that there is worth a couple of season ending championships worth of extra kudos - if not more.* To channel all that effort to perform so well in such a short space is a rarer occurrence even than someone winning a slam without losing a set.

    Notwithstanding that he has more slams than Edberg or Becker, his best year was miles, miles better than any either of them ever came close to in their careers.

    (*Note: Sure, Becker also has an amazing "added value" card up his sleeve too - he won Wimbledon at 17 and then proved it wasn't a fluke by defending it the next year. Extra kudos for being the best young achiever by far)
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2012
  25. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    If you count on Connors win in the 1977 Masters, then you should count Vilas win in the 1974 Masters.
     
  26. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715

    Connors also won 3 out of 4 , in 1974.
     
  27. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    510
    Vilas' win in the 1974 Masters counts. The 74 Masters was one of Vilas best tournament victories and over a strong field. It wasn't a Grand Slam event win over Borg, but a win all the same.
     
  28. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    Vilas isn't even close to Becker/Edberg/Wilander ...... The one people should be bringing up in these discussions - as the next one below Djoker is Courier and not Vilas ...
     
  29. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Edberg, Becker and Djoko won big tournaments only on fast courts. Wilander and Vilas won on clay and on grass (and Wilander on clay, on grass and on hard courts). That's a big difference.
     
  30. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    since when did rebound ace/plexicushion become fast courts ? Both are slow/slow-medium hard courts ... Becker , djokovic have won on them .....

    And I'd take Edberg's AO performances on rebound ace ( 3 finals - one of which he had to default due to injury) over Vilas' joke draw wins at the AO .....( only thing you could argue here is Vilas' Mastes win in 74 which was legit )

    Let's know when Vilas made it past the QF at the wimbledon - the premier grass court tournament , oh wait he didn't ! ( I'd say the same for Wilander too, but he beat legit players during his AO wins )
     
  31. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    The Australian Opens Vilas won are legit. You have to show up to have any chance of winning the tournament.
     
  32. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    I agree. Vilas worked very hard to win this tournament, won several matches in 5 sets, beated very good grass players like Chris Lewis (Wimbledon finalist), Tony Roche, McNamara or Amaya. It's not his fault if Borg and Connors prefered staying with their family during Christmus. And Vilas beated Borg in Australia during the Masters. Vilas was a great grass player, not only a clay player. He didn't win Wimbledon, because he couldn't prepare it like he prepared the AO : in Wimbledon, he lost often against players less strong than the players he beated in AO.
     
  33. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,338
    In addition - people talk as if Rebound Ace and the current surface can be compared when they're completely different surfaces. Rebounce Ace was quite lively, in the medium speed range and serve-volley players could thrive there, as could aggressive baseliners. Plexicusion as they lay it at the AO is slow as sin, especially with the balls they use there now.
     
  34. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I think Rebound Ace was even slower than Plexicushion. This was especially true on those really hot, humid days when the Rebound Ace surface was all sticky.
     
  35. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,338
    Rebound ace was definitely quicker than Plexi.

    I played on Rebound Ace - laid by the same people as the AO, and to the same specs (as a practice venue they paid the same specs) - hundreds of times at my old club in Melbs in the 90s. I hit at Flinders/Melb Park too. I've also done the same at another venue with Plexicusion in the last couple of years which relays their centre court each year - they hold two AO lead-up tournaments (1x WTA, 1xATP). It is so slow that when I've played we often get one of the back courts which haven't been relaid each year as they're much quicker once they wear a little.

    One thing about RA also was it seemed to get slipperier quicker from even the smallest amount of dust. It was way less sand-papery than Plexi. Since it was softer tho it didn't have that same zing that a painted asphalt court would - and, as you say, they got more sluggish when hot. They radiated heat like a damned heater which I guess was part of why they got ditched in most places - they were nearly impossible to lay perfectly, got permanently damaged easily by chairs, thrown racquets etc., and a nightmare to fix.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2012
  36. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,459
    Judge players only by the standards of their time - not by current standards

    The only way to judge a player is to rate them according to what was important at the time they played. That is why I find it so frustrating when people discount Year end championships. For years they were regarded as defacto majors. Another example is how officials have forgotten about the World Hard Court championships (1912 to 1923) when players at the time werre very clear that it was THE world clay court championship. But the habit of judging players of the past by what is currently important persists.

    Hence, getting back to Becker - his indoor majors outshine the one less total he has in Slam titles than Wilander - in my opinion. Winning Masters and WCT finals were really important at the time.
     
  37. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    When I said legit, I meant of 'great value'. No doubt it counts as a tournament win, but when Vilas won it in those fields, it was of pretty less value - maybe equal to a 500 tournament today, that's about it .....
     
  38. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    no, Vilas wasn't a great grass player. Great grass players don't struggle to go past the QF of the premier grass court tournament .....

    Now if you'd talk mostly about his win in 74 Masters beating Newcombe, Borg, Nastatse et al, I'd listen !
     
  39. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    no, it wasn't. Plexicushion is by some distance slower than Rebound Ace ..
     
  40. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    I agree ....
     
  41. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    OK, Vilas was a great australian grass player. It's true that australian grass was very different than english grass, and more adapted for clay players (Wilander and Vilas).
    But if you see videos about Vilas's victories in Australia, it's incredible : he served and volleyed very good.
     
  42. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715

    I suuport that.In most of 70´s and in the first half of the 80´s, the Masters and the WCT Finals were well above the Australian Open in consideration.One has to, at least, look upon those 2 titles + GS titles for any judgement on the 70´s and 80´s records.
     
  43. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Wrong.Just the fact that the AO was played 5 sets from the first round, gave it a different status than most events...not to mention the fact that, depleted or not, it had GS status.

    Maybe, the best way to look at was the concept of " Triple Crown" the Gran Prix awarded to Wimbledon,Forest Hills and Roland Garros.It´s like an upgrade over their slam status in the 70´s until middle 80´s.
     
  44. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715

    2 main reasons behind Vilas win at the 74 Masters:

    First, players were pretty much spent after a gruelling season.Newcombe was the ebst grass courter then, but he had played a full loaded WCT tour plus many other events.Same for Borg and Nastase.Parun as just a good grass coruter but not a truly great player.Ramirez was not the player he´d turn to be in 1975 and 1976.

    Second, melbourne´s grass was very dense and tupid, which enpowered top spin and deprived fast serves to rwach their maximum speed.That worked for Vilas as proven by him beating big servers like Pfister,Marks,Edmondson and John Sadri during his AO wins.
     
  45. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    The fact that AO was played 5 sets from the first round is not a detail. This is very important and that's why it was a very important tournament, a real Grand Slam, even if Borg, Connors or others didn't play.
     
  46. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    No player won more important titles on Australian Grass, in the 70´s, than Vilas.2 AO+1 Masters as opossed to 2 AO for Rosewall and 2 AO for Newcombe...Vilas used to say that grass was for cows, but he should have said " english grass is for cows, aussie grass is also for tennis"
     
  47. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    First : that's not Vilas's fault if others players were tired !! And Vilas was tired too. It's not an argument to depreciate Vilas victory.

    Second : I agree. That's why I said australian grass and english grass are very different. But at this era, you have to play serve and volley on the both.
     
  48. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Just after winning the Masters, he said on the court : "I said grass is for cow. Now I say some for cow and some for tennis".
     
  49. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    I agree and not trying to depreciatte Vilas win.In fact, he was playing even more than the other 7 guys of the field...but Vilas, in 1974, and before Borg later developed into the IceMan, was IMo the strongest and best stamina player of the whole tour, possibly even stronger than Borg (Things changed from 1975 on).

    He could serve and volley pretty well, he had nice touch volleys ( but he didn´t feel too comfortable at the net ) and if he had developed a better first serve, he would have been a real challenger for any title in contention.Even Wimbledon.
     
  50. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Yes. His first serve was always his main problem. Except during the USO final 1977 : he served very strong, and did a lot of aces. But this whole match was exceptional.
     

Share This Page