Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by bladepdb, Apr 21, 2009.
Saw a thread about this. Figured it was a poll-worthy question.
Guga. Never heard anyone say anything bad about him.
Im gonna say Agassi...i don't see him flamed to holy hell
as far as the poll goes, i voted Guga.
you coulda added Vitas Gerulaitis to the list though. i've only ever heard good things about him. Even McEnroe loved him when they were on the tour together. that should say somethin about him.
He used to be when he was young though, a lot!
I love the objectivity of a poll that puts Federer among the choices but not Nadal...
How about Rafter?
Well I think its Federer and Agassi both.
I know more about Fed so I'll say this-boy,are people crazy about the guy pretty much everywhere. :wink:
The guy appeals to people of all generations IMO.
He's solid, never says anything wrong, plays fair and plays well.
Other then that, it seems Safin has a much bigger fan base than you'd expect. I vote Marat.
It's blatantly obvious that he shouldn't be there:???:
But i agree with you neither should Fed....im suprised the anti-fans haven't nailed him to a cross yet
I haven't heard anyone say anything bad about edberg before, I think he is universally liked.
The thing is though, Nadal is hated by a lot of people.
Even though if you put all the bad things Nadal and Federer have done together, logically, it should be Federer who is hated more.
Wait are we talking universally as in this forum? or in general? because otherwise for me it's fed, on this forum it's Andre
out of my household alone, Me, my mom (she finds him handsome), my 2 younger brothers, and my uncle are Fed fans, only my dad likes Nadal (my parents are casual viewers though)
well..Davydenko dosent have the appeal that people want to see but I personally agree with your views about him
I love Marat too
WTF? What kind if a logic is that?
well yes,you're right in a way.But many could never relate to Edberg.Surprisngly Borg inspite of being the ice man had a gigantic fan base..or so I've heard.
what bad things? I don't understand how either of these two people are anyone on the atp tour can be hated unless they did something horrible. Did anyone come after your mom or something? Being blunt and saying things that can thought of as hurtful doesn't equal "all the bad things".
I'd say Edberg by far.
well i don't know about relating to him, but he was known to be very classy and was really pleasant to watch oncourt. This is just from what I've heard and seen.
Borg seems like a guy i could have been friends with in a different time and place
His unwavering and composed facial expression and quiet demeanor (from what i've seen) practically mirrors my own
I was talking about edberg.
yeah he was amazing to watch , thats for sure..aesthetically pleasing.One player who's vids I can always watch.
You sad ever and than put only players who played in this decade, with Edberg as a lone exception.
Where are Laver, Borg and other older generations players?
I guarantee that if we could actually poll players, the most universally liked player would be a an everyday tour player, not one of the elite.
There's a difference between being affirmatively liked as a person, and simply not being disliked.
Being a champion takes a certain focus and intensity that in some ways can isolate the best from the rest. At the very least, since the best players are always going deep in tournaments and are usually regimented in their preparation, they have less time to hang around, get to really know other players as people. I'm sure they have a few "friends" on tour, but beyond that, they won't have as much time to get to know others. And, the best players usually have bigger entourages who can take up a lot of time.
Of course, they know everyone from the lockeroom as you know and I know everyone at work because we see them all the time, but really getting to know someone takes more than repeated small-talk discussions.
Someone like Jonas Bjorkman (just an example) would probably be the most universally liked.
I think Pat Rafter would have won this pole if included.
I would have voted for Patrick Rafter but since he ain't in the choices I'd go with Guga....
Well, I would not have included Federer. I don't particularly like Federer and am not a Nadal fan either.
What I don't understand is the inclusion of Edberg. Why of all the former stars pick him? How is he more liked than Connors, Borg, or Becker? Anyway, its the posters thread and he has the right to make his own picks.
Oh, and I voted for Marat, who else. I think if this poll were open to the world, Marat would win hands down.
Hey, where's John McEnroe on this list? :shock:
i forgot to mention them previously but most definitelly Kuerten and Rafter like someone said...
also going a bit backwards... Amritraj...
Rafter or Edberg. Universally liked. Guga was really popular too.
Agassi was considered a bully, even in his post slump, holier than thou phase.
Not sure how popular Safin is either.
Completely agree with this. Him or Guga of the modern crowd. Rafter apparently was well liked also but had a tendency to get confrontational with people sometimes I've read. I'd also put in a vote for Edberg. Gerulaitus though for me is the "all time" winner.
Stefan Edberg was so well liked that they should name an award after him.
I second that.
Would have to say Borg.
Fed, Agassi and Blake are fake, holier than thou idiots.
That name "Nadal" will be long remembered when all the others are forgotten
how so? as of now, i can bet more people will remember the names Laver, Sampras, and Federer.
longevity is key. when jim courier was number one he won a few slams, up until his legs quit during quarterfinal matches of tournies.
only the future can tell for certain, but history gives huge hints.
Have Sampras and Federer won on all surfaces in a year: FO, Olympics, Wimbledon, AO - or have i missed something here? Did they inject some of the passion back into tennis that had been missing for so long?
that is great that rafa has done that for you. rafa, to this date, has done a lot, for sure. but most people can still argue, and will argue successfully, that rafa isn't as accomplished as Laver and Sampras, and even Federer. to answer your question, federer has won on all surfaces in one year, and so has Laver(all surfaces at the time).
if you consider the AO and Olympic, Beijing courts to be different surfaces, then your argument fails, Rafa hasn't won on all surfaces in a single year because he hasn't won on the USO hardcourts.
i guess you are missing something. but don't get me wrong, rafa is certainly on his way, but there are a lot of variables in his way. stamina throughout the year, injury due to style of play, possible lack of career longevity due to style of play. i'm being very objective here.
The USO will no doubt be on his agenda this year - no problem
I think he meant Federer (or Sampras for that matter) have not won slams on clay, grass and hard court.
Your distinction between Olympic hard court and USO hard court doesn't make much sense since it was widely publicized that The Olympics and the USO surfaces were as similar as can be.
he never mentioned "slam" in his original statement. so i guess he was referring to regular surfaces regardless of caliber. and i was just proving a point that hardcourts are hardcourts. rafa won on hard, as well as sampras and federer. rafa federer and sampras have all won on hard, grass and clay. albeit sampras may not have won on all 3 surfaces in one year.
He only mentioned slams + Olympics in his post. You really thought he meant tournaments like Kitzbuhel?
I for one am telling you that Nadal is the only one of the 3 (Federer and Sampras) who has won slams on grass, clay and hard and who doesn't have a weak surface.
Voted for Agassi.
Guga "Ooo-airr!!" Kuerten and Agassi IMO.
Separate names with a comma.