Whats your top 10 of all time right now?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by 90's Clay, Aug 22, 2012.

  1. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
    Another thing about Laver's Grand slam is that the Australian open was not equal to the other majors ( many players used to skip it ) + The weak competition + the fact that majors at that time were played on grass and clay . therefore , Roger's 3 slams+1 final ( more than once ) or 12 out of 16 slams in 4 years is a more impressive feat

    this is not to belittle Laver, no. I do believe he's one of the greatest but one should at the same time be more objective and fair towards other greats
     
  2. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,062
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Apart from Arthur Ashe, the 1969 Australian Open had all the best players. And the grass of Brisbane, Wimbledon and Forest Hills all had different conditions.
     
  3. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
    really ?? I've heard many times that it wasn't highly regarded and that many players at that time used to skip it
     
  4. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
    grass is grass my friend . maybe there's a little difference but it remains grass
     
  5. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,062
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Yes, in the 1970s and early 1980s, especially from 1976-1982, but not in 1969. The 1969 Australian Open had Laver, Rosewall, Roche, Newcombe, Gonzales, Stolle, Riessen, Gimeno, Bowrey, Emerson, Ruffels, Buchholz, Anderson, Taylor and Stone.
     
  6. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
    Laver is said to have won 200 tournaments . Can someone put a list of them and provide us with some information and details about them ?
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  7. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,062
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Forest Hills was a bog of a court that year. The 1969 US Open final between Laver and Roche shows this pretty clearly.
     
  8. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
    they are Australian ? NO?
     
  9. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,062
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
  10. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    230
  11. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,062
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Australians had a load of tennis talent from the 1930s to the 1970s. It was like a conveyer belt. There was Crawford, Hopman, McGrath, Bromwich, Quist, Pails, Sedgman, Rosewall, Hoad, Anderson, Cooper, Fraser, Emerson, Laver, Mulligan, Stolle, Roche, Newcombe and Edmondson. I may have missed some as well. Edmondson was probably the last of a long line. Since Edmondson won the 1976 Australian Open, the only really prominent Australian male players has been Cash, Rafter and Hewitt.

    Besides, of those names I mentioned from the 1969 Australian Open, Gonzales, Riessen, Gimeno, Buchholz and Taylor were not Australian.
     
  12. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,031
    1969 AO the draw consists over 50% of the players from one country(Aussie). The depth of the competition isn't even close to today since the best athletes are coming from all around the world.
     
  13. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,062
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    As I've said, the Australians were dominant in tennis at the time. They were the best players.
     
  14. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    As I said, in most cases the differences are so tight that it is just how I made the list today...what do you mean by the fascination angle?

    The criteria is: I see a player more than once live, I analyze different aspects,I judge potential and talent ( of coursem always a subjective thing) and finally I quantiify how much I enjoy him play or not and from there up try to put him in an order.

    That is what counts, not boring stuff that anybody can read in wiky or any book.That is not watching tennis.
     
  15. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    As I said, in most cases the differences are so tight that it is just how I made the list today...what do you mean by the fascination angle? I just don´t get your point.

    The criteria is: I see a player more than once live, I analyze different aspects,I judge potential and talent ( of course always a subjective thing) and finally I try to quantify how much I enjoy him play or not and from there up try to put him in an order.

    That is what counts, not boring stuff that anybody can read in wiky or any book.That is not watching tennis.
     
  16. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    when did you start watching tennis ?
     
  17. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    ROFLMAO:):):):)
     
  18. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    a multislam path consisting of Emmo.Stolle,Roche and Gimeno..LOL
     
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I have watched a few players from Rosewall to Murray...
     
  20. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Yes, Gonzales and Gimeno are first generation australians...plus australians dominated tennis from 1950 onwards, you don´t know that.
     
  21. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    More than 50% of the NBA are americans...does it mean the NBA is a joke?
     
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks for your qualified answer.
     
  23. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    And what is your scientific proof of this?

    How about giving some answers backed by some facts and apples to apples comparisons instead of apples to oranges comparison? Do your research before making some statements.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  24. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,031
    No. But the NBA is a lot better than 40 years ago because the league has much more foreign players. More of a global sports means there's more depth/talent players.
     
  25. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    You realize the NBA has many more teams now so the level of play may not be as good.
     
  26. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,031
    And do you guys have any scientific proof of this?
    Funny how you say I belittles Laver but the old-timers started the whole thing.

    My reason is always remaining the same and it's a valid point. Tennis and any other sports improve overtime. It can't regress, can't stay constant, but gets better.
     
  27. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    It was 32 tournaments. Here's a little information-Tipsarevic has played 29 tournaments so far this year and it's September. Do the math. At that rate it's about 38 tournaments in one year. Almagro has played 28 tournaments so far this year in 2012 and at that rate he'll play about 37. Yeah, it's impossible---IN YOUR MIND but not in reality.

    Just a little more information-Guillermo Vilas won 17 tournaments in 1977 on a 145-14 match record. I'm fairly certain he played over thirty tournaments. Laver and Vilas also played doubles. These guys had super stamina and no they didn't collapse.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  28. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,031
    The reason why they have more team because there's more athletes. If population continue to grow and more people try out for basketball, there's more athletes that are good enough to play in the NBA. Same for baseball, hockey, etc...
     
  29. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,031
    He played 21 tournament so far this year.
    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Janko-Tipsarevic.aspx?t=pa

    And it's not the number of tournaments that tells the story, but the number of matches. Right now, he's played a total of 66 matches(including this USO).
     
  30. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx

    Actually you may be correct because I think the 29 and 28 respectively is over a 12 month period. Still 29 is not far from 32. Check number 33, he's played 31 tournaments over 12 months. Actually a few have played over 30 tournaments over 12 months.

    The bottom line is that they (the top players) make soooooooooooo much money they don't have to play a lot of tournaments.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  31. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    No they have more teams to make more money. It's the real world. You could have the greatest athletes in the world and if you don't make money they wouldn't be playing.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  32. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    What are you writing about? I never claimed scientific proof of anything. I give out information that can be backed up. You make outrageous statements that Isner would serve 60 aces against Laver.

    Please make some sense in your rebuttals.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  33. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    TMF,thanks for your qualified answer. It speaks for itself...

    I have defended you against unqualified insults but you insult me badly.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  34. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    Delete post.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  35. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Sorry to say this but your lack of knowledge is astonishing.NBA was a better league in the 80´s and there were 0 non americans.That means, 100% of the field was US citizens ( except Olajuwon) and that is the same as for aussies in the 60´s, although there were some very good non aussie players.

    Think a little bit better next time.
     
  36. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    There is only wishful thinking behind that theory
     
  37. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    The Aussie was poorly attended after Laver won it. In 1969 it was very well attended. You should study the draws rather than speaking generally.
     
  38. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    Kiki,

    While I disagree a bit with the order of your list. Thanks for writing it. I like the names on there.:) Great stuff.
     
  39. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    TMF wrote that I write the same crap as usual. I had mentioned that Laver did have tough competition in 1969 with players like Rosewall, Emerson, Newcombe, Roche, Ashe and Smith.

    Sorry, I came late with my answer. But you gave me the opportunity to show how wrong TMF was when writing that Laver did not have tough opposition when making the Grand Slam that year...
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2012
  40. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I guess this must mean that Oscar Robertson isn't very good.
     
  41. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    IMO, there's more than 5 or close to 10 players in tennis history that we can call "first-tier". We can identify them, because we know who dominated which generation.

    But ranking them is fruitless. It's like ranking Andrei Tarkovsky films versus Ingmar Bergman films. Why bother?

    I'd isolate these players: Bill Tilden, Pancho Gonzales, Ken Rosewall, Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer.

    If we go WWI and earlier we could add some more.
     
  42. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    Amazing how people rarely talk about the Big O anymore. He was the first guy to average a triple double.

    Red Auerbach the great Celtic GM and coach who obviously knew NBA talent once said that player with the greatest talent was Wilt Chamberlain who played in the 1960's and 1970's.
     
  43. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Your commands are orders for me.

    As you can see, I didn´t put Kodes in the top 10.
     
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I happily agree with your tier 1 list.
     
  45. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    I undrstand. Of course Laver had tough competition in 1969 and throughout his great career. TMF only writes that to defend his favorite. There is no reason to put down people to make your favorite better. The favorite of his in this case is a fantastic player and will be remembered throughout tennis history.

    I know a lot of people who love to put people down to bring themselves up. Never could understand that because those people should strive to improve themselves to reach the other person's level. In some ways this is similar I believe.
     
  46. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    I won´t discuss with the big Red.Robertson is an all time great and Chamberlain is still the reference for the post game.
     
  47. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Hoad,Budge,Cochet,Wilding,Perry,Kramer,Connors,Newcombe,Mac,Lendl,Nadal,Agassi,Becker and Sedgman would make a long second tier although I could agree that Hoad and Budge have top tier credentials.
     
  48. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    Kramer would also have top tier credentials easily also in my opinion as would Connors and Lendl because of the huge amount of tournaments they won plus WCTs, Year End Masters.

    I thought Nadal was a shoo in for the top level but that's questionable because of his injuries. Still think he'll do it.
     
  49. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    ...neither are Bill Russell,Jerry Lucas,Jerry West,Earl Monroe,Walt Frazier,Kareem Abdul Jabbar or Wilt Chamberlian.

    No, Dwight Howard and Westbrook are faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar better than them...
     
  50. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,343
    Outside of Dwight Howard, are there any decent centers today?
     

Share This Page