Whats your top 10 of all time right now?

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

  1. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    More mortals
    11/Stones
    12/ACDC
    13/Clash
    14/Sex Pistols
    15/Beatles
    16/ELP
    17/Judas Priest
    18/Metalica
    19/Guns and Roses
    20/Eagles/Aerosmith/Rainbow
     
  2. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Hoad is nowhere near GOAT.
     
  3. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    Most overrated player on forum by far. Djokovic level player when all things considered
     
  4. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Hoad had more talent in his pinky than Djoker in his body
     
  5. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    that's subjective, Rosewall or Laver hype I get, Hoad? Absolutely not. Titles are not there, results are not there. If he was so good he'd have results to show for it. I mean you can this guy "at his peak" is unplayable, but you can say that about a lot of people. GOAT is too elite for this.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  6. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    and where are those bad boys?
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  7. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    My Top 10:
    1. Roger Federer
    2. Rod Laver
    3. Bjorn Borg
    4. Pete Sampras
    5. Bill Tilden
    6. Pancho Gonzales
    7. Ken Rosewall
    8. Rafael Nadal
    9. John McEnroe
    10. Ivan Lendl
     
  8. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Fed and Borg would WILT having to play Hoad's schedule against the toughest lineup of talent ever, more than 150 matches per year, with a 70% winning edge.
    Think about it.
     
  9. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Hoad


    Absolutely nothing in there ^^^ screams GOAT material.
    I'd like Fed's chances against anyone ever at any surface not named Nadal.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  10. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Nadal and Borg on clay are the only men I believe are a level above Federer on a given surface. No-one on a fast surface is.

    Hoad seems to be given credit here because "on his day he was unbeatable". Old timers will no doubt be talking about Safin in such terms in 50 years' time and try to bump him up the list. However Hoad's achievements pale in a comparison with many other greats.
     
  11. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, the jester, makes the best jokes: Hoad as No.1 or No.2 is a world class joke.

    I rank Hoad at No.8 but only because I considered also his peak level. Regarding achievements Lew has no place among the top ten. I guess you are the only tennis expert wordwide who ranks Lew as No.1 or among the top five...

    Just a comparison between two players of the same age: Rosewall won 23 majors, Hoad won 4 majors (or 5 if you include Forest Hills 1959).
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  12. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    yeah you can say that about in form Nalbandian, consistent Safin, U.S. Open 2009 Delpo, etc. Doesn't make the person GOAT worthy. Looking at his numbers it's an all time great career, but even suggesting him next to people like Fed, Laver, Borg, Sampras is ludicrous. They are a stratosphere above.
     
  13. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    I said I just rated human beings.

    LedZep are not human beings.at elast, not from this solar system.

    Pink Floyd, top 5 for Symphonic Rock, but completely overrated.Top 25 for R&R nads all together.
     
  14. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Think harder.
     
  15. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Why then, would Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver all pick him at number one? Were they intellectually below your level?
     
  16. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Bobby, I guess you think that Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver are world-class jokers. Eh?

    Winning a major is important IF you beat someone great at their peak in the process. Otherwise, it can be a joke.
     
  17. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    cancelled....
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  18. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    This guy is your answer to Bach and Beethoven?
    Like Fed and Nadal are your answer to Hoad and Gonzales.
     
  19. SoBad

    SoBad Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,746
    Location:
    shiran
    1. Safin
    2. Sampras
    3. Nadal
    4. Kafelnikov
    5. Dimitrov
    6. Kournikova
    7. Djokovic
    ...
    18. Frank Hadow
    19. Wendy Turnbull
    20. Stephanie Graf
    21. Andrew Agassi
    22. Rogerline Federer
    ...
     
  20. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    I prefer rock to classical.
     
  21. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,396
    In no order for the women
    Graf
    Navratilova
    Evert
    Court
    Serena Williams
    Henin
    Clijsters (odd I know but I love her talent)
    Wills
    Lenglen
    Marble
    Connolly
    King
    Goolagong
    Bueno
    Hart
    Brough
     
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    You must realize that the players ranked Hoad because of his peak level.

    Regarding achievements I rank Hoad at place 16. A tennis expert should also be reasonable...
     
  23. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,396
    Dan,

    Do you have Hoad number one for career accomplishments?
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2012
  24. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I think that Gonzalez, Rosewall and Laver did know what and how they ranked Hoad, but you don't know how they ranked (peak level).

    I know that the players are not idiots. They about know about the achievements of Hoad and his comrades.
     
  25. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, it happens seldom but I agree with you...
     
  26. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Talent is talent no matter the music
    Page could be Mozart in Mozart time and Mozart could be Page in Jimmy's time
     
  27. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    While moderm champs had Laver as a model Laver himself had Hoad
    Gonzo was awful and Pockets too mean but Lew was so appealing
     
  28. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    A very revealing statement.
     
  29. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Bobby, again, these guys did not restrict their evaluation to "peak level", but made an overall rating.
    Your understanding of "achievements" is inadequate if it does not take into consideration the QUALITY of titles won. Kramer ripped right through Wimbledon in 1947, but whom did he beat?
     
  30. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    My understanding of "accomplishments" does NOT place great emphasis on the raw NUMBERS of titles won, but on the QUALITY of the titles won. I do not give much credit, for example, to Kramer's Wimbledon victory in 1947, or Nastase's French Open win in 1973, or Gimeno's French win the previous year, etc....because they enjoyed a relatively weak path to victory. Sure, they did the best they could under the circumstances, but it doesn't tell us very much about their level of play.

    Even peak levels is not the key, for example there were several one-time Wimbledon champs in the open era who accomplished little else, so we have to see some consistency.

    In Hoad's case, he experienced a number of career interruptions due to injury, as has Nadal, but had notable achievements over an 11 year period, and some great showing every year during that period. At his high point, from July 1957 to January 1960, he played about 400 matches against all the giants of the fifties, so I think that is sufficient space to make an evaluation.

    Yes, I accept the rating of Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver, putting Hoad in number one.
     
  31. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    How the heck is Lew Hoad the best ever on the basis of tournaments won? How can anyone possibly make that case? If Hoad is ranked as the greatest by some people, it is because of the level of play that Hoad was capable of when he was in his best form.

    Jack Kramer's run to the 1947 Wimbledon title:

    R128: Jack Kramer def. Bill Moss (6-0, 6-1, 6-0)
    R64: Jack Kramer def. Czeslaw Spychala (6-2, 6-2, 6-2)
    R32: Jack Kramer def. Giovanni Cucelli (6-0, 6-2, 6-0)
    R16: Jack Kramer def. Torsten Johansson (7-5, 6-2, 6-3)
    QF: Jack Kramer def. Geoff Brown (6-0, 6-1, 6-3)
    SF: Jack Kramer def. Dinny Pails (6-1, 3-6, 6-1, 6-0)
    FR: Jack Kramer def. Tom Brown (6-1, 6-3, 6-2)

    Geoff Brown was the number 5 seed, and a Wimbledon finalist the previous year in 1946. Dinny Pails was the reigning Australian Championships title holder, and Tom Brown was the number 3 seed (who Kramer personally never lost a single set against in 7 matches).
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2012
  32. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    As I stated above, you have to look at the QUALITY of the opposition in the tournaments won, not just the raw numbers. That's how you get a top ranking for Hoad.
    Are you seriously suggesting that a lineup of Geoff Brown (never won a major, made only two good showings, both at Wimbledon), Dinny Pails (won only a "closed" Australian title), and Tom Brown (never won anything) constitutes a challenging field? This is what I mean by taking account of the QUALITY of a major win.
     
  33. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    The Australian Championships was not closed to any amateur players, and it had been an official major since 1924. Only professional players were banned from playing in the event. Tom Brown "never won anything" because Jack Kramer was in his way.
     
  34. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I used "closed" in quotation marks, because there were apparently no foreign players present.
    Tom Brown had a BRIEF flare-up of quality in 1946-47, but what happened then?
     
  35. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    My apologies. Tom Brown won many senior singles titles.
     
  36. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Two Americans, Tom Brown and Gardnar Mulloy, were in the semi finals of the 1947 Australian Championships. Brown's involvement in tennis went down in the 1950s.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2012
  37. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    But not in the final, where Bromwich lost a close one to Pails, Pails winning the last two sets 7-5, 8-6 against the tiring veteran Bromwich.
    Kramer and Schroeder apparently took the quick boat back to America after winning the 1946 Davis Cup, leaving Tom Brown and Mulloy behind to play the Australian (or were they "induced" to stay behind?)
     
  38. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I'm well aware that Bromwich lost the final, after having held a championship point, but there were non-Australians in the tournament, which disproves your earlier statement about no foreign players being present in the tournament.
     
  39. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    also prefer some pop, trance, house, electronica, some metal, some reggae, some world music, bulgarian music, some hip hop, r&b, soul, funk,jazz, blues and punk to classical. Other than that, it's right up there for me.
     
  40. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, Muscles was not mean. He was an idol for Millions of players and spectators. He was the epitome of fairness...
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2012
  41. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,396
    Thanks for answering.
     
  42. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, The fact that the greats did not say:"We rank players along their peak level" does NOT mean that they did not rank them that way. It just was completely natural for them to consider the playing strength at the peak of the best players and not along their achievements.

    Even though I wrote you are a tennis expert, you are in danger to lose that label if you again claim that Hoad is No. 1 overall (i.e. including his accomplishments) Nobody can follow you that way ....

    Of course not all majors have the same level of quality, but we still must accept the amount of majors won by the players.

    Yes we can argue that f.i. Federer for years played in a weak era but we cannot take away the number of his majors won.
     
  43. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, in 1973 all strong players with the exception of Laver and Rosewall entered the French Open. And the two Aussies were after their prime and I guess none of them would have beaten Nastase, unlike the previous year.
     
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, as an expert you should know that Bromwich was not a veteran in 1947.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2012
  45. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Take a look at whom Nastase beat that year. A VERY weak path to a major.
    Rosewall had Nastase's number for years, even in 1975, 1976, 1977. Would have beaten him at RG in '73.
     
  46. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    He was 28.
     
  47. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, even as a Rosewall admirer I think that Muscles would not have beaten Nastase in the 1973 French Open,
     
  48. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Quod erat demonstrandum. Bromwich not a veteran in 1947 Wimbledon.
     
  49. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,396
    As great as Rosewall was, he was going to be 39 in 1973 and that would be very tough to beat a Nastase who would be 27 in 1973. Nastase in 1973 would be a big major for anyone on clay and he was absolutely at his peak then. The person I think would have had the best chance to defeat Nastase would have been Manuel Orantes but he was upset earlier in the tournament.
     
  50. billnepill

    billnepill Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,075
    Location:
    UK
    Do you have a point at all?
     

Share This Page