Whats your top 10 of all time right now?

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

  1. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    qindarka: I respect your words. I will try to not using insulting words. There is only ONE problem: It's name is Dan Lobb...
     
  2. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I would try to contradict but without hateful words.
     
  3. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    If it came out hateful sorry
     
  4. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,369
    But wouldn't also want to help BobbyOne with his top 10 flawed list about players' longevity? That's even worse than arche3's opinion about Roger's BH. Yet, you were all over arche3 in another thread but openly support BobbyOne's opinion(which no one agree his list).
     
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    forzamilan90, Thanks a lot.
     
  6. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    TMF, Longevity was only a part of the criteria I used for my list!

    I yet hope that a few posters or readers agree with my lists, at least approximately...
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  7. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    Most posters dont venture out into the former section too much if at all, but I am pretty sure there are few General section regulars who will like the list
     
  8. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Deleted post.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  9. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    yeah, agree to all this ...
     
  10. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    Please do call me forza for short. Should have been more creative instead choosing a username after a poular football chant
     
  11. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    Theres a few who will be thrilled Fed aint there but "the greatest rivalry in world history" is on the list. Local posters will know who I am referring to lol
     
  12. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    To be fair to my opinion I said fed bh is goat. I know his fh is even more goat than his goat bh.
    Just that his bh is more goat than Laver bh. That's all.
     
  13. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    what exactly are you trying to prove by mentioning names like rosewall, gonzalez, newk & roche ?

    gonzalez exited his prime long before newk/roche hit theirs .....even rosewall was past his best before newk/roche hit their primes ...

    and rosewall's prime coincided with a weak era b/w that of gonzales/hoad and that of laver ? get it ?

    coming back to the modern era,

    nadal was already in the scene by 2005 btw .....djokovic by 2007

    agassi was playing a high level of tennis in 2004-05

    you also had guys like nalbandian, davydenko, coria etc in the mix


    and do you realize that nadal being younger than federer is consistently closer to his best/prime in the past 2-3 years ..... which is one of the main reasons why he's been better than federer in that time-period ?

    besides we were talking about level of play ...... what exactly has nadal done that shows convincingly that his level of play is superior to that of federer's , off clay ...

    or for that matter same for djoker ( except maybe on the slow courts of the AO these days )

    and nadal is an early bloomer ....... we'll see how long his career goes ...
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  14. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,369
    Ok, got it. I appologize for not being clear.
     
  15. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    You're well aware that it's much harder to maintain longevity at the top of an individual sport like tennis when the game has become so much more physical and the fitness demands are greater now than in previous eras.

    Hence we will never again have guys like Tilden, Gonzales, Rosewall who played into their 40s at a high level. This doesn't mean that later greats are lacking in longevity compared to these guys, however.

    The better way to look at longevity is to look at players within a certain generation and assess their longevity compared to their peers. In this instance, I would say that Agassi, who played to 36 (and made a US Open final at 35) had comparable longevity to Rosewall, who played to around 44 (and made Wimbledon/US Open finals at 39).

    Similarly if Federer plays at a high level until he is 35, I will consider him, in the context of his era, to have achieved comparable longevity to Rosewall. Consider how all the other top players of Fed's era, bar Hewitt, have now retired - and yet he is still sitting as Wimbledon champion and No 2 in the world.

    Oh and one more thing...........no man who has a 0-4 record in Wimbledon finals can be GOAT. So please remove Rosewall from equal first in your list.
     
  16. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    yeah, this .......

    djokovic @ this year's wimbledon was still unable to keep up with the quick-strike tennis of federer even though federer's diminished reflexes were clearly showing ....
     
  17. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    federer >>> newk/roche on clay or slow HC , quite a bit better on any kind of HC for that matter..... regardless of equipment ...they might get occasional win here and there , but federer would dominate them easily

    I LOL'ed at this .....especially in a post involving newk .... federer's BH is so much better than newk's it isn't funny !

    federer's BH is a very good BH, with crazy variety (one of the most versatile ones, if not the most versatile one ) ...... yes, has problems in dealing with high balls to it ( so do many 1-H BHs ) and can be inconsistent with it at times ( those times were rare in his peak ).......

    But when in form, he's outclassed almost every other baseliner in BH to BH on many occasions, every one of them - agassi, safin, djoker, murray, nalbandian ....... this isn't to say its better, just that its not that far behind ....

    its only nadal on slow, high bouncing surfaces who was able to make a dent consistently @ his prime....... otherwise, most others tried and failed, miserably at times - including agassi, hewitt, nalbandian etc ......

    even nadal on the low bouncing surfaces @ the YEC, got ripped apart multiple times by federer's BH, barely able to make a dent on it , a grand total of 1 set in 4 matches there ......
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  18. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    ^^^oh yeah Fed's backhand is amazing during the WTF
     
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    forza, I will do so.

    Bobby
     
  20. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    arche3, If Federer's bh is GOAT, his fh (even much better) must be God...
     
  21. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    abmk, I mentioned those players because all of them (and many more greats) were opponents of Laver. Laver had tougher competition than Federer had in his prime
     
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Phoenix1983, If the physical of the game is now so much stronger is debatable.

    I will not remove Rosewall from his place. I would have thought that I and others have long enough explained why Rosewall did not win at Wimbledon.

    I woun't explain it once more. It's your -easy-task to find the answer...
     
  23. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,465
    Federer may very well be better than Nadal indoors but I do also wonder if a partial reason is that Nadal is worn out by the end of the year. It's really not an excuse because Federer's style is so smooth that he's less worn out but I would be curious what would happen if they played an important indoor match let's say around May or June. Anyone check the record for Nadal and Federer indoors around the middle of the year? I doubt if they have played any matches around that time since few indoor matches are played nowadays. I can't check now because I have some work to take care of.

    One think Federer does have in common with Rosewall is that both were ultra smooth strokers and moved very well with great footwork. I think that helps tremendously in prolonging a career because of the lesser wear and tear. Gonzalez was along those lines also. And all of these guys played a long time and accomplished a lot. I worry if Nadal can last with his style. Djokovic, while smoother imo than Nadal also plays a very grinding game and you also wonder if that will wear him down early.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  24. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    Yeah hopefully Fed does keep playing till 2016 as he wanted to partake in Rio Olympics. The longer he plays the better for the sport.
     
  25. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Presumably you mean because he missed many years of opportunity? Of course, if everyone had played at Wimbledon, he would have had to face Hoad, Gonzales et al every year so no guarantee he would have won it in any case, but that's not the point...

    The point is that in the Wimbledon finals he did reach, he had a 0-4 record. I simply cannot accept that someone who has such a record in the final of the game's biggest tournament can be GOAT. Irrespective of whether he would have won in other years he was banned.

    If you are GOAT, you win the biggest matches at the biggest venues. Of course even the greatest players can lose to other greats in finals, but to reach 4 Wimbledon finals and not win a single one....you simply cannot call such a man GOAT. I don't care what else he achieved in his career...
     
  26. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,465
    Nadal at WTF aka Masters Cup record.

    Just curious if he was worn out at the end of the year.

    Here's his record in the years he played
    2006-2-2
    2007-2-2
    2009-0-3
    2010-4-1

    Total-8-8

    Now it's possible he wasn't worn out but just played super tough opponents and just doesn't play well indoors. However he has lost to guys you think he should beat in Ferrer, Davydenko, Soderling, Tsonga and ....... drum roll James Blake.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  27. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,465
    Phoenix,

    Let's be fair, Rosewall was a teen when he lost his first two finals and 35 and 39 when he lost the last two. In the Open Era along Rosewall won the French Open, two Australian Opens and one US Open. That's pretty big tournaments won on big stages. He also won the WCT championships in 71 and 72 over Laver and that essentially was a big time major. Rosewall was born in 1934. The open era started in 1968.

    In the Wimbledon final of 1970 he lost in five sets to John Newcombe on grass. Newk was perhaps the best grass player in the world. In 1974 he just got destroyed by Jimmy Connors at his best but he did defeat Roscoe Tanner, John Newcombe and Stan Smith in that tournament to reach the final.

    The odds are very high that Rosewall imo would have won at least one Wimbledon in the years he was dominant. No one can prove it of course but I believe there was great chance.

    Sometime I do think this stuff about not winning a tournament is overrated. I think the important thing is that great players prove that they can win and be very strong on all surfaces. Certainly Rosewall has more than proven he can win on grass.

    Federer is for example a super clay court player as is Novak Djokovic. Federer has won one French but would he be any less a player if he never won the French? Don't think so. I think Djokovic is a super clay court player. I would not hold it against Djokovic if he never won the French.

    Look at how many years it took Martina Navratilova to finally win the US Open. But given the extra opportunities she finally won it. Rosewall didn't get that chance as did Pancho Gonzalez by the way.

    Kiki's going to get me for this but Jan Kodes won Wimbledon, Rosewall did not, does that make Kodes a better player or a better pressure player than Rosewall?
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  28. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,641
    Location:
    Weak era
    Thanks, I guess.

    There's absolutely no maybe about it, Fed is just plain better than Nadal indoors, disregarding the lopsided H2H in Fed's favour in those conditions, Fed has 20 indoor titles to Nadal's one and 6 YEC titles to Nadal's one final.

    Now regarding their encounters indoors, yes Nadal might have done better if they played in the middle of the year but I sincerely doubt the final outcome of those matches would have been different.

    Remember, even in the best year of Nadal's career in 2010 which also happened to be Fed's worse year since 2003 Fed still won rather comfortably in the final (6-1 final set), remember this is a 29 year old Fed vs Nadal in his absolute peak.

    The low bounce and indoor conditions at YEC take away Nadal's main weapon against Fed, it's hardly a surprise he struggles to beat him (or even take a set) in those conditions.

    Of course if Fed sticks around till 2016 I have little doubt Nadal will beat him at WTF eventually but at their best I'd favour Fed to beat Nadal indoors 9 out of 10 times regardless.

    -Ferrer has beaten Nadal in both HC slams and his only masters title is indoor Paris.

    -Davy has Nadal's number on HC, their H2H is 5-1 on that surface so that's hardly a surprising loss (quite the opposite actually).

    -Soderling beat Nadal at WTF the same year he also beat him at FO so he was obviously tough for Nadal to handle that year (in 2009) and for a long time Soderling was considered to be an indoor specialist (certainly more comfortable in those conditions than Nadal).

    -Tsonga is a big server, losing to a big server indoors is hardly something I'd call a shock loss.

    -James Blake was always a tough opponent for Nadal on HC and he was playing the tennis of his life in 2006, it was an expected loss (and not even a close match).


    Aside from maybe Tsonga and Ferrer I didn't really expect Nadal to beat any of those players at YEC/WTF at the times that he faced them, against Ferrer I actually thought it was roughly 50-50 (Ferrer was in excellent form at YEC and has beaten Nadal in USO that year).
     
  29. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    He was 21 when he lost to Hoad in 1956. And he won all the other three majors from the ages of 18 - 20, and the ages of 33-37, so his age is no excuse!


    Yes I know, he won everywhere bar Wimbledon regularly. Everywhere bar the biggest tournament of them all.

    1974 was a year I can excuse him for losing in the final, aged 39 and against Connors who was just a completely new type of player from what Rosewall and his generation had faced before.

    I can't excuse him for 1970 though.

    No-one can prove it and it's also irrelevant. He was 0-4 in the finals of the biggest tournament in the game.

    I know what you are saying but I slightly disagree - i.e. you would presumably demote Sampras because he was relatively poor on clay, despite him dominating all other surfaces. Yet his overall record, including winning a record 7 Wimbledons, demands for me that he be placed above Rosewall.

    Let's put it this way - I consider Federer GOAT, just ahead of Laver. If Federer hadn't won the French, I would still have Laver top.

    So yes - if we are talking about being GOAT - not just one of the greats, but GOAT, you have to have won all four slams (assuming you participated enough everywhere to have done so - i.e. can't hold it against Borg at the AO, Gonzales at most of the slams). It's not good enough to reach 4 finals and never win at a particular slam, and expect to be ranked No 1 all-time (this argument goes for Borg and his failures at the US Open as well).

    He can never be GOAT if he hasn't won the French though. Not when Federer and Laver have won all four slams.

    Pancho is a different case to Rosewall. He missed even more of his career to the pros, and was not good enough (i.e. too young or old) to be a contender at Wimbledon when he was allowed to compete. Therefore I can make concessions for him that I cannot for Rosewall. I say it again - if a man makes 4 Wimbledon finals and does not win a single one, he cannot be GOAT.

    I don't consider Pancho the GOAT either by the way, because he never won a clay court major in the pros. He was essentially a Sampras equivalent but played in a weaker period of mens' tennis with a divided tour.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  30. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,465
    I would agree with you on every point. I was curious what Nadal's record was in the World Tour Final. I was surprised it was that bad. Ferrer to me seems to me to be the type of player who will trouble Nadal on surfaces aside from clay. Always enjoyed Ferrer's game.
     
  31. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,641
    Location:
    Weak era
    I think a great misconception about Ferrer is that he's a CC specialist, some of his qualities do indeed translate well to clay (fitness, speed, anticipation, strong competitive spirit etc.) but I strongly feel that he plays his best tennis on faster surfaces when he can hit through the court easier with his FH, his performance against Berdych at DC final this year was exquisite (and I think Berdych would have put up a much bigger fight if they played on clay).

    People didn't take notice but he also improved his netplay and DTL BH over the years, I like Ferrer as well.
     
  32. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    What is your support data for this uncredibly bold statement?
     
  33. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Kiki won´t get mad since Kiki knows Rosewall was a better player than Kodes and, specially on fast grass.

    In fact, Rosewall won more grass court titles than guys like Arthur Ashe and certainly Stan Smith, who won Wimbledon.To name a few...

    I agree with your post above.by 1962, 1963 or 1964 Rosewall would be heavily favoured to win at Wimbledon.From 1965 to 1967 he still could but I clearly give the edge to Laver.
     
  34. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    14,390
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Djokovic and Nadal (off clay) at their peaks still have trouble with slower less explosive ******* yet they have higher peak play? Federer has bagelled Nadal on all 3 surfaces, and has infact bagelled both Djokovic and Nadal in the last year.

    How did you decide they both rank above him? Nadal's win percentage off clay is far worse than Federer's against largely the same field. And Djokovic still has a lot of trouble with Federer even now.
     
  35. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    The problem with new - current fans is not they are biassed or not, because an old time fan can be just as much biassed.it is its lack of perspective.

    1/Rosewall won as many if not more majors than the rest of players, including Laver,Sampras and Federer if you add pro and amateurs

    2/he did so while facing the toughest opposition ever.Prime Hoad,Sedgman,Trabert,Gonzales and Segura in the late 50´s and peak Laver ( and peak Newcombe,Roche,Ashe,Nastase and some others) from the 60´s and 70´s.

    You and many others should put things in perspective and you´d at least have some respect for him.
     
  36. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    What do you mean? I have a PhD in Laver bh sucks. Lol. No it's just my opinion. Just like everyone else's. No data needed other than fed has won more slams.
     
  37. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Nadal is 18-10 vs Federer, 8-2 in slams, 3-2 in slams off of clay (while 5-0 overall), 5-2 lifetime on outdoor hard courts, including 2-1 when peak Federer played 17-19 year old Nadal (and the only loss being a huge choke by 18 year old Nadal from 2 sets to 0 and 5-3 up). Head to head play is the absolute last place you want to go when comparing Federer to Nadal.

    As for Federer in Djokovic if we declare Fedreer's prime as 2004-2007, and presume Djokovic's will end up being 2011-2014 or so, Federer was having mighty problems with and often losing to Djokovic in 08/09 when he was closer to his prime than Djokovic was. In fact their H2H from late 2007-end of 2009 was 4-4.
     
  38. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    You "don't care". Very ignorant.

    Rosewall's four finals are not a blame. They underline how great this player is.

    Rosewall lost 13 years at Wimbledon, among them his very best ones.

    If you blame Muscles you should realize that also the more acknowledged Laver did NOT win at Wimbledon at 20, 22, 36 and 40.

    Rosewall beat Laver twice in pro majors on grass, every time decisively. Why not believe he could also had won in 1960 or 61 or 62 or 63 or 64 or 65 at Wimbledon?

    If a player reaches 4 finals at W. at such a young and old age, it's probable (but of course not sure) he would have fared even better when in his prime!

    I hate it to discuss matters on such a low level as you show here...
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  39. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks, pc1.

    Phoenix wrote that Rosewall would had have troubles against Hoad and Gonzalez. But both were pretty old (and Hoad injured) when Rosewall reached his peak.
     
  40. Tagg

    Tagg New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    in no order

    sampras
    federer
    lendl
    borg
    laver
    nadal
    agassi
    connors
    mcenroe
    edberg
     
  41. Tagg

    Tagg New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    can't edit for some reason?

    i stick to open era. if you bring pre open era into it, and especially pre world war 2 into it, it just becomes messy

    it's hard enough comparing players in the 70s/80s/90s to nowadays, never mind further back
     
  42. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    It's interesting: You make concessions for Gonzalez (and I agree) but NOT for Rosewall who succeeded much more at W. than Pancho...

    The age issue works for Pancho but not for Muscles? Interesting view.

    May I remember you that Rosewall reached his peak not at 21 but at about 25, 26? And he was about 6 (six) years past his prime when he beat Roche and lost to Newcombe in five after gruelling singles and doubles matches!

    Is this so difficult to understand?

    There is a tiny difference between Borg and Rosewall: Borg played US Open in his prime while Rosewall not...
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  43. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, I agree. Thanks that you consider Rosewall's greatness in a serious way.

    By the way, I guess that many posters are not aware that Rosewall has won more grass majors than Sampras or Federer. I concede in his time there were much more grass court events.

    Laver leads with 12 grass majors.
    Tilden is second with 11 (included one pro major at FH)
    Rosewall is third with 8 grass majors.
     
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Many of their matches were played when Federer was in his prime and Nadal and Djokovic not.

    I doubt that a peak Federer was stronger or at least equal than 2011 Djoker.
     
  45. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    ...and I would have more respect for TMF and a few other posters...
     
  46. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Nadal/Agassi. I could not have explained the matter better or equal to you.
     
  47. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,369
    No he doesn't. Rosewall won 8 slams(4 were from the amateur) while Federer won 17 modern slams. Rosewall won 15 pro majors but Federer won 6 WTFs. Overall, Fed's slams/WTFs have more value than all of Rosewall's 23 slams/pro majors combined.
     
  48. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,005
    Not to be contradictory, but just whom did Federer beat in all these slams? The best players money could buy?
    Rosewall and Hoad had to beat giants from round 1, no easy matches like in the early rounds of a modern slam.
     
  49. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    that shouldn't be a negative. Sport has grown, more players on the tour, different, lower ranked guys at the beginning stages, if top guys keep winning, no biggie, they can meet each other as appropriate in some latter stages.
     
  50. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,633
    Location:
    Bangalore, India

    If I hurt you, I am sorry about that..
     

Share This Page