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 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,157
    joe sch, I would agree. I just would omit the "h" from Novak's name ;-)
     
  2. BlueB

    BlueB Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,453
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Absolutely. If anything, it should be a "ć".

    But what about Borg 8?

    Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
     
  3. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,117
    The problems with conflating pre-open majors and non-traditional majors with traditional open majors are two fold: (1) pre-open amateur and pro majors are not the equivalent of open majors and, in my view, disrespects, discounts and diminishes the value of winning an open major, and (2) if you are going to do it for Rosewall, then you have to do it for everyone. On that basis, by my estimation, Laver has 36 major titles.

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/did-laver-win-36-majors.562156/
     
  4. NatF

    NatF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    21,109
    Location:
    Cretaceous
    If we're including amateur and pro majors in this I think the YEC should be included - Borg also has 11 classic majors not 8.
     
  5. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,117
    Then shouldn't the TCC and ALL of the "pro majors," pre-open and open era, be included? What about the 1970 Dunlop International? Wasn't it the defacto AO that year?
     
  6. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,791
    And then Emerson makes the list of leaders.
     
  7. NatF

    NatF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    21,109
    Location:
    Cretaceous
    Erm no? I've already said that I don't think we should lump all these different types of tournaments together as one. My point was that if the standards for major status are so varried and low then the YEC should be included. I don't want to have to explain this again...

    Dunlop should be considered a major though due to the absence of a suitable AO IMO.

    Well I wouldn't include amateur majors at all personally.
     
  8. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,791
    Then you have to deduct those amateur majors from Laver and Rosewall....you cannot have two standards.
     
  9. NatF

    NatF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    21,109
    Location:
    Cretaceous
    Have you seen me list major counts for any players recently? ;)
     
  10. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,117
    I have repeated this several times:

    "The problems with conflating pre-open majors [amateur and pro] and non-traditional majors with traditional open majors are two fold: (1) pre-open amateur and pro majors are not the equivalent of open majors and, in my view, disrespects, discounts and diminishes the value of winning an open major, and (2) if you are going to do it for Rosewall, then you have to do it for everyone. On that basis, by my estimation, Laver has 36 major titles."

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/did-laver-win-36-majors.562156/

    I don't want to have to explain this again, either!

    So, you have said that they YEC and the Dunlop should be included in the major count. What about the TCC? Wasn't that bigger, more prestigious than any traditional major? It was higher paying than all of the traditional majors combined.
     

Share This Page