Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Former Pro Player Talk (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37)
-   -   What if Lendl won wimbledon, mac won FO, etc (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=450542)

ttwarrior1 01-10-2013 11:47 PM

What if Lendl won wimbledon, mac won FO, etc
 
How would the legacy be if Lendl had won wimbledon, johny mac won french open, courier winning wim, borg winning a us open, becker winning a french open, etc

whose legacy would of changed the most?

bluetrain4 01-11-2013 12:19 AM

I'd add Edberg as well, as he lost in a 5-set French Open final.

All legacies would be enhanced, obviously, some more than others.

Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

timnz 01-11-2013 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluetrain4 (Post 7111869)
I'd add Edberg as well, as he lost in a 5-set French Open final.

All legacies would be enhanced, obviously, some more than others.

Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

Lendl would have loved today's grass. Even high bouncing grass.

Blocker 01-11-2013 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluetrain4 (Post 7111869)
I'd add Edberg as well, as he lost in a 5-set French Open final.

All legacies would be enhanced, obviously, some more than others.

Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

Good post. Sums it up in a nutshell.

slowfox 01-11-2013 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluetrain4 (Post 7111869)
Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Imagine if he did it in 1988. Calendar Grand Slam...

Lefty78 01-11-2013 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluetrain4 (Post 7111869)
If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

I think the fact that Lendl himself placed so much emphasis on winning Wimby has a lot to do with this.

TMF 01-11-2013 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ttwarrior1 (Post 7111841)
How would the legacy be if Lendl had won wimbledon, johny mac won french open, courier winning wim, borg winning a us open, becker winning a french open, etc

whose legacy would of changed the most?

I would say Lendl because he would earn a Career Slam which is not far behind Laver's 1969 GS. McEnroe win the FO in 1984 would earn him 3 out 4 slam that year, best win/loss record, and arguably ranked #1 greatest season of all time.

hoodjem 01-11-2013 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMF (Post 7112608)
McEnroe win the FO in 1984 would earn him 3 out 4 slam that year, best win/loss record, and arguably ranked #1 greatest season of all time.

Gotta agree. Pretty much true.

Great Uncle Bulgaria 01-11-2013 10:10 AM

If McEnroe had won the French in 1984 I am sure he would have gone to Australia and won, giving him a CYGS.

kiki 01-11-2013 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ttwarrior1 (Post 7111841)
How would the legacy be if Lendl had won wimbledon, johny mac won french open, courier winning wim, borg winning a us open, becker winning a french open, etc

whose legacy would of changed the most?

Borg would probably be considered the GOAT if heŽd only won a single US open title.

FedericRoma83 01-11-2013 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki (Post 7113478)
Borg would probably be considered the GOAT if heŽd only won a single US open title.

I feel the same for Lendl at Wimbledon. Or at least, a Career Slam achieved in the strongest era of the sport would have been a solid claim.

kiki 01-11-2013 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FedericRoma83 (Post 7113486)
I feel the same for Lendl at Wimbledon. Or at least, a Career Slam achieved in the strongest era of the sport would have been a solid claim.

No doubt.But Borg had that extra greatness magic.a US title would have been talked by all the world in that time.

FedericRoma83 01-11-2013 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki (Post 7113523)
No doubt.But Borg had that extra greatness magic

Not for me. I mean, I like him very much but I've some troubles to empathize with him. On the contrary, when I watch Lendl, I'm there suffering :D

kiki 01-11-2013 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FedericRoma83 (Post 7113545)
Not for me. I mean, I like him very much but I've some troubles to empathize with him. On the contrary, when I watch Lendl, I'm there suffering :D

Certo.Lendl is one of the players I have witnessed most.IŽve undergone any kind of emotional experience with him: like,admire,hate,respect,disrespect,ignore...a true emotional learning.same for Connors,Mac,Nastase and a few more ( Borg, I never loved him but I just admired him, he had such an aurea that you donŽt see anymore)

TMF 01-11-2013 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki (Post 7113478)
Borg would probably be considered the GOAT if heŽd only won a single US open title.

Borg still wouldn't have a Career Slam with a USO win.

FedericRoma83 01-11-2013 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMF (Post 7113760)
Borg still wouldn't have a Career Slam with a USO win.

During his era the AO was not important, so it wouldn't have affected his achievement. Anyway, after a US Open victory, he surely would have played the AO.

kiki 01-12-2013 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMF (Post 7113760)
Borg still wouldn't have a Career Slam with a USO win.

HeŽd have finally played the aussie if he had won Flushing.You know, in his time, the Masters/WCT titles were vastly more important than the Melbourne one, so he won all the majors except the open.

Kirijax 01-12-2013 10:20 AM

Most of the players back then had their one tournament they could not win. Nowadays, we have to go to the Davis Cup, WTF, or the Olympics to find something they haven't won. Interesting the way it all changes.

timnz 01-12-2013 10:46 AM

Reason
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirijax (Post 7114918)
Most of the players back then had their one tournament they could not win. Nowadays, we have to go to the Davis Cup, WTF, or the Olympics to find something they haven't won. Interesting the way it all changes.

This is not because todays players are better but rather because of surface homogenization. For instance, Wimbledon going from being a fast court event to a medium paced court event

ttwarrior1 01-12-2013 12:18 PM

yes i agree, the goat if borg won us open, and same as lendl


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse