View Single Post
Old 10-01-2009, 11:28 PM   #26
Ventolin
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chopin View Post

The answer is hero-worship and the personal connection to past greats these posters have (however false and misguided).

Many of you continue to put players on pedestals (Laver being the prime example, though worse still, egotistical players like Mac and Connors) and argue, essentially, that these players are inherently greater than today's players. Now I fully understand that there is a difference between admiring a person's accomplishment and admiring the person, but again and again, many posters come across as grown-up, adult fanboys, who defend these players not for tennis reasons, but out of a sense of personal connection to these players (despite not knowing them). For example, the love for Borg from many of you defies logic (many of you seem to ignore Mac getting the best of him). Borg is neither a role-model or hero for me, nor is he GOAT. I ask some of you: do you know Borg personally?

I'll leave you all with the following question. How can tennis strive in the United States if some of it's biggest and most passionate fans refuse to acknowledge the amazing depth and high level of play of today's players? Is this about tennis or your own personal memories of growing up and watching Borg?

Furthermore, Is this about tennis greatness--or your own egos?

Kind Regards,
Chopin

*1 Footnote: There is no legitimate way to statistically prove the strength of an era. Looking at slam distribution tells us nothing of value in regards to this specific question
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chopin View Post
OK, I am a little harsh on Laver, but I strongly believe that he's overrated.

I don't think that Sampras and Nadal are overrated though. I don't even particularly like Sampras, but I still think he's #2 all time behind Federer. And I respect Nadal a lot, I just don't think we should read into his head to head with Federer until he proves that he's as great a player as Federer in the long-run. Nadal has proved that he's very, very good at playing Federer on clay, and good at playing him off clay, but he hasn't proved that he's as good as Federer in the grand scheme of tennis.

And it might sound harsh, but I'm not going to make excuses for the guy when he play way too many tournaments and when his very style of play, the very thing that makes him tough, is not an easy style of play for his body to handle. Injuries go hand in hand with how he plays tennis. Nadal wouldn't want us making excuses for him either.
Sounds like your doing with Federer exactly what you accuse others of doing.

It doesn't make it ok for you to be a total hypocrite because in your mind you are correct and Federer is GOAT.

The debate about who is GOAT is far from over and it probably never will be. Your opinion on who is GOAT is just that, your opinion. Your opinion is not more valuable than anyone else.

Many people disagree with you. Deal with it in another way besides making childish threads calling other people names because they don't agree with your opinions.

I don't find it at all surprising that people dislike you enough to stalk your threads and vote everything 1 star.

You come across as incredibly arrogant, pretentious, and misinformed.
Ventolin is offline   Reply With Quote