Originally Posted by kiki
Talent wise, he is as good if not better than Ememrson ( this guy was the GOAT opportunistic since he decided to remain amateur9 but I donīt think Kodes was more talented than Ashe,Roche and , of course, Nastase.He was less talented, without any doubt.
If we go to records, Kodes won as many GS titles as Ashe ( but Ashe won WCT finals so his record is a bit better than Kodes) and more than Nastase and Roche, although one can make a case for Nastaseīs 4 Masters titles, which Kodes never won, so it is about tied.
Roche is far behind them, he was a great talent, with a solid ground game and a terrific volley but quite of a loser if we consider how many opportunities did he have and how many finals he lost.In doubles, however, ranks among the best ever.
Sorry, not a chance. Emerson was one of the greatest all around athletes in tennis history. He had a first tier 1hb, a first tier net game and was among the fastest players who ever played. Kodes was a tireless, fearless competitor, but, not an exceptionally talented athlete like Emerson.
Tony Roche was as much an underachiever as Kodes was an overachiever. Injuries was partly responsible for that. Roche could also get angry and down on himself in tough matches. Roche also had the misfortune of coming up with Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Ashe, Smith, Nastase and others with championship level competitiveness.