Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
So Bobby Riggs is possibly top 10 all time, while Nadal and Agassi are not. Total crock list, sorry. Comparing Riggs or Segura (and yes I know he was a top pro player in the early 50s when the mens pro game was briefly thin anyway) to Nadal or even Agassi is equivalent to the certain someone who kept trying to compare Kodes to Vines. The massive gap Nadal and Agassi have over such players is as large or bigger than that.
You're probably right that Agassi is in CONSIDERATION of top ten.
Originally Posted by forzamilan90
This is the one time I agree with you
However consideration doesn't mean I believe he is top ten. Here's some of my thought processes on Agassi. Remember the key is worthy of consideration for top ten, not necessarily do I think they are top ten.
I was just thinking that Agassi is so recent and I've seen so many players superior to him JUST RECENTLY in my opinion. I have no doubt that Tilden, Rosewall, Laver, Gonzalez and Borg were superior to him. That's five. We look at Jack Kramer and Kramer was dominant for years, was the clearly best player in the world for years. Agassi was never clearly number one for many years in a row like Kramer. That's six. Recently we have Connors, more than double the tournaments won, equal with majors. That's seven. How about Lendl who is another fairly recent player? Against more than double Agassi in tournament wins. Equal in majors and in head to head he was in the plus column. That's eight. What about Federer, currently playing and another recent player who played during the Agassi era? That's nine. I know I erred on the side of caution with Nadal (anther current player and recent player who played old Agassi) but so far in average level of play he's ahead of Agassi plus he had far more majors. That's ten. Djokovic will probably be ahead. That's eleven. Clearly Pete Sampras (the dominant player of the Agassi era and another recent player) is ahead of Agassi so that's twelve. If we take away Djokovic for now it's still eleven ahead of Agassi.
When I wrote consideration of top ten, the player has to had an least some sort of argument he's in the top ten. Do you see him ahead of Sampras, Federer, Nadal, Lendl, Connors, Borg, Laver, Rosewall for those greats who played in the Open Era and won majors? And that's just in the Open Era. Heck for a while there Agassi wasn't even the best in his family, Pancho Gonzalez was his brother in law.
So now we have to look at before the Open Era. We have Tilden, Gonzalez who are clearly ahead of Agassi and it's not close.
My friends, this is opinion and opinions often greatly vary. I can tell you that I respect Agassi's career but frankly the guy took years off in a career that was hardly super dominant like a Tilden or other. He also had many weaknesses as a player. He wasn't quick, didn't volley that well and his serve was good but not overpoweringly. Courier for a few years was able to consistently beat Agassi in big matches. Courier was terrific but hardly a super duper player even at his best. So yes I agree you're correct that he's in consideration for top ten but I don't think he is top ten.
Let's talk stats. Agassi won eight majors in his career in 61 attempts. Pretty good but not exactly super. He won 76.05% of his career matches. Hardly awesome. McEnroe, Connors, Lendl were in the 82% range in much longer careers. A six point gap is huge. Nadal is around the 83% range. Federer is in the 82% range. Djokovic currently is in the 79% range and moving up. Sampras was in the 77% range but I will say that Sampras didn't play quite as long so so percentage stats would have probably gone down. However Sampras still won more tournaments than Agassi, 64 to 60. Agassi never had super great years like McEnroe, Borg, Lendl, Connors, Federer, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzale, Tilden, Djokovic or Nadal. My point is that we assume Agassi has to be in the top ten because he's Agassi but is that a given? He has to be penalized somewhat for the years he didn't put as much effort into the game.
So tell me, do any of you feel Agassi belongs ahead of Tilden, Laver, Borg, Rosewall, Sampras, Nadal, Federer, Gonzalez, Lendl, Connors, Kramer? I forgot about John McEnroe who won one less major than Agassi but over 100 tournaments. McEnroe won over 80% of his matches for his career. He won many WCT Championships and he won Year End Masters. I'd rank McEnroe ahead of Agassi. What about Budge, Perry, Hoad, Sedgman and Newcombe? I think Agassi is ahead of Becker and Edberg.
My thinking was not consistent for Agassi as it was for the others so I apologize for that. He is clearly worthy of being considered for top ten.
If I look at a great like Riggs who was a dominant player. We can only say that Kramer was superior to him and that's debatable that Kramer was vastly superior because even Kramer thought Riggs tanked the tour after he fell behind by six or seven matches. We cannot compare him to Gonzalez head to head because he essentially was retired when Gonzalez played. Riggs won virtually everything he wanted to win.
If I look at Segura I see possibly the second best player of the 1950's with only Gonzalez able to beat him consistently during the decade. Maybe Kramer if you think of the early 1950's. Many, not just me rank him in the top ten. If you read the post carefully I was looking at players with even some flimsy reasons (but not logically totally disputable) for being in the top ten. Segura does have some half decent arguments imho. You realize that I'm trying to be flexible and to be open that some players may have some reasons to be in the top ten all time.
So no I don't think it's a crock list.
All of you know that I rarely post an opinion without putting some subjective thought that I try to base on facts and logic. I try to look at the facts and give my opinions based on the facts. I have a decent amount of information on Bobby Riggs' career and game to make me believe he is potentially top ten all time material. You saw the information I've given. Do all of you believe I am that far off? Look at Riggs' stats and resume in post 2368. Do you think it may be top ten material? I think it potentially is and if you don't, wow you really have to be impressed!
Segura incidentally years ago was named in the top twenty all time in a poll of tennis writers and experts. Some of these writers were Lance Tingay, Rex Bellamy, Bud Collins, Rino Tommasi, Allison Danzig, Will Grimsley, Ned Potter so it wasn't exactly guys off the street. Is potential top ten unreasonable? This is hardly ranking Kodes over Vines as NadalAgassi indicated. I know Vines by the way put Segura as number five after WW two ahead of guys like Rosewall, Riggs, Hoad, Sedgman, Trabert and also ahead of Emerson. Kramer ranked Segura in the second tier but clearly top ten and he ranked Riggs in the top tier ahead of Gonzalez, Laver and Rosewall.
I think Segura and Riggs were vastly underrated players. Are they really top ten? I don't think so. Are they in the running for top ten? Possibly in my opinion.