Greatest Tennis Players (Men) YOU have SEEN

[Azzurri]

I feel to rate a player its important to have actually seen him play. Here is my top 10

1. Sampras
2. Federer
3. Mcenroe
4. Connors
5. Borg (Connors is higher because Borg retired so early and Jimm was great into his late 30's)
6. Lendl
7. Agassi
8. Edberg
9. Wilander
10. Becker

I really like Nadal and he needs a couple more slams to break the top 10. Thos slams have to be USO, W or AO.

I may have ommited a great player, but these are the guys I watched growing up and following. I could never rate Don Budge....I don't even know what he looks like.

[Moose Malloy]

I could never rate Don Budge....I don't even know what he looks like.

He helped the #3 on your list turn around his rivalry with Lendl after losing 6 straight in '82.

[Azzurri]

Originally Posted by Moose Malloy

He helped the #3 on your list turn around his rivalry with Lendl after losing 6 straight in '82.

I was joking a bit. Yes Don Budge did help Mac...

[drakulie]

1. Federer (Putting statistics aside, to me, he is the best player I have ever seen between the lines)

2. Sampras

3. Agassi (what impresses me the most about Agassi is how much he was able to achieve even though he had soooo many lows, and how he didn't take the game so seriously in many of his first few years. This guy was a rare talent. Additionally, he won Wimbledon at a time where there were still "Grass Court Specialist (S & Vers), and then was able to transcend his game to a compelely different surface and win the French in an era of "Clay Court Specialist"

4. Mcenroe (I am at times more impressed with him than any other player on this list. The fact he was not only an amazing singles player, but one of the best doubles players of all time. None of the others on this list can make that boast. Additionally, his Davis Cup record makes his tennis achievements even more impressive. My first "favorite player".

5. Borg

6. Connors (Amazing player. Only guy on the list I coudn't stand).

7. Lendl

8. Edberg

9. Wilander

10. Becker

[Pro Staff Pete]

World Group 1994
Quarterfinal
Mullerpier, Rotterdam, Netherlands
15 July - 17 July 1994
Surface: Hard (Plexipave) - Outdoors
Ball Type: Dunlop

Tie Completed
USA defeated Netherlands 3-2 in Netherlands

Sunday:
R.KRAJICEK (NED) def. P.SAMPRAS (USA)
2-6 7-5 7-6(5) 7-5

I was only a small boy but I can still remember that amazing game! They built a great stadium for the tie and it was fully packed. Sampras played very well, but not at his best though.

Two years ago I saw Federer play at the ABN atp in Rotterdam. I was sitting very closely to the court and it was just amazing (movement, pace).

[CEvertFan]

Originally Posted by drakulie

1. Federer (Putting statistics aside, to me, he is the best player I have ever seen between the lines)

2. Sampras

3. Agassi (what impresses me the most about Agassi is how much he was able to achieve even though he had soooo many lows, and how he didn't take the game so seriously in many of his first few years. This guy was a rare talent. Additionally, he won Wimbledon at a time where there were still "Grass Court Specialist (S & Vers), and then was able to transcend his game to a compelely different surface and win the French in an era of "Clay Court Specialist"

4. Mcenroe (I am at times more impressed with him than any other player on this list. The fact he was not only an amazing singles player, but one of the best doubles players of all time. None of the others on this list can make that boast. Additionally, his Davis Cup record makes his tennis achievements even more impressive. My first "favorite player".

5. Borg

6. Connors (Amazing player. Only guy on the list I coudn't stand).

7. Lendl

8. Edberg

9. Wilander

10. Becker

I wouldn't change a thing about your list. I agree with all the choices and the order you have them. Well done!

[Dedans Penthouse]

Renee Richards

[Pete Semper]

Sampras
Federer
Agassi
McEnroe
Edberg
Mecir
Becker
Connors
Leconte
Nadal

[z-money]

Best we have SEEN people: Id say Agassi was the best ive seen but mcenroe was cool too. Andy was fun but he is overrated

[Azzurri]

Originally Posted by z-money

Best we have SEEN people: Id say Agassi was the best ive seen but mcenroe was cool too. Andy was fun but he is overrated

I meant watched (tv or live).

I never got to see Mac...could have went to the 90 Open....chose to go another time. I would have been able to see his match against Pete, big mistake.

[Azzurri]

Originally Posted by drakulie

1. Federer (Putting statistics aside, to me, he is the best player I have ever seen between the lines)

2. Sampras

3. Agassi (what impresses me the most about Agassi is how much he was able to achieve even though he had soooo many lows, and how he didn't take the game so seriously in many of his first few years. This guy was a rare talent. Additionally, he won Wimbledon at a time where there were still "Grass Court Specialist (S & Vers), and then was able to transcend his game to a compelely different surface and win the French in an era of "Clay Court Specialist"

4. Mcenroe (I am at times more impressed with him than any other player on this list. The fact he was not only an amazing singles player, but one of the best doubles players of all time. None of the others on this list can make that boast. Additionally, his Davis Cup record makes his tennis achievements even more impressive. My first "favorite player".

5. Borg

6. Connors (Amazing player. Only guy on the list I coudn't stand).

7. Lendl

8. Edberg

9. Wilander

10. Becker

Great list. One question...Agassi over Borg?

[FiveO]

Also numbers aside and based on talent and varied "talents" at that:

1. Federer
1aT Laver, Borg, Sampras, Nastase (at his best, yes he was that talented)
6. Lendl
7T McEnroe, Agassi, Safin
10T Connors, Newcombe
12. Becker
13. Edberg, Wilander, Rosewall
16. Kuerten, Nadal, Vilas

[armand]

Define "SEEN". If I saw a 6 minute Youtube clip of Rod Laver, does that qualify me to have "SEEN" him?

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by CEvertFan

I wouldn't change a thing about your list. I agree with all the choices and the order you have them. Well done!

Great minds think alike.

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by slappano

Great list. One question...Agassi over Borg?

I'll explain. Similar to what I stated about Fed, even though Agassi doesn't have as many slams as Borg, I think he was the better player.

Honestly, the list gets rough for me between 2-5. For example, I will say I'm far more more impressed with McEnroes accoomplishments in TENNIS as a whole, than I am with Pete's 14 singles slams. If Pete would of played both singles and doubles would he have as many doubles slams as Mc? Would it have had an impact on his singles totals? That goes for all those guys (Agassi, Borg, Lendl, etc).

On the other hand, I think one of, if not the most impressive achievements is Borg's French and Wimbledon success. I think that feat has proven to be far harder to obtain than total # of slams. Quite frankly, I don't see that feat ever being duplicated (even with the slower grass). I do see the total # of slams being surpassed.

As too many arguments could be made, my list finally came down to taking numbers out of the equation and going by who I thought was the better singles player in their prime.

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by FiveO

Also numbers aside and based on talent and varied "talents" at that:

1. Federer
1aT Laver, Borg, Sampras, Nastase (at his best, yes he was that talented)
6. Lendl
7T McEnroe, Agassi, Safin
10T Connors, Newcombe
12. Becker
13. Edberg, Wilander, Rosewall
16. Kuerten, Nadal, Vilas

FiveO, interesting way to look at it. After revieweing your list I'm surprised you didn't place Rios up there. Not that I would, but with all the hoopla about him (which I really don't get), I would have expected to see him there along with Safin.

By the way, I agree Safin is one of the best players I have ever seen. I always thought he was going to be the next guy to be number # 1for years, and winning slams every year, etc. The guy could do it all.

[FiveO]

Originally Posted by drakulie

FiveO, interesting way to look at it. After revieweing your list I'm surprised you didn't place Rios up there. Not that I would, but with all the hoopla about him (which I really don't get), I would have expected to see him there along with Safin.

By the way, I agree Safin is one of the best players I have ever seen. I always thought he was going to be the next guy to be number # 1for years, and winning slams every year, etc. The guy could do it all.

Same thoughts on Safin.

Rios? I have to admit my bias here. Yes, very talented. However with very little to show for it and just not talented in the jaw-dropping Safin-esque way to me. Believe it or not I viewed Rios as more of a Hicham Arazi with a little more court sense. Like I said, I admit my bias on him.

[Azzurri]

Originally Posted by armand

Define "SEEN". If I saw a 6 minute Youtube clip of Rod Laver, does that qualify me to have "SEEN" him?

No....6 minutes is not enough.

By seen I mean watched them play for most of their career. Not every match, but 5-10 tourneys a year. How much tennis do you watch now? I watch all the GS, basically anytime ESPN shows matches. That is quite a bit of tennis. I watched/played a lot of tennis and followed it a great deal from 1979 to 2000. My list was based on players I have watched play each other a great deal.

[Azzurri]

Originally Posted by drakulie

I'll explain. Similar to what I stated about Fed, even though Agassi doesn't have as many slams as Borg, I think he was the better player.

Honestly, the list gets rough for me between 2-5. For example, I will say I'm far more more impressed with McEnroes accoomplishments in TENNIS as a whole, than I am with Pete's 14 singles slams. If Pete would of played both singles and doubles would he have as many doubles slams as Mc? Would it have had an impact on his singles totals? That goes for all those guys (Agassi, Borg, Lendl, etc).

On the other hand, I think one of, if not the most impressive achievements is Borg's French and Wimbledon success. I think that feat has proven to be far harder to obtain than total # of slams. Quite frankly, I don't see that feat ever being duplicated (even with the slower grass). I do see the total # of slams being surpassed.

As too many arguments could be made, my list finally came down to taking numbers out of the equation and going by who I thought was the better singles player in their prime.

I see...good way of choosing. Now that I think about it, a 28 year old Agassi probably would have beat Borg in his prime, but not sure on clay. As for the other surfaces Agassi and Borg would be a great great match!

[40Love]

No player that I have seen on courts dating back to Laver and Emerson-yes I saw them play-electrified crowds like Jimmy Connors.