Where do you put Agassi on your GOAT list (if you have one)?

[kiki]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

My top 10 of all time:

1. Laver
2. Gonzales
3. Federer
4. Sampras
5. Nadal
6. Rosewall
7. Borg
8. Tilden
9. Budge
10. Vines
11. Connors
12. Lendl
13. McEnroe
14. Agassi
15. Djokovic

I could never leave Rosewall outside the top 10. Way too much longevity as a persistent non ending top 2 or 3 player in the World, and a period of a few years as the best player too (which someone like Agassi sadly doesnt have).

3 of those must go in: Hoad, Perry, Newcombe and Kramer in, and maybe Sedgman.Vines,Agassi and Djokovic out.rest is OK for me ( although in a slight different order).Agassi can be in the top 15 but no way Vines and Djokovic are.Becker,Wilander or Edberg eat Djokovic for breakfast,lunch and dinner respectively ( up to this moment, at least)

[NadalAgassi]

Some posters on this site helped me appreciate Vines record more. He was the best player in the World most of the 1930s.

[kiki]

I am delighted that Vines is considered top 15.That puts Kodes authomatically in the list.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by kiki

I am delighted that Vines is considered top 15.That puts Kodes authomatically in the list.

LOL are you saying Kodes is as good as Vines. Based on what.

[forzamilan90]

This is my top 20, Agassi is #12.
1. Roger Federer
2. Rod Laver
3. Pete Sampras
4. Bill Tilden
5. Pancho Gonzales
6. Ken Rosewall
7. Rafael Nadal
8. Bjorn Borg
9. Roy Emerson
10. Jimmy Connors
11. Ivan Lendl
12. Andre Agassi
13. Don Budge
14. John McEnroe
15. Ellsworth Vines
16. John Newcombe
17. Boris Becker
18. Mats Wilander
19. Stefan Edberg
20. Henri Cochet

[kiki]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

LOL are you saying Kodes is as good as Vines. Based on what.

In fact he may be better.If I was TMF I would say Kodes won majors on grass AND clay while Vines just on grass...fortunately, I am not TMF

Both won 3 majors, BTW

[90's Clay]

It hurt Andre that he had to play his entire career (aside from his final 3 years but by that time he was old and with a bad back) vs another GOAT candidate in Sampras. Perhaps the best player to ever live as far as fast surfaces are concerned. I think Pete was a big reason why Andre's career sunk after the USO in 95 and didn't really surge back until 3 years later. He lost quite a few USO titles to Pete and another wimbledon or two IMO ( not to mention a WTF or two).

Unfortunate for Andre. He was only like 1 year apart from Pete so their careers/primes intertwined with each other. He didn't have like a 5-6 age difference where perhaps he was in his prime, Pete was yet to reach his or vice versa where he could have had the opportunity to gobble more big titles.

[NadalAgassi]

I think if Agassi had won that 95 U.S Open final he would be a top 5 player all time today. He would be atleast where Nadal is considered today, and probably above. That changed everything for a few years, and he got things all back together starting in mid 99, but by then he was pretty old for a tennis player and his ability to dominate and win alot was very limited.

Pete didnt exactly own from 96-98 like he did from 93-95 either, well in 97 he did pretty much, but not really in 96 and 98, so it would have been an even better opportunity for Agassi. I think he felt with the tennis he played in 95 he deserved atleast 2 slams and the year end #1 and to do over Pete would have given his confidence and belief he could hold his head up high in the rivalry. I am sure he knows there is no way you do that to Pete every year, but he would also know he had already done it atleast once and could do it again. Failing to do it when he had played so well that year, had been so utterly dominant on regular hard courts especialy, and when he knows Pete started the year with emotional problems as well, and to have those tough losses at 3 different slams that year (especialy the Wimbledon and U.S Open ones) was just too much to overcome pyschologically I think.

He also could hav easily ended the year #1 but pretty much gave up already on it after the U.S Open, I dont think he felt like a real #1 with having 1 less slam title and 1 less slam final than Sampras.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

My top 10 of all time:

1. Laver
2. Gonzales
3. Federer
4. Sampras
5. Nadal
6. Rosewall
7. Borg
8. Tilden
9. Budge
10. Vines
11. Connors
12. Lendl
13. McEnroe
14. Agassi
15. Djokovic

I could never leave Rosewall outside the top 10. Way too much longevity as a persistent non ending top 2 or 3 player in the World, and a period of a few years as the best player too (which someone like Agassi sadly doesnt have).

It's fine that you mention Rosewall's longevity as a measure for greatness.

Reasonable list!

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Surecatch

In the top ten. I don't include pre-Open era players....I have no base for evaluating Tilden, Pancho, etc. against modern players, so with that in mind, Andre would make the top ten...probably 7-10ish. I always forget someone when I do this, but quickly, it still goes something like this:

1. Federer
2. Laver
3. Sampras
4. Nadal
5. Borg
6. Lendl
7. Agassi
8. McEnroe
9. Conners
10.Becker.

My list is a little iffy down in the second half, but it's "about" right, for the purpose of getting a number for AA.

It's interesting that you rank only "modern" players with one exception: Laver. Do you really think that Gonzalez and Rosewall were so much lower than the Rocket?

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by kiki

3 of those must go in: Hoad, Perry, Newcombe and Kramer in, and maybe Sedgman.Vines,Agassi and Djokovic out.rest is OK for me ( although in a slight different order).Agassi can be in the top 15 but no way Vines and Djokovic are.Becker,Wilander or Edberg eat Djokovic for breakfast,lunch and dinner respectively ( up to this moment, at least)

You underrate Vines and Djokovic.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by forzamilan90

This is my top 20, Agassi is #12.
1. Roger Federer
2. Rod Laver
3. Pete Sampras
4. Bill Tilden
5. Pancho Gonzales
6. Ken Rosewall
7. Rafael Nadal
8. Bjorn Borg
9. Roy Emerson
10. Jimmy Connors
11. Ivan Lendl
12. Andre Agassi
13. Don Budge
14. John McEnroe
15. Ellsworth Vines
16. John Newcombe
17. Boris Becker
18. Mats Wilander
19. Stefan Edberg
20. Henri Cochet

Not the worst list but you overrate Emerson (as many do) . His 12 major titles don't mean too much. He is the only player in your list who never was No.1!

And you should include Jack Kramer.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

You underrate Vines and Djokovic.

And you underrate Becker,Newcombe,Wilander,Edberg and Jan Kodes ( who won the same nº of GS titles as Vines BUT ON MORE VARIETY OF SURFACES, learn history mein lieben kind)

[kiki]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

It's interesting that you rank only "modern" players with one exception: Laver. Do you really think that Gonzalez and Rosewall were so much lower than the Rocket?

..and who is that " Conners" ranked so highly? never heard of him

[kiki]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Not the worst list but you overrate Emerson (as many do) . His 12 major titles don't mean too much. He is the only player in your list who never was No.1!

And you should include Jack Kramer.

Not a bad list but not an accurate one without Perry,Sedgman and, of course, Lew Hoad out of the top 20.I could understand them out of the top 10, but never out of any top 20 list.

If we talk about best player and not greatest record, Hoad is top 5 and possibly top 3

[kiki]

Seems like tennis started off with Big Bill Tilden, which may be at some point true form the popularity POV, but there are stars like Wilding,Mc Laughlin,Sears,Brookes, Doherty and the Renshaws that, had they had more press and radio coverage, would be much more talked about right now when time comes to elaborate a top 20 all time greats list.it is a pitty.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by kiki

And you underrate Becker,Newcombe,Wilander,Edberg and Jan Kodes ( who won the same nº of GS titles as Vines BUT ON MORE VARIETY OF SURFACES, learn history mein lieben kind)

Do you want to start a discussion like my long quarrels with Lobb and Limpinhitter?

I guess I will not learn in the rest of my life that you accept that Vines won more majors than Jan Kodes and that he won on two surfaces just like Kodes did.

I'm a rather old "kind" with my 63 years.... But you make me feel a bit younger! Thanks.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by kiki

Not a bad list but not an accurate one without Perry,Sedgman and, of course, Lew Hoad out of the top 20.I could understand them out of the top 10, but never out of any top 20 list.

If we talk about best player and not greatest record, Hoad is top 5 and possibly top 3

I learnt history already and agree with you in both points.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by kiki

Seems like tennis started off with Big Bill Tilden, which may be at some point true form the popularity POV, but there are stars like Wilding,Mc Laughlin,Sears,Brookes, Doherty and the Renshaws that, had they had more press and radio coverage, would be much more talked about right now when time comes to elaborate a top 20 all time greats list.it is a pitty.

I again agree but perhaps the depth of the tennis fields was a bit weaker than from Tilden times onwards.

[Carsomyr]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Do you want to start a discussion like my long quarrels with Lobb and Limpinhitter?

I guess I will not learn in the rest of my life that you accept that Vines won more majors than Jan Kodes and that he won on two surfaces just like Kodes did.

I'm a rather old "kind" with my 63 years.... But you make me feel a bit younger!

I really don't get it. He has no problem trumping up Laver's career based on pro majors, yet totally dismisses them when it comes to Vines, who beat great players like Nüsslein, Tilden, and Perry to win them.