Most talented player of all time

egn

egn

Hall of Fame
380pistol said:
I never said Gonzales could or couldn't. I said "I could say". As I was responding to JoshDragon's post about the fitness and training of today's players. A lot of things have evolved. It's the same with baseball years ago they'd show up 20lbs over weight and needed 6 weeks of spring training to lose the weight, who does that today?? But if players today played in the past would they focus on fitness the way they do now??

It's probable that during Pancho's time tennis wasn't as near as physical, but with all this baseline bashing one could say today's game is not as skilled, technical or refined. That's why I said a comparison can be made, but it's subjective.
Click to expand...

100 percent on that. It was not a huge demand for fitness, as the game in the past was quicker, not about lasting really long and was far more technical. Hand-eye coordination was probably much more important than being a brute.
 
Azzurri

Azzurri

Legend
VivalaVida said:
The game is so different now than it was in those days. What makes you think that Gonzalez even if he put in effort would be a beast on todays circuit? Gonzalez might not even be able to beat Roddick if he was playing today. Every player should be judged in their own Era, you cant compare Gonzalez to Nadal or Federer. Also, Gonzalez played in a time where Tennis was no where near as physical at that time as it is nowadays and he was able to keep his diet of hamburgers and hot dogs.
Click to expand...

I could care less about this thread.................
 
Last edited:
egn

egn

Hall of Fame
Azzurri said:
you get it, it seems most on this thread don't. Guys from the 40's would not be able to compete, let alone win.

To be clear to some of the "experts". When I say competitive, I mean pluck Gonzalez from his prime era, bring him to the present..he gets destroyed. Now a Gonzalez BORN within today's era would probably be a beast based ONLY on how he did against his peers. But since HE WAS NOT BORN IN THIS ERA, you cannot possible judge how he would do against today's player (I still believe the 90's player was better or at least much more versatile. Give those guys the poly string and the 90's player would destroy the current player-not named Roger or Rafa).
Click to expand...

What about vice versa? now to 40s
 
joe sch

joe sch

Legend
I vote either Pancho Gonzalez or John McEnroe since both had the talent to beat anybody in the world till about 40 years of age and both were able to keep playing at world class levels till about 50 years old. Mac is still going. Both also dominated the world for atleast 5 years.
 
A

ajs72us

New User
The Chilean Marcelo Rios

The guy was just oooozing with physical talent. it was the mental side he lacked in. If this guy had chang's head he would have won several grand slams. He could do anything with the ball.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
joe sch said:
I vote either Pancho Gonzalez or John McEnroe since both had the talent to beat anybody in the world till about 40 years of age and both were able to keep playing at world class levels till about 50 years old. Mac is still going. Both also dominated the world for atleast 5 years.
Click to expand...

Either one of these choices are wonderful. Both of them made tennis seems so easy.
 
Azzurri

Azzurri

Legend
joe sch said:
I vote either Pancho Gonzalez or John McEnroe since both had the talent to beat anybody in the world till about 40 years of age and both were able to keep playing at world class levels till about 50 years old. Mac is still going. Both also dominated the world for atleast 5 years.
Click to expand...

I could care less about this thread.................
 
Last edited:
J

JW10S

Hall of Fame
Give Nadal or Federer a wooden racquet instead of their graphite racquets with polyester strings and have them play Gonzalez--who do you think would win? Automatically assuming current players are better and saying 'put players from the past in current draws and they'd get killed' is very naive. I say current players would have trouble going back and beating Bill Tilden wearing long pants, long sleeves and a weilding 16 oz. wood racquet that didn't even have a grip on it, just bare wood. The topic was who was the most 'talented' player. Gonzalez had the perfect make up. He was tall but moved around the court effortlessly (in canvas shoes no less), had the perfect blend of power and finesse, and had a competitive instinct second to none.
 
Last edited:
hoodjem

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
JW10S said:
and beating Bill Tilden wearing long pants, long sleeves and a wielding 16 oz. wood racquet that didn't even have a grip on it, just bare wood.
Click to expand...
Actually, that was Budge with the 16.5 oz racquet and a no-leather-grip, bare wood handle.
 
J

JW10S

Hall of Fame
hoodjem said:
Actually, that was Budge with the 16.5 oz racquet and a no-leather-grip, bare wood handle.
Click to expand...
I hate to break it to you, but Budge was not the only one who used heavy racquets with no grips in those days--it was more the norm rather than the exception. Even the women of that era did so.
 
Last edited:
Azzurri

Azzurri

Legend
krosero said:
Azzurri, this does look like a contradiction, and it's not getting any clearer.

Whether you bring today's players to the past, or the past players to the future, you've got the same problem: you haven't seen the older players.

That's the reason you gave for not wanting to imagine the modern players in the 1940s. Fine, you don't want to pit them against players you've never seen, in conditions you've never witnessed. But these same players you've never seen, you're willing to judge that they would not adapt well to modern conditions. You know next to nothing about how these players adapted to their own conditions, nothing about what specific similarities might exist between their conditions and ours -- but nevertheless you're sure that they would not adapt well.

In another post you said it's clear that tennis is very different today. Very true, but if that's your point, then today's players are going to face very different conditions in the past. That's at least a great challenge for them -- but you won't even touch that question. It's hard to see why. Seriously, you don't need to see anyone play -- you don't even need to see one minute of old reels -- to know that changes in the sport over time are going to challenge any "time traveler" in either direction.

I'm surprised you thought only the "clueless" would see a double standard here. The problems you have with comparisons -- you mentioned the changes in technology, and lack of knowledge about older players due to limited footage -- cut both ways when comparing generations. But you've only cut in one direction.



On the one hand, Pancho was not born in this era. So no judgments are possible, you say, about how he would do with newer technology. But the 90s players, you're convinced, would do great if we gave them newer technology.

If the reason for your confidence is that you've actually seen the 90s players, I get that. But then I don't see you anywhere suspending judgment about how older players would adapt to new technology. To the contrary you've said everywhere that they would be destroyed.

Everything that you know about the past eras of tennis comes from short film reels about as long as YouTube clips, and from historians, which technically is "word of mouth" - though I would not call it that; otherwise we could never do history about anything.
Click to expand...

I could care less about this thread.................
 
Last edited:
J

JW10S

Hall of Fame
Azzurri said:
Some of the players mentioned were great players in their time. tennis has changed too much. I just don't see how players from the past could play in today's game because they grew up playing a different game altogether. Could Gonzalez challenge if he were born 20 years ago? Maybe, but I nor anyone else knows. way too much specualtion. but ist the so called "experts that make statements as fact that irks me.
Click to expand...

As I asked in a post above--could the players of today go back and compete with the players of the past using the equipment of the past? Could Nadal or Federer beat Tilden if they had to play with Tilden's heavy wood racquets rather than their present day graphites with poly strings wearing long pants and long sleeve button down shirts? Of course Tilden would have trouble competing in today's game with his equipment but today's players would also have trouble if they went back in time and had to play with equipment of that era. Again, the topic of this thread is who is the most 'talented' player of all time. Saying a player from the 40's could not compete in today's game does absolutely nothing to answer that question.

Again, I say Gonzalez, for the reasons I listed in a previous post.
 
egn

egn

Hall of Fame
Azzurri said:
I should have stated those were opinions, based on not knowing. none of us know.
Click to expand...

So you can make opinions...but they can't. Nobody is saying for face player a would beat player b. It has always been speculation and an opinion. This whole forum is opinion based.
 
wangs78

wangs78

Legend
clayman2000 said:
for me whoever you feel is the GOAT is the is the most talented player
Talent = natural skill + lots of work
Roger Federer didnt become as talented as he did by sitting around in his home... he had to go out and work on his presice shots...
And i dont think the GOAT is Roger
Click to expand...

I disagree. Talent = natural skill. That said, Talent + hard work/fortitude = success = greatness.
 
grafselesfan

grafselesfan

Banned
egn said:
Explain Fed being at the top. Explain Djokovic. There are tons of lower ranked guys with good mental games who don't succeed for lack of talent. The talented players with bad mental game fails, but those are guys like Nalby and Safin. Tons of other players have strong mental games and don't succeed. By the way you are clueless then..cause the top pros in the 40-60s had great games. I am not 100% wrong stop making ******** statistics you back up with insults and horrible misspellings. I can name a bunch of good players who had a tough mental game and did not win slams and tons of great players who had crappy mental games and won slams.

Good mental games from today's game who did not win slams
Davydenko he doesn't choke he is just not good enough to beat the top
Verdasco plays great in Davis Cup doesn't win slams and gets beat a lot for lack of talent
Hewitt only had 2 slams in a weak era had a great mental game could not beat Fed..not for his mental state lack of talent.
A lot of guys in the the top 50 have good mental games they just get beaten by the more talented guys. Outside of Fed, Djokovic, Roddick, Nalby, Safin not too many guys strike me as being weak mentally. Del Potro I guess but he is 19.

Bad mental games won lots of slams
Lendl..choked in tons of slam finals still won a bunch
Fed..horrible headcase against Nadal still won 13 slams
Agassi..was a train wreck in the early 90s to mid 90s and still managed greatness.

Care to explain that..no wait your statistic is right because you backed it up with the word CLUELESS.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of that. Well not sure on Davydenko. I think he does choke. Yes he isnt as strong as the very best but remember the 2007 French Open semis vs Federer for example? The 5th set of the 2005 French Open semis vs Puerta? Some other matches in his career although I cant remember them all now.
 
egn

egn

Hall of Fame
grafselesfan said:
I agree with most of that. Well not sure on Davydenko. I think he does choke. Yes he isnt as strong as the very best but remember the 2007 French Open semis vs Federer for example? The 5th set of the 2005 French Open semis vs Puerta? Some other matches in his career although I cant remember them all now.
Click to expand...

2005 yes I don't think he choked 2007, I think he just got outplayed. 2005 yes, but everyone chokes occasionally, but all and all Davydenko does not choke that often. 2006 he was playing his best tennis ever and did not choke at all in his AO QF he lost though to Fed completely off form. Not because he choked but Fed just was that far ahead of him. 2005 I am not sure if it was choking or exhaustion but I admit yes that match was disappointing. However guys like Blake, Fish, Phillioposus and anyone on that German Davis Cup team with Becker had no mental weakness. They did not succeed out of the Davis Cup though..lack of talent. It is not just mental game..talent plays a huge part.
 
kiki

kiki

Banned
Laver
Hoad
Gonzales
Federer
Sampras
Tilden
Mc Enroe
Rosewall
Connors
Nastase

Cochet,Budge,Kramer,Borg,Edberg and Agassi would also deserve honourific mentions
 
L

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
kiki said:
Laver
Hoad
Gonzales
Federer
Sampras
Tilden
Mc Enroe
Rosewall
Connors
Nastase

Cochet,Budge,Kramer,Borg,Edberg and Agassi would also deserve honourific mentions
Click to expand...

Good list! I can't think of anyone more talented than Laver. But, I would put Nastase and Borg near the top of that list.
 
DeShaun

DeShaun

Banned
Tops by category (second place):
McEnroe's hands (Bahrami)
Edberg's footwork (Nadal)
Federer's anticipation (Agassi)
Borg's footspeed (Federer)
Laver's shot arsenal (Federer)
Nadal's point construction (Wilander)
 
kiki

kiki

Banned
Limpinhitter said:
Good list! I can't think of anyone more talented than Laver. But, I would put Nastase and Borg near the top of that list.
Click to expand...

Other great talents: Santana,Roche,Panatta,Orantes,Gerulaitis,Mecir,Stich and Safin - in terms of pure tennis ability-.Leconte could have been there, so Rios, but they wasted much more talent than they used, so do not deserve to be considered true talented players.
 
Joe Pike

Joe Pike

Banned
pc1 said:
Just curious about your opinions on who is the most talented player ever. It doesn't necessarily mean achievement but you can for example name a player like Safin if you think he's the most talented ever. It's all subjective and I'm curious about people's thoughts here. You can name the most talented male player and the most talented female player. No such thing as wrong answer here.
Click to expand...

Graf, definitely!

Sadly she didn't win as much slams as she was supposed to do.
 
A

adidasman

Professional
Azzurri said:
I could care less about this thread.................
Click to expand...
The phrase is, "I COULDN'T care less about this thread." "I could care less" means, of course, that you could care even less than you do; I doubt that's what you mean. If you're going to be an irritant, at least get your irritating remark right. (And you're trying soooooooooo hard to get someone to comment on your ambivalence, I didn't want you to burst from the anticipation.)
 
L

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
adidasman said:
The phrase is, "I COULDN'T care less about this thread." "I could care less" means, of course, that you could care even less than you do; I doubt that's what you mean. If you're going to be an irritant, at least get your irritating remark right. (And you're trying soooooooooo hard to get someone to comment on your ambivalence, I didn't want you to burst from the anticipation.)
Click to expand...

I think he meant what he said, he could care less because he cares so much now. Why else would he be spending his valuable time posting here.
 
N

NLBwell

Legend
A couple points in Pancho Gonzales' favor. One, he didn't have many advantages and had to fight the system to even get to play. Two, he walked away from the game for years at a time a couple of times and was able to come back and play at the highest level.
 
L

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
Rock Strongo said:
She sure had a talented backhand slice. That was all I remembered her for as a child, and that all of her strokes looked EXTREMELY awkward.
Click to expand...

I'll probably get flamed for this, but, I think a lot of players, men and women, would benefit from emulating Graf's forehand. It was unique in that it incorporated the best of an old school Eastern drive and a modern semi-WW and reverse follow through when needed, similar to Sampras' forehand but with a more compact, simpler, more repeatable, windup.
 
hoodjem

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
Limpinhitter said:
I'll probably get flamed for this, but, I think a lot of players, men and women, would benefit from emulating Graf's forehand. It was unique in that it incorporated the best of an old school Eastern drive and a modern semi-WW and reverse follow through when needed, similar to Sampras' forehand but with a more compact, simpler, more repeatable, windup.
Click to expand...
We might do a female-GOATs-of-FH list. I bet Graf's would be top-5 of all time.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
hoodjem said:
We might do a female-GOATs-of-FH list. I bet Graf's would be top-5 of all time.
Click to expand...

Graf would be my choice for number one.

Hopefully you do a greatest female forehand list Hoodjem.

Possible names-Wills, Lenglen, Connolly, Navratilova, Seles, Serena, Clijsters.
 
DeShaun

DeShaun

Banned
Manus Domini said:
No way Federer's footwork is worse than Nadal's
Click to expand...

Roger has better footspeed, IMO. Rafa takes more smaller steps. Witness Rafa's propensity for having to lunge versus Roger's more upright style of movement when each player is being made to run around and play awesome defense. You will see proof that Roger has better pull away speed though perhaps not as strong a first step as Rafa.

Now if this is true, then why is it that Rafa gets into fantastic hitting position on just as many balls, except if Rafa's prep were a tad bit better which would be due in part to him having slightly superior footwork.
 
L

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
DeShaun said:
Roger has better footspeed, IMO. Rafa takes more smaller steps. Witness Rafa's propensity for having to lunge versus Roger's more upright style of movement when each player is being made to run around and play awesome defense. You will see proof that Roger has better pull away speed though perhaps not as strong a first step as Rafa.

Now if this is true, then why is it that Rafa gets into fantastic hitting position on just as many balls, except if Rafa's prep were a tad bit better which would be due in part to him having slightly superior footwork.
Click to expand...

Just the opposite, IMO. Ralph has more natural speed. Federer has the best, most efficient, movement I've ever seen on a tennis court. Connors had the best footwork overall, but, Federer's movement is more economical.
 
M

Manus Domini

Hall of Fame
DeShaun said:
Roger has better footspeed, IMO. Rafa takes more smaller steps. Witness Rafa's propensity for having to lunge versus Roger's more upright style of movement when each player is being made to run around and play awesome defense. You will see proof that Roger has better pull away speed though perhaps not as strong a first step as Rafa.

Now if this is true, then why is it that Rafa gets into fantastic hitting position on just as many balls, except if Rafa's prep were a tad bit better which would be due in part to him having slightly superior footwork.
Click to expand...

Federer flows into position, he doesn't take the small steps because he doesn't need to; he's already there and set up. He gets to the ball as quickly because he has better anticipation, while Rafa is faster
 
TennisLovaLova

TennisLovaLova

Hall of Fame
Ask a pro :
"Roger Federer is the most talented tennis player I have ever seen. He has the capacity to become the greatest in history."
Nick Bollettieri.

End of thread.
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
The 5 most TALENTED baseliners of all time.
Replies
48
Views
4K
Pete Semper
P
1
Is Agassi the most talented player of the open era?
2
Replies
99
Views
9K
hoodjem
hoodjem
Federer20042006
  • Poll
Most talented tennis player of all-time
2 3
Replies
107
Views
11K
Candide
Candide
Nadalgaenger
  • Poll
Is Fed the most TALENTED player ever?
2 3 4
Replies
161
Views
5K
mike danny
mike danny
theagassiman
The Most intelligent player of all time
2
Replies
65
Views
6K
nfor304
nfor304
Top