Tennis Channel - The 100 GOAT : 1, Roger Federer. 2, Rod Laver. 5, Pete Sampras.

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
So basically you even admit the group of opinions you use to place Federer at #1 is an entirely different group than the one you are using to place Nadal as low as #6 (and the latter would never rank Federer #1 either which you concede). Hence why your initial statement in this thread was flawed to begin with.

Yes, that is a common mistake: using confliction positions to fit a terribly empty argument.


Find me one poster or quote one expert who has Federer at #1 all time and Nadal at 6th or lower (other than a known turd like Monfed). At this point anyone who has Federer #1 has Nadal no lower than 3rd or 4th. I have Federer at #2 and Nadal at #3 personally.

Well said; Federer--under any rational, historically correct judgement cannot be #1, yet Nadal is at #6 or below. That is the end result of fanboy desire: to keep as much distance between Nadal and Federer as possible, as they do see the former as a serious threat to soon pass Federer's own non-GOAT records.
 

ultradr

Legend
Let's see if Federer can withstand the test of time.

In 10-20 years, both Federer and Nadal will be under Laver and Sampras.

In fact, the whole list can not be serious. Gonzalez and Rosewall well below Roy Emerson ?
You can not be serious.

This is a list of popularity GOAT list for casual tennis fans. Not for real tennis community.
 
Last edited:

Kenshin

Semi-Pro
Let's see if Federer can withstand the test of time.

In 10-20 years, both Federer and Nadal will be under Laver and Sampras.

In fact, the whole list can not be serious. Gonzalez and Rosewall well below Roy Emerson ?
You can not be serious.

I think both Federer and Nadal will stand the test of time. Especially Nadal because it is difficult for a player to have so much success on clay and be an all-court player. There have been many hard court and grass court greats in the past but Nadal is probably the first clay great to win all acoss the surface. That is why he is so unique.
 

granddog29

Banned
Let's see if Federer can withstand the test of time.

In 10-20 years, both Federer and Nadal will be under Laver and Sampras.

In fact, the whole list can not be serious. Gonzalez and Rosewall well below Roy Emerson ?
You can not be serious.

This is a list of popularity GOAT list for casual tennis fans. Not for real tennis community.

That is what alot of short sighted fans of Federer, and to a lesser degree of Nadal, dont seem to realize. You can only tell how you will really be measured in history after you have been retired for a little while. Look at Sampras, when he retired the so called experts were crowning him GOAT over Laver, and now he is almost the forgotten first tier all timer. Federer like others before him is rated higher now than what he will be after he has retired.

I think Federer years after his retirement will be seen as clearly below Laver, and quite possibly below Nadal, Sampras, and possibly Gonzales as well. To those wondering how Sampras could be seen as over him eventually, well there is a very good chance Federer will lose status as best of his own era to Nadal. The moment Nadal wins his 17th slam it has already happened. That will not stand him in good stead vs Sampras who was far and away the best of his era. Sampras's 6 year end #1s in a row will also trump any record Federer has if Nadal ties/passes his slam mark as I expect he will (both Sampras and Federer have 7 Wimbledons so share that mark). Ironically Sampras could easily repass Federer in most peoples estimation after having passed him a few years back. It all depends on Nadal and his final career, and the perspective it ends up painting on Federer's career.
 

90's Clay

Banned
Fans live for the moment and whatever is happening now, is looked at as the greatest but once guys retire things become more put into perspective. Thats a great point about Sampras. In 2000 and 2002 people were crowning him the very greatest to play the game without question. 10 years later, people damn near got Sampras in their first tier anymore.

So from GOAT to borderline 2nd tier in just the span of a decade? ROFLMAO. In just 10 years, people truly forgot just how great and dominant Sampras was.

I expect Fed's stock to significantly drop once Nadal gets in the 15-16 slam range (which he will barring a career ender type injury)
 

ultradr

Legend
I think both Federer and Nadal will stand the test of time. Especially Nadal because it is difficult for a player to have so much success on clay and be an all-court player. There have been many hard court and grass court greats in the past but Nadal is probably the first clay great to win all acoss the surface. That is why he is so unique.

The homogeneous surface tour condition allowed it happen.
Same reason why Federer could do career slam.
Everybody is a baseliner, not just Nadal.

We are simply having inflation on slam counts due to surface condition.

if the tour condition does not changes, we'll have dominant players winning
15- 20 slams per decade.

Then people will realize domination period(years at #1) is more useful
in comparing different era.

You need unique record to survive test of time.

In this era, Nadal's count on French Open is the unique one and probably
will never be broken forever.

Following record will be hard to top, IMHO

Laver (7-8 years at #1, 2 grand slams, ~20+ slams)
Gonzalez( 7-8 years at #1, ~20+ slams)
Sampras( 6 straight years at #1 open era)
...
Nadal ( 8+ French Open, how many more FO he will win?)
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
That is what alot of short sighted fans of Federer, and to a lesser degree of Nadal, dont seem to realize. You can only tell how you will really be measured in history after you have been retired for a little while. Look at Sampras, when he retired the so called experts were crowning him GOAT over Laver, and now he is almost the forgotten first tier all timer. Federer like others before him is rated higher now than what he will be after he has retired.

I think Federer years after his retirement will be seen as clearly below Laver, and quite possibly below Nadal, Sampras, and possibly Gonzales as well. To those wondering how Sampras could be seen as over him eventually, well there is a very good chance Federer will lose status as best of his own era to Nadal. The moment Nadal wins his 17th slam it has already happened. That will not stand him in good stead vs Sampras who was far and away the best of his era. Sampras's 6 year end #1s in a row will also trump any record Federer has if Nadal ties/passes his slam mark as I expect he will (both Sampras and Federer have 7 Wimbledons so share that mark). Ironically Sampras could easily repass Federer in most peoples estimation after having passed him a few years back. It all depends on Nadal and his final career, and the perspective it ends up painting on Federer's career.


Sorry to burst your bubble, history will rate based on majors alone. After 20 years, H2H , weak era allegation , olympics are all not regarded. If you watch on telly, what comes up every other hour is 'List of Players with Most Majors'.

Federer and Nadal will be top. Already new kids on the block dont know who Borg is . Sampras is getting there soon.
 

bullfan

Legend
The homogeneous surface tour condition allowed it happen.
Same reason why Federer could do career slam.
Everybody is a baseliner, not just Nadal.

We are simply having inflation on slam counts due to surface condition.

if the tour condition does not changes, we'll have dominant players winning
15- 20 slams per decade.

Then people will realize domination period(years at #1) is more useful
in comparing different era.

You need unique record to survive test of time.

In this era, Nadal's count on French Open is the unique one and probably
will never be broken forever.

Following record will be hard to top, IMHO

Laver (7-8 years at #1, 2 grand slams, ~20+ slams)
Gonzalez( 7-8 years at #1, ~20+ slams)
Sampras( 6 straight years at #1 open era)
...
Nadal ( 8+ French Open, how many more FO he will win?)

I think through genetics and lots of scientific research, we'll see athletes in 30-50 years far superior to today's athletes.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Fans live for the moment and whatever is happening now, is looked at as the greatest but once guys retire things become more put into perspective. Thats a great point about Sampras. In 2000 and 2002 people were crowning him the very greatest to play the game without question. 10 years later, people damn near got Sampras in their first tier anymore.

So from GOAT to borderline 2nd tier in just the span of a decade? ROFLMAO. In just 10 years, people truly forgot just how great and dominant Sampras was.

I expect Fed's stock to significantly drop once Nadal gets in the 15-16 slam range (which he will barring a career ender type injury)

Wilander and McEnroe equating 15 majors and H2H will almost equal Fed's 17 majors is soothing to the current Nadal fans, however the larger the gap he leaves with Fed, lesser the perceived greatness in times to come. The irony is Sampras will move to 4th tier behind Fed, Nadal and Laver.
 

austintennis2005

Professional
Sorry to burst your bubble, history will rate based on majors alone. After 20 years, H2H , weak era allegation , olympics are all not regarded. If you watch on telly, what comes up every other hour is 'List of Players with Most Majors'.

Federer and Nadal will be top. Already new kids on the block dont know who Borg is . Sampras is getting there soon.


ya for the casual/uninformed fans majors is something they can use to compare players but there is actually much more to it than that. Up until the 90's players really didnt care very much about the french and aussie open or their total slam count--in fact Borg didnt even consider it a major (quote from his book) he would have gone there only to try and complete the grand slam... Margaret Court has 24 singles slams yet no one regards her as the female GOAT.
All that can be asked of a player is to dominate his era--
 

Kenshin

Semi-Pro
Fans live for the moment and whatever is happening now, is looked at as the greatest but once guys retire things become more put into perspective. Thats a great point about Sampras. In 2000 and 2002 people were crowning him the very greatest to play the game without question. 10 years later, people damn near got Sampras in their first tier anymore.

So from GOAT to borderline 2nd tier in just the span of a decade? ROFLMAO. In just 10 years, people truly forgot just how great and dominant Sampras was.

I expect Fed's stock to significantly drop once Nadal gets in the 15-16 slam range (which he will barring a career ender type injury)

I still don't believe Federer is better than Sampras. I don't think it's that clear cut. Sure Federer has more grand slams than Sampras but Sampras dominated his main rivals and he was clearly the best of his era. Whereas Federer has the most grand slam titles but gets dominated by his greatest rival. It's not all about who has the most titles. We have to factor in how they fared against their opposition.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
I still don't believe Federer is better than Sampras. I don't think it's that clear cut. Sure Federer has more grand slams than Sampras but Sampras dominated his main rivals and he was clearly the best of his era. Whereas Federer has the most grand slam titles but gets dominated by his greatest rival. It's not all about who has the most titles. We have to factor in how they fared against their opposition.

Do you know Laver's H2H or Pancho's H2H with their era ?
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
That is what alot of short sighted fans of Federer, and to a lesser degree of Nadal, dont seem to realize. You can only tell how you will really be measured in history after you have been retired for a little while. Look at Sampras, when he retired the so called experts were crowning him GOAT over Laver, and now he is almost the forgotten first tier all timer. Federer like others before him is rated higher now than what he will be after he has retired.

I think Federer years after his retirement will be seen as clearly below Laver, and quite possibly below Nadal, Sampras, and possibly Gonzales as well. To those wondering how Sampras could be seen as over him eventually, well there is a very good chance Federer will lose status as best of his own era to Nadal. The moment Nadal wins his 17th slam it has already happened. That will not stand him in good stead vs Sampras who was far and away the best of his era. Sampras's 6 year end #1s in a row will also trump any record Federer has if Nadal ties/passes his slam mark as I expect he will (both Sampras and Federer have 7 Wimbledons so share that mark). Ironically Sampras could easily repass Federer in most peoples estimation after having passed him a few years back. It all depends on Nadal and his final career, and the perspective it ends up painting on Federer's career.

This is so true.

In every era they find the most successful current player to call the GOAT. This sells tickets and keeps fan interest high. Fans want to see this latest, greatest player of their generation. As time wears on and that player retires or otherwise leaves the game, they find someone in the current crop who has had a break through and they switch their allegiance to them. Hence, why they started calling Federer the GOAT when his numbers were nowhere near Pete's.

Now, they are switching to Nadal. From a marketing aspect, this makes sense. What good is Pete if he is not on the tour? He is no longer selling tickets and fans don't want to hear about the good old days. They want someone that they can root for NOW.

Federer is 32 and his results are not what they used to be, so it's time to put him out to pasture. We need the latest, greatest player again. After Rafa, there will be another player to temporarily wear this mythical crown, because the GOAT must be current.

But, alas, they have their ace in the hole and perennial GOAT, Laver who won the grand slam. Laver will always be their go to guy amongst whom they will measure all others.

So, for those who want to argue about who is the GOAT, be prepared, because it ain't going to happen. Every player will be the interim GOAT until the grand slam has been duplicated.
 

granddog29

Banned
Following record will be hard to top, IMHO

Laver (7-8 years at #1, 2 grand slams, ~20+ slams)
Gonzalez( 7-8 years at #1, ~20+ slams)
Sampras( 6 straight years at #1 open era)
...
Nadal ( 8+ French Open, how many more FO he will win?)

I agree, all those records will be near impossible to top. Meanwhile all of Federer's marks are quite beatable and will likely have all fallen 15 years from now max. Even his ballyhooed semifinal and quarterfinal streaks in majors can be bested by Djokovic in the next few years. Most of them exist only due to previous circumstances (eg- guys being barred from official slams as credited today most of their career before 1970, no computer ranking until 1975).

In the long run that will not be good for Federer's historical place.
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
Sorry to burst your bubble, history will rate based on majors alone. After 20 years, H2H , weak era allegation , olympics are all not regarded. If you watch on telly, what comes up every other hour is 'List of Players with Most Majors'.

Federer and Nadal will be top. Already new kids on the block dont know who Borg is . Sampras is getting there soon.

If that were true, history would have had Emerson over Laver. The major titles have to have something unique to go along with it, Laver's grand slam trumps Emerson's additional major. Number of slams alone has never been the criterion for greatness.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
This is so true.

In every era they find the most successful current player to call the GOAT. This sells tickets and keeps fan interest high. Fans want to see this latest, greatest player of their generation. As time wears on and that player retires or otherwise leaves the game, they find someone in the current crop who has had a break through and they switch their allegiance to them. Hence, why they started calling Federer the GOAT when his numbers were nowhere near Pete's.

Now, they are switching to Nadal. From a marketing aspect, this makes sense. What good is Pete if he is not on the tour? He is no longer selling tickets and fans don't want to hear about the good old days. They want someone that they can root for NOW.

Federer is 32 and his results are not what they used to be, so it's time to put him out to pasture. We need the latest, greatest player again. After Rafa, there will be another player to temporarily wear this mythical crown, because the GOAT must be current.

But, alas, they have their ace in the hole and perennial GOAT, Laver who won the grand slam. Laver will always be their go to guy amongst whom they will measure all others.

So, for those who want to argue about who is the GOAT, be prepared, because it ain't going to happen. Every player will be the interim GOAT until the grand slam has been duplicated.

In 45 years of open era tennis, how many players have 15 or more majors ? In the next 45 years, how many more players do you think will get 15 majors ?

The gap between Fed and Laver is 6 majors which is HUGE and that is the reason he is rated second, inspite of 2 grand slam.

Federer's place in the history is secure. no chance in hell that Laver or Sampras find a way to get ahead, unless they come out of retirement. Nadal has a good chance to equal or overtake Fed, let us see.
 

Kenshin

Semi-Pro
I agree, all those records will be near impossible to top. Meanwhile all of Federer's marks are quite beatable and will likely have all fallen 15 years from now max. Even his ballyhooed semifinal and quarterfinal streaks in majors can be bested by Djokovic in the next few years. Most of them exist only due to previous circumstances (eg- guys being barred from official slams as credited today most of their career before 1970, no computer ranking until 1975).

In the long run that will not be good for Federer's historical place.

Nadal closing on Federer's slam count is really good for TENNIS. There won't be a clear cut GOAT so people will have a chance to respect more for the many past great players.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
If that were true, history would have had Emerson over Laver. The major titles have to have something unique to go along with it, Laver's grand slam trumps Emerson's additional major. Number of slams alone has never been the criterion for greatness.

Laver's trump card is grand slam, not one but two. I agree , just due to that he will stay in top 3 all time.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
I agree, all those records will be near impossible to top. Meanwhile all of Federer's marks are quite beatable and will likely have all fallen 15 years from now max. Even his ballyhooed semifinal and quarterfinal streaks in majors can be bested by Djokovic in the next few years. Most of them exist only due to previous circumstances (eg- guys being barred from official slams as credited today most of their career before 1970, no computer ranking until 1975).

In the long run that will not be good for Federer's historical place.

At a point of time, Fed has the highest majors on 3 of the 4 slams. Let us see how many achieve that .
 

Midaso240

Legend
I agree, all those records will be near impossible to top. Meanwhile all of Federer's marks are quite beatable and will likely have all fallen 15 years from now max. Even his ballyhooed semifinal and quarterfinal streaks in majors can be bested by Djokovic in the next few years. Most of them exist only due to previous circumstances (eg- guys being barred from official slams as credited today most of their career before 1970, no computer ranking until 1975).

In the long run that will not be good for Federer's historical place.
You're right,complete mug this Federer
 

Tony48

Legend
Dunno if it was mentioned, but wasn't this list created some time last year?

Serena, Djokovic, Murray and Nadal have probably all gone up (especially Murray and Serena)
 

Backspin1183

Talk Tennis Guru
The thing with Nadal-Federer H2H is that Nadal isn't just another tennis player. He's a GOAT contender, therefore the H2H between two GOATs cannot be ignored just like that.

Federer is still the greater of the two as of now. But if Nadal wins a few more slams, I have no doubt he's going to be considered greater than his friend and rival the Swiss maestro.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Well said; Federer--under any rational, historically correct judgement cannot be #1, yet Nadal is at #6 or below. That is the end result of fanboy desire: to keep as much distance between Nadal and Federer as possible, as they do see the former as a serious threat to soon pass Federer's own non-GOAT records.

Once again, you are projecting your own beliefs on to me.

It's perfectly rational to have Federer as #1 and Nadal at #6, and it's not to "keep as much distance" between them as possible.

Indeed, I will recognise Nadal as GOAT when he gets there, not before - and not like yourself and granddog29, who wish to have him one place behind Federer despite being four slams behind! The GOAT debate is not only about two men, so you're being very disrespectful to the likes of Sampras, Gonzales and Rosewall by excluding them from the higher echelons of the list.

We can all see you guys' game: place Nadal just below Federer now, so that when he reaches, say, 15 slams, you can state that Nadal has then surpassed Federer, as "the h2h more than compensates for the 2 slams difference".

No one is buying it. Nadal is not GOAT without 17 slams (assuming Federer stays at 17), period.
 

ktid

Rookie
I split the list into genders

62 – Michael Chang, M, USA

61 – Henry Bunny Austin, M, GBR

60 – Pat Cash, M, AUS

59 – Manuel Orantes, M, ESP

58 – Thomas Muster, M, AUT

57 – Andy Roddick, M, USA

56 – Nicola Pietrangeli, M, ITA

55 – Bill Johnston, M, USA

54 – Tony Wilding, M, NZL

53 – Yannick Noah, M, FRA

52 – Norman Brookes, M, AUS

51 – Jan Kodes, M, CZE

50 – Yevgeny Kafelnikov, M, RUS

49 – Vic Seixas, M, USA

48 – Marat Safin, M, RUS

47 – Ashley Cooper, M, AUS

46 – William Renshaw, M, GBR

45 – Tony Roche, M, AUS

44 – Jaroslav Drobny, M, CZE

43 – Gottfried Von Cramm, M, GER

42 – Patrick Rafter , M, AUS

41 – Fred Stolle , M, AUS

40 – Bobby Riggs , M, USA

39 – Pancho Segura , M, ECU

38 – Ellsworth Vines , M, USA

37 – Lleyton Hewitt , M, AUS

36 – Neale Fraser , M, AUS

35 – Stan Smith, M, USA

34 – Gustavo Kuerten, M, BRA

33 – Manuel Santana, M, ESP

32 – Jack Crawford, M, AUS

31 – Tony Trabert, M, USA

30 – Ilie Nastase , M, ROM

29 – Frank Sedgman, M, AUS

28 – Jean Borotra, M, FRA

27 – Henri Cochet, M, FRA

26 – Jim Courier, M, USA

25 – Guillermo Vilas, M, ARG

24 – Novak Djokovic, M, SRB

23 – Rene Lacoste, M, FRA

22 – Pancho Gonzalez, M, USA

21 – Jack Kramer, M, USA

20 – Mats Wilander, M, SWE

19 – Lew Hoad, M, AUS

18 – John Newcombe, M, AUS

17 – Arthur Ashe, M, USA

16 – Stefan Edberg, M, SWE

15 – Fred Perry, M, GBR

14 – Boris Becker, M, GER

13 – Ken Rosewall, M, AUS

12 – Ivan Lendl, M, CZE

11 – Roy Emerson, M, AUS

10 – Bill Tilden, M, USA

9 – Jimmy Connors, M, USA

8 – John McEnroe, M, USA

7 – Andre Agassi, M, USA

6 – Don Budge, M, USA

5 – Bjorn Borg, M, SWE

4 – Rafael Nadal, M, ESP

3 – Pete Sampras, M, USA

2 – Rod Laver, M, AUS

1 – Roger Federer, M, SUI
----------------------------------------
38 – Ann Haydon Jones, F, GBR

37 – Svetlana Kuznetsova, F, RUS

36 – Shirley Fry Irvin, F, USA

35 – Dorothea Lambert Chambers, F, GBR

34 – Amelie Mauresmo, F, FRA

33 – Mary Pierce, F, FRA

32 – Gabriela Sabatini, F, ARG

31 – Molla Mallory, F, USA7

30 – Pauline Betz Addie, F, USA

29 – Maria Sharapova, F, RUS

28 – Louise Brough , F, USA

27 – Helen Hull Jacobs , F, USA

26 – Hana Mandlikova , F, CZE

25 – Virginia Wade , F, GBR

24 – Margaret Osborne Dupont, F, USA

23 – Alice Marble , F, USA

22 – Jennifer Capriati , F, USA

21 – Tracy Austin, F, USA

20 – Doris Hart, F, USA

19 – Kim Clijsters, F, BEL

18 – Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, F, ESP

17 – Lindsay Davenport, F, USA

16 – Althea Gibson, F, USA

15 – Maria Bueno, M, BRA

14 – Evonne Goolagong Cawley, F, AUS

13 – Martina Hingis, F, SUI

12 – Helen Wills Moody Roark, F, USA

11 – Maureen Connolly Brinker, F, USA

10 – Justine Henin, F, BEL

9 – Suzanne Lenglen, F, FRA

8 – Venus Williams, F, USA

7 – Monica Seles, F, USA

6 – Serena Williams, F, USA

5 – Billie Jean King, F, USA

4 – Chris Evert, F, USA

3 – Margaret Court, F, AUS

2 – Martina Navratilova, F, USA/CZE

1 – Steffi Graf, F, GER
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Once again, you are projecting your own beliefs on to me.

Hypersensitivty is your companion--or perhaps guilt, since I obviously pointed out a truth you see fit to offer comment on...


It's perfectly rational to have Federer as #1 and Nadal at #6, and it's not to "keep as much distance" between them as possible.

Sure its not.

Indeed, I will recognise Nadal as GOAT when he gets there, not before - and not like yourself and granddog29, who wish to have him one place behind Federer despite being four slams behind!

Again, your paranoia rears its head, as recent conversation has been about Nadal one day surpassing Federer--the Great Universal Nadalian Fear causing Federates many a sleepless night. The fear which has many of your ilk saying--in current threads--that Nadal will still be below Federer, even if he wins 18 or more majors.

Speaks volumes.
 
Last edited:

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Again, your paranoia rears its head, as recent conversation has been about Nadal one day surpassing Federer--the Great Universal Nadalian Fear causing Federates many a sleepless night. The fear which has many of your ilk saying--in current threads--that Nadal will still be below Federer, even if he wins 18 or more majors.

Speaks volumes.

Grow up, TV. No-one is having "sleepless nights" about the possibility of Nadal winning more slams than Federer.

It's just a sport and this is just a message board. Sadly you seem to take it all a bit too seriously...

And by the way, here is where I will rank Nadal, should he continue to win majors, and should Federer win no more (so that you and others may see that I am being rational with my rankings);

13 majors - stays at No 6
14 majors - overtakes Rosewall to move to No 5
15 majors - overtakes Sampras and Gonzales to move to No 3
16 majors - overtakes Laver to move to No 2
17 majors - overtakes Federer to become GOAT

Do you understand my rankings now, and how they are to pay respect to past greats?
 
Last edited:

ilovetennis212

Professional
62 – Michael Chang, M, USA

61 – Henry Bunny Austin, M, GBR

60 – Pat Cash, M, AUS

59 – Manuel Orantes, M, ESP

58 – Thomas Muster, M, AUT

57 – Andy Roddick, M, USA

56 – Nicola Pietrangeli, M, ITA

55 – Bill Johnston, M, USA

54 – Tony Wilding, M, NZL

53 – Yannick Noah, M, FRA

52 – Norman Brookes, M, AUS

51 – Jan Kodes, M, CZE

50 – Yevgeny Kafelnikov, M, RUS

49 – Vic Seixas, M, USA

48 – Marat Safin, M, RUS

47 – Ashley Cooper, M, AUS

46 – William Renshaw, M, GBR

45 – Tony Roche, M, AUS

44 – Jaroslav Drobny, M, CZE

43 – Gottfried Von Cramm, M, GER

42 – Patrick Rafter , M, AUS

41 – Fred Stolle , M, AUS

40 – Bobby Riggs , M, USA

39 – Pancho Segura , M, ECU

38 – Ellsworth Vines , M, USA

37 – Lleyton Hewitt , M, AUS

36 – Neale Fraser , M, AUS

35 – Stan Smith, M, USA

34 – Gustavo Kuerten, M, BRA

33 – Manuel Santana, M, ESP

32 – Jack Crawford, M, AUS

31 – Tony Trabert, M, USA

30 – Ilie Nastase , M, ROM

29 – Frank Sedgman, M, AUS

28 – Jean Borotra, M, FRA

27 – Henri Cochet, M, FRA

26 – Jim Courier, M, USA

25 – Guillermo Vilas, M, ARG

24 – Novak Djokovic, M, SRB

23 – Rene Lacoste, M, FRA

22 – Pancho Gonzalez, M, USA

21 – Jack Kramer, M, USA

20 – Mats Wilander, M, SWE

19 – Lew Hoad, M, AUS

18 – John Newcombe, M, AUS

17 – Arthur Ashe, M, USA

16 – Stefan Edberg, M, SWE

15 – Fred Perry, M, GBR

14 – Boris Becker, M, GER

13 – Ken Rosewall, M, AUS

12 – Ivan Lendl, M, CZE

11 – Roy Emerson, M, AUS

10 – Bill Tilden, M, USA

9 – Jimmy Connors, M, USA

8 – John McEnroe, M, USA

7 – Andre Agassi, M, USA

6 – Don Budge, M, USA

5 – Bjorn Borg, M, SWE

4 – Rafael Nadal, M, ESP

3 – Pete Sampras, M, USA

2 – Rod Laver, M, AUS

1 – Roger Federer, M, SUI
----------------------------------------
38 – Ann Haydon Jones, F, GBR

37 – Svetlana Kuznetsova, F, RUS

36 – Shirley Fry Irvin, F, USA

35 – Dorothea Lambert Chambers, F, GBR

34 – Amelie Mauresmo, F, FRA

33 – Mary Pierce, F, FRA

32 – Gabriela Sabatini, F, ARG

31 – Molla Mallory, F, USA7

30 – Pauline Betz Addie, F, USA

29 – Maria Sharapova, F, RUS

28 – Louise Brough , F, USA

27 – Helen Hull Jacobs , F, USA

26 – Hana Mandlikova , F, CZE

25 – Virginia Wade , F, GBR

24 – Margaret Osborne Dupont, F, USA

23 – Alice Marble , F, USA

22 – Jennifer Capriati , F, USA

21 – Tracy Austin, F, USA

20 – Doris Hart, F, USA

19 – Kim Clijsters, F, BEL

18 – Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, F, ESP

17 – Lindsay Davenport, F, USA

16 – Althea Gibson, F, USA

15 – Maria Bueno, M, BRA

14 – Evonne Goolagong Cawley, F, AUS

13 – Martina Hingis, F, SUI

12 – Helen Wills Moody Roark, F, USA

11 – Maureen Connolly Brinker, F, USA

10 – Justine Henin, F, BEL

9 – Suzanne Lenglen, F, FRA

8 – Venus Williams, F, USA

7 – Monica Seles, F, USA

6 – Serena Williams, F, USA

5 – Billie Jean King, F, USA

4 – Chris Evert, F, USA

3 – Margaret Court, F, AUS

2 – Martina Navratilova, F, USA/CZE

1 – Steffi Graf, F, GER

Is this the goat list?
Or top ranked players of history?
We really should cut it down to the goat 10.
And Nadal will be the goat no.2 soon.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
So, for those who want to argue about who is the GOAT, be prepared, because it ain't going to happen. Every player will be the interim GOAT until the grand slam has been duplicated.

...and that is the eternal stone in the shoes of Federer's defenders: the fact he--at 32--will never win the Grand Slam, so in order to continue the false premise of his being the GOAT, they attempt to trash not only the records of true GOAT Laver, but that of anyone who "threatens" Federer's numbers in a hypothetical future.

Objective observers can point to that kind of desperation for creating an all or nothing "god" status for Federer--where he must be all things to all people of the past, present and future.
 
Hypersensitivty is your companion--or perhaps guilt...
Again, your paranoia rears its headthe Great Universal Nadalian Fear causing Federates many a sleepless night.
Grow up, TV. No-one is having "sleepless nights" about the possibility of Nadal winning more slams than Federer.

It's just a sport and this is just a message board. Sadly you seem to take it all a bit too seriously...
Yes, and projecting it on to others:
...where he must be all things to all people of the past, present and future.
 
Last edited:

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Hypersensitivty is your companion--or perhaps guilt, since I obviously pointed out a truth you see fit to offer comment on...




Sure its not.



Again, your paranoia rears its head, as recent conversation has been about Nadal one day surpassing Federer--the Great Universal Nadalian Fear causing Federates many a sleepless night. The fear which has many of your ilk saying--in current threads--that Nadal will still be below Federer, even if he wins 18 or more majors.

Speaks volumes.

Not true, several Fed fans are on record saying they will gladly accept Nadal as GOAT when he gets to 18, some even at 17 .

It appears some Nadal fans are just not confident in his abilities that he can get close, hence want to start having the goat debate right now, which everyone who is sane will agree it is premature.

Infact several Fed fans including myself believe Nadal has a very good shot at making 17 , espescially after today's news about Murray. I would say he has more chance of getting to 18 than Federer.
 

granddog29

Banned
TMF answer a simple question. Do you believe one could even reasonably place Gonzales lower than Emerson, let alone a whopping 11 spot lower (well more than that as they mixed men and women). Straight up answer, no beating around the bush.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
TMF answer a simple question. Do you believe one could even reasonably place Gonzales lower than Emerson, let alone a whopping 11 spot lower (well more than that as they mixed men and women). Straight up answer, no beating around the bush.

When is THUNDERVOLLEY going to answer the simple question about Don Budge's GOAThood, according to his own criteria?
 

granddog29

Banned
When is THUNDERVOLLEY going to answer the simple question about Don Budge's GOAThood, according to his own criteria?

I already gave you an explanation for him and will happily do it again:

Budge is highly elevated by his Grand Slam. Without it he would barely be top 20 all time, and might even be outside the top 20, and with it he is generally seen around 8th all time. The Grand Slam is bar none the most important achievement in tennis but Budge has not achieved enough to be at the very top even with the Grand Slam. Many think Vines was even the best player of that decade, not Budge, and Budge only came up to his level in 38-39 (yet Budge is ranked much higher than Vines by most, again the importance of the Grand Slam).

Laver though has easily achieved enough other great things:

-World #1 for 7 or 8 years straight, longer than Sampras and much longer than Federer.

-11 slams despite being barred from official slam tournaments for 5 years right in his prime from ages 24-29. Something Sampras, Federer, or Nadal would have likely never come close to accomplishing under the same conditions.

-144 tournament titles, far above the Open Era marks of Connors and Lendl, and about double those of Sampras, Federer, and Nadal.

-He actually achieved the Grand Slam more than once no matter how you look at it.


Laver could easily be called GOAT even without his Grand Slams, but with it, it slams the door completely shut on anyone else as there is other SERIOUS GOAT candidate who even achieved.




Hypocrite TMF is the last one who can accuse others of inconsistency. He gives Federer the Australian Open GOAT due to more finals than Agassi and Djokovic, but then gives Federer the U.S Open GOAT despite Sampras having 2 more finals than Federer has. He says Federer's longevity at Wimbledon (7 titles in 9 years/10 Wimledons) is a reason he is better than Sampras (7 titles in 7 years/8 Wimbledons) despite Sampras's greater dominance in a shorter period, but then says Sampras winning U.S Opens over 12 years/13 U.S Opens is an inferior achievement to Federer winning 5 in a row, but then making one more final, and never another one before or since.
 
Last edited:

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
I already gave you an explanation for him and will happily do it again:

Budge is highly elevated by his Grand Slam. Without it he would barely be top 20 all time, and might even be outside the top 20, and with it he is generally seen around 8th all time. The Grand Slam is bar none the most important achievement in tennis but Budge has not achieved enough to be at the very top even with the Grand Slam. Many think Vines was even the best player of that decade, not Budge, and Budge only came up to his level in 38-39 (yet Budge is ranked much higher than Vines by most, again the importance of the Grand Slam).

No, but you're not getting it:

THUNDERVOLLEY said that whoever wins the CYGS is GOAT, whoever does not, is not GOAT. There are no considerations given to other achievements. He ranked Graf as GOAT at the end of 1988 when she only had 5 slams, because she'd won the CYGS in 1988.

Thus, by his own logic, Budge and Laver should be co-GOATs on the men's side. Yet, he only has Laver there.

I'm well aware of why Budge, in reality, is considered well below Laver.

However, the onus is on TV to explain why, by his logic, Budge is not GOAT.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Not true, several Fed fans are on record saying they will gladly accept Nadal as GOAT when he gets to 18, some even at 17 .p

YOU might be rational and beieve that, but this forum is now hosting several threads where Nadal at 17--or more majors will still not be the GOAT in their eyes.

It appears some Nadal fans are just not confident in his abilities that he can get close, hence want to start having the goat debate right now, which everyone who is sane will agree it is premature.

Just the opposite. I think Nadal--playing a relaxed, intelligent schedule (in other words, not beating himself up by entering every event on earth) over the next four years can catch and pass Federer. But again, the schedule has to be relaxed.
 

Graf1stClass

Professional
that's no where near the goat list.

a steffi graf at #3??

They obviously dont know anything about tennis. steffi has more achievements than roger, a better slice and forehand, a better end career, a better personality, more struggles that she got past, and a better, hah, serve.

rod laver is old and wasnt always on the pros. he had no hardships and most importantly didnt win a golden slam.
 

BrooklynNY

Hall of Fame
Hypocrite TMF is the last one who can accuse others of inconsistency. He gives Federer the Australian Open GOAT due to more finals than Agassi and Djokovic, but then gives Federer the U.S Open GOAT despite Sampras having 2 more finals than Federer has. He says Federer's longevity at Wimbledon (7 titles in 9 years/10 Wimledons) is a reason he is better than Sampras (7 titles in 7 years/8 Wimbledons) despite Sampras's greater dominance in a shorter period, but then says Sampras winning U.S Opens over 12 years/13 U.S Opens is an inferior achievement to Federer winning 5 in a row, but then making one more final, and never another one before or since.

For starters....
 
that's no where near the goat list.

a steffi graf at #3??

They obviously dont know anything about tennis. steffi has more achievements than roger, a better slice and forehand, a better end career, a better personality, more struggles that she got past, and a better, hah, serve.

rod laver is old and wasnt always on the pros. he had no hardships and most importantly didnt win a golden slam.

you think Graf can beat Federer or Laver in a tennis match?
 

granddog29

Banned
you think Graf can beat Federer or Laver in a tennis match?

Well in that case why are there any women on the list. In the event one is being fair to the realistic differences in strength and athleticsm from being an elite man to an elite women, which they must be attempting to be otherwise there is no point of making a unisex list, Graf should be #1 over Laver and Federer, and all others. Her career far trumps everyone else. Laver has the 3 Grand Slams to her 1, but even that isnt enough to overcome Graf's many other advantages.
 
Top