Search results

The most important thing is that apart from his doubles Pete didn’t commit even one unforced error.

Yes Pete himself said it was the best tennis he ever played, but honestly I find the 95 final against Becker more impressive.

I watch close to zero tennis nowadays which will be literally zero once Djokovic retires. Maybe I will watch the odd Zverev match here and there but that’s it. Unless of course a new interesting young player emerges.

A three slam difference can next to never be made up for, especially not if we are talking a zero slammer here (the difference between 0 and 1 slam is bigger than between any other one slam gap). As good as Zverev is outside of the slams there is no way anyone will prefer his career over Stan’s.

This should end the thread.

The thing is this match is sometimes praised as Pete’s best Wimbledon performance ever which it clearly wasn’t. Out of this stretch from 3-3 in the first to 2-0 in the second it was a normal performance. Even in those five games Agassi made a lot of unforced errors so it was not entirely due to...

Didn’t you have me on ignore Nachiket? lol at thinking that being greater than Murray is a benchmark.

Behind both.

Borg’s greatness can not be measured on his slam count alone, given that he only played three per year and retired at 25 from playing slams. On another note. I joined that forum back in 2017, but even back then I didn’t consider Borg the indisputable GOAT. However, at that time, I saw him as a...

Nobody of the three guys you mentioned is close to Borg in achievements so far.

lol. So many wrong statements in one post. If I didn’t know it was intentional trolling..

Karpov was very strong. If it wasn’t for Kasparov he would have dominated for decades.

It had a prize money of two millions for the winner at some point, more than any slam. That enough should he incentive to take it seriously, I know Becker skipped it once stating that he didn’t want to support such travesty, for which he was mocked by Muster calling him a fake Robin Hood.

I am not at all a guy who takes player’s words as gospel or as a debate ending argument, far from it. The folks resorting to that Fed 2015 statement I have always called out, as of course players have an agenda when saying such things. Having watched the 96 final countless times though I agree...

Reaching 9 finals in a row is already crazy.

Becker himself stated that the 96 final was the best he ever played.

Yea that was not his best at all.

Pete won the match where Becker was at his absolute best. Peak level those two are #1and #2. Pete was rather inconsistent but at his best he was close to unbeatable.

Becker and Sampras are both ahead of Connors that should not even be debatable. Pete, for me is also ahead of Becker. The latter might be 7-6 but Pete won the more important matches.

What is the argument for Connors > Lendl? And where is Pete in all this?

You are right. I meant 3-5 on carpet. Indoors in general Mac has additionally won their first meeting in Stockholm 78 on indoor hard. For me indoors mostly equals carpet.

Was 3-5 vs Borg indoors. Pete and Becker have the highest level indoors of all times imho. Most successful ones are Mac and Lendl.

Ivanovic will be remembered for being hot. Bad example.

It may have. But if at all players would put #1 over a slam but no way #2. I do think though that still 2 slams over #1 with no slam.

Even if Alcaraz had only won one slam he would have had a better year. Nobody puts #2 over a slam.

The famous summer of revenge. After losing the Wimbledon semi against Becker, he won Washington, Montreal, Cincinnati and New Haven before reaching the USO final where he lost to Pete making it 26/27. He then won a DC match against Wilander and the first round of Essen against Eltingh making it...

He definitely is. Nothing the others did comes close to his FO/Wimbledon dominance.

Lendl has the consistency stats of Pete/Fed/Nole in weeks at No.1, tournament wins, YEC etc but he completely underperformed at slams with his 8-11 finals record. He has actually one more slam final than Pete. That he has only as many slams as Andre is on him, then again he had to face way...

McEnroe and Connors are among the least physically intimidating guys around. Both stickmen and only loudmouths. When they went at each other at the exho one could see that they were all talk. Didn’t Lendl push Mac at the wall in the locker room once?

Why? Are you the authority to decide tha?. Level of play cannot objectively be measured so of course it is a debate lol. We are not talking Fed vs Köllerer here but two legit GOAT candidates.