10 greatest players of the last 25 years?

[federerhoogenbandfan]

These would be mine in order:

1. Pete Sampras
2. Bjorn Borg
3. Ivan Lendl
4. Andre Agassi
5. John McEnroe
6. Jimmy Conners
7. Mats Wilander
8. Roger Federer
9. Boris Becker
10. Stephan Edberg


1. Steffi Graf
2. Martina Navratilova
3. Chris Evert
4. Monica Seles
5. Serena Williams
6. Venus Williams
7. Aranxta Sanchez Vicario
8. Martina Hingis
9. Justine Henin
10. Hana Mandilikova

 

[Andres]

I want to add Sabatini in the Women, but don't know which Williams I want to get-off.

 

[GotGame?]

I want to add Sabatini in the Women, but don't know which Williams I want to get-off.

Simple, Venus.

Serena - seven major titles, finished the year no.1 in 2002
Venus - five major titles, won Olympic gold in singles and doubles

 

[federerhoogenbandfan]

I would like to have left Venus off, not just because I dont like her, but also because Davenport, Mandilikova, Henin, and others have not dropped out of the top 10 strictly based on results, at any point in their primes; Henin and Davenport did due to not playing enough due to injuries, was Venus put herself out of the top 10 sometime in the last year strictly through results. As well the fact her record on various surfaces is not as balanced as many of the other top players, she has one final in the AO and French Open, fine, but she has no other appearances past the quarters there. However her dominance in the most significant parts of the year in both 2001 and 2002, her dominance over everybody except the dominant player for another stretch(when she lost all those slam finals to Serena), and winning her 5th slam and 3rd Wimbledon, makes it pretty hard to justify not having her up there, atleast in the top 10.

 

[Andres]

Can I simply erase both from that list?

 

[federerhoogenbandfan]

You can make your own list, and leave both off. That is only my list, anybody can make their own list.

 

[Andres]

Uhmmm. Yeah. Maybe I will

 

[Matthew]

but don't know which Williams I want to get-off.

I am not going to say a word...

 

[newnuse]

This is not based on career achievement but by "greatness" at their peak

1. Borg (dominated on dirt and grass)
2. Mac (might have passed Borg but Borg quit early)
3. Sampras (Could not put him on top, not enough of a fighter, plus he stunk on clay)
4. Lendl (missed Wimbledon)
5. Connors (had to go head to head vs Borg, Mac and Lendl)
6. Agassi (Would have him ahead of Connors but got spanked by Sampras too often)
7. Becker
8. Wilander (got burned out too quickly after being #1)
9. Edberg
10. Federererer (lack of any great rivals....time will tell how high he goes)

1. Martina (went head to head vs Evert and got the best of her)
2. Seles (young but still knocked off Graf when she was in her prime)
3. Evert (gave Martina all she could handle)
4. Graf (had Seles as her rival only a brief period)
5. Austin (injury forced her out way too early)
6. Serena (mentally tougher than her sister)
7. Venus (making a comeback, might move pass her sister)
8. Justin HH
9. Davenport
10. a raunchy chick from the barrio

 

[RB]

---- federerhoogenbandfan
I would think more of your list--if you even knew enough about Jimmy CONNORS to spell his name right---nuff said

 

[newnuse]

That's not nice... it's his list

Why don't you add something to this thread by giving us your list

 

[shsman2091]

Are you serious? Roger Federer's at eight? and McEnroe was definitely better than Agassi, he still is! But Roger Federer should not be at eight, I mean their comparing him to Pete Sampras and you toss him behind Wilander, unbelievable!

 

[zAllianceBmx]

i dont think roger should even be on the list at this point. he has only started his dominating career fairly recently. after a couple more years should he earn a spot as top 10 greatest players in the last 25 years.

 

[FREDDY]

This is not based on career achievement but by "greatness" at their peak

10. Federererer (lack of any great rivals....time will tell how high he goes)

thats soooo true dude. the reason he makes everything look so damn easy is because it is.

 

[wildbill88AA]

time for the weekly "best ever" discussion? what is so magical about only the last 25 years? does that make agassi's record look better? #4 alltime and yearend #1 only once. o ya, if it weren't for sampras, lendl, edburg, courier, becker, federer, brooke shields, he'd a done better. polls are bull$hit. record books read what they read. it generally shows most years and weeks at number 1, most slams won, most tournaments won. have a look. you'll see, in the open era, sampras, connors, and lendl's names come up quite a bit.

 

[Coria]

Let's call it since '75-----1. Sampras 2. Borg 3. Agassi 4. McEnroe 5. Lendl 6. Becker 7. Connors 8) Federer (and climbing) 9) Edberg 10) Wilander

 

[rhubarb]

i dont think roger should even be on the list at this point. he has only started his dominating career fairly recently. after a couple more years should he earn a spot as top 10 greatest players in the last 25 years.

How many players have won more than 5 slams and been number one for longer than 80 weeks in the last 25 years though?

 

[BERDI4]

What about Vilas, who won 62 tournaments?

 

[Babblelot]

These would be mine in order:
1. Pete Sampras
2. Bjorn Borg
3. Ivan Lendl
4. Andre Agassi
5. John McEnroe
6. Jimmy Conners
7. Mats Wilander
8. Roger Federer
9. Boris Becker
10. Stephan Edberg

Good list, but I'd sneak Jim Courier in there.
2 AO titles
2 RG titles
1 W final
1 USO final
*one of just a handful to reach the finals of all four slams
#1 for 68 consequtive weeks

...hmmm, upon further review, maybe place Courier just outside the Top 10.

 

[Coria]

Good list, but I'd sneak Jim Courier in there.
2 AO titles
2 RG titles
1 W final
1 USO final
*one of just a handful to reach the finals of all four slams
#1 for 68 consequtive weeks

...hmmm, upon further review, maybe place Courier just outside the Top 10.

I like Courier too. But who could he possibly be put ahead of on the list?

Becker won 6 grand slams and was in four other grand slam finals, while winning nearly 50 tournaments. Wilander won 7 grand slams. Courier won 4. Edberg won 6 also and more tournaments than Courier. Courier should be number 12, behind Vilas at number 11.

 

[uNIVERSE mAN]

This is not based on career achievement but by "greatness" at their peak

1. Borg (dominated on dirt and grass)
2. Mac (might have passed Borg but Borg quit early)
3. Sampras (Could not put him on top, not enough of a fighter, plus he stunk on clay)
4. Lendl (missed Wimbledon)
5. Connors (had to go head to head vs Borg, Mac and Lendl)
6. Agassi (Would have him ahead of Connors but got spanked by Sampras too often)
7. Becker
8. Wilander (got burned out too quickly after being #1)
9. Edberg
10. Federererer (lack of any great rivals....time will tell how high he goes)

1. Martina (went head to head vs Evert and got the best of her)
2. Seles (young but still knocked off Graf when she was in her prime)
3. Evert (gave Martina all she could handle)
4. Graf (had Seles as her rival only a brief period)
5. Austin (injury forced her out way too early)
6. Serena (mentally tougher than her sister)
7. Venus (making a comeback, might move pass her sister)
8. Justin HH
9. Davenport
10. a raunchy chick from the barrio

Mac??? The guy didn't win a slam after 23.

 

[newnuse]

Mac??? The guy didn't win a slam after 23.

Guy was born in 1959, won the US Open in 79

My bad, read your post as before 23, not after 23... though he did win in 84

If you had a chance to watch Mac in his prime, you would know how good he was. The commentators would talk about how his opponents would quake in their boots sorta speak, like Tiger's opponents. He stopped Borg's run at the big W. He was better than Lendl & Connors. He quit and came back but was never the same.

 

[goosala]

Even though Lendl did not win Wimbledon he made it to the final twice and gave it a true effort in 1990. I would place him at the top of consistency since he was a US Open finalist eight straight years. He had the best looking one handed backhand ever.

 

[federerhoogenbandfan]

This is not based on career achievement but by "greatness" at their peak

1. Borg (dominated on dirt and grass)
2. Mac (might have passed Borg but Borg quit early)

I must admit I find this fairly interesting. It seems Borg actually might have saved himself in your eyes, by quitting early when McEnroe started getting the better of him, and it saves himself possably from dropping below McEnroe, not actually possably hindering your opinion of him slightly, is that right?

 

[newnuse]

I must admit I find this fairly interesting. It seems Borg actually might have saved himself in your eyes, by quitting early when McEnroe started getting the better of him, and it saves himself possably from dropping below McEnroe, not actually possably hindering your opinion of him slightly, is that right?

Yeah that's right. Borg vs Mac was 7-7. I think eventually Mac would have passed him, but Borg quit before he had a chance. I'm a Mac fan, but cannot put him in front of Borg.

He was basically even with Borg and better than Lendl or Connors. As you know federerhoogenbandfan I think you judge a player by their rivals. Borg vs Mac was even, so I gave it to Borg because of his run at W and FO.

I wish he had not retired so early. I don't think he retired because of Mac so I can't lower him for that reason. The rivalry would have been one of the all time best, but oh well. One of my favorite quotes from McEnroe was that he never forgave Borg for retiring so early. In a way, I don't think we ever saw the best in Mac because Borg was the guy that brought it out of him. Becker to a lesser extent did as well. Mac, despite being past his prime played some great matches against Becker.

I'm surprise you had Sampras as your #1, because of all the Sampras vs Fed discussions we had.