Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
If you want, I can say Tier 1 (GOAT contenders) are Federer and Laver.
Then the rest are 'just' Tier 1.
But I'm not lowering the likes of Gonzales, Borg, Sampras etc. to Tier 2. Their achievements are too mighty for that.
Andre Agassi picks Rafael Nadal ahead of Roger Federer as tennis's greatest all-time
- Thread starter newpball
- Start date
If you want, I can say Tier 1 (GOAT contenders) are Federer and Laver.
Then the rest are 'just' Tier 1.
But I'm not lowering the likes of Gonzales, Borg, Sampras etc. to Tier 2. Their achievements are too mighty for that.
mightyrick
Legend
In that case, the only player who can be arguably placed on the same tier with Pancho Gonzales is -- nobody.
monfed
Banned
Ahaahhaaha JG!! That's gold, reminds me of zagor's subtle sarcasm. :lol:
helloworld
Hall of Fame
This is my response to Fa-rd's trolling. Federer with 1 FO = Kuerten with 3 FO. Therefore, Federer needs 42 slams, 3 times more slams than Sampras to be in the same tier with Sampras. See how easy it is to troll?
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Did you even read what I wrote? And then did you understand it? I said barring a guy coming along that wins 25+ or something crazy they are all in tier 1. It was a general remark. The key word is something. It is not all literal. Stop being intentionally hard to get along with. Which means that if someone comes along who does this I can revise my way of thinking, but until then Sampras and Federer are both tier 1 because Sampras has surpassed a certain level of achievement. 14 slams is way too many and too close to 17 for me to separate Federer and Sampras. You can compare the gap to other players careers all you like, but I will still think there is a big difference between 0 and 3 slams and 14 and 17. The numerical difference is the same, but the perceptional difference is not.
I will say though, that I would separate Federer and Sampras if the former ends up with perhaps 20 slams although that seems extremely unlikely. The gap between Federer and Sampras would have to be pretty large.
Last edited:
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
I said Borg could probably be tier 2 given he won channel slams so many times and it was during a time when AO was not considererd the same as other majors, but no way he was tier 1.
Why would you discount AO now for Agassi or Sampras or Fed ?
Do you read what I said? You said 25+. That to me means up to 24.
Also why do you use only majors? Fed has tons of other records over Sampras.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
That to me means you're being way too literal with everything I say and as a result being intentionally hard to get along with.
Last edited:
helloworld
Hall of Fame
You mean the consecutive semis and quarters record?? Seriously? Even their WTF and weeks #1 are so close that we can hardly separate between them.
Sorry but even if we use your exaggerated case, your logic doesn't work.
It would work if Sampras made like 40 GS finals and losing most of them to some uber goat, who won 30 majors. In that case yeah, Sampras would be in the same tier as Fed with even 10 GS wins.
I mean your analogy was totally wrong.
I wasn't literal. You said 25+, I gave you breathing room with saying 24.
We can say 21 for example, that still means that in theory you would put a guy with 13 majors in the same tier as a guy with 21 majors. Since they both met some standards.
I don't like such system.
And you didn't answer my question. Don't you use other records too? In masters, Fed is tier above Pete. Federer has career slam, that should put him a tier above Pete. How about 5 more GS finals?
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
3 major including 1 FO + 4 other FO finals is the difference.
That is probably the career of Hewitt + Murray put together.
Sampras + Hewitt + Murray = Federer.
helloworld
Hall of Fame
Do you realize that these records are just for decorations? Why do you even mention them? It's only going to convince us that you're just trying too hard to troll.
helloworld
Hall of Fame
You just gave Sampras 18 slams with 9 Wimbledon and 7 US Open. That makes Sampras 1 tier above Federer, thank you very much.
Ok, maybe Sampras has a case with barely making the cut into the lower tier 1.
You are right 286 weeks is very huge to me. But Fed is still ahead by 3 majors + 4 RG finals + 1 W final. Also 1 WTF title and a lot of masters.
On top of that more weeks nr.1 and the Rafa factor. I feel Rafa is much tougher rival than Agassi. And Agassi was the same age and wasn't consistently nr.2.
I think all of the above should put Fed in different tier.
I'm actually a huge Sampras fan. He is like Fed, they are similar. I never thought someone can come along who will be even better. People really underestimate how good Fed is.
But no way Borg and Nadal can come to the same tier with so few weeks nr.1.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Well, I think the career slam is huge, but I agree with you that the rest are just for decoration and are not really important in comparison to other records.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
I just don't get why you can't accept that the likes of Borg and Sampras are in the top tier. Their records are so exceptional that they demand to be placed in that tier.
Even if Fed is greater than them and No 1 in that tier, we can't relegate the likes of Borg and Sampras to 'minor great' status, which is what you seem to want to do.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
You just gave Sampras 18 slams with 9 Wimbledon and 7 US Open. That makes Sampras 1 tier above Federer, thank you very much.
Comprehension fail. On the other hand, still no FO.
I guess you need a reminder of Sampras's exploits at FO, starting the age of 25
1995 : R128: Gilbert Schaller def. Pete Sampras
1997: R32: Magnus Norman def. Pete Sampras
1998: R64: Ramon Delgado def. Pete Sampras
1999 : R64: Andrei Medvedev def. Pete Sampras
2000: R128: Mark Philippoussis def. Pete Sampras
2001 : R64Galo Blanco def. Pete Sampras
2002 : R128: Andrea Gaudenzi def. Pete Sampras
I don't mind them being in the top tier. Just not in the same tier as Federer and Laver. Fine, if they are tier 1, then those guys are tier 0.
Or they are tier 2 and Fed and Laver are tier 1. Just semantics really.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
helloworld
Hall of Fame
FO has always been Sampras hole in his resume. Should I remind you the pathetic list of Federer's H2H record vs Nadal?
Yeah, why do people think that saying Sampras isn't the same tier as Fed is devaluing Sampras or something.
No, Sampras stays at tier 1, no lowering. We just elevate Fed to tier 0, different tier.
So, Sampras isn't demoted, he stays the same as a legend with 14 majors.
It's just that Fed is promoted. That doesn't take anything away from Pete. But his fans seem to think it does. I don't know why.
helloworld
Hall of Fame
Tell me one reason why Federer should be in the same tier as Laver with a measly 17 slams. :shock:
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Hmmm..I nearly agree. But I would say Fed and Laver are Tier 1 GOAT contenders, and the rest (Tilden, Gonzales, Rosewall, Borg, Sampras, Nadal) are Tier 1.
FO has always been Sampras hole in his resume. Should I remind you the pathetic list of Federer's H2H record vs Nadal?
You are misrepresenting that h2h. That is the result of Fed making those extra clay finals.
I guess Sampras would be 0-0 vs Rafa losing to newbies on clay. Somehow losing clay finals to Rafa is worse than losing early to journeyman.
I wonder how Pete would do vs Rafa even on non clay if Rafa was 5 years younger than Pete.
You are implying that Pete would own Rafa on clay or something since you are using h2h which is comprised mostly of 13-2 clay skew.
Last edited:
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
FO has always been Sampras hole in his resume. Should I remind you the pathetic list of Federer's H2H record vs Nadal?
FO is one of 4 majors. A lack of even a final is a gaping hole.
That is one reason why Nadal with his one dimensional play ranks almost as much as Sampras.
They dpnt give points or prize money for h2h, lame attempt .
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Not winning a title is a much bigger hole than a H2H.FO has always been Sampras hole in his resume. Should I remind you the pathetic list of Federer's H2H record vs Nadal?
Toni Nadal for example said Nadal, Agassi, Sampras are the same tier, Fed and Laver are tier above.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Most Federer fans were and still are huge fans of Sampras. If Fed had stopped at 2008 Wimbledon after the disappointing loss to Nadal, we could have called it even.
Federer elevated himself a lot by doing what he did the summer of 2009 and thereafter till date.
The fact that he is in the running at age 32/33 and at number 3/4 in this slowed down era speaks so much about Federer.
Yeah this. And when you need fitness and youth. Fed is in better shape than Murray, Nadal, Djokovic at the moment, which is crazy.
Fed is in this for the long term. Maybe those guys won a lot of battles, but Fed is winning the war.
Yeah, last 3 majors past 14 is a lot harder. And that separates men from boys.
It's like running a marathon. Last hundred meters is what it's all about. Till then they are all almost equal. That finish line is important.
President
Legend
Weren't you banned for making death threats against Nadal? :lol:
MonkeyBoy
Hall of Fame
I think Federer and Nadal are very even on the ATG list. I would be prone to putting Roger slightly ahead at this juncture. The head 2 head does count against him (contrary to what the Fed fanatics want to believe) but it doesn't outweigh his greater surface versatility and overall deeper achievements in the sport.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Fed fanboys having a field day, eh? :lol:
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Nadal gets under people's skin at levels that blow my mind. People are so riled up over this :shock: How DARE Andre? Reminds me of the Beyonce skit from SNL last week.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
That's what happens when certain Federer fans consider him a "god" who is above all others. When facts, history and yes, Agassi all express something in the opposite direction, the aforementioned fans go into hate/desperation/spin mode.
I am literally LMAO!!!
I told you guys, back in 2009, when the media started to proclaim Federer as GOAT, that is was ****ing absurd (it is impossible to compare greatest players from different eras), and I told you all that I had seen it all before, precisely with Sampras few years earlier (which again was absurd too to have proclaimed him the GOAT, there are just some greatest players from different eras, period).
And when some deluded people like TMF and some others tried to convince themselves that Federer was some kind of GOAT and that the media was right, I told you all that it would happen again, that the same media (former players, people trying to sell the present as the best thing ever) would proclaim the next good player as the undisputed GOAT.
Nobody believed me back then, but now, little by little, you all are seeing what I told you back then. They are now selling a new GOAT, and it is even worse, they are not selling the next generation (some 10+ years difference) great player as the GOAT, but they are proclaiming GOAT a player from THE SAME FEDERER ERA, which is even worse for Federer (not being considered the best of his own era).
And I tell you all again: they will do exactly the same with the next great player after Nadal.
They want the casual fans to believe they are watching the greatest ever, something never seen before.
Of course it is absurd. Nadal is not the GOAT, just like Federer was not the GOAT, neither Sampras was the GOAT.
They are just some of the 15 greatest players ever, but it is impossible and senseless trying to proclaim just one of them as the GOAT, much more if you are comparing players from different eras, given that it is impossible to know what kind of numbers/achievements one great player could have had in a different era.
Seriously, I am LMAO, with people like TMF that relied a lot on what former players say, not even knowing that former players can and do say completely absurd things all the time.
This is comedy gold.
I told you guys, back in 2009, when the media started to proclaim Federer as GOAT, that is was ****ing absurd (it is impossible to compare greatest players from different eras), and I told you all that I had seen it all before, precisely with Sampras few years earlier (which again was absurd too to have proclaimed him the GOAT, there are just some greatest players from different eras, period).
And when some deluded people like TMF and some others tried to convince themselves that Federer was some kind of GOAT and that the media was right, I told you all that it would happen again, that the same media (former players, people trying to sell the present as the best thing ever) would proclaim the next good player as the undisputed GOAT.
Nobody believed me back then, but now, little by little, you all are seeing what I told you back then. They are now selling a new GOAT, and it is even worse, they are not selling the next generation (some 10+ years difference) great player as the GOAT, but they are proclaiming GOAT a player from THE SAME FEDERER ERA, which is even worse for Federer (not being considered the best of his own era).
And I tell you all again: they will do exactly the same with the next great player after Nadal.
They want the casual fans to believe they are watching the greatest ever, something never seen before.
Of course it is absurd. Nadal is not the GOAT, just like Federer was not the GOAT, neither Sampras was the GOAT.
They are just some of the 15 greatest players ever, but it is impossible and senseless trying to proclaim just one of them as the GOAT, much more if you are comparing players from different eras, given that it is impossible to know what kind of numbers/achievements one great player could have had in a different era.
Seriously, I am LMAO, with people like TMF that relied a lot on what former players say, not even knowing that former players can and do say completely absurd things all the time.
This is comedy gold.
RF20Lennon
Legend
LOL Tomic? I guess thats the best he has!
Omega_7000
Legend
Join Date: Jul 2011 :twisted:
btw I agree with you about there being no GOAT...Some of my old threads,
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=376001
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=479738
LOL, then it was not here, it was in another forum, but I started saying the same here when I joined in 2011.
monfed
Banned
LOL and how are you today? Yea, Nadal's had a fairly dismal year since the AO final so the timing seems off.
J
JRAJ1988
Guest
I'm starting to liken some Federer fans to a political ideology or a religious cult which doesn't tolerate any descent...and will mock and scoff to defame the person who's given ones opinion...."Agassi is a Meth addict" from one commenter. He went with Barbara Streisand when he was 20 and when she was 48....THAT'S impressive!
It reminds me of 1984 somewhat. Can people learn to respect other peoples opinions then move on?
It reminds me of 1984 somewhat. Can people learn to respect other peoples opinions then move on?
Last edited by a moderator:
monfed
Banned
You're not having a bad one yourself, smiling ear to ear like a cheshire cat. :lol:
monfed
Banned
We can if they're consistent and have a semblance of logic. Seriously,what has changed Andre's mind? Nadal hasn't even equalled Sampras yet and he's suddenly overtaken Fed? If you're gonna mention the H2H well it's been bad for Fed since 08 so his change of stance makes no sense.
Last edited:
I know, but it doesn't even matter.
Even if Nadal loses in 3rd round or earlier in RG, WB and USO this year, Agassi will still say that Nadal is the GOAT because blablabla (whatever).
Only when the next great player wins, say, 8-10 GS, will they start selling him as the new GOAT. Because all the young players are totally crap, they have to sell Nadal as GOAT even if he starts losing in each and every tournament.
But, if Nadal retires earlier than Federer? Will they go back to proclaim Federer as GOAT (because GOAT must be a player actually playing the Tour, they can't proclaim a GOAT that is no longer playing...)
Steffi-forever
Hall of Fame
I like Andre but Federer has accomplished so much more than Nadal.
Last edited:
Where were you in 2009?
I've already answered that question.
