Being an ATG was never about 6 slams, it was more than that, it's about the impact a person had on Tennis by revolutionizing it ...

Razer

G.O.A.T.
Often we see people say that Murray is an ATG, we won 3 slams in the era of Big 3, so he must be great and does not need 6 slams to be called an ATG ? ...

but then we are looking at this all wrong, it was never about 6 slams, it was more than 6 slams.... it was about impact of a player to society and tennis. It is about how that player took tennis a bit forward and stood out in his era as a special player.

Lets look at each player who is known as an ATG and see how they added something to tennis/stood out, then lets ask ourselves what Murray has done.


Player number 1 - Federer - Champion strokemaker like never seen before, the man who raised the level of Tennis in the 2000s and popularized it again after the slight snoozefest of the snv era of the 1990s had lost a lot of fans....

Player number 2 - Djokovic - Great flexibility, stamina like never seen before and also known for his mental toughness against hostile crowds. Rally Tolerance also like never seen before or since.... clear attributes that Djokovic added to tennis, no matter how much we bash him, these are true too.

Player number 3 - Nadal - Scintillating athleticism, changed the way topspin affected tennis, rendered 1 handed backhand useless. Fighting spirit like never seen before by playing every point like it is his last. His record of 14 French Opens is probably the only true exceptional record that we have seen in our lifetimes, everything else we saw was not that special.

Player number 4 - Sampras - The King of Swing, he was the undisputed king of the big serve and volleying in the 1990s. He was an upgrade to everyone before him and was the reason why they had to slow down courts. He was the ultimate Alpha of his era.

Player number 5 -. Lendl - First ATG to make fitness really important in tennis and emphasising on professional preparation. People Like Mcenroe and Borg used to party all night but Lendl used to lead a disciplined life always.

Player number 6 - Connors - 1st ATG of the open era, tenacious aggressive baseline game, in a serve and volleying era he played from the back of the baseline. Ability to get the crowd involved behind him, versatile across various surfaces.

Player number 7 - Borg - Popularized Tennis, introduced heavy topspin on his forehand and backhand, paving the way for future greats like Nadal to learn his way. It is rumoured that Uncle Toni read Borg's book and got ideas on weaponizing the top spin forehand for his nephew.

Player number 8 - John Mcenroe - Incredible hand eye co-ordination, formed the popular rivalry with Bjorn Borg which popularized Tennis more and gave it more coverage worldwide. His bad boy image along with Connors brought an attitude era to Tennis similar to the late 1990s in WWF/WWE like Austin and Shawn Michaels.

Player number 9 - Agassi - The first modern baseliner

Player number 10 - Becker - Weaponized Serve and introduced athletic power tennis as a teenager, forever a legend. Even in continents like Asia with less influence for Tennis Boris Becker was a popular name. We've also seen how he improved Djokovic's game as a coach ... the ultimate alpha coach I would say.

Player number 11 - Edberg - Best volleyer ever, enough said

Player number 12 - Alcaraz - Modern era protoype of an athlete to include qualities of all of the Big 3 has in his way weaponized the drop shot with his game, breathe of fresh air after 90s gen stink for so long

Player number 13 - Wilander - master grinder, strategist, best practitioner of high percentage tennis ever until the modern baseline era began.

Player number 14 - Sinner - The new Robot built on Djokovic's game, he is a Djokovic 2.0 according to many, a relentless machine from the baseline. I would not say this is a clear upgrade to anything but surely he is also a product of the change we witnessed in tennis from Federer to Djokovic.



Now ask yourself ---->>>> Does Sir Andy Murray merit a mention as an ATG ? If yes then you need to tell what has he added to Tennis and how did he stand out in his era. This was never about a 6 slams cut off, it was beyond that.


I created this thread because every now and then we find Sir Murray mentioned as an ATG, but the real question is have we understood what the term " All Time Great " in tennis really means ????
 
Last edited:
peter-griffin-peter.png
 
Andy Murray is still under your bed.

My feelings were about the same back then, in 2016. Been playing this game a long time. lol
 
Last edited:
Player number 15 — Mike Fishbach. Revolutionized the game of tennis by introducing the “spaghetti racket” on the pro level at the 1977 US Open using it to destroy Stan Smith in R2 6–0, 6–2 (yes, Bo3 at the time until the QFs).

Mike Fishbach ATG. Alas, the spaghetti racket was banned a few weeks later. Sad.
 
I would put Agassi in the top five for sure as he inspired more kids in the late 80s and 90s to pick up Tennis and anyone

If that really was true then the US would not be following the sampras model of tennis, you would have seen more Agassi clones.

Players like Roddick and even Ben Shelton are more from the Sampras mould of game revolving around Serve.

Agassi was influential but a bit overrated IMO.

The influence of Sampras and Boris Becker is what you see in the USA I guess.... @Rosstour correct me if I am wrong..
 
Hewitt deserves ATG status more than any other non-6 slammer. 75 consecutive weeks at #1. The guy had his own era. I became a diehard tennis fan in the 90s because of the Williams sisters, but pretty much ignored men's tennis. Hewitt is when I started focusing on men's tennis.
 
Grand Slam matches played against 20+ Slam winners:

Murray 25
Becker 0
Edberg 0
Wilander 0

Murray had it much harder. And no, you can't compare playing Sampras, Lendl to playing Big3s. If Murray with 3 Slams can't be compared to Becker with 6 Slams then Sampras and Lendl with 14 and 8 Slam can't be compared to Big3s with 20+ Slams.
 
Slam finals/semis vs 20+ Slam winners:

Murray 20
Hewitt 3
Becker 0
Edberg 0
Wilander 0
Courier 0
Vilas 0

Those other borderline ATGs mentioned did not even have it remotely as tough as Murray did.
 
No way does Hewitt deserve it more than Courier.

Perhaps you are right, but Hewitt was also known to have killed Serve and Volley, this was said by Federer himself who praised Hewitt as the 1st player who showed everyone else how it was done on the modern day grass courts.

 
Perhaps you are right, but Hewitt was also known to have killed Serve and Volley, this was said by Federer himself who praised Hewitt as the 1st player who showed everyone else how it was done on the modern day grass courts.


Courier was world number one is what was the toughest era in tennis history, four slams, made all slam finals when surfaces were polarized.

Hewitt shouldn't ever be put ahead of a player who won double the amount of slams that he did, otherwise you are opening a very big case for Murray, which I think is the opposite of this thread's intentions.
 
Courier was world number one is what was the toughest era in tennis history, four slams, made all slam finals when surfaces were polarized.

Hewitt shouldn't ever be put ahead of a player who won double the amount of slams that he did, otherwise you are opening a very big case for Murray, which I think is the opposite of this thread's intentions.

Yes Hewitt cannot be put ahead of Courier, that is for sure. Murray and Hewitt are similar, Courier a step above them.

In terms of influence

Courier > Hewitt > Murray

Stats or no stats, Courier clears them both with ease.
 
Yes Hewitt cannot be put ahead of Courier, that is for sure. Murray and Hewitt are similar, Courier a step above them.

In terms of influence

Courier > Hewitt > Murray

Stats or no stats, Courier clears them both with ease.

Courier was part of the huge American influence at the top of the game, along with Sampras, Agassi and Chang, and to a lesser extent Wheaton, Martin
 
Player number 14 - Sinner - The new Robot built on Djokovic's game, he is a Djokovic 2.0 according to many, a relentless machine from the baseline. I would not say this is a clear upgrade to anything but surely he is also a product of the change we witnessed in tennis from Federer to Djokovic.



Now ask yourself ---->>>> Does Sir Andy Murray merit a mention as an ATG ? If yes then you need to tell what has he added to Tennis and how did he stand out in his era. This was never about a 6 slams cut off, it was beyond that.


I created this thread because every now and then we find Sir Murray mentioned as an ATG, but the real question is have we understood what the term " All Time Great " in tennis really means ????
What is this absolute nonsense?

So Sinner, a guy who even by your own admission is just a BTEC Djokovic, and a guy who from what we’ve seen so far would have probably won 0 slams in the big 4 era, is an ATG … why precisely?

You want to talk about things that stand up to tennis’ history? Murray has arguably the best return of serve (purely as the shot, not the overall return game) and possibly the best lob in the history of men’s tennis. Also renowned af alongside Djokovic and Nadal for taking hustle to new extremes and widely praised for his insane tennis IQ personally I think this is overrated af but we can’t deny that others think it’s GOATY

What does Sinner have as an epochal shot? Some long limbed groundstrokes? A f***ing forehand that got beaten down the moment Djokovic did a vague impression of his 2013 self? A serve that goes missing in almost every big match against his main rival?

Murray has single handedly dragging Kyle Edmund and James Ward and co to victory by redefining the greatest Davis Cup performance by a men’s player in history, and is the only man to ever win singles Olympic gold twice, doing so in an era where Djokovic, Federer and Nadal all took it seriously too. Sinner has some obscure stats about being the youngest guy to win every single hard court zzzzzzz … sorry, I fell asleep

Mats Wilander an ATG for being Mr OG High Percentage grinder? What even is this, chatgpt sludge?
 
Last edited:
75+ consecutive weeks at #1 is something only ATGs have accomplished. Hewitt also stands with ATGs as those who ended the year #1 consecutively.

Courier had four slams, and 58 weeks at number one.

He was also the top guy during a far more tougher time. No way should about 22 more weeks at number one be greater than two additional slams.

Courier also defended both his AO and RG titles.

4 > 2
 
What is this absolute nonsense?

So Sinner, a guy who even by your own admission is just a BTEC Djokovic, and a guy who from what we’ve seen so far would have probably won 0 slams in the big 4 era, is an ATG … why precisely?

You want to talk about things that stand up to tennis’ history? Murray has arguably the best return of serve (purely as the shot, not the overall return game) and possibly the best lob in the history of men’s tennis. Also renowned af alongside Djokovic and Nadal for taking hustle to new extremes and widely praised for his insane tennis IQ personally I think this is overrated af but we can’t deny that others think it’s GOATY

What does Sinner have as an epochal shot? Some long limbed groundstrokes? A f***ing forehand that got beaten down the moment Djokovic did a vague impression of his 2013 self? A serve that goes missing in almost every big match against his main rival?

Murray has single handedly dragging Kyle Edmund and James Ward and co to victory by redefining the greatest Davis Cup performance by a men’s player in history and is the only man to ever win singles Olympic gold twice, doing so in an era where Djokovic, Federer and Nadal all took it seriously too. Sinner has some obscure stats about being the youngest guy to win every single hard court zzzzzzz … sorry, I fell asleep

Mats Wilander an ATG for being Mr OG High Percentage grinder? What even is this, chatgpt sludge?

Sinner hits the ball harder than Big 3 and Murray, the rally speeds would say that, so the control of the ball from corner to corner at high speed is definitely an upgrade. This is not a question of he being a pigeon of Alcaraz, he can be his pigeon and still win 7-8 slams with ease because he possesses certain skills that make him a relentless robot. Sinner's game indoors is levels above Murray, what are we even comparing here?

Return of Serve for Murray? - Great but I would rate Federer the best there.
Lob ? Ok that can be Murray but still not enough to say that he had influence on tennis.

Murray is great in his own way but if we are not even considering Courier and Hewitt as ATGs for their influence on the game then it would be wrong to put Murray up there.

Regarding Wilander, sure before him even Borg played high percentage tennis but Wilander played that tennis in the presence of players like Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg and he held his own, he grinded out long hard victories in that era. You can say Murray could also play like Mats did but then Mats did it 25 years before Murray, that is what being a pioneer is all about. Mats is a legend for sure, a far more respected figure in the game than Sir Andy in terms of influence.
 
Hate Sinner all you want but he has 2 Year end titles now at 24 and he might win many more

He is an ATG in the making.
 
Courier had four slams, and 58 weeks at number one.

He was also the top guy during a far more tougher time. No way should about 22 more weeks at number one be greater than two additional slams.

Consecutive weeks at #1 was the gist of my post. But since you brought it up, Hewitt's 80 weeks at #1 is yet another accomplishment achieved only by ATGs.
 
Consecutive weeks at #1 was the gist of my post. But since you brought it up, Hewitt's 80 weeks at #1 is yet another accomplishment achieved only by ATGs.

How is that greater than two extra slams?

And you like to apply context, so why don't you apply context to the strength of field when Courier was number one, when he had Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Chang, Edberg, Lendl, Stich, Ivanisevic around. Hewitt filled in the gap left by Sampras leaving his prime, and was quickly taken out when Federer got his head together.
 
Often we see people say that Murray is an ATG, we won 3 slams in the era of Big 3, so he must be great and does not need 6 slams to be called an ATG ? ...

but then we are looking at this all wrong, it was never about 6 slams, it was more than 6 slams.... it was about impact of a player to society and tennis. It is about how that player took tennis a bit forward and stood out in his era as a special player.

Lets look at each player who is known as an ATG and see how they added something to tennis/stood out, then lets ask ourselves what Murray has done.


Player number 1 - Federer - Champion strokemaker like never seen before, the man who raised the level of Tennis in the 2000s and popularized it again after the slight snoozefest of the snv era of the 1990s had lost a lot of fans....

Player number 2 - Djokovic - Great flexibility, stamina like never seen before and also known for his mental toughness against hostile crowds. Rally Tolerance also like never seen before or since.... clear attributes that Djokovic added to tennis, no matter how much we bash him, these are true too.

Player number 3 - Nadal - Scintillating athleticism, changed the way topspin affected tennis, rendered 1 handed backhand useless. Fighting spirit like never seen before by playing every point like it is his last. His record of 14 French Opens is probably the only true exceptional record that we have seen in our lifetimes, everything else we saw was not that special.

Player number 4 - Sampras - The King of Swing, he was the undisputed king of the big serve and volleying in the 1990s. He was an upgrade to everyone before him and was the reason why they had to slow down courts. He was the ultimate Alpha of his era.

Player number 5 -. Lendl - First ATG to make fitness really important in tennis and emphasising on professional preparation. People Like Mcenroe and Borg used to party all night but Lendl used to lead a disciplined life always.

Player number 6 - Connors - 1st ATG of the open era, tenacious aggressive baseline game, in a serve and volleying era he played from the back of the baseline. Ability to get the crowd involved behind him, versatile across various surfaces.

Player number 7 - Borg - Popularized Tennis, introduced heavy topspin on his forehand and backhand, paving the way for future greats like Nadal to learn his way. It is rumoured that Uncle Toni read Borg's book and got ideas on weaponizing the top spin forehand for his nephew.

Player number 8 - John Mcenroe - Incredible hand eye co-ordination, formed the popular rivalry with Bjorn Borg which popularized Tennis more and gave it more coverage worldwide. His bad boy image along with Connors brought an attitude era to Tennis similar to the late 1990s in WWF/WWE like Austin and Shawn Michaels.

Player number 9 - Agassi - The first modern baseliner

Player number 10 - Becker - Weaponized Serve and introduced athletic power tennis as a teenager, forever a legend. Even in continents like Asia with less influence for Tennis Boris Becker was a popular name. We've also seen how he improved Djokovic's game as a coach ... the ultimate alpha coach I would say.

Player number 11 - Edberg - Best volleyer ever, enough said

Player number 12 - Alcaraz - Modern era protoype of an athlete to include qualities of all of the Big 3 has in his way weaponized the drop shot with his game, breathe of fresh air after 90s gen stink for so long

Player number 13 - Wilander - master grinder, strategist, best practitioner of high percentage tennis ever until the modern baseline era began.

Player number 14 - Sinner - The new Robot built on Djokovic's game, he is a Djokovic 2.0 according to many, a relentless machine from the baseline. I would not say this is a clear upgrade to anything but surely he is also a product of the change we witnessed in tennis from Federer to Djokovic.
Wouldn't you have a stronger point if you included some with less than 6 slams who made an impact on the game? That would really show how it's not about the numbers.

The 6 slam cutoff works because it's almost impossible to win that much without having brought something special to the sport.
 
lol, this thread is about ATG being more than the # of slams, and you're arguing with the # of slams.

So what you are saying is we should just ignore the fact Courier has DOUBLE the amount of slams Hewitt had, and just talk weeks at number one, and throw away that all so precious context you like to using to devalue Djokovic's recent slam wins?

There is absolutely no way, that if you apply the context of strength of field did Hewitt have to deal with anything of the likes Courier dealt with. Courier was dealing with the peak versions of Sampras, not the washed up old version that Hewitt played.
 
So what you are saying is we should just ignore the fact Courier has DOUBLE the amount of slams Hewitt had, and just talk weeks at number one, and throw away that all so precious context you like to using to devalue Djokovic's recent slam wins?

There is absolutely no way, that if you apply the context of strength of field did Hewitt have to deal with anything of the likes Courier dealt with. Courier was dealing with the peak versions of Sampras, not the washed up old version that Hewitt played.

Yes, that's your approach in all your replies to my posts. Well, I'm not in the mood.
 
Yes, that's your approach in all your replies to my posts. Well, I'm not in the mood.

Because its transparent what you continually say between the lines.

Back to the point, Hewitt picking up 22 weeks more in a significantly weaker period when you compare it to early 90s is no where close to shifting the balance of two slams.

Face it, Federer was the only ATG player of his generation, and there was no ATG in the generation above his, the closest was Guga and he only won three slams and all were at RG.
 
If that really was true then the US would not be following the sampras model of tennis, you would have seen more Agassi clones.

Players like Roddick and even Ben Shelton are more from the Sampras mould of game revolving around Serve.

Agassi was influential but a bit overrated IMO.

The influence of Sampras and Boris Becker is what you see in the USA I guess.... @Rosstour correct me if I am wrong..
Incorrect. If anything, he was underrated rock ‘n’ roll tennis.
 
If the best volley in history qualifies you then the best first serve return and lob in history qualifies you. Also, according to this logic if an exact clone of Federer came on the scene today he would not be an ATG.
 
Courier was world number one is what was the toughest era in tennis history, four slams, made all slam finals when surfaces were polarized.

Hewitt shouldn't ever be put ahead of a player who won double the amount of slams that he did, otherwise you are opening a very big case for Murray, which I think is the opposite of this thread's intentions.
Hewitt has two YECs to Courier’s zero, but then again Courier lost two finals against Becker and Pete who are the two carpet BOATs.
 
Hewitt has two YECs to Courier’s zero, but then again Courier lost two finals against Becker and Pete who are the two carpet BOATs.

Yep. We know Courier was number one during the era which unquestionably had the deepest field in open era history. Hewitt, as good as he was, was the best in the world, after the party was over.
 
was the best in the world, after the party was over.

One thing which Murray and Hewitt have in common is that they were both rank 1 when the party was either over or paused, once the party re-started they were not rank 1 anymore.

If the best volley in history qualifies you then the best first serve return and lob in history qualifies you. Also, according to this logic if an exact clone of Federer came on the scene today he would not be an ATG.

The guy in your DP Hewitt was more influential than Murray from an impact on tennis. I never see you praising Hewitt anywhere but you are quick to praise/defend Murray

ok but the problem is that AI does not think Murray is even in the top 3 in the best 1st service returns. Lob I'll give it to you but not return and sadly lob is not enough to be considered influential.

656791832_4297343180412146_5038117943815381778_n.jpg
 
Wouldn't you have a stronger point if you included some with less than 6 slams who made an impact on the game? That would really show how it's not about the numbers.

The 6 slam cutoff works because it's almost impossible to win that much without having brought something special to the sport.

Good point.

Maybe the 6 slams cut off does make sense for that reason, to stand out in one's era one has to win a lot and be the best at some point of time and that is not possible without being exceptional. ... agreed
 
Wouldn't you have a stronger point if you included some with less than 6 slams who made an impact on the game? That would really show how it's not about the numbers.

The 6 slam cutoff works because it's almost impossible to win that much without having brought something special to the sport.
Wilander brought nothing special
 
Back
Top