Best and 2nd best players of every decade- men and women

[NadalAgassi]

Going back to every decade starting in the 1920s who do you think were the best and 2nd best players of every decade. Mine would be:

Men:

1920s: best Bill Tilden, 2nd best Rene LaCoste
1930s: best Don Budge, 2nd best Fred Perry
1940s: best Jack Kramer, 2nd best Bobby Riggs
1950s: best Pancho Gonzales, 2nd best Frank Sedgeman
1960s: best Rod Laver, 2nd best Ken Rosewall
1970s: best Bjorn Borg, 2nd best Jimmy Connors
1980s: best John McEnroe, 2nd best Ivan Lendl
1990s: best Pete Sampras, 2nd best Jim Courier
2000s: best Roger Federer, 2nd best Rafael Nadal


Women:

1920: best Suzanne Lenglen, 2nd best Helen Wills Moody
1930s: best Helen Wills Moody, 2nd best Alice Marble
1940s: best Pauline Betz, 2nd best Margaret Osborne Du Pont
1950s: best Maureen Connolly, 2nd best Doris Hart
1960s: best Margaret Court, 2nd best Maria Bueno
1970s: best Margaret Court, 2nd best Chris Evert
1980s: best Martina Navratilova, 2nd best Steffi Graf
1990s: best Steffi Graf, 2nd best Martina Hingis
2000s: best Serena Williams, 2nd best Justine Henin

 

[li0scc0]

That is a great list, NadalAgassi.
I would reverse Lendl and McEnroe if only because Lendl's consistency was higher than McEnroe from year to year, but it is hard to argue against McEnroe.
Seems a shame not to have Becker or Edberg or Wilander or Agassi on that list, but where COULD they be?
Nicely done.

 

[1970CRBase]

I think that 80's is a case of a transition between wood and graphite, therefore Mac is best of the first half of the 80's, Lendl 2nd. Lendl is best of the 2nd half of the 80's with Mats 2nd. But overall, I'd say it is either a tie or Lendl edges Mac, assuming we only count singles.

What is the reason for placing Bueno over King as 2nd of the 60's? I always assumed it was BJK. I'm not familiar with Bueno's career tho.

80's women : Navratilova/Graf/Evert. Graf's cygs and triple slam year places her ahead.

90's women : Graf/Seles/Hingis/Sanchez I can't find any way to place Hingis over Seles because the h2h is only their specific individual matchup. Which I suspect would have been different, not pre and post Seles stabbing, but Seles when she was 15/16, short and nimble and Seles after she grew up, tall and ungainly. Still, 16 year old Seles would have suffered the same problem against 16 year old Hingis that older Seles did, however 16 year old Seles with her then body might have been able to handle it better against Hingis on anything but grass.

2000's women : Serena/Venus-Henin tie, again only counting singles.

2010's women .... :mrgreen:

 

[NadalAgassi]

I think that 80's is a case of a transition between wood and graphite, therefore Mac is best of the first half of the 80's, Lendl 2nd. Lendl is best of the 2nd half of the 80's with Mats 2nd. But overall, I'd say it is either a tie or Lendl edges Mac, assuming we only count singles.

What is the reason for placing Bueno over King as 2nd of the 60's? I always assumed it was BJK. I'm not familiar with Bueno's career tho.

80's women : Navratilova/Graf/Evert. Graf's cygs and triple slam year places her ahead.

90's women : Graf/Seles/Hingis/Sanchez I can't find any way to place Hingis over Seles because the h2h is only their specific individual matchup. Which I suspect would have been different, not pre and post Seles stabbing, but Seles when she was 15/16, short and nimble and Seles after she grew up, tall and ungainly. Still, 16 year old Seles would have suffered the same problem against 16 year old Hingis that older Seles did, however 16 year old Seles with her then body might have been able to handle it better against Hingis on anything but grass.

2000's women : Serena/Venus-Henin tie, again only counting singles.

2010's women .... :mrgreen:

King was a crossover of the 60s and 70s, and actually won more slams in the 70s than 60s. I would have rated her in the top 2 of the 70s except for Evert's dominane and Court's early 70s dominance and Grand Slam. Bueno won a combined 5 Wimbledon and U.S Opens in the 60s, while King won 5 total slams in the 60s. Bueno beat Court in a Wimbledon and U.S Open final during the height of her dominance. King dominated mostly in late 66-68 where Court was mostly out. Bueno is rated as the #1 player of 1960, 1961, 1964. King of 1966, 1967, and 1968. It is close but I went with Bueno. Of course counting whole careers King is easily ahead. King had 2 decades like that (or her 70s was even better), while Bueno only had a great 1959 and nothing else in any other decade.

90s women: I rated Hingis over Seles since Hingis was the best player in the World 1997-1999 and Seles 1991-1992, so Hingis was longer. Plus the dominating H2H. I am consistent with my view H2H with your main rivals matters, not just when it comes to Federer and Nadal. Hingis was also a force at all slams, even at the French where she didnt win reaching so many finals or semis in a row. Seles never was a real factor at Wimbledon, one final beatdown all she has to show. Hingis also lost only 2 matches until after the 97 U.S Open, so was even more dominating that year than Seles ever was, even though her competition sucked that year.

Lendl vs McEnroe, I went with Mcenroe due to his historic 1984, and due to all his Wimbledon and U.S Open wins which back then were far and away the more prestigous events, though the French and even Australian gained alot in the second half of the 1980s. His peak level of play was easily higher than Lendl's as well IMO, even if the H2H was fairly competitive even in McEnroe's prime years. McEnroe was best player in 1981, 1983, and 1984, while Lendl was 1985, 1986, and 1987 so that is about equal, but McEnroe's 1981 and 1984 were better vs tougher competition IMO. I definitely understand why many will go with Lendl, and it is probably right, but my gut went with McEnroe as being tops by a bit, and it isnt bias as I am quite neutral on both as far as fan support goes.

Anyway I dont want everyone to agree with me, I would like to see everyone give their own lists.

 

[Mustard]

Men
1920s: Bill Tilden, Bill Johnston
1930s: Ellsworth Vines, Don Budge
1940s: Jack Kramer, Bobby Riggs
1950s: Pancho Gonzales, Pancho Segura
1960s: Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall
1970s: Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors
1980s: Ivan Lendl, John McEnroe
1990s: Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi
2000s: Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal
2010s (so far): Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic

Women
1920s: Suzanne Lenglen, Helen Wills Moody
1930s: Helen Wills Moody, Alice Marble
1940s: Pauline Betz, Sarah Palfrey Cooke
1950s: Maureen Connolly, Althea Gibson
1960s: Margaret Court, Billie Jean King
1970s: Margaret Court, Chris Evert
1980s: Martina Navratilova, Chris Evert
1990s: Steffi Graf, Monica Seles
2000s: Serena Williams, Venus Williams
2010s (so far): Kim Clijsters, Victoria Azarenka

 

[1970CRBase]

Serena also has some case to be best so far in the 2010's. I had a thought a long while back, surveying the broken generation on the womens side, that possibly if Serena paces herself and stayed healthy, she can be in contention to keep winning one or two slams per year until 2015 or 2016. That will give her the only ever distinction of being best in two decades, mens or womens. Unfortunately, she hurt herself and was out for a year.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Yeah Serena could end up being the best of the 2010s. I am not sure who would be right now though. It probably is Clijsters to be honest, 2 slams, WTA Championships and Miami titles, and a number of other tournament wins. Kim is already packing it in and playing out the string it seems though so definitely wont be her at the end.

 

[abmk]

90s women: I rated Hingis over Seles since Hingis was the best player in the World 1997-1999 and Seles 1991-1992, so Hingis was longer. Plus the dominating H2H. I am consistent with my view H2H with your main rivals matters, not just when it comes to Federer and Nadal. Hingis was also a force at all slams, even at the French where she didnt win reaching so many finals or semis in a row. Seles never was a real factor at Wimbledon, one final beatdown all she has to show. Hingis also lost only 2 matches until after the 97 U.S Open, so was even more dominating that year than Seles ever was, even though her competition sucked that year.

lulz, what sort of new revisionist history is this ??? this is new high, oops I mean low even by your standards

you are just making a mockery out of yourself in this case just to prove you don't consider H2H only in the case of fed-nadal ....

eve without the mention of the stabbing, seles' career is country miles ahead of hingis' ...

9 majors vs 5 majors .....

oh and seles' 91 and 92 nearly identical to hingis' 97 winning % wise and seles' was against better competition by some distance .....

seles has one more major at their mutual best major, AO..

way better at her second best major, FO, than hingis at major, USO

better than hingis at their 3rd best major, USO for seles and wimbledon for hingis ( only results wise , hingis was actually better on clay than on grass ...)

the only edge hingis has in this comparison is their worst surface ....

H2H comes into the picture only when achievements are close ..... which in this case isn't .....

oh and finally while hingis H2H vs seles is impressive, very impressive .... one shouldn't forget it was against post stabbing seles ..... it sure as hell wouldn't be that lopsided if it was prime seles ....

 

[NadalAgassi]

you are just making a mockery out of yourself

Funny statement considering nobody until you had any major problems with my choices. You are the one who makes a mockery of yourself daily with your over the top rants whenever anyone dares to disagree with the oh mighty abmk, who in reality is about on par with her rival kiki on knowledge on tennis. You honestly think typing in bold and going !?!?!!?!?!?!? makes you appear smarter than you really are but trust me it doesnt. Like I said in another thread you and kiki and your back and forth whiny rants/debates are like watching the movie dumb and dumber.

 

[abmk]

Funny statement considering nobody until you had any major problems with my choices.

1970CRBase disagreed with you and explicitly said so ......
mustard also disagreed with you ....

You are the one who makes a mockery of yourself daily with your over the top rants whenever anyone dares to disagree with the oh mighty abmk, who in reality is about on par with her rival kiki on knowledge on tennis. You honestly think typing in bold and going !?!?!!?!?!?!? makes you appear smarter than you really are but trust me it doesnt. Like I said in another thread you and kiki and your back and forth whiny rants/debates are like watching the movie dumb and dumber.

LOL, I sense a lot of butthurt in this ....

I disagree strongly only when I see dumb comments .....which is a lot in the case of kiki ( and yourself to a lesser extent )

don't you think I noticed how you disappeared from this thread after getting owned big time ??

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=338440&page=60

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=6510388&postcount=1186

LOL !!!!!

get back to the topic if you can .....

 

[Xavier G]

Men
70's 1 Borg 2 Connors
80's McEnroe 2 Lendl
90's 1 Sampras 2 Agassi
2000's 1 Federer 2 Nadal

Women
70's 1 Court 2 Evert
80's 1 Navratilova 2 Evert
90's.1 Graf 2 Seles
2000's 1 Serena Williams 2 Henin

Many people may give Lendl the 80's, I gave the edge to Mac for peak play, doubles, Davis Cup etc.
With. the women, it's more interesting. I just gave first place to Court in the 70's, but I wouldn't argue with Chrissie Evert getting the nod, it was very close, maybe joint top would have been fairer. Evert just gets second place in the 80's too, behind Martina but ahead of Graf. Graf gets top place in the 90's, Seles was on top of the game in 1993 when she was stabbed, but Steffi has to get the nod, Seles second. In the 2000's, Serena first and then Justine ahead of Venus.

 

[1970CRBase]

Lendl vs McEnroe, I went with Mcenroe due to his historic 1984, and due to all his Wimbledon and U.S Open wins which back then were far and away the more prestigous events, though the French and even Australian gained alot in the second half of the 1980s. His peak level of play was easily higher than Lendl's as well IMO, even if the H2H was fairly competitive even in McEnroe's prime years. McEnroe was best player in 1981, 1983, and 1984, while Lendl was 1985, 1986, and 1987 so that is about equal, but McEnroe's 1981 and 1984 were better vs tougher competition IMO. I definitely understand why many will go with Lendl, and it is probably right, but my gut went with McEnroe as being tops by a bit, and it isnt bias as I am quite neutral on both as far as fan support goes.

Anyway I dont want everyone to agree with me, I would like to see everyone give their own lists.

Other than counting the number of years each were best (1981, 1983, and 1984 vs 1985, 1986, and 1987) which points to their peak, you can also try comparing the years they ended as 2nd best, which points to consistency. e.g: in 1989 Becker was best BUT there was also a weaker case for Lendl albeit I'd say he was second best that year. Also with 1988 it was clearly Mats who was best although perhaps Stefan was second best that year with Becker and Lendl in respectively 3rd and 4th place. Sort of for best in a year, 10 points, 2nd best get 9 points 10th best gets 1 point etc and then we add that up over a decade to find the "overall top 10 of a decade"

Players are not limited to one decade of course : eg Becker in the 80's and 90's would make the top 10 of both.

 

[1970CRBase]

/\ I hope I haven't opened up a can of worms with this one. :mrgreen:

 

[FedericRoma83]

20s Tilden, Cochet (Lacoste maybe had higher peaks, but his health problems prevented him to overtake Cochet's consistency)
30s Budge, Perry (Vines was penalized by his tournée-only seasons when he was at his peak. He was surely as good as the other two)
40s Kramer, Riggs
50s Gonzales, Sedgman
60s Laver, Rosewall (but I prefer Rosewall's career if I take it in its entirety)
70s Borg, Connors
80s Lendl, McEnroe (Lendl grass game was surely better than McEnroe clay game + he won more titles and leads 21-15 in head-to-head matches... 23-15 if we count the great Antwerp tournament. Mats Wilander has also a strong claim as no. 2)
90s Sampras, Agassi (but I prefer Agassi as a player)
00s Federer, Nadal

 

[Carsomyr]

Agree with most, though I'd favor Lendl over McEnroe in the 80s and definitely Agassi over Courier in the 90s. While Courier's peak was far more productive, Agassi was in contention for big titles the entire decade, while Courier flamed out after '95. Agassi also won nearly every big title one could possibly win while Courier's dominance was restricted to just two major events.

 

[monfed]

Courier over Agassi in the 90s? :?

 

[Mustard]

Courier over Agassi in the 90s? :?

If it was 1990-1998, I would say Courier was the second best player behind Sampras, but 1999 takes Agassi over Courier.

 

[1970CRBase]

If it was 1990-1998, I would say Courier was the second best player behind Sampras, but 1999 takes Agassi over Courier.

Who was the best player of 1999? Agassi ended 99 #1 and won 2 slams to Pete's W and tour final. But Pete beat him 4 (?) times. Agassi was better than everybody else but Pete was better than Agassi.

I'd say Pete was the real best of 1999. So he gets 10 points that year by my system and Agassi gets 9.

 

[Mustard]

Who was the best player of 1999? Agassi ended 99 #1 and won 2 slams to Pete's W and tour final. But Pete beat him 4 (?) times. Agassi was better than everybody else but Pete was better than Agassi.

I'd say Pete was the real best of 1999. So he gets 10 points that year by my system and Agassi gets 9.

Agassi was the best player of 1999. Sampras might have demolished Agassi at Wimbledon and had the last laugh at the World Championships, but Agassi had the best results throughout the year. Sampras missed the Australian Open and US Open, and lost in the second round of the French Open to Medvedev. Agassi won the French Open and US Open, and was runner-up of Wimbledon and the World Championships, and he won the Paris Indoors.

 

[rufus_smith]

Something to consider: This type of thing should be done by half-decade not decade since a player is at his peak for only about 5 years at most

 

[NadalAgassi]

Other than counting the number of years each were best (1981, 1983, and 1984 vs 1985, 1986, and 1987) which points to their peak, you can also try comparing the years they ended as 2nd best, which points to consistency. e.g: in 1989 Becker was best BUT there was also a weaker case for Lendl albeit I'd say he was second best that year. Also with 1988 it was clearly Mats who was best although perhaps Stefan was second best that year with Becker and Lendl in respectively 3rd and 4th place. Sort of for best in a year, 10 points, 2nd best get 9 points 10th best gets 1 point etc and then we add that up over a decade to find the "overall top 10 of a decade"

Players are not limited to one decade of course : eg Becker in the 80's and 90's would make the top 10 of both.

Well I would say McEnroe in 1980 despite not being the best player that year was easily better than Lendl in any year outside of 1985-1987, and McEnroe in 1982 and 1985 was about on par with Lendl in 1988 and 1989. JMO though.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Courier over Agassi in the 90s? :?

Courier was the best player in the World 1992 and early 1993. Agassi was never considered the best player in the World. Even his 1999 was overshadowed by his 1-4 record vs Sampras, including smackdowns in their two biggest matches, and Sampras's U.S Open withdrawal. Courier had a run for over 2 years alot like Agassi's run for 8 months from mid 99-early 2000, against a much tougher field. Agassi has only 1 more slam, which isnt a big edge, and never defended a slam title that decade.

 

[Mustard]

Agassi was never considered the best player in the World.

During the 1995 summer, Agassi was considered the best player in the world, at least off of clay. It makes one wonder how much different the post-1995 years would have been had Agassi won the 1995 US Open. Agassi took the loss very badly indeed.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Something to consider: This type of thing should be done by half-decade not decade since a player is at his peak for only about 5 years at most

Fair point. Half decades then:

First Half 20s: Best women Lenglen, 2nd best women Mallorey. Best man Bill Tilden, 2nd best man Bill Johnson

Second Half 20s: Best women Helen Wills Moody, 2nd best women Lenglen. Best man Rene LaCoste, 2nd Best man Henri Cochet

First Half 30s: Best man Elsworth Vines, 2nd best man Jack Crawford. Best women, Best women Helen Wills Moody, 2nd best women Helen Jacobs

Second Half 30s: Best man Donald Budge, 2nd best man Fred Perry. Best women Alice Marble, 2nd best women Helen Wills Moody

First Half 40s: Best man Donald Budge, 2nd best man Bobby Riggs. Best women Pauline Betz, 2nd best women Sarah Palfrey

Second Half 40s: Best man Jack Kramer, 2nd best man Bobby Riggs. Best women Margaret Osborne Du Pont, 2nd best women Louise Brough

First Half 50s: Best man Jack Kramer, 2nd best man Pancho Gonzalez. Best women Maureen Connolly, 2nd best women Doris Hart

Second Half 50s: Best man Pancho Gonzales, 2nd best man Lew Hoad. Best women Shirley Fry, 2nd best women Althea Gibson

First Half 60s: Best man Ken Rosewall, 2nd best man Rod Laver. Best women
Margaret Court, 2nd best women Maria Bueno

Second Half 60s: Best man Rod Laver, 2nd best man Ken Rosewall. Best women Billie Jean King, 2nd best women Margaret Court

First Half 70s: Best man John Newcombe, 2nd best man Jimmy Connors. Best women Margaret Court, 2nd best women Billie Jean King

Second Half 70s: Best man Bjorn Borg, 2nd best man Jimmy Connors. Best women Chris Evert, 2nd best women Evonne Goolagong

First Half 80s: Best man John McEnroe, 2nd best man Bjorn Borg, Best women
Martina Navratilova, 2nd Best women Chris Evert

Second Half 80s: Best man Ivan Lendl, 2nd best man Boris Becker. Best women Steffi Graf, 2nd best women Martina Navratilova

First Half 90s: Best man Pete Sampras, 2nd best man Jim Courier. Best women Steffi Graf, 2nd best women Monica Seles.

Second Half 90s: Best man Pete Sampras, 2nd best man Andre Agassi. Best women Steffi Graf, 2nd best women Martina Hingis.

First Half 2000s: Best man Roger Federer, 2nd best man Lleyton Hewitt. Best women Serena Williams, 2nd best women Venus Williams.

Second Half 2000s: Best man Roger Federer, 2nd best man Rafael Nadal. Best women Justine Henin, 2nd best women Serena Williams.

 

[NadalAgassi]

During the 1995 summer, Agassi was considered the best player in the world, at least off of clay. It makes one wonder how much different the post-1995 years would have been had Agassi won the 1995 US Open. Agassi took the loss very badly indeed.

I dont think he had convinced people yet since before the U.S Open final both Mary Carillo and John McEnroe said that Pete Sampras had to play bad for Agassi to win, and if Sampras played well he was certain to win his 3rd U.S Open final. They wouldnt say that if they thought Sampras wasnt still the best. In the event he had won that match, people would have had to have been sold on it.

 

[abmk]

Courier was the best player in the World 1992 and early 1993. Agassi was never considered the best player in the World. Even his 1999 was overshadowed by his 1-4 record vs Sampras, including smackdowns in their two biggest matches, and Sampras's U.S Open withdrawal. Courier had a run for over 2 years alot like Agassi's run for 8 months from mid 99-early 2000, against a much tougher field. Agassi has only 1 more slam, which isnt a big edge, and never defended a slam title that decade.

most importantly agassi completed the career grand slam ...... courier only won at the slow court slams, FO and AO ...

agassi also won the YEC ...

agassi was making slam finals from 90 to 99 .... courier only from 91-93 ....

till 98, I'd say courier is ahead, but 99 puts agassi ahead IMO ....

 

[NadalAgassi]

I definitely have no problem with people who put Agassi ahead. I just see it slightly the other way is all. It is a close call and probably some will put either one ahead of the other. Agassi has the career slam and was more complete as far as winning on all surfaces. However Courier was the more dominating and intimidating player during his reign (albeit brief), and was more consistent by far from 1990-1996 than Agassi was over any stretch of the decade longer than roughly 2 years. Courier defending 2 slam titles when Agassi couldnt even do it once is a big edge as well IMO.

I agree that after 1998 Courier was way ahead of Agassi, even with having only 1 more slam, but 1999 is what might have pushed Agassi ahead if he is. Before that it was no contest.

 

[Mustard]

most importantly agassi completed the career grand slam ...... courier only won at the slow court slams, FO and AO ...

agassi also won the YEC ...

agassi was making slam finals from 90 to 99 .... courier only from 91-93 ....

till 98, I'd say courier is ahead, but 99 puts agassi ahead IMO ....

I agree.

At the end of 1998, their records were:

Jim Courier
1991 and 1992 French Open champion
1992 and 1993 Australian Open champion
1991 and 1993 Indian Wells champion
Runner-up of the 1991 US Open and 1993 Wimbledon
1992 and 1993 Rome champion
1991 Miami champion
2-time runner-up of the World Championships (now World Tour Finals)
Year end number 1 for 1992
58 weeks as world number 1 in total

Andre Agassi
1992 Wimbledon champion
1994 US Open champion
1995 Australian Open champion
1990, 1995 and 1996 Miami champion
1992, 1994 and 1995 Canada champion
1995 and 1996 Cincinnati champion
1996 Olympic singles gold medalist
1994 Paris Indoor champion
1990 World Championships winner
1998 Grand Slam Cup runner-up
32 weeks as world number 1 in total

 

[boredone3456]

Men:

1920s: Best is Tilden, dunno about 2nd.

1930s: Best is Budge, 2nd is Vines

1940s: Best is Kramer, 2nd...eh...guess I'll pick Riggs

1950s: Best is Pancho, 2nd is Segura (Sedgemann is wicked close though)

1960s:Best is Laver, 2nd is Rosewall

1970s: Best is Borg, 2nd is Connors

1980s: Best is Lendl (based on his consistency) 2nd is Mac.

1990s: Best is Sampras, 2nd is Agassi although I can understand picking Courier to some extent.

2000s: Best is Fed, 2nd is Rafa. Funny how as of now Federer isn't in the top 2 of the 2010s though. Djokovic has caused a major shift.

Women
1920s: Best is Lenglen, 2nd is Wills Woody

1930s Best is Wills Moody, 2nd best is Marble but I mean the cap between 1 & 2 here is more a grand canyon of distance.

1940s: 3 way fight for the best here between Osbourne Du Pont, Betz, and Brough Clapp. I can see calling any of them the best. I lean more toward putting Du Pont and Clapp at 1 & 2 because Betz didn't do much outside of the US Open. But Clapp suffers because she was a go between between the 40s and 50s, so maybe Betz beats her out for 2.

1950s Best is Connolly, 2nd Best in Hart

1960s: Best is Court, 2nd is Beuno (mainly because she beat Court in 2 major finals, the only one to do that). King could be argued as number 2 here as well.

1970s Best is Evert, 2nd is Court I guess...although there is an argument to be made for King.

1980s Best in Martina...second is tough between Graf and Evert. Evert was a constant prescense up until 1988 whereas Graf was dominant near the end. it comes down to a longevity vs Dominance thing and I can arguments for either.

1990s: Best is Graf, 2nd is Seles (Hingis had 1 stellar year where her main Competition was Novotna...sorry but she doesn't come close. Then the Williams and Davenport emerged and Graf came back and they all pretty much shut her up at the majors except in Australia)

2000s: Best is Serena, 2nd Best is Henin

 

[NadalAgassi]

I am not a Hingis fan but I dont understand the simple reasoning she just stopped winning major titles when big hitters came. Big hitters began maturing and becoming major slam threats again in mid 1998. Hingis still won the WTA Championships and Australian Open soon after, along with reaching the U.S Open final. She should have won the 1999 French without her final meltdown vs Graf when dominating and close to closing out the match in 2 sets. Reached the US Open, WTA Championships, and Australian Open finals all in a row, taking out big hitting top 3 player Venus in the semis of 2 of them. Blew legit chances to win both the 2000 French and U.S Opens. Basically since that French Open final metldown vs Graf, and her slam title drought starting to grow she became an increasing headcase, and it was that which held her back most, not that she couldnt compete with the power hitters, all whom she had a respectable record against still. The 2001 and 2002 Australian Open titles both should have been hers, and she beat both Williams to make the 2001 final, but by then she was just a headcase she blew both and lost to Capriati of all people. Then foot problems which began for her in 2000 and worsened with time ended her career in 2002. By 2002 and even late 2001 she was a real shadow of her old self, losing at Wimbledon to Ruano Pascual, and getting spanked around by the likes of Dementieva, Dokic, and Hantuchova. She was an early bloomer who peaked early and fizzled out like Seles, Austin, Jaeger, and a number of others. However her ending 1999 and 2000 as a solid #1, winning the Australian Open, Miami, and WTA Championships, and having a number of other real opportunities to win slams shows she was not lost the moment real power arrived. Injuries, decline, and headcase problems with began to arise from that French Open nightmare vs Graf and grew from there, are what her undoing was.

 

[kiki]

Well I would say McEnroe in 1980 despite not being the best player that year was easily better than Lendl in any year outside of 1985-1987, and McEnroe in 1982 and 1985 was about on par with Lendl in 1988 and 1989. JMO though.

Mac in 1980 won USO and lost WCT Finals and Wimbledon final
Lendl in 1984 took the French, lost the USO final and the Masters.

Even, even, even.

 

[kiki]

Men:

1920s: Best is Tilden, dunno about 2nd.

1930s: Best is Budge, 2nd is Vines

1940s: Best is Kramer, 2nd...eh...guess I'll pick Riggs

1950s: Best is Pancho, 2nd is Segura (Sedgemann is wicked close though)

1960s:Best is Laver, 2nd is Rosewall

1970s: Best is Borg, 2nd is Connors

1980s: Best is Lendl (based on his consistency) 2nd is Mac.

1990s: Best is Sampras, 2nd is Agassi although I can understand picking Courier to some extent.

2000s: Best is Fed, 2nd is Rafa. Funny how as of now Federer isn't in the top 2 of the 2010s though. Djokovic has caused a major shift.

Women
1920s: Best is Lenglen, 2nd is Wills Woody

1930s Best is Wills Moody, 2nd best is Marble but I mean the cap between 1 & 2 here is more a grand canyon of distance.

1940s: 3 way fight for the best here between Osbourne Du Pont, Betz, and Brough Clapp. I can see calling any of them the best. I lean more toward putting Du Pont and Clapp at 1 & 2 because Betz didn't do much outside of the US Open. But Clapp suffers because she was a go between between the 40s and 50s, so maybe Betz beats her out for 2.

1950s Best is Connolly, 2nd Best in Hart

1960s: Best is Court, 2nd is Beuno (mainly because she beat Court in 2 major finals, the only one to do that). King could be argued as number 2 here as well.

1970s Best is Evert, 2nd is Court I guess...although there is an argument to be made for King.

1980s Best in Martina...second is tough between Graf and Evert. Evert was a constant prescense up until 1988 whereas Graf was dominant near the end. it comes down to a longevity vs Dominance thing and I can arguments for either.

1990s: Best is Graf, 2nd is Seles (Hingis had 1 stellar year where her main Competition was Novotna...sorry but she doesn't come close. Then the Williams and Davenport emerged and Graf came back and they all pretty much shut her up at the majors except in Australia)

2000s: Best is Serena, 2nd Best is Henin

In the 1950´s Hoad ( and kramer and Sedgman) were far way off Segura.

Hingis wass the best woman for the second half of the 90´s...still Graff was the dominant player of the whole decade.

 

[1970CRBase]

Fair point. Half decades then:

I would only do half decade in the case of the 80's when 1) it was a wood/graphite transitional period, 2) Lendl's half, after 1985, and Mac's half pre 1985, were equally dominating.

With the mens and womens 90's it was very clear who were the best those decades, but second still can be discussed, albeit I still go with Agassi and Seles.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Mac in 1980 won USO and lost WCT Finals and Wimbledon final
Lendl in 1984 took the French, lost the USO final and the Masters.

Even, even, even.

McEnroe lost an all time great final to Borg then beat the great Borg at the U.S Open when Borg was at his absolute peak. Lendl was spanked badly by Mcenroe in the U.S Open and Masters finals, and was often losing to grandpa Connors this year. No contest IMO. You yourself keep pointing out you cant just look at final results, but competition and context.

 

[kiki]

McEnroe lost an all time great final to Borg then beat the great Borg at the U.S Open when Borg was at his absolute peak. Lendl was spanked badly by Mcenroe in the U.S Open and Masters finals, and was often losing to grandpa Connors this year. No contest IMO. You yourself keep pointing out you cant just look at final results, but competition and context.

I am a big Mc Enroe supporter, but his 1980 year and Lendl´s 1984 look pretty similar.I think Mac had a better 1979 than 1980.He won Dallas,Davis Cup,US Open.

In 1984, Lendl was a wimbledon semifinalist while in 1980, Mac was clocked at RG by ...Paul Mc Namee...and had a ver poor Masters, being ousted by Gene Mayer.

 

[1970CRBase]

I definitely have no problem with people who put Agassi ahead. I just see it slightly the other way is all. It is a close call and probably some will put either one ahead of the other. Agassi has the career slam and was more complete as far as winning on all surfaces. However Courier was the more dominating and intimidating player during his reign (albeit brief), and was more consistent by far from 1990-1996 than Agassi was over any stretch of the decade longer than roughly 2 years. Courier defending 2 slam titles when Agassi couldnt even do it once is a big edge as well IMO.

I agree that after 1998 Courier was way ahead of Agassi, even with having only 1 more slam, but 1999 is what might have pushed Agassi ahead if he is. Before that it was no contest.

Their h2h DURING the 90's is also relevant to the case, overall it is 7-5 to Courier but in the 90's it is 6-3 with Courier beating Agassi six times from 91-95 and leading 3-2 in slams. Agassi beat him at 96AO when Courier had declined, but in Courier's prime, he owned Agassi, their 90's h2h and overall h2h is still a mark in Courier's favour.

 

[kiki]

Courier owned Agassi in the first half of the 90´s.He even got to number 1.But declined fastly.

IMO,Agassi´s peak came from 1995 to 2000 or so.He won 2002 and 2003 AO in weak fields against slouch players...and still managed to be Fed´s main opposition for some time.

 

[1970CRBase]

Second Half 80s: Best man Ivan Lendl, 2nd best man Boris Becker.

I would put Becker ahead of Edberg in the 80's and also during the latter half the the 80's though on the h2h during the 80's and career overall, however Wilander did win 4 of his slams after the last day of 1984 and triple slam year which Lendl didn't have, so as I said if 80's is a split decade, Wilander is probably 2nd after 1985.

 

[1970CRBase]

Of course, pre-1984 or so for decades like 70's, we can't count the slams the same way as we did afterwards, we have to bear in mind the context of the importance of events like WCT.

1980s Best in Martina...second is tough between Graf and Evert. Evert was a constant prescense up until 1988 whereas Graf was dominant near the end. it comes down to a longevity vs Dominance thing and I can arguments for either.

Now if Longevity and Dominance are considered equal, then it comes down to h2h during the same period as tiebreaker, which is in Graf's favour.

 

[kiki]

I would put Becker ahead of Edberg in the 80's and also during the latter half the the 80's though on the h2h during the 80's and career overall, however Wilander did win 4 of his slams after the last day of 1984 and triple slam year which Lendl didn't have, so as I said if 80's is a split decade, Wilander is probably 2nd after 1985.

Very even.After 1984, Wilander won 2 FO, 1 Ao and 1 USO while Becker won, from 1985 to 1989, 3 W and 1 USO.Becker won the 1988 Dallas Finals and the 1988 Masters, which Matts never won.I´d give Becker the edge, but over the whole 1980´s decade, Wilander would possibly have the edge.Edberg is far from both.Of course, just 1980´s.

 

[Mustard]

Courier owned Agassi in the first half of the 90´s.He even got to number 1.But declined fastly.

Courier was number 1 for 58 weeks in total. He did have Agassi's number at the time.

IMO,Agassi´s peak came from 1995 to 2000 or so.He won 2002 and 2003 AO in weak fields against slouch players...and still managed to be Fed´s main opposition for some time.

Agassi had his peak in terms of level of play in 1995. 1996 saw a bit of a slump, but still some highs like winning Miami, Cincinnati and the Atlanta Olympics. 1997 saw a drastic slump to 141 in the world. 1998 was the rebuilding year where he played some very good tennis. 1999 was him eventually getting back to number 1.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I am a big Mc Enroe supporter, but his 1980 year and Lendl´s 1984 look pretty similar.I think Mac had a better 1979 than 1980.He won Dallas,Davis Cup,US Open.

In 1984, Lendl was a wimbledon semifinalist while in 1980, Mac was clocked at RG by ...Paul Mc Namee...and had a ver poor Masters, being ousted by Gene Mayer.

Even so my main point was McEnroe's 4th, 5th, and 6th best years of the decade are not really below Lendl's, if that was the suggestion.

 

[1970CRBase]

Very even.After 1984, Wilander won 2 FO, 1 Ao and 1 USO while Becker won, from 1985 to 1989, 3 W and 1 USO.Becker won the 1988 Dallas Finals and the 1988 Masters, which Matts never won.I´d give Becker the edge, but over the whole 1980´s decade, Wilander would possibly have the edge.Edberg is far from both.Of course, just 1980´s.

By my system, true best of a year gets 10 points that year to count towards their overall best in a decade, second gets 9 and so on.

So the top 10 of the 80's partial :

Lendl or Mac 1 or 2

Maybe Mats 3

In the 80's context, where to put Borg with his 1980 channel duo and best in 1980? (6?)

Becker 4 with his double slam 1989 (but Borg's RG+Wim should be considered > than BB's Wim+USO, if it comes down to tiebreak)

Edberg 5

?

 

[kiki]

Lendl-Mac is the closest possible contest for nº1/2 in a decade.Borg,Laver,Sampras,Federer,Gonzales,Kramer,Budge and Tilden, even Wilding and Doherty dominated their decades handily ( although, of course, with terrific opposition like Perry for Budge,Hoad for Gonzales,Nadal for Federer and Rosewall for laver).

But 1980´s is really close.One can accept any way.

 

[sandy mayer]

I think that 80's is a case of a transition between wood and graphite, therefore Mac is best of the first half of the 80's, Lendl 2nd. Lendl is best of the 2nd half of the 80's with Mats 2nd. But overall, I'd say it is either a tie or Lendl edges Mac, assuming we only count singles.

i'd say Connors was definitely ahead of lendl in the first half of the eighties. Mac is one for the first half with Connors 2. Lendl is 1 for the second half with Becker 2. I think Becker's 4 slams in 85-89 beats Wilander's 4 slams in the same period (due to the Australian having less prestige in those days) and also I just think Becker was better over the period. 89 was a really poor year for Wilander.

 

[Mustard]

Lendl-Mac is the closest possible contest for nº1/2 in a decade.Borg,Laver,Sampras,Federer,Gonzales,Kramer,Budge and Tilden, even Wilding and Doherty dominated their decades handily ( although, of course, with terrific opposition like Perry for Budge,Hoad for Gonzales,Nadal for Federer and Rosewall for laver).

But 1980´s is really close.One can accept any way.

I think you can make a case for Connors in the 1970s.

 

[kiki]

By my system, true best of a year gets 10 points that year to count towards their overall best in a decade, second gets 9 and so on.

So the top 10 of the 80's partial :

Lendl or Mac 1 or 2

Maybe Mats 3

Where to put Borg with his 1980 channel duo and best in 1980?

Becker 4 with his double slam 1989 (but Borg's RG+Wim should be considered > than BB's Wim+USO, if it comes down to tiebreak)

Edberg 5

?

Connors won 4 major titles in the 1980´s.Edberg won also 4.Borg won also 4.They were, IMO, even at 3 rd tier, behind Lendl/Mc ( top tier) and Becker/Wilander ( 2 nd tier of the decade).

Imagine how extremely competitive a decade was, that Borg, Connors and Edberg are in third tier...

and for the 4 th tier, I´d pick Cash,Kriek,Noah and Mecir.

 

[kiki]

I think you can make a case for Connors in the 1970s.

Borg dominated Connors.I still put Connors at nº 2, however, advancing Newcombe ( who owned him when it mattered)

 

[1970CRBase]

Take Mecir for example, will he make best 10 of the 80's? 1987 Lipton was a strong field, almost like a slam, and he did win Olympics. Can that put him over Chang's 1989?

 

[Mustard]

Borg dominated Connors.I still put Connors at nº 2, however, advancing Newcombe ( who owned him when it mattered)

Borg didn't dominate Connors until 1979. Connors dominated Borg from 1974-1976, and in 1977-1978, it was very close. As for Newcombe, Connors didn't play against him that often. Newcombe won their 1973 US Open quarter final and 1975 Australian Open final, but Connors won the 1975 Las Vegas exhibition match, which was a big event.