Reading some of the recent threads about Connors, Lendl and Agassi, i found it funny, how the perception of many records changes. For instance Agassi: His so called 'Career Grand Slam', the term was invented for him, was seen around 2000 as one of the best records of all time. Players like Connors, Borg, Becker, Lendl, Sampras had tried and missed, to take the last leg of the majors. Then Agassi came, and made it - quite surprinsingly. Now 11 years later, the trick of winning all four majors in a career, has become quite common. Fed and Nadal did it, Djoker has good chances, and i wouldn't even rule out Murray. At least he reached at all majors the semis or better this year. In consequence, Agassi's status has lost some of his luster. On the other hand, Connors with his consistency seems to take a new high ride. Maybe spurred by Federer's semis record, people care more about consistency. Even some scientific reseachers give Connors the highest accolades. Back in the 80s or 90s, nobody cared much about Connors' (or Everts) consistency records. With Djkoker's big year the interest is shifting again to one year performances. I find this tendency quite funny and amusing.