Comments by Paul Annacone on the greatness criteria (and Paris Masters)

[encylopedia]

In which case he better stop being dogsh*t when they next meet.

I too, with my decades long experience playing and coaching have observed that when great players lose, they often weren't playing great. I am also shocked Annacone omitted such stunning insight!

 

[UnderratedSlam]

there is one difference.
top boxers fight 1-2 matches per year
FIFA WC happens once every 4 years

tennis is played 11 months per year with 4 GS + WTF + a bunch of M1000, on various surfaces in various climacteric conditions, that's where the ranking comes to help

You actually thought I was comparing boxing and tennis because they were IDENTICAL?

Damn...

 

[UnderratedSlam]

But we are not talking about boxing or football here, but tennis, and even in football its the season end chapion who matters most . Team who has most points for the season. Nothing else comes close. GS count is recency bias created by media in 90s to support Sampras GOAT narative. Ask Gonzales or Kramer how much they cared about French Open in the 50s and 60s, or how much slams they won. Yes, you guessed the answer. So, to compare this great players with current ones by counting slam titles is utter nonsense.

Yeah, the amateur era.

Tennis itself was irrelevant back then during the ballet era, not just slams.

Quasi-slams.