Connors, Lendl, and McEnroe should still be ranked higher than Nadal

JennyS

Hall of Fame
Even though Nadal is 3-4 Slams ahead of these players, there are legitimate reasons to rank these players ahead of Nadal (for now). Back when Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl played, the Australian Open wasn't even treated like a major while the Masters (now WTF) was. Here are several reasons why these players could be considered more accomplished than Nadal:

Reason #1: They have spent more weeks ranked #1 in the world.
Lendl 270
Connors: 268
McEnroe: 168
Nadal: 102

Reason #2: More tournament titles won
Connors: 109
Lendl: 94
McEnroe: 77
Nadal: 50

Reason #3: All 3 players won the WTF (or Masters/ATP Championships, etc)
Lendl: 5 titles
McEnroe: 3 titles
Connors: 1 title
Nadal: 0 so far

Reason #4: Each player won at least 3 Slams on two surfaces
Connors: won 4 Slams on grass (2 Wimbledon, 1 USO, 1 AO), and 3 on hardcourt
McEnroe: won 4 Slams on hardcourt, 3 on grass
Lendl: won 5 Slams on Harcourt and 3 on clay.

Reason #5: Ability to play well indoors.

Has "indoors" ever been a players' weakest surface before Nadal? Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl won dozens of indoor titles (hardcourt and carpet). Heck, Courier and Wilander won 5 and 3 indoor titles respectively.
 

ivan_the_terrible

Hall of Fame
....
Has "indoors" ever been a players' weakest surface before Nadal? Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl won dozens of indoor titles (hardcourt and carpet). Heck, Courier and Wilander won 5 and 3 indoor titles respectively.

Weird that even those 2 grinders were able to win, yet not poor ****?

Isn't it odd that poor **** is the only one that gets burnt out at the WTF?

Isn't it even more bizarre that he's typically a beast (and the fittest one at that) over the previous tournaments? Yet he arrives there dropping balls inside the service line and looking gassed? Getting bagelled & straight-setted over the years by the guy that he apparently owns, the guy that's so intimidated by him?

Enquiring minds want to know..
 

papertank

Hall of Fame
Nadal has been the most dominant on a single surface of all time, has the career grand slam and olympic gold, more total majors, way more masters series, and a dominating winning record against the (should be) undisputed GOAT. Plus he isn't even close to being done yet.
 

Arafel

Professional
No. Sorry, but NO.

Oh, I don't know. It depends on lot on your criteria. The race for Slams is very recent phenomena. The AO and French weren't really important in the 70s. Everybody knows Connors was banned in 74 and skipped it through 78 because he was annoyed by the ban, but far fewer people know that Borg skipped it in 77; can you imagine Rafa skipping the French, his best Slam? Lendl skipped at least one Wimbledon, claiming he was allergic to grass (his game certainly was at that time). McEnroe rarely played the AO, and Connors never did after losing in the final to Newcombe in 75. The AO didn't really become important again until it moved to hard courts and became the first Slam of the year again in 87.

The game was much different back then, and I think that needs to be taken into account. It's one reason why, for instance, though I respect Steffi Graf immensely, her 22 Slams are not solely enough to put her over Martina and Chris in my book, since 1) they Martina and Chris had to go through each other for a majority of their careers to win a Slam, while Graf only had Seles as a serious rival for 2.5 years, and 2) the Slam counts are skewered. Chris, for instance, could have easily bettered Graf's Slam count if she had played the AO before 81 and hadn't skipped the French Open for three years when she was unbeatable on clay. Martina could have potentially had more Slams if she had played the AO from 77-80, when she was one of the best grass courter's in the world. However, Slam counts didn't matter as much back then, especially in the nascent days of pro tennis, when playing tournaments with decent purses and earning a living was more important.
 

dudeski

Hall of Fame
Weird that even those 2 grinders were able to win, yet not poor ****?

Isn't it odd that poor **** is the only one that gets burnt out at the WTF?

Isn't it even more bizarre that he's typically a beast (and the fittest one at that) over the previous tournaments? Yet he arrives there dropping balls inside the service line and looking gassed? Getting bagelled & straight-setted over the years by the guy that he apparently owns, the guy that's so intimidated by him?

Enquiring minds want to know..

... and then he plays DC final the next week and destroys everyone because it's on clay.
 
Top