Greatest baseliner of all time?

[lambielspins]

Who do you consider the best baseliner of all time? This does not neccessarily the greatest player who is considered first a baseliner, as even if the baseline play is the primary game of the players, one who you dont believe is the best baseliner could still be the best from other aspects of the game-net game, serving or returning ability, longevity of career, mental toughnes, whatever.

So just in terms of their overall baseline games-overall forehand, overall backhand, overall movement, shot selection, point construction, baseline rally court positioning, who is the best out of a group of Borg, Agassi, Federer, Lendl, Courier, Connors, Wilander, Nadal, Rosewall(I think he was considered primarily a baseline, all courter too, but more a baseliner), or other?

 

[drakulie]

Of the group you mentioned this would be my top 5:

1. Federer
2. Agassi
3. Borg
4. Lendl
5. Connors

 

[lambielspins]

deleted post

 

[fastdunn]

I think Federer "will" become the one pretty soon (surpassing Borg and Lendle,IMHO)
At least he's the best I've ever seen.

Agassi is still the best service returner I've ever seen...

 

[lambielspins]

I voted for Borg. He could hit something like 1000 shots from the baseline without missing one. Placements and directions hard to hit winners off of for opponents. So quick, could get to any ball. So I voted for Borg.

 

[BlankenshipBabaganoosh]

federer is an all-courter. muster should be on that list. nadal shouldn't be since he is worthless. i voted courier

 

[J-man]

I voted Federer. It's so good to the point where he feels he doesn't have to come to the night as much against opponents. That says something

 

[BlackSheep]

Why did you even put Nadal on there?

 

[Nadal_Freak]

federer is an all-courter. muster should be on that list. nadal shouldn't be since he is worthless. i voted courier

Well winning 2 FO's on a surface built for baseliners could be a reason.

 

[lambielspins]

Why did you even put Nadal on there?

Why shouldnt Nadal be on the list? He has the all time longest winning streak on a surface that puts a premium on baseline play. Of course that is far from gauranteeing he is the best baseliner of all time, he isnt my choice either, but it would be crazy not to include him as an option. Sure he has only 2 slams, he is also only 20 years old.

With 10 possable options I figure best to include as many as possable. Who is a better option that I did not include, Kuerten? Well some think Kuerten is better maybe, I myself see a 20 year old with 2 slams and a record win streak on clay, who made a Wimbledon final playing only from the baseline, should be an option over a guy finished(his career for all intents and purposes is finished)with 3 slams, and while 1 more French that is vs a 20 year old, and never as dominant on clay as far as overall tournaments as Nadal. Kuerten is the only possable alternative to be taken over somebody I already have on the list. Muster was great clay courter for sure too but underperformed at the French winning only 1 one, and while his dominance on clay was incredable, he to has never matched the dominant streak Nadal has on it now.

Alot of past great players, even the lesser greats, were all courters, since in recent decades, gradualy, generation of player by generation play has shifted to more a primarily baseliners style it was hard to come up with many names in the past as so many of them were truly all serve-volleyers or truly all courters.

 

[chaognosis]

Federer is the best of the choices, though perhaps not a "true" baseliner, but rather more of an all-court player. I think the real all-time honor has to go to Don Budge, who had the best backhand of all time, as well as a forehand that was nearly as good and supposedly never missed. He had one of the great serves of his day, as well, to complete the package, and was perhaps the first player to master hitting with power and taking the ball on the rise at the same time (he wanted to combine the strengths of Vines and Perry, and ended up surpassing them both). Connors's game was modelled after Budge's, and one might see Agassi too as his descendent, though neither was as good. If we go simply by results, Budge indeed comes out on top, winning six straight majors--including the first Grand Slam--in 1937-38, then turning pro and defeating both Vines and Perry in tours. Budge owns one of the greatest records in tennis, winning the Wimbledon "hat trick" two straight years, which will never be touched. In '37 he also played perhaps the greatest match of all time in Davis Cup, defeating in five brilliant sets a certain Gottfried Von Cramm, whose career was sadly cut short when he was imprisoned by Hitler on account of his loss.

 

[The Gorilla]

tilden should be on that list I think, he has more of a claim to it than nadal or muster.

 

[lambielspins]

I actualy had thought Budge was more of an "all courter". Thanks for giving some insight into his game.

 

[lambielspins]

tilden should be on that list I think, he has more of a claim to it than nadal or muster.

The tapes I have seen of him he is definitely an "all courter" unless those were not typical of the way he played.

 

[The Gorilla]

he could play any shot but described himseld as a baseliner, just because you can volley doesn't make you an all courter, those tapes were probably gs's played on grass where he probably would have volleyed a bit more.

 

[Supernatural_Serve]

I don't know if he's the best, but he is certainly my favorite baseliner:

Gustavo Kuerten.

 

[chaognosis]

It is often hard to make these very general classifications. I too would classify both Tilden and Budge as all-court players, but by the same token I would have to classify Federer as an all-courter as well. Tilden and Budge could both do virtually anything from anywhere, but their comfort zone was at the baseline. Tilden had a more varied shot selection, perhaps the best ever, and was a bit more like Federer in this regard. Budge had a more stable stroke arsenal--he was less of a shotmaking artist--but many saw it as the perfect arsenal. (Kramer has always said Budge had the most perfect and consistent set of mechanics ever seen.) By today's standards I think Budge would be classified as a power baseliner, but one who could also play an all-court game. Some, including urban on this forum, compare Budge's game to that of Lendl, but Budge was a far greater player. He was at least as good off the forehand wing, much better off the backhand, with a better serve, and he had a penchant for winning the biggest matches, whereas Lendl was something of a choker.

 

[Dark Victory]

I picked Federer.

Fed is a baseliner with all-court skills.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

If you ignore the serve and the return of serve I think Nadal beats out Federer as a better pure baseliner. It just depends on what you include in the baseline game.

 

[rrhstennis]

I picked Federer.

Fed is a baseliner with all-court skills.

I agree, but the scariest thing about Federer is that I think he could spend six months or a year learning to serve and volley better and could be nearly if not as effective as he is now.

 

[brayman9]

aggasi's strokes wre amazing and always solid he is the best baseliner

 

[Deleted member 6835]

undoubtedly federer

 

[Sagittar]

borg and agassi after ..
federer is more of an all-court player not a pure baseliner ..

 

[stormholloway]

Yes, and Tilden played tennis in pants. Come on dude, Budge is better than Agassi from the baseline?

 

[chrisdaniel]

...

I want to say,straight up Baseliner..Its really close from Agassi to Federer...like I imagine a game where there are no serves,no net play,...just hitting,I think it would come down to these two...I voted Andre since he picked the ball so early and pretty much tired his opponents out...but at the same time I know Andre gets hurt when he over hits to Feds forehand as well...its close.. Connors is a great baseliner,and Borg as well..

 

[justineheninhoogenbandfan]

It was a bit funny to see the only vote for Nadal coming from somebody who calls himself/herself Nadal_Freak.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

On Grass Federer
On Hard court Agassi
On Clay Nadal. You happy now?

 

[David L]

On Grass Federer
On Hard court Agassi
On Clay Nadal. You happy now?

This still does'nt resolve who is the greatest baseliner of all time overall.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Well Federer is always forced to come to the net against Nadal due to Nadal being a backboard. I can see why you are deceived by Federer's overall game but if he always stayed back he would struggle against Nadal.

 

[David L]

Well Federer is always forced to come to the net against Nadal due to Nadal being a backboard. I can see why you are deceived by Federer's overall game but if he always stayed back he would struggle against Nadal.

Have another look at their matches at The Masters, Wimbledon and Miami. In any case, we are talking about greatest baseliner of all time, not the Federer Nadal show.

 

[David L]

Consistency on different surfaces and over the competition should probably be factored in at some point.

 

[Volkl_4_life]

Borg is definatly hes got a better dominance on clay than even nadal and is of course a true baseliner unlike federer who is an all court player, Borg is easily the best baseliner

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Describing Federer as a baseliner is quite the slap in his face; he's clearly the all-court player. That said, Borg and Connors come to mind as the greatest of the baseliners (surprising Connors does not have more votes, since it is evident his historic weeks at #1 says much about the strength of his baseline game).

 

[justineheninhoogenbandfan]

I am not surprised Connors doesnt have more votes as fellow baseliner Borg was generaly regarded the better player from 77-81 anyway and won most of their meetings. Connors was an amazing player and a great baseliner, but hard to get many votes as the best baseliner all time when you werent even the best baseliner in your own era. As for his historic weeks at #1 was he the real #1 in either 77 or 78 where alot of that historic mark comes from?

I think if Connors and Borg are baseliners then Federer is. Federer volleys much better then both of them IMO, yet he came into the net LESS then both of them. Federer volleys much better then Roddick and Nadal, who are even below Connors and Borg in volleying, yet he comes in even less then they do as well. He doesnt come to net nearly enough to be called an all courter, I dont think he should be considered one until he starts coming in more.

 

[David L]

Yes, being a baseliner does'nt mean one never comes to the net, just that one spends an overwhelming amount of the time on the baseline. Borg and Connors came in quite a lot, especially on grass.

 

[fastdunn]

federer is an all-courter.

Then what is Borg who volleyed more than Federer ?

 

[Nick Irons]

Connors, barely a mention ?

Jeeez.

Federer ? The best ever Baseliner ? Possibly the best tennis player ever, but best baseliner ?

Wilander without a single vote ?!

(Kid's say the darndest things)

 

[iscottius]

why is courier on the list?

1. Need to define baseliner (is federer a baseliner? )

2. It is hard to compare era's especially wooden racquet vs modern.

that being said, borg was the best baseliner that I have seen.

 

[jm1980]

Fed is GOAT baseliner until he's rebranded as an all-court player

 

[ImageIsEverything]

Djoker. Totally scary consistency and very underrated shotmaking and offense. Agassi is my all time favorite though and its hard not to vote for him.

 

[Jokervich]

I was going to ask why wasn't Djokovic in the poll, then I realised this thread was created at the beginning of 2007.

Fed is GOAT baseliner until he's rebranded as an all-court player

Why are you bumping a thread that's more than 8 years old?

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Djoker. Totally scary consistency and very underrated shotmaking and offense. Agassi is my all time favorite though and its hard not to vote for him.

Borg > Djokovic.

 

[xFedal]

Fed is GOAT baseliner until he's rebranded as an all-court player

I would argue Nole is a better baseliner and more versatile player than Fed.

Djoker. Totally scary consistency and very underrated shotmaking and offense. Agassi is my all time favorite though and its hard not to vote for him.

Was Aggasi better than Nole from both wings? I don't think so.

Borg > Djokovic.

Djokovic>Everyone else.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Djokovic>Everyone else.

Nope.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I would argue Nole is a better baseliner and more versatile player than Fed.

So versatile he can't hit an overhead to save his life.

 

[xFedal]

So versatile he can't hit an overhead to save his life.

Everybody makes mistakes and Novak ain't no God that he going to be 100% flawless.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Everybody makes mistakes and Novak ain't no God that he going to be 100% flawless.

Federer had a more well-rounded game when he was at his best.

Nole has a solid groundgame, but his intangibles aren't great.

 

[mattosgrant]

Federer had a more well-rounded game when he was at his best.

Nole has a solid groundgame, but his intangibles aren't great.

The Djoker is mostly just about the tangibles (not that this is a bad thing).

 

[Deleted member 307496]

The Djoker is mostly just about the tangibles (not that this is a bad thing).

Agreed, and he may be the greatest ever at that aspect of the game. But I cannot say he doesn't have a weakness or that he's the greatest baseliner of all time when there have been more well-rounded players in the past.

 

[xFedal]

Federer had a more well-rounded game when he was at his best.

Nole has a solid groundgame, but his intangibles aren't great.

Federer at his best was all about crushing his forehand, Novaks F-B S-R Combo is better than Federers F-B S-R.