Greatest Player of All Times (school research project)
- Thread starter yevmes
- Start date
M
meg0529
Guest
She likes playing tennis, but she is not like me who loves the game in general. She liked Sharapova at some point of time, but mostly probably because Sharapova is also Russian and my daughter has always been teased by adults as being next Sharapova
She is old enough now to understand and appreciate Roger's style or Nadal's athleticism. But that whole conversation started when she learned about Graf's slam record and she quickly pointed out that she has more slams than Roger, so it intrigued her that Graf is never mentioned in the goat debate. So she decided to make a school project out of this, but had to expand the topic a bit since concentrating on Graf would have been too narrow.
Funny thing is that she wants to write to Graf and ask for her opinion. It remains to be seen if we can somehow find a way to at least send something without actually expecting to hear anything back.
We live in Vancouver, so the plan is also to try to contact local legend Grant Connell and ask him what his take on this. He is a real estate agent now, so it should be possible to get in touch with him.
I normally do not interfere with my daughter's school work, but it is such as interesting topic that i decided to chip in.
A better topic would be the lack of focus on female tennis stars during the goat debate? They are tons of articles for the men, but fewer for the women.
This is quite the tall order for a 10year old! It might be best for you to locate articles on the internet written by sports writers. Aside from getting more solid facts, you'll have to wade through less nonsense.
My vote goes to Steffi Graf. There is the likes of Rod Laver, of course, with all his numbers and impressive resume I have read about. But thats the key phrase in there - read about. I have never seen Rod Laver play, and I started following tennis with a passion from the time Martina Navratilova was just fading away to the power of Steffi Graf. And when Courier, Agassi and Sampras were at the top. And when Thomas Muster was winning just about every French Open.
So, from what I have seen, Steffi Graf, Pete Sampras and Roger Federer stand out. Pete Sampras was a magician at the net, but he was never as dominant a player as Federer, who thumped just about everyone for a good part of 5 years. And Roger Federer, for all his greatness with the racquet, for all his achievements still has a very poor record against the top rival of his time, something Pete Sampras always maintained in his favor. Queen Steffi, though, covered just about everything a tennis player wants to achieve and retire with. Olympic gold, the Golden Slam, great H2H record against all of her rivals, 22 Grand Slams, had an even winning record in all slams to prove she was great on any surface, was #1 for God knows how long.... She is the greatest ever tennis player in my books.
So, from what I have seen, Steffi Graf, Pete Sampras and Roger Federer stand out. Pete Sampras was a magician at the net, but he was never as dominant a player as Federer, who thumped just about everyone for a good part of 5 years. And Roger Federer, for all his greatness with the racquet, for all his achievements still has a very poor record against the top rival of his time, something Pete Sampras always maintained in his favor. Queen Steffi, though, covered just about everything a tennis player wants to achieve and retire with. Olympic gold, the Golden Slam, great H2H record against all of her rivals, 22 Grand Slams, had an even winning record in all slams to prove she was great on any surface, was #1 for God knows how long.... She is the greatest ever tennis player in my books.
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Really? Last time I checked Roger has some legal issues he is dealing with for cheating...
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Roger does not even compare to Graf, what fools voted him?
She picked that topic herself, but the teacher helped to expand it a bit.
Don't worry, I knew what to expect from this board
While I don't post a lot, I read it quit often. We needed diverse opinions. She would read a lot of sports writers, she checked out some books form the library, we also picked up couple of good links from here, so he have enough from "formal" sources, but it is also fun to see what regular tennis players think about it. Also, she needs some "products" and a poll is a cool think to include. Thanks again for interesting conversation.single_handed_champion
Professional
Frankly, forums like this are the wrong place to do research for a project whose subject matter you are only learning as you go. People have their biased opinions and stats can be twisted to support any argument. So then (and especially because you are looking to do such a general comparison of players of all generations and sexes), your best bet is to gather all the statistics and weight them for yourself, as an outsider.
In general, you can say that some stats are more meaningful than others, like Slams, weeks at no. 1, titles won, Head-to-heads, win/loss%, records on different surfaces. These are not constant across generations (surfaces, playing fields, formats, technology), so there are several intangibles right there. Plus, some people find 1 style of play beautiful, complete etc etc while others prefer a radically different style.
If you prefer to do just Slams and weeks at no. 1, you have clear winners. If you include doubles, there are others. If you look at titles, win/loss %, you have others. If you consider other great records (consecutive titles/finals, records on all surfaces), others. It is such a complex debate that people keep revising their opinions or consolidate even more statistics to back their arguments or refute others'. And I am talking just about the GOAT on either the men's or women's tour.
I hope you are reading these posts before you let your daughter do so. There can be a lot of vitriol spewed around here.
In general, you can say that some stats are more meaningful than others, like Slams, weeks at no. 1, titles won, Head-to-heads, win/loss%, records on different surfaces. These are not constant across generations (surfaces, playing fields, formats, technology), so there are several intangibles right there. Plus, some people find 1 style of play beautiful, complete etc etc while others prefer a radically different style.
If you prefer to do just Slams and weeks at no. 1, you have clear winners. If you include doubles, there are others. If you look at titles, win/loss %, you have others. If you consider other great records (consecutive titles/finals, records on all surfaces), others. It is such a complex debate that people keep revising their opinions or consolidate even more statistics to back their arguments or refute others'. And I am talking just about the GOAT on either the men's or women's tour.
I hope you are reading these posts before you let your daughter do so. There can be a lot of vitriol spewed around here.
Thanks for your input. I am actually kind of impressed with replies. I honestly expected a lot worse. I don't think I need to filter it a lot
But I would disagree with you on the usefulness of this. As I sad, she has access to formal statistics and such and she will obviously put more weight on it, but the goal of the project is to use critical thinking while obtaining information and she needs to lean how to process information from different sources. Also, as I said, she needs cool ways of supporting her points and we though that a poll would be a good idea. This forum was the best place to have a poll from.
single_handed_champion
Professional
Thanks for your input. I am actually kind of impressed with replies. I honestly expected a lot worse. I don't think I need to filter it a lot
But I would disagree with you on the usefulness of this. As I sad, she has access to formal statistics and such and she will obviously put more weight on it, but the goal of the project is to use critical thinking while obtaining information and she needs to lean how to process information from different sources. Also, as I said, she needs cool ways of supporting her points and we though that a poll would be a good idea. This forum was the best place to have a poll from.
Good luck to her, but it sounds like an awfully hard assignment for someone so young, who has not followed the game for decades. But you mentioned she read up on tennis history from reputed sources (books, journalists), so hopefully she should get some perspective.
I am not going to do a 'best ever' thing, but I pick Graf and Federer. A personal choice, you see. I know Navratilova had some staggering numbers in terms of longevity, titles, doubles success etc., but I loved Steffi and she compiled some truly mind-boggling numbers of her own in the late 80's and 90's, especially relating to the Slams. I also think she bridged the Navratilova-Evert and current generations best. I have not watched the earlier legends (Evert, Navratilova, Court, King) enough to make a case for them except based on stats. Similarly, having watched the Federer era unfold and seen him play countless times, it seems like he could have no peers, and his achievements support such sentiments, thankfully (also holds several fun, and likely unsurpassable records).
Who knows, 5 years from now, Nadal might have racked up more achievements than Federer, and I enjoy watching him as well, so I might be singing a different tune at that point.
forzamilan90
Legend
Roger Federer, encompasses greatness through his titles record, not the mention the briliance of his game (he's the MJ of the tennis, only with the most Grand Slam singles titles in his sport)
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Pc1, I think she can write this to the teacher as long as she can make reasonable arguments for it. So let's keep this conversation going in different direction and she can make her own conclusions. I probably would need to help her whith all these information though
No problem. If she can write this, that's fine with me. Just trying to help.
Omega_7000
Legend
LOL @ all the *******s voting for other! :lol:
P_Agony
Banned
Look at this:
And now look at this:
So let me get this straight, veroniqeum.
You claim there is no such thing as "the greatest", but at the same time you claim Nadal is "more than perfect" and you agree with Martina about him being the GOAT.
You also claim "Every champion brought something to the sport that is complementary to what the others brought" and at the same time you claim "Maybe he's gonna end up as the DOAT (dullest of all time, although Sampras is still a prime contender in that category for me )".
veroniquem, that is why you are and will always be one of the least respected posters in this forum.
And now look at this:
Definitely. Personally, that's what I've predicted since Miami 2005. I feel very flattered to be joined by Martina. Graf has also said in an interview that Rafa brings everything that tennis needs. Girls are smart!
Let the boys cling onto their Fedgod. Us girls can tell a great man when we see one
So let me get this straight, veroniqeum.
You claim there is no such thing as "the greatest", but at the same time you claim Nadal is "more than perfect" and you agree with Martina about him being the GOAT.
You also claim "Every champion brought something to the sport that is complementary to what the others brought" and at the same time you claim "Maybe he's gonna end up as the DOAT (dullest of all time, although Sampras is still a prime contender in that category for me )".
veroniquem, that is why you are and will always be one of the least respected posters in this forum.
P_Agony
Banned
If that turns out to be true I would be heavily disappointed with Fed. However, Nadal will still be leagues above him in the cheating department. You can't even compare the two.
Omega_7000
Legend
Manus Domini
Hall of Fame
is it just me or are the *******s the tennis version of the Tea Party movement?
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
Well...its tough to compare women and men in terms of ability and domination and all that as the tours are so different, always have been and always will be.
For the men: Laver or Federer
For the women: Navratilova or Graf (I prefer the first option in both, but can't really knock people for thinking the other)
comparing the two...well, I really find it hard, Navratilova peaked late and missed a lot of time early in her career where she could have been doing more had she been in shape. Laver missed "traditional slam" opportunities by going pro, but was amazing for almost his entire career.
I guess what I would ask is, do you mean greatest in terms of highest level of play they achieved relative to their competition, or in terms of actual achievement relative to their competition? I don't think there really is a "greatest" that can be concretely proven or named, but it would help a little.
For the men: Laver or Federer
For the women: Navratilova or Graf (I prefer the first option in both, but can't really knock people for thinking the other)
comparing the two...well, I really find it hard, Navratilova peaked late and missed a lot of time early in her career where she could have been doing more had she been in shape. Laver missed "traditional slam" opportunities by going pro, but was amazing for almost his entire career.
I guess what I would ask is, do you mean greatest in terms of highest level of play they achieved relative to their competition, or in terms of actual achievement relative to their competition? I don't think there really is a "greatest" that can be concretely proven or named, but it would help a little.
I seriously hope you arent using that as an argument in her favor.
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
umm no i'm not, I do hold it against her (much as I hold the weaker Aussies against Court, the Martina factor against Chris and Seles and what happened to her against Steffi) but that leads to my question about whether we are talking about peak level of play or achievement or some combination of both. If we went just based on achievement the answer is one pretty obvious one for both men and women, if its peak, its more difficult to pinpoint, and the same with both. People measure great in different ways and I want to know what exactly "greatest" here.
As for what Martina was in her younger days, its disappointing, she likely could have won a lot more had she whipped herself into shape sooner, Chris knocking her around all over the place all the time it seemed for so long finally motivated her, if she had done that earlier, she may have won more, or burned out and won less or who knows, you can't really tell.
Well if the Australian and French had been more valued by players in the 70s Evert might have won close to 25 slams as she was the player to beat on all surfaces nearly all that time, and untouchable on clay.
If Graf hadnt had so many injuries throughout her career she probably would have won close to 30 slams. And while injuries arent the same as a stabbing of course I would be willing to bet if you remove both Graf still ends up with more than her current 22.
If Court didnt take all those pregnancy breaks she would have probably won over 30 slams. And if the Aussie was a fully attended slam but didnt have all those pregnancy breaks and the temporary retirement before those I still bet she has more than he current 24.
And all those seem like better excuses than just choosing to be out of shape when you should have been in shape. Just saying....
If Graf hadnt had so many injuries throughout her career she probably would have won close to 30 slams. And while injuries arent the same as a stabbing of course I would be willing to bet if you remove both Graf still ends up with more than her current 22.
If Court didnt take all those pregnancy breaks she would have probably won over 30 slams. And if the Aussie was a fully attended slam but didnt have all those pregnancy breaks and the temporary retirement before those I still bet she has more than he current 24.
And all those seem like better excuses than just choosing to be out of shape when you should have been in shape. Just saying....
Last edited:
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Not MORE than perfect: "better", just meaning that I prefer moving and humane to the cold, abstract concept of "perfect".
I agree when Martina says Rafa may surpass Fed. I've always thought he could.
The "doat" comment was a joke obviously.
There are 2 different issues here: favorite player (for me that's Rafa and it has to do with his style and personality more than his records, although records are always nice too) and then GOAT: one and only one since the beginning of the sport. There are plenty of records that Fed doesn't have: most year ends at #1, calendar slam, most titles, etc. My opinion is that no player has ALL the records, so there is no such thing as a unique and definitive GOAT.
DeShaun
Banned
I vote Martina and Rod. Steffi is more beautiful than Martina, but not a better tennis player. Roger may have achieved more than Rod depending on how you count the hardware, and these two are close, in talent level, in my opinion (with Rafa being in the room too) but Laver played such brilliant tennis, like Roger, yet seemed steely in big moments, too, like Rafa. I vote Rod and Martina. Martina's got tons upon tons of hardware, lots of which albeit she gathered through her doubles play...but hey.
A lot of people on this board are also kids or idiots.
If the question was worded this way:
We've polled 400 tennis experts, 100 each of....
- Tennis Commentators & Journalists
- Tennis Greats - all former top 10 players
- Current ATP & WTA players
- Coaches of note - National coaches, coaches of former Top 10 players
Exactly how many people would put their money where their fandom is and choose Nadal?
I'm not saying things might not be different in 5 year's time, but as at now, I'd be hardly anyone would be brave or stupid enough to seriously choose Nadal.
kiki
Banned
men:
1-.Laver
2-.Borg
3-.federer
4-.sampras
5-.mc
6-.Connors
7-.Lendl
8-.Nadal
9-.Agassi
10-.Becker
11-.Edberg
12-.Wilander
13-.Rosewall
14-.Newcombe
15-.Safin
16-.Courier
women:
1-.Navratilova
2-.Graf
3-.Serena
4-.Venus
5-.Court
6-.King
7-.Evert
8-.Henin
9-.Seles
10-.Hingis
11-.Goolagong
12-.Sharapova
13-.Kuznetsova
14.-Clijsters
15-.Mandlikova
16-.Sanchez Vicario
Those are the seeds players in a contest from 1968 to 2010
1-.Laver
2-.Borg
3-.federer
4-.sampras
5-.mc
6-.Connors
7-.Lendl
8-.Nadal
9-.Agassi
10-.Becker
11-.Edberg
12-.Wilander
13-.Rosewall
14-.Newcombe
15-.Safin
16-.Courier
women:
1-.Navratilova
2-.Graf
3-.Serena
4-.Venus
5-.Court
6-.King
7-.Evert
8-.Henin
9-.Seles
10-.Hingis
11-.Goolagong
12-.Sharapova
13-.Kuznetsova
14.-Clijsters
15-.Mandlikova
16-.Sanchez Vicario
Those are the seeds players in a contest from 1968 to 2010
Manus Domini
Hall of Fame
kiki has it about right, but I would switch fed, sampras and borg's order a little
kiki
Banned
I agree on your list&explanation.I just miss 2 names: underachieving Lew Hoad and overachieving Roy Emerson ( just be/c we need to be respectful to his record , even when pros didn´t play him).I also would include Wilander and Agassi again for the same reason.
Ladies: I miss BJK and Maria Esther Bueno, as well as the 2 Williams ( not likeable at all, but a heck of tennis player).Hingis and Henin, could also challenge considering only talent.
borg number one
Legend
As of today, if I had to list a top 10, I'll go with this order:
1. Borg
2. Laver
3. Federer
4. Sampras
5. Gonzalez
6. Rosewall
7. Connors
8. Rafael Nadal
9. John McEnroe
10. Ivan Lendl
Note: I put Lendl at 10, but I would take Don Budge at 10, if I removed Lendl.
1. Borg
2. Laver
3. Federer
4. Sampras
5. Gonzalez
6. Rosewall
7. Connors
8. Rafael Nadal
9. John McEnroe
10. Ivan Lendl
Note: I put Lendl at 10, but I would take Don Budge at 10, if I removed Lendl.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
