Greatest USO player of all time?

[Fedex]

I agree that Sampras is getting the shaft, but I'd say some of the votes he should get are going to Connors. It seems that a lot of people vote for Federer just because he's Federer which I concede is very strange. For example, I'm a Federer fan, but I voted for Connors, and if this poll was only Fed and Sampras, I'd vote for Sampras based on his 2 extra finals over Fed. 5 in a row is pretty insane, but I'd still vote for Sampras considering you could make an opposite case for his time between his first and last titles as opposed to Federer's 5 year run.

Respect to the Steve for an honest opinion.
Obviously winning 5 titles spread out over a longer time before, during and after a player's prime is a greater achievement than 5 consecutive titles achieved all during a player's prime.
For instance, Federer's last Wimbledon title last year, to me, was the most impressive because he's managed to maintain a very high almost prime level standard way past the time of a player's normal traditional prime. That's far tougher to do.
Federer's had to work his butt off and really plan and sacrifice to be able to do that, and that more than anything proves just how talented and physically strong and resilient he is.
Borg for instance won 5 consecutive Wimbledon's then burnt out shortly afterwards. If he had won another Wimbledon age 31, that would be far more impressive than winning his 6th in a row age 26 when he's in his prime.
Thus the USO vote should go to Connors.

 

[Prisoner of Birth]

I voted for Connors too and Federer is my favorite player. When I made the poll, I wasn't sure, but after thinking on it, I am.

 

[Prisoner of Birth]

Borgie was the best ever non winner

Perhaps, but that's irrelevant to the topic.

 

[Gonzo_style]

Poll results shows that Federer is USO GOAT, discussion is over

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Poll results shows that Federer is USO GOAT, discussion is over

If we control the bias, the poll clearly shows that Connor is the USO GOAT :twisted:

 

[Devilito]

Poll results shows that Federer is USO GOAT, discussion is over

poll results show that most of the time people have no clue what planet they're on

 

[Fedex]

I voted for Connors too and Federer is my favorite player. When I made the poll, I wasn't sure, but after thinking on it, I am.

Refreshing to see people being unbiased.
What is also special about your Connors (USO) and Federer (Wimbledon) long lived types is what keeps them motivated?
Minimum requirement - extreme competitiveness and talent?

Edit: And extreme ego you might argue?

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Refreshing to see people being unbiased.
What is also special about your Connors (USO) and Federer (Wimbledon) long lived types is what keeps them motivated?
Minimum requirement - extreme competitiveness and talent?

Edit: And extreme ego you might argue?

In another thread I compiled the results of the three. It shows that Connors is the greatest by a good margin, whoever once favorite player is:

Connors at the USO:
5 titles, 2 finals, 7 SF, 3 QF. From 1973 to 1991 he missed only once the QF or better.

Sampras:
5 titles, 3 finals, 1SF, 1 QF.

Federer:
5 titles, 1 finals, 2 SF, 1QF. His titles were consecutive.

Lendl:
3 titles, 5 finals, 1 SF, 2 QF. He had the same consistency than Sampras, but struggled to win it.

I would say that Connors is the USOPen Goat by a good margin. He was a factor here for a freakin 20 years! Behind him Sampras and Fed are tied. Fed as the consecutive titles while Sampras has more finals. Fed is not done though. Lendl is not in the discussion, as he couldn't win the last match.

 

[Mustard]

I don't understand why Connors > Sampras. Same # of titles, except in fewer attempts for Sampras and more finals for Sampras as well.

Connors won 98 matches at the US Open. Look at their records below, and I think it's clear that Connors' record is the best:

Jimmy Connors
1970: Round of 128 Loser
1971: Round of 64 Loser
1972: Round of 128 Loser
1973: Quarter Final Loser
1974: CHAMPION
1975: Runner-up
1976: CHAMPION
1977: Runner-up
1978: CHAMPION
1979: Semi Final Loser
1980: Semi Final Loser
1981: Semi Final Loser
1982: CHAMPION
1983: CHAMPION
1984: Semi Final Loser
1985: Semi Final Loser
1986: Round of 32 Loser
1987: Semi Final Loser
1988: Quarter Final Loser
1989: Quarter Final Loser
1991: Semi Final Loser
1992: Round of 64 Loser

Pete Sampras
1988: Round of 128 Loser
1989: Round of 16 Loser
1990: CHAMPION
1991: Quarter Final Loser
1992: Runner-up
1993: CHAMPION
1994: Round of 16 Loser
1995: CHAMPION
1996: CHAMPION
1997: Round of 16 Loser
1998: Semi Final Loser
2000: Runner-up
2001: Runner-up
2002: CHAMPION

Roger Federer
2000: Round of 32 Loser
2001: Round of 16 Loser
2002: Round of 16 Loser
2003: Round of 16 Loser
2004: CHAMPION
2005: CHAMPION
2006: CHAMPION
2007: CHAMPION
2008: CHAMPION
2009: Runner-up
2010: Semi Final Loser
2011: Semi Final Loser
2012: Quarter Final Loser

 

[Gonzo_style]

If we control the bias, the poll clearly shows that Connor is the USO GOAT :twisted:

poll results show that most of the time people have no clue what planet they're on

Wrong, poll is objective way to find out who's the best in USO

 

[Start da Game]

sampras quite easily.......beat far better players and on a faster surface.......

 

[TMF]

sampras quite easily.......beat far better players and on a faster surface.......

But he got destroyed by Safin and Hewitt, who Roger crushed him in 2004 final.

 

[Start da Game]

But he got destroyed by Safin and Hewitt, who Roger crushed him in 2004 final.

30s federer can't even get to the final of us open.......

 

[TMF]

30s federer can't even get to the final of us open.......

Federe doesn't get demolished straight sets by a young players.

 

[Start da Game]

Federe doesn't get demolished straight sets by a young players.

that is irrelevant to this discussion.......we'll see first if he can get to the finals.......then only we can talk.......

 

[forzamilan90]

Don't bother arguing with him. He is a notorious troll/deluded person from MTF who got permabanned there.

As is 90s clay who also had a similar account SetSampras on ZmTF and GameSampras here

 

[tennis_pro]

I would have to give the nod to Connors. He won the US Open on 3 different surfaces, he even beat Borg there when it was on clay. 35 thousand SF in a row. Beat everyone who was to beat in his time. Made a semi aged 39. At 32 he pushed peakest of peaks McEnroe who was in the middle of a 82-3 year (arguably the best ever and some of the best tennis ever) to a 5th set.

If Federer wins US no 6 I would give it to him. Until then it's Jimbo and Fed-Sampras tied for 2nd (depending on what you value more - Sampras had more finals, Fed was dominant for a 5-6 year period winning 5 in a row)

 

[Tropikal_Knights]

Connors or Fed - a toss up

 

[Phoenix1983]

I say Sampras at the US.

5 titles (1 when a teenager, 3 in his dominant period and 1 when an old man) over a period of 12 years. Plus another 3 finals.

 

[Fiji]

Jimmy Connors.

 

[TMF]

If consecutive wins matter the most is the reason Nole is the goat at AO then Federer is the goat at the USO. The poll result reflects that argument.

 

[kiki]

Poll results shows that Federer is USO GOAT, discussion is over

in TT???? no, it is not possible¡¡¡

 

[arrowbar]

I would pick Sampras. I was going to say Connors but I realized his U.S Open finals from 75-77 were on mush clay, rather than true red clay, which make them less impressive.

 

[Mustard]

I would pick Sampras. I was going to say Connors but I realized his U.S Open finals from 75-77 were on mush clay, rather than true red clay, which make them less impressive.

How, exactly?

 

[arrowbar]

How, exactly?

Well they weren't a proper clay court. I think he would have struggled to win them more on real clay given his struggles at the French and lack of red clay titles. As you see he is losing this poll so most agree with me.

 

[Mustard]

Well they weren't a proper clay court. I think he would have struggled to win them more on real clay given his struggles at the French and lack of red clay titles. As you see he is losing this poll so most agree with me.

Connors didn't play at the French Open from 1974 to 1978. In 1974, he was banned from playing the French Open.

 

[Smasher08]

Connors didn't play at the French Open from 1974 to 1978. In 1974, he was banned from playing the French Open.

Given "arrowbar"'s prodigious posting -- all since yesterday afternoon -- it's reasonable to conclude that he's someone's alternate account.

Clearly someone who's been banned for trolling.

 

[chicagodude]

Lendl deserves a spot in this poll, imo. Sure, he 'only' won the USO 3x, but he made the final a staggering 8x in a row!

Besides that, Connors gets my vote, mainly due to his longevity. If Federer somehow manages to reach another 2 finals, he'l have my vote.

 

[Smasher08]

IMO here are the main contenders:

Sampras
W: 5
F: 3
Consec F+: 3
SF: 1
Consec SF+: 3
QF: 3
4R: 3
4R+: 13

Federer
W: 5
F: 1
Consec F+: 6
SF: 2
Consec SF+: 8
QF: 1
4R: 4
4R+: 13

Lendl
W: 3
F: 5
Consec F+: 8
SF: 1
Consec SF+: 8
QF: 3
4R: 1
4R+: 13

Connors
W: 5
F: 2
Consec F+: 5
SF: 7
Consec SF+: 12
QF: 3
4R: 0
4R+: 16


Any way you slice it it's Connors.

For Fed to overtake him, imo he'd need to win another trophy in addition to another SF or better.

 

[TennisCJC]

I had to go with Federer. 6 straight finals and winning 5 of 6 is pretty outrageous. Also, 5 in row is insane.

 

[90's Clay]

Looking back at all of tennis history now.. Tilden hands down.

The guy won 7 USO titles

 

[tennisaddict]

Looking back at all of tennis history now.. Tilden hands down.

The guy won 7 USO titles

Exactly, but how many were in the playing field and who were his competition ?

 

[McEnroeisanartist]

Gotta go with Federer. He has the open era highest sets winning percentage at the U.S. Open. 81.32% compared to Sthe second best, Sampras at 78.4%.

 

[NatF]

Looking back at all of tennis history now.. Tilden hands down.

The guy won 7 USO titles

Guess numbers are all that matter now to you?

 

[TMF]

Gotta go with Federer. He has the open era highest sets winning percentage at the U.S. Open. 81.32% compared to Sthe second best, Sampras at 78.4%.

And he did it without having home court advantage unlike Pete and Jimbo.

 

[90's Clay]

Exactly, but how many were in the playing field and who were his competition ?

All that matters to you Fed fans is the results, numbers, and stats. So why do you have a problem with someone winning 7 USO titles at the very top?

 

[NatF]

All that matters to you Fed fans is the results, numbers, and stats. So why do you have a problem with someone winning 7 USO titles at the very top?

Sorry but the 1920's can't compare to even the weakest years of the Open Era in terms of competition. How many international players were able to play the USO in the 20's?

 

[Mustard]

Sorry but the 1920's can't compare to even the weakest years of the Open Era in terms of competition. How many international players were able to play the USO in the 20's?

International players were free to play in the US Championships in the 1920s. Only professionals were barred, and the best players of the 1920s were amateurs. Bill Tilden turning professional in late 1930 was the first really big name to turn professional.

Bill Tilden is a GOAT candidate.

 

[NatF]

International players were free to play in the US Championships in the 1920s. Only professionals were barred, and the best players of the 1920s were amateurs. Bill Tilden turning professional in late 1930 was the first really big name to turn professional.

Bill Tilden is a GOAT candidate.

How many international players played though - not how many were allowed to enter. Sorry but the competition in the 1920's is inferior to anything modern. Tilden had a huge impact on the game and I rank him highly. But you can't compare his 7 USO's to the runs of Connors, Federer and Sampras.

 

[TMF]

All that matters to you Fed fans is the results, numbers, and stats. So why do you have a problem with someone winning 7 USO titles at the very top?

International players were free to play in the US Championships in the 1920s. Only professionals were barred, and the best players of the 1920s were amateurs. Bill Tilden turning professional in late 1930 was the first really big name to turn professional.

Bill Tilden is a GOAT candidate.

Tennis in the 1920s players were wearing long pants and women were wearing long dress. They look more suitable going to the prom. Not exactly what you expect from today's game that required the highest level.

 

[Mustard]

How many international players played though - not how many were allowed to enter. Sorry but the competition in the 1920's is inferior to anything modern. Tilden had a huge impact on the game and I rank him highly. But you can't compare his 7 USO's to the runs of Connors, Federer and Sampras.

As I've already said, The US Championships were open to players of all nationalities, and that had been the case since 1882. Only professional players were barred, until the open era began in 1968.

 

[NatF]

As I've already said, The US Championships were open to players of all nationalities, and that had been the case since 1882. Only professional players were barred, until the open era began in 1968.

Yes but how many people travelled across the oceans to take part. Thats what I was getting at.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Seriously ppl? Way too much emphasis on consecutive titles. That just shows a relatively short (5-6 year) dominance. I'm much more impressed with overall (lifetime) achievements. While RF is one of my all-time favorites, there is no way that he should be ahead of Pete, 70-30. It should be a lot closer than this, particularly since PS got to the finals 2 more times than RF. I went with JC ftw.

 

[Mustard]

Laurie Doherty of Britain was the first player to win both Wimbledon and the US Championships, in 1903. A huge achievement.

 

[roundiesee]

Connors winning all those U.S Opens on different surfaces, including clay which is his worst by far, is mighty impressive so I voted him. Had the U.S Open been on decoturf every year he probably would have 7 titles now as well.

Yes, agreed; perhaps the OP omitted to put that fact down? I'll go with Connors. Plus I think NY City absolutely adored him (at The Open anyway),

 

[MauricioDias]

Tennis in the 1920s players were wearing long pants and women were wearing long dress. They look more suitable going to the prom. Not exactly what you expect from today's game that required the highest level.

Nice picture indeed

 

[helloworld]

Sampras reached 8 USO Finals. Why is Federer winning the poll anyway?

 

[Mustard]

Sampras reached 8 USO Finals

Connors won 98 matches at the US Open.

 

[helloworld]

Connors won 98 matches at the US Open.

Not surprising given he played into his 40s...

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Sampras reached 8 USO Finals. Why is Federer winning the poll anyway?

Yeah, that was my primary point as well.

Connors won 98 matches at the US Open.

Not surprising given he played into his 40s...

Bur then he won the USO at 31 and kept doing fairly well after that -- reached the SF another 4x (as well as 2 more QFs). The last of those SF appearances was at the age of 39. Even tho' he continued to play pro tennis until he was 43, he stopped playing the USO and other slams after 40. He played on the pro tour for about a quarter of a century, some 10 yrs past his best slam years, and yet he still managed to win 85.2% of his matches at the USO.