If we take away the biggest weapon..

The-Champ

Legend
If we take away the biggest weapon of those we consider tennis greats, those who won more than 4 slams, and put them all in the years 1990-2000, and they are the only people present in every tournament. Who would dominate?


1. Sampras and Becker have Chang's serve.
2. Agassi and Lendl have Berasategui's backhand.
3. Nadal, Borg, Wilander, Connors and Federer have the footwork and quickness of Karlovic.
4. Johnny Mac, Laver and Edberg volley like Roddick


Who would dominate the slams?
 
Last edited:
If we take away the biggest weapon of those we consider tennis greats, those who won more than 4 slams, and put them all in the years 1990-2000, and they are the only people present in every tournament. Who would dominate?


1. Sampras and Becker has Chang's serve.
2. Agassi and Lendl have Berasategui's backhand.
3. Nadal, Borg, Wilander, Connors and Federer have the footwork and quickness of Karlovic.
4. Johnny Mac, Laver and Edberg volley like Roddick


Who would dominate the slams?
That's rather insulting to Chang, Berasategui and Karlovic.
 

paulorenzo

Hall of Fame
If we take away the biggest weapon of those we consider tennis greats, those who won more than 4 slams, and put them all in the years 1990-2000, and they are the only people present in every tournament. Who would dominate?


1. Sampras and Becker have Chang's serve.
2. Agassi and Lendl have Berasategui's backhand.
3. Nadal, Borg, Wilander, Connors and Federer have the footwork and quickness of Karlovic.
4. Johnny Mac, Laver and Edberg volley like Roddick


Who would dominate the slams?
that would be one lackluster decade, for sure. :)

i would say Agassi also.
footwork is the most important aspect of tennis so, imo, nadal, borg, wilander, and federer would be out. the serve is the most imortant stroke, and its importance is definately amplified when we are talking about pete's, so without it, he may not have a lot of free points or seemingly easy put away volleys.

shaven-head andre had a good enough forehand to keep him alive. but not only that, he had footspeed and was supreme on the baseline when it came to hitting balls early.
 
D

Deleted member 21996

Guest
since you only take away agassi's backhand it would be easy for him to dominate whereas his forehand was massive as well... while none of the others had a second big weapon beside maybe Sampras forehand (on the run) and Lendl's forehand...
imo!
 

msc886

Professional
That's rather insulting to Chang, Berasategui and Karlovic.
I agree just because it's their weakness, doesn't mean its right to poke fun at it. It's better that 99% of the posters on this board. As for the topic at hand, the player with the best plan B will win, and I think all the players mentioned above will still fare quite well although they won't dominate.
 

paulorenzo

Hall of Fame
I don't know if I'd say that...

Remember that the current no.1 is clearly dominating and he has a serve which by pro standards is pretty average.
oh touche! how could i forget.
ahah, damn those old tennis books. :D

but you have to admit, his placement and that lefty hook to his ad-court serves balance things out in terms of speed.
 
Last edited:

ace-nelis

Rookie
hahaha lol,,
Well nobody on the list you made would have been the best. I would go for some1 like richard krajiceck ( if he would not be hurt as much as he was.)
 
Last edited:
Top