Laver: McEnroe, Sampras, Borg and Federer better than Nadal in the Open Era

John McEnroe isn't better than Nadal, and I'm not sure I buy that Borg was either. But, everyone is entitled to thier opinion.
 
Clarky21 said:
I think Fed is GOAT, but I also think Nadal should be rated higher on that list. Tennis_Hands is a dumb troll who does nothing but provoke Nadal fans with every single post he makes. Nadal fans can't be happy about a win or compliment him at all without Tennis_Hands and the rest of the usual suspects ruining it. Check out any Nadal match thread or any thread started about him and you will see what I mean. He deserves what he gets and if he can't take it well that's too bad.
Click to expand...

I think John McEnroe is too high on the list but it just goes to show you that everybody has his own biases even Rod Laver. McEnroe is a huge Laver lover and McEnroe states all of the time on the air that Laver is his idol. That must have something to do with placing McEnroe so high.
 
BobbyOne said:
Ignorant fellow, I have not critisized Laver in this post. I just wrote that Laver, as also Rosewall and others do, referred to peak play. Only an idiot would rank Hoad at first place regarding achievements. Are you an idiot? Do you know what Hoad achieved in comparison to Laver, Rosewall, Gonzalez, Tilden, Borg, Sampras and Federer?

But I have criticized Laver in another post for ranking Rosewall too low.

Note: Even a GOAT contender can err...
Click to expand...

BobbyOne,

you would be better off sticking to the places, where people have no sense of humour and don't want to read. Apparently you fit exactly this description.

IF you have read the thread and my opinions on the subject, you would have understood by now, that my opinion on the personal opinions of the past Greats is, that they are as much suceptible to agendas and personal bias as the least informed person on this board (well, maybe with a better overall level of sanity to them), and they are to be taken for what they are: a personal opinions, no matter how great the player was/is.

You didn't pay attention to the last line in my post, did you? Do you think, that it was placed there accidentally?

However, there was a jab in my post, directed to all those people, that gladly take the opinions of the past Greats as some kind of truth, that is set in stone, when their opinions support their own views/bias/agendas/whatever, and then proceed to say, that those same opinions might mean something different, when they don't.

And, don't worry. I devote enough time to the history of the game.

cc0509 said:
Clarky, you constantly state on here that Federer is greater than Nadal so why are you complaining about Laver's list which places Federer at number one?

I think you are starting to lose it. You are either bashing Nadal every minute on here or you are trying to claim he is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Which is it? Who should be number one according to you?
Click to expand...

Clarky doesn't get it.

1) it wasn't ment to be a serious remark, concerning the relevancy of Laver's lists

2) she is on my ignore list, so I get to see her posts, when someone else (like you in this case) quotes them

But, yeah, she is lost.
 
NadalAgassi said:
More likely he would log in under one of his few alternate accounts that has not yet been banned (eg- TMF, monfed, TennisMaze) and try to "support" himself.
Click to expand...

So me and TMF are the same person huh? Is this fact or your ageing brain playing tricks on you,Professor? :lol:
I guess spending almost a decade on this forum with different avatars has fried your brain. :lol:
 
monfed said:
So me and TMF are the same person huh? Is this fact or your ageing brain playing tricks on you,Professor? :lol:
I guess spending almost a decade on this forum with different avatars has fried your brain. :lol:
Click to expand...

hehehe Why you call him professor?
 
TMF said:
They have criticized other historians/experts like Steve Flink.

Yes, they think they are more knowledgeable than Laver.
Click to expand...

Mighty F., A man (Tennis Channel) who ranks Emerson ahead of Rosewall and Gonzalez can hardly be called an expert.

As far as I know Laver is great (probably the GOAT) because of his achievements as a tennis player, not for his ranking skills. But even Rocket knows exactly that Hoad has NOT achieved the most among the old players...
 
Tennis_Hands said:
BobbyOne,

you would be better off sticking to the places, where people have no sense of humour and don't want to read. Apparently you fit exactly this description.

IF you have read the thread and my opinions on the subject, you would have understood by now, that my opinion on the personal opinions of the past Greats is, that they are as much suceptible to agendas and personal bias as the least informed person on this board (well, maybe with a better overall level of sanity to them), and they are to be taken for what they are: a personal opinions, no matter how great the player was/is.

You didn't pay attention to the last line in my post, did you? Do you think, that it was placed there accidentally?

However, there was a jab in my post, directed to all those people, that gladly take the opinions of the past Greats as some kind of truth, that is set in stone, when their opinions support their own views/bias/agendas/whatever, and then proceed to say, that those same opinions might mean something different, when they don't.

And, don't worry. I devote enough time to the history of the game.



Clarky doesn't get it.

1) it wasn't ment to be a serious remark, concerning the relevancy of Laver's lists

2) she is on my ignore list, so I get to see her posts, when someone else (like you in this case) quotes them

But, yeah, she is lost.
Click to expand...

Tennis Hands, I agree mostly. Sorry for my harsh words.
 
Gonzo_style said:
Really?

Possible, I read it on Wikipedia

" After the 2012 Australian Open, Rod Laver came out with his greatest in the amateur and Open Era lists. Djokovic was ranked 6th and Nadal 5th on the Open Era list. Laver said the 2012 Australian Open final was a main reason for including both players"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Australian_Open_–_Men's_Singles_final#Legacy
Click to expand...

Well, the link provided in the OP is from the 25th of Jan. And the semis hadn't been played then. Hard to know for sure though - you've got a good source too.
 
zagor said:
Who do you think the great Rod Laver believes are the Top 10 Players of the Past and Present?

Here are his picks. (With his usual humility, he excludes himself, of course.)

Enjoy:

PAST
10. John Newcombe (AUS)
9. Jack Crawford (AUS)
8. Bobby Riggs (USA)
7. Ellsworth Vines (USA)
6. Ken Rosewall (AUS)
5. Fred Perry (GBR)
4. Don Budge (USA)
3. Pancho Gonzalez (USA)
2. Jack Kramer (USA)
1. Lew Hoad (AUS)

PRESENT (OPEN ERA)
10. Stefan Edberg (SWE)
9. Ivan Lendl (USA)
8. Jimmy Connors (USA)
7. Andre Agassi (USA)
6. Novak Djokovic (SER)
5. Rafael Nadal (ESP)
4. John McEnroe (USA)
3. Pete Sampras (USA)
2. Bjorn Borg (SWE)
1. Roger Federer (SUI)

http://timelesstennis.blogspot.com/2012/01/rod-lavers-top-10-from-past-and-present.html


Fed the best player of the Open Era, Lew Hoad of the pre Open era, and more.
Click to expand...

Frankly, I think Laver is spot on. I might tip Sampras over Borg and Nadal over McEnroe, but Laver clearly knows a thing or two about tennis. When did he make this assessment?
 
I agree about Lew Hoad from a qualitative perspective. much like Venus Williams, his peak is the highest I've seen on a court (youtube comes in real handy)...
 
DRII said:
I agree about Lew Hoad from a qualitative perspective. much like Venus Williams, his peak is the highest I've seen on a court (youtube comes in real handy)...
Click to expand...

From a few very brief youtube clips you've come to the conclusion his peak is the highest? Lolwut?
 
forzamilan90 said:
From a few very brief youtube clips you've come to the conclusion his peak is the highest? Lolwut?
Click to expand...

who told you the clips were brief :confused:

there are full mini documentaries on Hoad, and you don't have to take my word for it as Laver himself feels Hoad's peak level was the highest he's ever seen and I happen to concur...
 
Feather said:
How is talking sense only half the time pawning someone?
Click to expand...

half the time is still about 75% more of the time than the monfool-TMF-FakeDjokovicForWin-MotherMarjorie etc....poster ever made sense (which is something well below the zero mark)
 
This is silly .

Mcenroe never could win on clay

Borg never could win on HC

Lendl never even won Wimbledon .

Sampras never won on clay

Laver himself never played on Hard.

Finally Nadal has beaten the "goat" on every surface so many times
That it's embarrasing already.
 
The Dark Knight said:
This is silly .

Mcenroe never could win on clay

Borg never could win on HC

Lendl never even won Wimbledon .

Sampras never won on clay

Laver himself never played on Hard.

Finally Nadal has beaten the "goat" on every surface so many times
That it's embarrasing already.
Click to expand...

Bwahahaha!

So utterly predictable!

What happened to former tennis greats know the best? Or about seeing both sides of the argument?

I guess opinion of former tennis greats should be taken for granted only when it coincides with the opinion of The Dark Knight, internet poster extraordinare, otherwise they're "silly".
 
zagor said:
Bwahahaha!

So utterly predictable!

What happened to former tennis greats know the best? Or about seeing both sides of the argument?

I guess opinion of former tennis greats should be taken for granted only when it coincides with the opinion of The Dark Knight, internet poster extraordinare, otherwise they're "silly".
Click to expand...

Well to be quite frank we don't even know he said this ?

You click on the video and it's not there. There is no reference in any publication anywhere . It looks made up
 
To me the top players are always the top players of their time. I find it ludicrous to compare players from different tennis eras, they never played against each other while they were at their top so one cannot compare.

And the argument that XXX won grand slam YYY ZZZ times so he must be the best is also not convincing to me. Perhaps at one time there was less direct competition and vice versa if there were two super players in the same era each would win far less grand slam tournaments than if he were alone in that era.
 
The Dark Knight said:
Well to be quite frank we don't even know he said this ?

You click on the video and it's not there. There is no reference in any publication anywhere . It looks made up
Click to expand...

Right, do you have videos for all the articles you recently posted?

Here are TW threads on it from last year:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=410422

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=410420

But hey believe whatever you want to believe, your double standards are hilarious.

Also, here, another reference for "made" up list:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/archive/old-sport-pages/gallery-fn77kxzt-1226250654969?page=4
 
newpball said:
To me the top players are always the top players of their time. I find it ludicrous to compare players from different tennis eras, they never played against each other while they were at their top so one cannot compare.

And the argument that XXX won grand slam YYY ZZZ times so he must be the best is also not convincing to me. Perhaps at one time there was less direct competition and vice versa if there were two super players in the same era each would win far less grand slam tournaments than if he were alone in that era.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair points. But if this is the case, there's no point in claiming Sampras is better than Roddick. Or that Nadal is better clay courter than Sampras.
 
newpball said:
To me the top players are always the top players of their time. I find it ludicrous to compare players from different tennis eras, they never played against each other while they were at their top so one cannot compare.

And the argument that XXX won grand slam YYY ZZZ times so he must be the best is also not convincing to me. Perhaps at one time there was less direct competition and vice versa if there were two super players in the same era each would win far less grand slam tournaments than if he were alone in that era.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, you have a brain. Not very usual here though...
 
Chanwan said:
Nah, the list is from the 25th. Murray-Djoko was on the 28th, I believe.

It's really astounding he put Djoko at 6th - he had 4 slams and a WTF (and one of the best seasons ever) to show for it. That's better than Lendl, Connors etc?
Click to expand...
Djokos domination of Fedal 10-1 deserves all the praise he can get....
 
Laver seems to rate Djokovic very highly. Already in 2013 he thought Novak was above likes of agassi, Lendl Edberg etc. Wonder where he has him now after 4 in a row.

Otherwise a good list.
 
xFedal said:
Am not too sure about that.... But now he is top 5 all time.... What a legend Novak is ....
Click to expand...
not too sure about that either - all time that is. Laver, Pancho, Fed for sure in top 5. Then the next 2 are debatable.

But he is a legend, that's for sure. And he'll add to his legend too.
 
Chanwan said:
not too sure about that either - all time that is. Laver, Pancho, Fed for sure in top 5. Then the next 2 are debatable.

But he is a legend, that's for sure. And he'll add to his legend too.
Click to expand...
Laver is ahead of Novak because of his GrandSlam or because of his 7YE#1? If it's because his 7E#1 then thats fine....
 
Nadal was far superior to MAC or Borg and I dont see it being even close !!!!

Every shot NADAL has is far superior to Borg and Borg never won the USO
MAC had better volleys, of course, but MAC never won the French
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
xFedal said:
Ye ye but reason exactly do you rate him above Novak?
Click to expand...
He has 14 titles that I'd consider the rough equivalent of majors. That he managed to win the first two editions of Wimbledon in the Open Era is also very significant, because that was the Slam that everyone wanted at the time and he won it twice in a full field.

I do think Djokovic's achievement of winning 4 Slams in a row is more impressive than Laver's, though. But I don't place any importance on winning them in a row as opposed to winning them spaced out.
 
The_18th_Slam said:
He has 14 titles that I'd consider the rough equivalent of majors. That he managed to win the first two editions of Wimbledon in the Open Era is also very significant, because that was the Slam that everyone wanted at the time and he won it twice in a full field.

I do think Djokovic's achievement of winning 4 Slams in a row is more impressive than Laver's, though. But I don't place any importance on winning them in a row as opposed to winning them spaced out.
Click to expand...
What happens if Djokovic wins 14 slams?
 
zagor said:
Who do you think the great Rod Laver believes are the Top 10 Players of the Past and Present?

Here are his picks. (With his usual humility, he excludes himself, of course.)

Enjoy:

PAST
10. John Newcombe (AUS)
9. Jack Crawford (AUS)
8. Bobby Riggs (USA)
7. Ellsworth Vines (USA)
6. Ken Rosewall (AUS)
5. Fred Perry (GBR)
4. Don Budge (USA)
3. Pancho Gonzalez (USA)
2. Jack Kramer (USA)
1. Lew Hoad (AUS)

PRESENT (OPEN ERA)
10. Stefan Edberg (SWE)
9. Ivan Lendl (USA)
8. Jimmy Connors (USA)
7. Andre Agassi (USA)
6. Novak Djokovic (SER)
5. Rafael Nadal (ESP)
4. John McEnroe (USA)
3. Pete Sampras (USA)
2. Bjorn Borg (SWE)
1. Roger Federer (SUI)

http://timelesstennis.blogspot.com/2012/01/rod-lavers-top-10-from-past-and-present.html


Fed the best player of the Open Era, Lew Hoad of the pre Open era, and more.
Click to expand...


This is a very good list. Rafa and Djokovic are not done yet, so they have an opportunity to improve on their standing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

UnforcedTerror
Who do you think is the most underrated ATG?
Replies
49
Views
2K
killerboss
killerboss
T
Tennis Channel's "100 Greatest of All Time"
7 8 9
Replies
422
Views
74K
pmerk34
P
T
Roger Federer amazing stats.....
Replies
4
Views
1K
Megafanoftennis100
M
L
Brad Gilbert's Top 10 of the "Open Era"
Replies
0
Views
539
Limpinhitter
L
L
Brad Gilbert's top 10 Men of the "Open Era"
Replies
1
Views
343
Charlemagne
Charlemagne
Back
Top