Mentally toughest player in Open era.

[skaj]

That was a work of fiction.

You do realise that the Exhibition match between Riggs and King was played with the background of Riggs owing a huge sum of money in gambling debts at the time. Riggs was never going to win that match. The whole thing was a sham.

As for Smith-Court's "Mental Prowess", let's stick to REAL tennis, not Exhibition shams .....

Smith-Court was the first female player to win the GRAND SLAM in the Open Era. And she was the first Mother to win a Major Title.

I merely said that you would enjoy the film where the characters are stating that Court is unlike King not that tough mentally, it wasn't an argument of any kind.

And your arguments are the clips of Court's wins against Evert and King? Or that she was the first to win the grand slam in the Open Era(at the very beginning of the Open Era )? Or that she was the first mother to win a major?

 

[skaj]

Agree with most of those. The ones I disagree with would be:

3. Nadal- Mental toughness is overrated. Always comes up with fake injuries to have excuses in case he loses, hardly a sign of mental toughness.

4. Borg- Only half disagree. He quit when he had someone getting the better of him (McEnroe) which looks weak. However he exhibited such mental toughenss up until then I can mostly forgive that.

6. Serena- I am on the fence on her. She won more slams after saving match point than anyone in history but she also has had some massive meltdowns which shows her mental breaking down badly and unable to keep her composure in adversity. Her massive struggle to reach #24, choking in slam final after slam final, and her bigtime choke vs Vinci when going for the Grand Slam in 2015 are not pluses in mental toughness either.

9. Graf- Definitely overrated mentally. Big chokes in many big matches in her career- 86 U.S Open semis vs Navratilova, 86 French Open quarters vs Mandlikova (she could have won both those events without choking when about to put away both those matches), 89 French Open final vs Sanchez which was a bigtime choke when it prevented the Double Grand Slam. The end of the 92 French Open final vs Seles when after fighting her way back into the match she got super tenative and made errors the last 3 games from 8-7 up to lose. 94 U.S open final vs Sanchez, even if injury were a possible factor, bigtime choke at the end of the 2nd and 3rd sets. The 90 French final vs Seles and 90 U.S Open final vs Sabatini had some real choking too, especialy in the 1st set tiebreak vs Seles and 2nd set tiebreak vs Sabatini, both finals which she probably wins otherwise especialy as Sabatini was badly out of game. She wouldn't even make my top 20 in this.

You have some good arguments, but it is really difficult to rank them in the "right" order.

I would also like to mention post-child birth Clijsters.

 

[Karma Tennis]

And your arguments are the clips of Court's wins against Evert and King? Or that she was the first to win the grand slam in the Open Era(at the very beginning of the Open Era )? Or that she was the first mother to win a major?

No argument at all. Simply pointing out the view that a lot of Mental Toughness is required to beat King at Wimbledon or Evert at Roland Garros. And a lot of Mental Toughness is also required to win a Major as a mother - something many others along with Serena have been unable to achieve.

Smith-Court played with the added burden of being Australian, having to be away from home for many months at a time.

Also, referring to the "Open Era" with regards to the Women's game is a bit of a misnomer. I simply referred to it to keep things simple as so many seem to be obsessed with the idea of the "Open Era". (Maureen Connolly was the first women to achieve the GRAND SLAM.)

 

[BTURNER]

That was a work of fiction.

You do realise that the Exhibition match between Riggs and King was played with the background of Riggs owing a huge sum of money in gambling debts at the time. Riggs was never going to win that match. The whole thing was a sham.

As for Smith-Court's "Mental Prowess", let's stick to REAL tennis, not Exhibition shams .....

Smith-Court was the first female player to win the GRAND SLAM in the Open Era. And she was the first Mother to win a Major Title.

That Court -Evert match is so misunderstood. This was not that much of an upset at all. Evert was undoubtedly seen as extremely dangerous, and a serious contender for this title, but Court was really the favorite and #1 seed at the beginning of that tournament despite having lost to Evert on Har Tru clay. Margaret was the winner of four prior RG titles, with tons of experience playing both in Europe and on slow red clay. Chris had never played in at RG, never played outside the states, , never played a Grand Slam final, and never played on slow red clay before she played this French Open. Evert lost her first Italian championship just a few weeks later to Evonne in the same circumstances, only Goolagong did so in straight sets. While everyone saw this Court/ Evert match-up as the match of the tournament, Chrissie was pretty green still. 'As for Margaret, well she clearly had the best clay game prior to Evert's ascendency directly after this European season.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

I would say Nadal if Djokovic didn't exist...

 

[Drob]

This thread was created 11 years ago and the ballot is 11 years old. Should be updated definitely

 

[Karma Tennis]

While everyone saw this Court/ Evert match-up as the match of the tournament, Chrissie was pretty green still

It is a lot tougher mentally to remain at the Top than it is to get to the Top. That's what makes the last 15 years and the success of the Big 4 so astounding. They have taken on All Comers - young and old - and are still dominating the Game.

 

[skaj]

No argument at all. Simply pointing out the view that a lot of Mental Toughness is required to beat King at Wimbledon or Evert at Roland Garros. And a lot of Mental Toughness is also required to win a Major as a mother - something many others along with Serena have been unable to achieve.

Smith-Court played with the added burden of being Australian, having to be away from home for many months at a time.

Also, referring to the "Open Era" with regards to the Women's game is a bit of a misnomer. I simply referred to it to keep things simple as so many seem to be obsessed with the idea of the "Open Era". (Maureen Connolly was the first women to achieve the GRAND SLAM.)

No argument, and than you explain that it was - an argument for Court's mental toughness. She beat King in Wimbledon once(on grass, with a bigger serve, after 7 match points), and teen Evert in her first grand slam finals. And she won a major as a mother, I don't see a correlation between the two(btw in a totally different era, against totally different lesser opponents). Other players are not away from home for many months a year?

 

[BTURNER]

It is a lot tougher mentally to remain at the Top than it is to get to the Top. That's what makes the last 15 years and the success of the Big 4 so astounding. They have taken on All Comers - young and old - and are still dominating the Game.

My point is that nobody saw Goolagong's victory against Evert on the same surfac, by a far easier margin, a few weeks later as some great defining moment of her career. That is because Evonne had not managed to lose to an even younger Evert on green clay twice before her Italian win. Margaret won a match she should have seeded 1, after losing in straight sets three times in a row to the same lass, when she should not have.

 

[Karma Tennis]

Other players are not away from home for many months a year?

Europe to North America (6 hours flying time.)
Australia to North America (20 to 25 Hours flying time)
Australia to Europe (20 to 25 Hours flying time)

Most Tournaments are staged in Europe and North America. (The AO is staged at the start of the Season. One trip out and back for most players.)
Most Australian players have bases in Europe or NA. I don't know of any non Australian players who have a base in Australia.

You appear to be very anti Margaret Smith-Court ... but the results speak for themselves. AND she still leads the way with a GRAND SLAM AND 24 Major Titles. And before you start negating her achievements ... a player can only beat who they play against.

 

[skaj]

Europe to North America (6 hours flying time.)
Australia to North America (20 to 25 Hours flying time)
Australia to Europe (20 to 25 Hours flying time)

Most Tournaments are staged in Europe and North America. (The AO is staged at the start of the Season. One trip out and back for most players.)
Most Australian players have bases in Europe or NA. I don't know of any non Australian players who have a base in Australia.

You appear to be very anti Margaret Smith-Court ... but the results speak for themselves. AND she still leads the way with a GRAND SLAM AND 24 Major Titles. And before you start negating her achievements ... a player can only beat who they play against.

And you apparently tend to get to wrong conclusions.
Now, let's get back to the topic which is mental toughness, not who won the most slams, nor who was physically prepared the best in order to overcome the exhaustion from constant travelling.

 

[indigo81]

We need to agree on what is meant by strongly mentally
if you mean coldness and ability to maintain lucidity in crucial moments
if you mean the ability to face negative moments during the match and refuse the failure (Go on tennis court and fight for your life)

 

[SamprasisGOAT]

Sampras
Borg
Connors

In that order

 

[Karma Tennis]

And you apparently tend to get to wrong conclusions.
Now, let's get back to the topic which is mental toughness, not who won the most slams, nor who was physically prepared the best in order to overcome the exhaustion from constant travelling.

Well your reply is simplistic at best and idiotic at worst.

Constant travelling takes a physical and mental toll on all human beings. It should be obvious, even to you, that what goes on away from the court has as much impact on a player's mental state, if not more, than anything that happens on the court.

We need to agree on what is meant by strongly mentally

Easy. The ability to formulate a solution to the problem one is presented with.

 

[skaj]

Well your reply is simplistic at best and idiotic at worst.

Constant travelling takes a physical and mental toll on all human beings. It should be obvious, even to you, that what goes on away from the court has as much impact on a player's mental state, if not more, than anything that happens on the court.



Easy. The ability to formulate a solution to the problem one is presented with.

And why exactly is MY reply simplistic and idiotic?
Speaking of simplistic and idiotic, your reply regarding the mental toughness of Court is that she had to travel a lot more and it influences mental state. Or she won more slams than anyone... Do you even understand what I am talking about here? Judging from your previous responses I suspect that you don't, so in that case I will explain it to you in more details.

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

Pete "Break point down and second serve? Pfff Ace! LMAO!" Sampras

 

[longtimelurker]

 

[BTURNER]

i don't think so because he is too good. Guys who are too good don't need to be mentally tough to win matches. Their weapons will do the job. It's the guys who have weaknesses in their games who need to be mentally tough to win matches.

This is how I look at it. I ask myself which weapons did not determine the wins in a career, and that sort of leaves only a couple of options for what did determine the wins in a career. If you are wondering how a champion keeps 'getting away with it', because the magic is not easily seen or documented, chances are high that something much less tangible, did a lot of the heavy lifting.

 

[Karma Tennis]

your reply regarding the mental toughness of Court is that she had to travel a lot more and it influences mental state.

Unless you are an Australian, you have absolutely no idea what Australian sports people in the 1950s, 1960, and 1970s had to endure in order to perform at a consistently high level on the World Stage. In the 50s and 60s Australia might as well have been on the Moon.

Even today, it is extremely difficult for Australians to get to those high levels for much the same reasons. The rest of the World is still many many hours away on a Plane. It is very difficult for Australian juniors unless they leave Australia and base themselves overseas - very expensive and very mentally tough. That in itself is one reason why guys like Kyrgios and Tomic have such a rough time. Even Ash Barty took a couple of years away from the sport because of the travelling. On the other hand, Alex De Minaur spent a lot of time in Europe and his results reflect that.

Laver and Court's achievement have to be elevated to an even higher level because of that. But I guess you will never see that because it doesn't fit your agenda. Never mind.

 

[skaj]

Unless you are an Australian, you have absolutely no idea what Australian sports people in the 1950s, 1960, and 1970s had to endure in order to perform at a consistently high level on the World Stage. In the 50s and 60s Australia might as well have been on the Moon.

Even today, it is extremely difficult for Australians to get to those high levels for much the same reasons. The rest of the World is still many many hours away on a Plane. It is very difficult for Australian juniors unless they leave Australia and base themselves overseas - very expensive and very mentally tough. That in itself is one reason why guys like Kyrgios and Tomic have such a rough time. Even Ash Barty took a couple of years away from the sport because of the travelling. On the other hand, Alex De Minaur spent a lot of time in Europe and his results reflect that.

Laver and Court's achievement have to be elevated to an even higher level because of that. But I guess you will never see that because it doesn't fit your agenda. Never mind.

My agenda? I advise you not to analyse me here, not just because you are bad at it but because I am not the topic. Instead maybe you should try to find better arguments for Court's mental toughness than the fact that she is Australian.

Btw I love Australia, prefer it to the USA, and have nothing against Margaret Court...

 

[Karma Tennis]

Instead maybe you should try to find better arguments for Court's mental toughness than the fact that she is Australian.

Have you read any of the books written on her at the time she was a Tennis player? Have you read Margaret's autobiographies? Listened to any of her interviews, especially during the time she was playing?

Same for Evonne?

 

[BTURNER]

The only knock I ever read about Court from contemporaries like Wade or King etc, was that if you could somehow manage to keep the score tight, keep the pressure on late in the sets, Margaret's nerves might falter. You might be handed an extra error here or there or a double that Court would hardly ever provide otherwise. Now its very easy to exaggerate that kind of thing. Clearly a woman with her record in finals, with her astonishing consistency before she ever gets to the final, has to be incredibly mentally resilient in close, tough matches. Whatever they are remembering, has to be about a point here or there, in a match here or there because this woman knew how to bring her big guns to bear in tight matches.

Still, a woman as technically and tactically as solid as Margaret was, who was as fast and strong as Margaret was, with the kinds of weapons she had, had some losses that are hard to explain away, especially at Wimbledon so I think these quotes probably had a seed of truth to them. Its interesting to compare Court with King because King has the reputation of being the mentally stronger of the two. Not sure I see it that way.

King had this astonishing capacity to focus on matches that really mattered to her. If she was playing on Centre court or at Forest Hills or in a Fed Cup match, she was incredibly hard to beat because she wanted so keenly to win, knew where the big points were in a match, and she kept a very clear sense of what she intended to do in them. She lived for those moments in those matches. On the other hand, she put in a lot of lackluster tennis around those matches. She was by temperament impatient and mercurial, and there were plenty of matches in her career where she simply did not put in her best mental effort and sustain it throughout. She got sloppy and tad less 'invested' if the tournament was smaller, or she was tired or burned out.

Margaret was much more disciplined day in, day out than King. She may put in a (for her) subpar performance, but she never put in an indifferent one. The Aussie was virtually impossible to take down early in tournaments, regardless of surface, weather or opponent because she played the percentages with just rock solid tennis shots firing from rock solid technique and tactics. Not much could go wrong with her game, and because she was such a good athlete, so physically strong that it was very hard to find a way to impose one's game on her enough that she would have reason to feel mental pressure, let alone respond to it.

 

[King No1e]

Can't speak for women's tennis, since I know less about women's tennis than Federer does about converting break points.

Speaking of converting break points, that's one of the reasons I consider Rafael Nadal the mentally toughest player of the Open Era (I guess OP didn't intend to count Laver in this). He's an absolute warrior, clutch when it matters most. He can play against an opponent playing 2-3 levels better than him, and come out on top because he won the big points. If I had to pick one player to play for my life, it would be Rafa Nadal.

Pete Sampras a close 2nd due to his "balls of steel" 2nd serve and his ruthless efficiency on big points.

 

[Karma Tennis]

If I had to pick one player to play for my life, it would be Rafa Nadal.

Really, over Bjorn Borg?

 

[EllieK]

I had toss up between Borg and Nadal. Perhaps recency bias had me pick Nadal

 

[SamprasisGOAT]

Nadal was like 30 votes behind Sampras and Borg and now the modern day tennis clowns have shown up.

 

[King No1e]

Really, over Bjorn Borg?

I'd go Laver >>> Nadal > Sampras > Borg, with Djokovic a little behind.
Although I could see a case for any of those 4 to be GMGOAT (greatest mental giant of all time).

 

[King No1e]

Sampras
Borg
Nadal
Graf
S. Williams

Name 10/10
Avatar 10/10

 

[Karma Tennis]

I'd go Laver >>> Nadal > Sampras > Borg, with Djokovic a little behind.

That is a great list. All possess incredible mental prowess on the Tennis court. The only question mark is the physical side.

Remember, Laver is a lot shorter than the other players. And most of the matches Laver played in often involved very short points. (It is true however that he played many Best of 5 Advantage Set Format matches.)

Main reason I pick Borg is because I think his game style straddles the "Good Old Days" and the "Modern Era". Not sure Nadal could do what he does with a 75 hooped woodie. Sampras would be the same with a woodie but his medical condition would probably impact him in the longer term.

Borg and Djokovic definitely have the right physique to be top pick on all surfaces in all formats. But I think Djokovic can get a little more "volatile" more often than Borg did. So for me it would probably be ...

Borg, Djokovic, Nadal, Sampras, Laver. (Talking about ONE MATCH, WINNER TAKE ALL, FOR THE PLANET!)

 

[hoodjem]

Is mental toughness the same as unemotional stoicism?

If not, then Gonzales.?

 

[PDJ]

Is mental toughness the same as unemotional stoicism?

If not, then Gonzales.?

That would also refer to Evert

 

[NonP]

You jokers are talking mental strength like there's only one kind when in reality you need all kinds of mojo to succeed. Here are the correct choices, men only (if much of this looks like my now-gone 100% definitive GOAT list*, that's because I did steal from my genius brain factory):

Clutchest, big match - Sampras
Clutchest, year-round - Borg
Never-Say-Diest - Chang, with honorable mention to Nadal
Outside-the-Comfort-Zonest - Djokovic
Smartest - Wilander
Opportunistest - Laver
(Energizer) Bunniest - Rosewall or Tilden
Tennis-Infatuatedest - Federer
Scariest - Gonzales by a light-year (read about his numerous on-court explosions if you're skeptical)
Iciest - Borg
Dirtiest - Connors (again with all due respect to Nasty)
Petulantest/Loudest - McEnroe
Svengaliest - Kramer
Hustlerest - Riggs
Evilest - Goold

*I'm keeping it PG-13 this time lest I be subjected to yet another deletion-ax treatment.

 

[skaj]

You jokers are talking mental strength like there's only one kind when in reality you need all kinds of mojo to succeed. Here are the correct choices, men only (if much of this looks like my now-gone 100% definitive GOAT list*, that's because I did steal from my genius brain factory):

Clutchest, big match - Sampras
Clutchest, year-round - Borg
Never-Say-Diest - Chang, with honorable mention to Nadal
Outside-the-Comfort-Zonest - Djokovic
Smartest - Wilander
Opportunistest - Laver
(Energizer) Bunniest - Rosewall or Tilden
Tennis-Infatuatedest - Federer
Scariest - Gonzales by a light-year (read about his numerous on-court explosions if you're skeptical)
Iciest - Borg
Dirtiest - Connors (again with all due respect to Nasty)
Petulantest/Loudest - McEnroe
Svengaliest - Kramer
Hustlerest - Riggs
Evilest - Goold

*I'm keeping it PG-13 this time lest I be subjected to yet another deletion-ax treatment.

Smartest - Rios or Nalbandian. Rosewall, Mecir, Santoro, Stepanek are also better candidates for this category than Wilander. (or maybe I just can't put smart and Mats in the same sentence ever since he became a commentator)

 

[Karma Tennis]

Dirtiest - Connors (again with all due respect to Nasty)

What is this sheet!?

I said, what is this SHEET!?

 

[WestboroChe]

This is a shoe in vote for Sampras..I mean just look at all of 40-15's he was down by and escaped..the guy was nearly invincible at coming back at these.

Or what about that win over Courier in the AO where he was physically sick because he coach had suddenly become (terminally) ill?

 

[Tshooter]

Nadal was like 30 votes behind Sampras and Borg and now the modern day tennis clowns have shown up.

I vote Nadal and I've been a tennis clown for a long time. Borg isn't even in the equation for me. Pete was tough as nails but I still give it to Nadal.

 

[Tshooter]

...Even today, it is extremely difficult for Australians to get to those high levels for much the same reasons....

 

[Karma Tennis]

I have always said that Nick would have conquered the tennis world a lot more quickly if he had played Lefty !

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Or what about that win over Courier in the AO where he was physically sick because he coach had suddenly become (terminally) ill?

You're confusing 1995 AO QF vs Courier (emotional disarray after learning Gullikson had brain cancer) and 1996 USO QF vs Corretja (completely exhausted and sick at the end of a grueling match). Both were epic though.

 

[Enceladus]

Also, referring to the "Open Era" with regards to the Women's game is a bit of a misnomer. I simply referred to it to keep things simple as so many seem to be obsessed with the idea of the "Open Era". (Maureen Connolly was the first women to achieve the GRAND SLAM.)

Open era in women's tennis is not a mistake, but a slightly different factor than in the men's tennis. Unlike male tennis, female tennis did not have a parallel pro-tour before 1968, but that doesn't mean that it didn't lose players. A few female tennis players prematurely ended their career for financial reasons, although they achieved great results in amateur tournaments.
Althea Gibson's commentary on her situation in the women's tennis before 1968 is eloquent:

Spoiler

"The truth, to put it bluntly, is that my finances were in heartbreaking shape," she wrote. "Being the Queen of Tennis is all well and good, but you can't eat a crown. Nor can you send the Internal Revenue Service a throne clipped to their tax forms. The landlord and grocer and tax collector are funny that way: they like cold cash ... I reign over an empty bank account, and I'm not going to fill it by playing amateur tennis."

 

[Enceladus]

For me, the mentally toughest player is Sampras (I rate tennis players whose entire career has been in the Open Era), followed by Borg, Connors, Nadal and Djokovic. All were/are mentally very strong, but Sampras stands out in that he didn't have a complex from his rival (like Borg from McEnroe or Nadal from Djokovic) and was resistant to chokes (except for the USO 1992 final against Edberg, where he could win third set and go to lead 2-1 to sets, but lost the set in TB and lost in four sets; but this match was before the Pete's prime era; this match forced Pete to be a better player).

 

[Karma Tennis]

Sampras stands out in that he didn't have a complex from his rival

So you don't think that it irked Sampras that Agassi achieved the Career GRAND SLAM? What about what Agassi said in his book about Sampras and money?

and was resistant to chokes

But Pete was such a dominant player during his peak years and his biggest weapon was his Serve (a closed skill), the likelihood that he would choke under those circumstances was small.

 

[JasonZ]

Borg was not mentally tough, Mc Enroe was

 

[hoodjem]

What is this sheet!?

I said, what is this SHEET!?

Quick Jimmy, rub out that mark before the umpire can get there to check it.

 

[Enceladus]

So you don't think that it irked Sampras that Agassi achieved the Career GRAND SLAM?

Clay didn't suit Sampras' style of play. And Agassi was fortunate that in the 1990s there was no dominant clay player like Borg or Nadal.

What about what Agassi said in his book about Sampras and money?

How does this question relate to mental power in tennis? Lol

But Pete was such a dominant player during his peak years and his biggest weapon was his Serve (a closed skill), the likelihood that he would choke under those circumstances was small.

In tennis, you need weapons to succeed unless you're called Mats Wilander, whose biggest weapon was his brain, i.e tactical maturity. Sampras wouldn't be so successful if he didn't have his excellent service, but similarly Nadal wouldn't be so successful if he didn't have his excellent forehand, or Djokovic wouldn't be so successful if he didn't have such a excellent backhand.

 

[WestboroChe]

You're confusing 1995 AO QF vs Courier (emotional disarray after learning Gullikson had brain cancer) and 1996 USO QF vs Corretja (completely exhausted and sick at the end of a grueling match). Both were epic though.

I seem to recall him doubling over at one point but I’ll admit I haven’t watched it in a while. I doubt I’m confusing the two as the 96 match you mentioned I don’t recall at all.

 

[WestboroChe]

Clay didn't suit Sampras' style of play. And Agassi was fortunate that in the 1990s there was no dominant clay player like Borg or Nadal.


How does this question relate to mental power in tennis? Lol


In tennis, you need weapons to succeed unless you're called Mats Wilander, whose biggest weapon was his brain, i.e tactical maturity. Sampras wouldn't be so successful if he didn't have his excellent service, but similarly Nadal wouldn't be so successful if he didn't have his excellent forehand, or Djokovic wouldn't be so successful if he didn't have such a excellent backhand.

Mats’ biggest weapon was his ability to put his opponent to sleep.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I seem to recall him doubling over at one point but I’ll admit I haven’t watched it in a while. I doubt I’m confusing the two as the 96 match you mentioned I don’t recall at all.

I've watched both about a year ago and remember well, no ailment in '95 it was all emotional, Pete had to wipe his eyes before every point but served as well as ever, fantastic.

 

[WestboroChe]

I've watched both about a year ago and remember well, no ailment in '95 it was all emotional, Pete had to wipe his eyes before every point but served as well as ever, fantastic.

Yes it was an amazing performance. I always hated Pete but after that match I just had to admit the guy was nails and no one was going to unseat him from the top for a while.

 

[GuyForget]

Yeah, 5 wimbledons still doesn't cut it. Just you remember that 'Federer'..

by decade: Borg, Wilander, Sampras, Nadal, Djokovic