Okay deciding GOAT is impossible but can we agree who is in the discussion?

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

According to Budge's book the match was played in 1957 so I was going with my memory of what Budge wrote.

However I believe you are correct that the tour was played in 1954. I should have known better than to believe totally what Budge writes. As I have discussed before, Budge always seems to make himself look better. It seems a lot more impressive that a man in his early forties can defeat an all time champion rather than a man in his late thirties.

I've read three quarters of his book and there are many errors. When I saw 1957 in your post I guessed you had read his book. He also wrote erroneously that Hoad was (as Crawford) one set short of the slam (Hoad only won one set in the Forest Hills final) in ... 1958 (instead of 1956). Other example he said that Parker won a decisive match against Quist in the Davis Cup Challenge Round in 1938 though it was Riggs.

 

[lambielspins]

There are 8 contenders: in no particular order Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, Sampras, Federer, Budge, Tilden, and Borg.

On the womens side there are 7 GOAT candidates IMO: Graf, Navratilova, Court, Evert, Lenglen, Wills Moody, and Connolly.

 

[sp00q]

I'll add Lendl in there too.

8 Grand Slam titles in 19 finals.
4 years at the no. 1.
Only player to regained the year-end no. 1 spot after losing it
Only player to have won at least 90% of his matches in 5 years.

 

[sp00q]

Pre WWI
William Renshaw
Lawrence Doherty and Reginald Doherty
Norman A. Brookes
Anthony Wilding

Between Wars
Bill Tilden
Don Budge

Post WWII
Pancho Gonzalez
Ken Rosewall
Rod Laver

Open Era
Björn Borg
Ivan Lendl
Pete Sampras
Roger Federer

 

[kOaMaster]

unfortunately sampras didnt have that honor to play his semis against del potro and then finals against soderling
most of his QF losses (if not all) came against multiple slam champions so...

well he did not only play those four games, right?

R64
Chang, Michael (USA)
19
1-6 1-6 1-6


R64
Champion, Thierry (FRA)
77
3-6 1-6 1-6


Q
Agassi, Andre (USA)
12
6-7(6) 2-6 1-6


Q
Bruguera, Sergi (ESP)
11
3-6 6-4 1-6 4-6


Q
Courier, Jim (USA)
7
4-6 7-5 4-6 4-6


R128
Schaller, Gilbert (AUT)
24
6-7(3) 6-4 7-6(4) 2-6 4-6


S
Kafelnikov, Yevgeny (RUS)
7
6-7(4) 0-6 2-6


R32
Norman, Magnus (SWE)
65
2-6 4-6 6-2 4-6


R64
Delgado, Ramon (PAR)
97
6-7(6) 3-6 4-6


R64
Medvedev, Andrei (UKR)
100
5-7 6-1 4-6 3-6


R128
Philippoussis, Mark (AUS)
25
6-4 5-7 6-7(4) 6-4 6-8


R64
Blanco, Galo (ESP)
76
6-7(4) 3-6 2-6


R128
Gaudenzi, Andrea (ITA)
69
6-3 4-6 2-6 6-7(3)

those are all the appearances Sampras' at RG from 89 to 02. Only in 90 he did no play.
Bruguera e.g. did win the french open AFTER he beat sampras. well, söderling went also all through to the finals after beating nadal, so he can't be that bad too?
neither agassi did win any grand slam before he won vs sampras.
what about losing in the first round in 95? or 97 vs norman?

 

[pc1]

I've read three quarters of his book and there are many errors. When I saw 1957 in your post I guessed you had read his book. He also wrote erroneously that Hoad was (as Crawford) one set short of the slam (Hoad only won one set in the Forest Hills final) in ... 1958 (instead of 1956). Other example he said that Parker won a decisive match against Quist in the Davis Cup Challenge Round in 1938 though it was Riggs.

Carlo,

There were a lot of errors in that book and as I have discussed with you in the past, I do wonder if the errors were not on purpose to make himself look better.

 

[grafrules]

unfortunately sampras didnt have that honor to play his semis against del potro and then finals against soderling
most of his QF losses (if not all) came against multiple slam champions so...

No he had the honor to play semis vs Woodbridge and finals against Pioline. Or semis vs Volkov and finals against Pioline. Yep thats such incredible opposition. Del Potro > Pioline no tour titles until I turned 27 and Soderling > some doubles specialist or some past his prime streaky dangerous floater.

By the way Del Potro will probably have a similar or better career than Kafelnikov who slaughtered Sampras for the loss of only 8 games in his only French Open semifinal. Del Potro playing the way he did at the French Open this year would crush Sampras 9 times out of 10 on clay.

 

[Danstevens]

5) Rafael Nadal:
For: Already 6 slams within 23 years. Dominates everyone including Roger.
Against: He may end up below 10 slams. Is a suspect on hard courts.

He certainly doesn't dominate Fed but he's without a doubt his strongest rival. I would just question as to whether he will be able to keep up his form for long enough and also, whether he's able enough to win on surfaces other than clay. OK - he's got 2 non-clay slams but certainly seems much weaker on other surfaces. There are also questions being asked about his ability to last.

Still, even if Nadal never won another slam, he'd still be right up there. Not in the greatest of all time group (yet) but maybe the second tier or great players. I believe he will win more and get in to the GOAT group eventually though.

 

[hoodjem]

Pete Sampras
Pancho Gonzales
Roger Federer
Rod Laver
Bill Tilden
Don Budge
Bjorn Borg

Add Rosewall, and your list will be complete.

 

[grafrules]

It seems there are more mens GOAT candidates than women.

I guess women you could make a case for Lenglen, Wills, or Connolly but almost nobody really pushes theirs. It seems to be only between Graf, Navratilova, Court, and Evert. The men there are atleast the 8 that have been mentioned, so twice as many candidates.