Post Your Top 10 Lists Here

C

chaognosis

Semi-Pro
How do you rank the 10 greatest tennis players of all time?

I conducted a poll a while back, but now I'm interested in compiling a collection of top ten lists by many of the regular posters on this forum. I'm looking mainly for lists from those who feel they have a pretty firm grasp of the history of the sport -- in other words, please don't bother if you're going to rank Andy Roddick or Rafael Nadal among your all-time top ten. Explanation of your choices is not required, though you're welcome to describe your selection process in as much or as little detail as you desire. I know we have some formidable tennis historians among us, so this thread should serve as an interesting reference.

Here's my list (Edited 8-Feb 2007):

1. Budge
2. Laver
3. Tilden
4. Gonzales
5. Federer
6. Sampras
7. Kramer
8. Borg
9. Perry
10. McEnroe
 
Last edited:
Good list, i would agree with all the names, although players like Cochet, Perry, Vines, Kramer, Hoad, Emerson, Newcombe, Agassi all have their legitimate claims.
Laver
Tilden
Borg/Sampras
Gonzales
Rosewall
Budge
Connors McEnroe
Lendl/Kramer
 
1. Baghdatis
2. Sampras
3. Borg
4. Nadal
5. Laver
6. Lendl
7. Federer
8. Santoro
9. NoBadMojo (his secret weapon = midplus!!!)
10. Serena
 
In my lifetime based on players/matches I've seen:
1 - Sampras
2 - Federer
3 - Connors
4 - Borg
5 - Lendl
6 - McEnroe
7 - Agassi
8 - Becker
9 - Edberg
10 - Wilander
 
1.Laver: 2 Grand Slams, RG-Wimby combo, 11 slams despite turning pro, great class
2.Borg: Besides his great record of 6 RG (amazing), and 5 Wimbies in a row (wow), 3 dubbles in the process, he propelled tennis in a new era with his charisma
3.Tilden: such a technician, dominated his era like no other
4.Sampras: 14 slams with 7 Wimbies over 12 years, deadly serve
5.Lendl: consistency and work ethic at their pinnacle, he was THE BOSS for so many years
6.Federer: still in the making, but we will miss this guy, his self-assurance and his never-seen-before dancing tennis when he's done.
7.Gonzales: Kicked asses of Laver and Rosewall when they turned pro, that says something on his skills
8.Connors:a milestone in tennis history, winning tons of tournies in 3 decades
9.Agassi: Career Grand Slam and consistency in top 10 over 2 decades
10.McEnroe: Genious with unconventionnal game, yet dominating both in singles and doubles

Special mention for their beautiful games: Edberg and Rafter
 
I'm looking mainly for lists from those who feel they have a pretty firm grasp of the history of the sport -- in other words, please don't bother if you're going to rank Andy Roddick or Rafael Nadal among your all-time top ten.
Click to expand...

So you only want to see opinions that you agree with?
 
pianeon said:
So you only want to see opinions that you agree with?
Click to expand...

Hardly, but I want lists that are credible. I don't think I'm being at all unreasonable in insisting that Roddick and Nadal have not yet earned a place among the ten greatest players of all time. Do you?
 
1- Pistol Pete
2- Guga
3- Johnny Mac
4- Jimmy Connors
5- Michael Chang
6- Federer
7- Boris Becker
8- Ivanisevic
9- Andre
10- Rafter

The players I picked are the top 10 that I enjoy watching and rooting for.
 
I'm looking mainly for lists from those who feel they have a pretty firm grasp of the history of the sport
Click to expand...

You and urban know more about the history of the sport than the rest of us combined. this is how Steve Flink ranked players in his book- The Greatest Tennis Matches of the Twentieth Century(this was at the end of '99 so his list may have changed since then)

1. Pete Sampras
2. Rod Laver
3. Jack Kramer
4. Bill Tilden
5. Bjorn Borg
6. Don Budge
7. Pancho Gonzales
8. Jimmy Connors
9. John McEnroe
10. Ivan Lendl and Fred Perry (tie)
 
1. Pete Sampras
2. Rod Laver
3. Andre Agassi
4. Bjorn Borg
5. John McEnroe
6. Ivan Lendle
7. Jimmy Conners
8. Roger Federer
9. Boris Becker
10. Stefan Edberg
 
top 10 players (since 1985)

1) Roger Federer
2) Pete Sampras
3) Ivan Lendl
4) Andre Agassi
5) Stefan Edberg
6) Boris Becker
7) Mats Wilander
8) Jim Courier
9) Gustavo Kuerten
10) Lleyton Hewitt
 
1. Rod Laver
2. Roy Emerson
3. Don Budge
4. Fred Perry
5. Andre Agassi
6. Pete Sampras
7. Bjorn Borg
8. Bill Tilden
9. Jimmy Connors
10 - a tie between Ivan Lendl and Stefan Edberg

As a matter of principle I feel, no matter what one's feelings are about Sampras and the Sampras/Agassi debate, the Top 5 should be the guys who completed the Grand Slam. I suspect there'll be six at some point thanks to Roger Federer.
 
I know the history of the sport but I've never seen Laver, Tilden, Pancho, or any of those old, OLD guys. I haven't seen much of Lendl/Borg either for that matter. So from what I do know...

1. Sampras - the man
2. Federer - most unbeatable player in the Open era
3. Agassi - more longevity than anyone, hugely influential game
4. Laver - the records
5. McEnroe - no man has ever been more talented with a racquet
6. Borg - said to be one of the best athletes in tennis
7. Connors - huge fighter, unbelievable stats
8. Lendl
9. Becker
10. Edberg
 
Moose Malloy said:
You and urban know more about the history of the sport than the rest of us combined. this is how Steve Flink ranked players in his book- The Greatest Tennis Matches of the Twentieth Century(this was at the end of '99 so his list may have changed since then)

1. Pete Sampras
2. Rod Laver
3. Jack Kramer
4. Bill Tilden
5. Bjorn Borg
6. Don Budge
7. Pancho Gonzales
8. Jimmy Connors
9. John McEnroe
10. Ivan Lendl and Fred Perry (tie)
Click to expand...

To have a top ten now and not include Federer is unrealitstic. I have no cnadle to burn for him per se but he'd make at least 8 on this list imo.
 
My ranking is going to start after Laver in say 1970, since I don't know how to compare the players Laver and before to players after Laver or even to each other.

1. Sampras - 6 straight years #1 and the record of 14 majors, more than anyone else that is in the running of my list

2. Borg - Amazing runs at the french and wimbledon. If he had not retired so young and had continued to play till 30 or so and also played the AO a bit, he easily would have had a better career than Sampras, IMO.

3. Federer - After the first 2, these get real tough. Federer has moved up fast, but has to continue to dominate for another year or two to be at the level of Borg. His total domination these last 2 years puts him ahead of the guys below him. His 2004 was the most impressive year since 1970 IMO. I think when total majors won is similar, the most important factor in these sort of rankings is the level of domination and that gives Fed the #3 spot.

4. McEnroe - Another guy who really dominated the game at his peak. Had that amazing 82-3 year. He had the talent to be at the top of this list if he hadn't burned out after that year.

5. Lendl - After reading threads about Lendl recently I know a lot more about his career. That streak of finals at the US open is pretty crazy. He could have been much higher if he had come through at finals in majors earlier in his career.

6. Connors - I really don't know all that much about Connors, so I am not sure exactly where to put him. I think he had a similar career with Agassi, both having long career but not amazing domination. I think his stats may be a bit inflated due to him playing many small tournaments and so total titles is not all that important. I will put him above Agassi because he was a clear #1 for a couple years unlike Agassi and had a pretty dominating year (99-4?).

7. Agassi - Won all 4 majors and really long successful career. His lack of domination keeps him from moving up on this list. He was unfortunate to have his prime nearly exactly coincide with Sampras, maybe he could have been higher if him and Lendl switched birthdates.

8. Wilander - His one great year puts him clearly above Becker and Edberg, but everyone above him has something else on him.

9. Becker - I'm getting tired of writing now. Becker and Edberg are real close.

10. Edberg


For fun if I was doing an all time list it would be 1. Gonzalez, 2. Laver, 3. Sampras, 4. Budge, 5. Tilden, 6. Borg, 7. Federer, 8. Kramer, 9. McEnroe, 10. Rosewall
 
This is very subjective... but this is my list of my top 10 (no particular order, they're all the best I've seen). therefore I won't include players I didn't see play such as Laver, gonzalez or Newcombe... though I'm well aware of their accomplishments:

1. Rafter
2. Borg
3. Becker
4. Sampras
5. Federer
6. Rios
7. Nastase
8. Edberg
9. Lendl
10. Muster
 
From what i have all heard.

1Laver
2Sampras
3Borg
4Gonzalez
5Lendl
6Federer-Will climb up
7Mcenroe
8Agassi
9Becker
10Wilander
 
jings said:
To have a top ten now and not include Federer is unrealitstic. I have no cnadle to burn for him per se but he'd make at least 8 on this list imo.
Click to expand...

I think many are simply waiting on Federer. If you are going to put him on a list right now, you need to do one of two things: (1) assume his career ends today and rank him according to what he's achieved so far; or (2) try to predict his later results by projecting his current success into the future. Both of these are flawed approaches -- the second, in particular, cannot be done with a reasonable amount of certainty. Even if I were to submit to the first approach, however, I would still be hard pressed to rank Federer in my top ten. Such an assessment seems to me ahistorical. Federer's achievements in my judgment do not yet match those of Lendl, Connors, Rosewall, etc., and I am loath to assume that they eventually will.
 
Well, this is a list not just of achievements but also of overall talent. Federer has more dimensions in his game than anyone in history.
 
Well, this is a list not just of achievements but also of overall talent. Federer has more dimensions in his game than anyone in history.
Click to expand...

That's what everyone said about Lew Hoad & look to see where he is ranked on these lists.
I am amazed by the talent of Federer. But if his career ended today, most historians would not talk about him as one of the alltime greats (Certainly not on par with Connors, Lendl, Rosewall).
I can imagine commentators 10 years from now, saying yeah that Federer was great but he was no Laver or Sampras.
Memory of a player's talent will fade, but not the names in the record books.
 
No, I believe they would be talking about Federer as an all time great. John McEnroe has already called him the greatest of all time, Agassi said he's the best he's played against, and all these legends have said how impressed they are with him and how he could be the best. And every player of this generation will say the same thing. Unlike those oldies, Federer has been unbeatable in a time with huge depth in tennis, and tennis is now more physical than it has ever been. It's more impressive than ever to be dominant in this era.
 
IMHO my list is:

1. Sampras - Based on sheer numbers of Slam titles
2. Laver - Two Grand Slams
3. Federer - Probably ranked too high but at the end of his career maybe #1?
4. Lendl - Innovator and physically the most dominant in his prime
5. Borg - Best player at the time the Open era was ushered in.
6. Connors - Most titles of any player ever to play
7. Tilden - Most dominant of his era
8. McEnroe - Best single season on record (and he played Davis Cup that yr.)
9. Emerson - Based purely on his numbers of Slam titles (mabe should be higher?)
10. Fred Perry/Andre Agassi - Great players with longevity in their careers and 8 GS titles each.
 
I can understand why people are saying it is too early in Federer's career to call him an all time great. People have been saying this all along. However, I now feel that his accomplishments are enough to consider him an all time great. In my rankings above, I was basing it on what he has accomplished so far and not how great he might become. I think what he has accomplished so far is comparable to McEnroe, Lendl, Connors, Agassi, and Wilander. All of these guys including Federer have either 7 or 8 slams. I rank him above all of them because he has had greater domination of the ATP than any of those guys IMO.
 
1-Oliver Marach
2-Oscar Hernandez
3-Jeff Morrison
4-Melle Van Gemerden
5-Sasa Tuksar
6-Edouard Roger-Vasselin
7-Nathan Healey
8-Noam Okun
9-Giorgio Galimberti
10-Rajeev Ram

These are the greatest players of all-time;) :p . Please I do not want anybody to freak out when they see this list that is made just for some little fun.


1-Pete Sampras
2-Rod Laver
3-Bjorn Borg
4-Ken Rosewall
5-Johnny McEnroe
6-Jimmy Connors
7-Andre Agassi
8-Ivan Lendl
9-Roger Federer
10-Jim Courier(just felt like I needed to put two red heads on this list):p
 
Laver
Sampras
Borg
Tilden
Budge / Kramer
Hoad
McEnroe
Connors
Perry / Vines

It's no coincidence that my choices are all Wimbledon champions. I don't believe that any player can stake a claim to the very highest level of greatness without having won the most important tournament in the world. Gonzales, Rosewall, and Lendl are all accomplished players, but most of their contemporaries agree that at their best, Kramer was superior to Gonzales, Hoad superior to Rosewall, and McEnroe superior to Lendl. I rank Perry and Vines together in the tenth spot, despite the fact that Vines established himself as Perry's master on the early pro tour, because of Perry's versatility, his longevity, and his vastly better amateur record.
 
I am intrigued by these last rankings. I see your point regarding the importance of Wimbledon, and I know others who share that opinion, but it does too great a disservice to the mid-century players who turned pro without having won the Big W. Gonzalez in particular seems to require that an exception be made, and to a lesser extent Rosewall as well. Nevertheless this is a good list. Whereas mine, urban's, and a few others are rooted primarily in a retrospective statistical approach, yours jives better with eyewitness accounts. With the exception of your note about Perry, your list does not seem to reward longevity, though I suppose that is a defensible stance.
 
I see the point with Wimbledon as most important event, especially in yesteryears, when lawn tennis was prevalent. These eye-witness-accounts are sometimes ambigious. Problem is, not many people have seen Kramer or Gonzales in their prime, not only because of the age factor, but also due to zero media exposure of the old pro tour. It is right, important voices like Trabert or Hoad rank Kramer very high as a player, but many accounts i have read differ on his abilities. Certainly he was an innovator in the mens game, the second after Alice Marble, to play the big game. Some praise his forehand, serve and volley, some say, what he technically lacked, he made up with his mind game. He was a very influential man, often the boss of the other players, which make his rating difficult. He selected his play and protected his ranking very carefully, always preferring fast courts and head-to-head tours. But when i see the lists of the pro titles in the 50s and 60s, i must say, that Gonzales and Rosewall won much more and set their ranking more in the line. Hoad is difficult to rate, because all players idolized him, and he was certainly one of the greatest talents. But on the pro tour he was clearly overshadowed by Rosewall, although he played a full schedule in the late 50s and early 60s.
 
urban said:
These eye-witness-accounts are sometimes ambigious. Problem is, not many people have seen Kramer or Gonzales in their prime, not only because of the age factor, but also due to zero media exposure of the old pro tour. It is right, important voices like Trabert or Hoad rank Kramer very high as a player, but many accounts i have read differ on his abilities.
Click to expand...

You are right, and my sense is that many writers of the day were swayed by Kramer's superior performance as an amateur -- I believe Kramer lost only three matches total in 1946-47, ending his amateur career on a 41-match winning streak. His performance at Wimbledon in 1947 was also truly one for the ages, losing only 37 games in seven matches en route to the title. Gonzales never had such a blistering display of excellence on tennis's grandest stage, though his game seems to have improved considerably after he turned pro, so I suppose there is cause to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Two accounts that I have on hand are in Paul Metzler's Tennis Styles and Stylists (1969) and Will Grimsley's Tennis: Its History, People and Events (1971). Metzler names Kramer the greatest player of all time, topping Budge, Gonzales, Laver, and Tilden. Grimsley does not choose a single player, but writes with respect to Kramer that "in any roll-call of the all-time greats, his name is always near the top. Most students of the sport rank him with Tilden, Budge and Laver, in varying order, as one of the best players ever to pick up a racket" (p. 82). What I wouldn't give to see these guys play each other at their peaks, not to mention Borg, McEnroe, Sampras, and Federer...
 
I don't know the book of Metzler, but Grimsley was one of the best American writers of the day, alongside Danzig, Wind and the Brits Bellamy, Tingay and Gray. Some good style descriptions of the time, i have read, were made by Julius Heldman, i think the husband of Gladys Heldman. It is to be said, that Kramer lost some years through the war. He was 26/27 on the high of his powers, when he won Wimbledon, 5 years older than Gonzales, when he turned pro. Interestingly, Kramer already played doubles in the last pre war Davis Cup final vs Australia.
 
1 Sampras
2 Laver
3 Borg
4 Tilden
5 Federer (Will be #1 when it's all said and done)
6 Emerson
7 Connors
8 Lendl (Lost way too many GS finals)
9 Agassi
10 McEnroe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

capriatifanatic
Who are your top 15 men and women all time.
2
Replies
89
Views
8K
CyBorg
CyBorg
Otacon
What is your list of top 10 greatest American male players ?
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
thrust
T
davey25
Top 10 years of all time in order
Replies
38
Views
4K
veroniquem
veroniquem
A
Top Ten Players of the Pre-Open Era?
Replies
27
Views
3K
Hard Court
H
Sunny014
What is your Subjective All Time top 10 List of Tennis Players as on today ???
2 3
Replies
141
Views
8K
Karma Tennis
Karma Tennis
Back
Top