Rating Agassi, Sampras, Connors, Mac, Fed, Lendl, Borg, in each area of game.

noeledmonds

Professional
You have much to learn federerfanatic. I fanatic you are, but it has blurred your judgment. Federer's serve and his volleying are both far insuperior to Sampras's. Federer's backhand is his weakness, you wouldn't get Nadal targetting Borg's or Agassi's backhand. Federer has done nothing to prove mental strength. Federer has often lost matches from tight situations (his record in five sets is about 8-8 ). Federer rarely gets in these situations because he is so tallented. Look at someone like Borg, he only lost 4 five setters in his career (26-4). Federer's stamina does not let him down over 5 sets, so it must be mental. The return is a very subjective catergory, but if you want a percentage return then it has to be Connors, or if you want winners then it has to be Agassi. I will give you the forehand one.
 
You have much to learn federerfanatic. I fanatic you are, but it has blurred your judgment.

Federer is on his way to being the best player ever by far. It is totally reasonable to think he is the best of the last 25 years in most categories, whether you like him or not.

Federer's serve and his volleying are both far insuperior to Sampras's.

Sampras had such a huge serve he poked away easy volleys. Federer does not serve-volley and comes in during the middle of points and makes tougher volleys. Federer can serve over 130 like Pete could and his placement, variety, action is just as perfect.

Federer's backhand is his weakness, you wouldn't get Nadal targetting Borg's or Agassi's backhand.

You are right, because their forehands are not as scary as Roger's is. Roger's grip and style preference does not like the heavy topspin of Nadal to the backhand side, it doesnt mean his backhand isnt the best. Connors did not like wide slices and kick serves to his backhand, it doesnt mean it isnt one of the best backhands ever.

Federer has done nothing to prove mental strength.

Yeah you go 10-1 in slam finals because of your lack of mental strength, and lose 9 matches in 2 years because of lack of mental strength. Next.....

The return is a very subjective catergory, but if you want a percentage return then it has to be Connors, or if you want winners then it has to be Agassi. I will give you the forehand one.

If you want somebody who is able to get their raquet on, or meet more of huge servers first serves, and get them back in play deep with enough action to start the point on neutral, it is Federer.



So lets see: weak backhand, weak return of serve, weak serve, weak volley, no mental strength, 10 grand slams, record # of weeks at #1. I guess Federer must have taken Gilbert's "winning ugly" to a new level then, and just combined it with only a great forehand.
 

BeckerFan

Rookie
I think Federer is a great server ... and often an underrated one. He undoubtedly has one of the most effective serves in the game today. But there is no way in hell it should be rated higher than Sampras's.
 

noeledmonds

Professional
Federer is on his way to being the best player ever by far. It is totally reasonable to think he is the best of the last 25 years in most categories, whether you like him or not.

I am actually a fan of Federer and greatly admire his game, I belive he will eclipse many records. However all his shots are not suprior to other greats. Every player has strengths and relative weaknesses.

Sampras had such a huge serve he poked away easy volleys. Federer does not serve-volley and comes in during the middle of points and makes tougher volleys. Federer can serve over 130 like Pete could and his placement, variety, action is just as perfect.

You have just effectivly admited that Sampras's serve is better, as he creates easier put aways. Pete's speed was not what made his serve so great, it was also his placement. Pete also had the knack of producing the big serves on the key points, even the 2nd serve aces. This is not something you see Federer do. Federer's volleys are good, but Pete's were far better. He put away easy volleys, but could also put away diving volleys, half volleys and drop volleys. Federer does fine when he comes to the net, but has neither the varitey or consisntancy of Sampras at the net.

You are right, because their forehands are not as scary as Roger's is. Roger's grip and style preference does not like the heavy topspin of Nadal to the backhand side, it doesnt mean his backhand isnt the best. Connors did not like wide slices and kick serves to his backhand, it doesnt mean it isnt one of the best backhands ever.

Come on Federer does not have the best backhand in his genertation. Federer's backhand can be broken down and is more error prone than many. He can still hit spectacular winners but so can all the players. Federer's bachand is not rock solid and can be exploited more than some players

Yeah you go 10-1 in slam finals because of your lack of mental strength, and lose 9 matches in 2 years because of lack of mental strength. Next.....

Winning matches does not show mental strength. He won the matches due to suprior shot making. Federer does not always win tight matches. Federer has a worse 5 set record than any other player on the list. Why would this be, given his fitness, if he did not have a mental weakness?

If you want somebody who is able to get their raquet on, or meet more of huge servers first serves, and get them back in play deep with enough action to start the point on neutral, it is Federer.

That is not what I want in a great returner. I think something should be done with the return.

So lets see: weak backhand, weak return of serve, weak serve, weak volley, no mental strength, 10 grand slams, record # of weeks at #1. I guess Federer must have taken Gilbert's "winning ugly" to a new level then, and just combined it with only a great forehand.

I did NOT say any of his shots were weak. I just said they were not the best of the last 25 years. There is a big difference. I think Federer has a strong serve and backhand etc.
 
I am actually a fan of Federer and greatly admire his game, I belive he will eclipse many records. However all his shots are not suprior to other greats. Every player has strengths and relative weaknesses.

I did not say all his shots were superior to other greats. I rated his volleying 2nd behind McEnroe's.


You have just effectivly admited that Sampras's serve is better, as he creates easier put aways.

No I didnt, I said he liked to serve-volley so he was able to put away easy putaways at the net. Fed could do this but prefers to stay back and hit the greatest shot of all time-the Federer forehand, for winners.

Pete's speed was not what made his serve so great, it was also his placement.

Roger places his serve as well as anyone, he can hit any line and on the outside of lines consistently.

Pete also had the knack of producing the big serves on the key points, even the 2nd serve aces. This is not something you see Federer do.

You obviously dont see Federer play much. Federer always comes up with clutch serves when he needs them, he gets his first serve in always on big points so he doesnt need a clutch 2nd serve.

Federer's volleys are good, but Pete's were far better. He put away easy volleys, but could also put away diving volleys, half volleys and drop volleys. Federer does fine when he comes to the net, but has neither the varitey or consisntancy of Sampras at the net.

Naw Sampras hit some great volleys, but missed a bunch of easy volleys I have seen too.

Come on Federer does not have the best backhand in his genertation. Federer's backhand can be broken down and is more error prone than many.

Ok you were saying he doesnt have the best backhand of these players, but now you are even saying he doesnt even have the best backhand of his own generation of players? ROTFL! Who the hell was better, Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, pleaaasssseee! Even if you dont think he is the best on this list as I do he has a better then anyone in his own generation easily.

He can still hit spectacular winners but so can all the players. Federer's bachand is not rock solid and can be exploited more than some players

Nadal is the only player who can exploit it, and only on slow high bouncing courts. Big deal, as I said Connors and his great backhand had trouble with the wide slices to the backhand, Agassi is dead whenever he is stretched out and has to hit a 1 handed backhand. That does not mean Federer's backhand is not as good or better then anyone elses.

Winning matches does not show mental strength. He won the matches due to suprior shot making. Federer does not always win tight matches. Federer has a worse 5 set record than any other player on the list. Why would this be, given his fitness, if he did not have a mental weakness?

If you watch Federer's matches he almost always win the big points and wins alot of matches in straight sets or 4 sets that could have gone the full 3(
in best 2 of 3)or 5 sets if not for his great mental strength and almost always winning the important points. Anyway how many of those matches were before the start of 2004? Before the start of 2004 means nothing since Federer was not the same player then. I think he has lost 3 5 setters since then in all, 1 of them was to Nadal on clay, no player on this list except maybe Borg who also excelled on clay would win a 5th set vs Nadal on clay, and Federer was 1 point from doing so, another was to Nalbandian were it was only Federer's incredable mental strength that allowed him to win 2 close first sets and almost come back to win the 5th since he was in such poor physical state rushing back from injury to play the event.

That is not what I want in a great returner. I think something should be done with the return.

Well if getting aced by a huge server 40+ times like Agassi is regularly is what you think makes the best returner then your choice. Dont look for me to come over to your side of the fence there.

I did NOT say any of his shots were weak. I just said they were not the best of the last 25 years. There is a big difference. I think Federer has a strong serve and backhand etc.

You say strong, I say the best.
 

The Gorilla

Banned
(1)tommy haas and gaudio have better backhands than federer.
(2)What made Sampras's serve the greatest of all time was that it could not be read, virtually every other great serve could be read, but sampras's could not.As a result players had to wait and watch the ball move before they could decide where to go, it is the same with Ivanisavic.Tim Henman served just sa big as Pete but did not get half the aces he does.I think Federer's serve is more on par with Henman's, well above average, but not in the same league as Sampras.
 
(1)tommy haas and gaudio have better backhands than federer.
(2)What made Sampras's serve the greatest of all time was that it could not be read, virtually every other great serve could be read, but sampras's could not.As a result players had to wait and watch the ball move before they could decide where to go, it is the same with Ivanisavic.Tim Henman served just sa big as Pete but did not get half the aces he does.I think Federer's serve is more on par with Henman's, well above average, but not in the same league as Sampras.


Haas and Gaudio better backhands then Federer!??! You are nuts. Gaudio and Haas do NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING better then Federer except blow snot rockets on court.

Henman did not serve nearly as big as Sampras as you say, and to put Federer's serve equal to Henman's is also nuts.
 

snapple

Rookie
Haas and Gaudio better backhands then Federer!??! You are nuts. Gaudio and Haas do NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING better then Federer except blow snot rockets on court.

Henman did not serve nearly as big as Sampras as you say, and to put Federer's serve equal to Henman's is also nuts.

Took the words right out of my mouth :)
 

noeledmonds

Professional
No I didnt, I said he liked to serve-volley so he was able to put away easy putaways at the net. Fed could do this but prefers to stay back and hit the greatest shot of all time-the Federer forehand, for winners.

Sampras had such a huge serve he poked away easy volleys. Federer does not serve-volley and comes in during the middle of points and makes tougher volleys.

Naw Sampras hit some great volleys, but missed a bunch of easy volleys I have seen too.

Roger places his serve as well as anyone, he can hit any line and on the outside of lines consistently.

You obviously dont see Federer play much. Federer always comes up with clutch serves when he needs them, he gets his first serve in always on big points so he doesnt need a clutch 2nd serve.


Are you saying that Federer deliberately creates tougher volleys for himself? Come off it. Sampras missed some easy volleys, but as do all players. I have seen Federer miss some sitters too. I have never seen Federer hit a true diving volley. Are you claiming Federer never misses 1st serves on the big points? All players miss 1st serves, that is why the 2nd serve is so important. I have seen Sampras hit countless 2nd serve aces, I cannot recall one 2nd serve ace from Federer. I have been following tennis since well before you were born, and watched Federer since he first made an impact on the scene as a Davis Cup player.

you are even saying he doesnt even have the best backhand of his own generation of players? ROTFL! Who the hell was better, Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, pleaaasssseee! Even if you dont think he is the best on this list as I do he has a better then anyone in his own generation easily.

Safin and Gasquet both have sublime backhands. I belive an onform Safin backhand is better.


Nadal is the only player who can exploit it, and only on slow high bouncing courts. Big deal, as I said Connors and his great backhand had trouble with the wide slices to the backhand, Agassi is dead whenever he is stretched out and has to hit a 1 handed backhand. That does not mean Federer's backhand is not as good or better then anyone elses.

Nadal beat Federer and Dubai on a moderately fast hard court you know. Safin was rolling backhands past Federer in the AO 05.

If you watch Federer's matches he almost always win the big points and wins alot of matches in straight sets or 4 sets that could have gone the full 3(
in best 2 of 3)or 5 sets if not for his great mental strength and almost always winning the important points. Anyway how many of those matches were before the start of 2004? Before the start of 2004 means nothing since Federer was not the same player then. I think he has lost 3 5 setters since then in all, 1 of them was to Nadal on clay, no player on this list except maybe Borg who also excelled on clay would win a 5th set vs Nadal on clay, and Federer was 1 point from doing so, another was to Nalbandian were it was only Federer's incredable mental strength that allowed him to win 2 close first sets and almost come back to win the 5th since he was in such poor physical state rushing back from injury to play the event.

The pressure is not really on in straight sets matches. You can always fight again in another set. I am not denying that Federer plays many big points well, but others were better. Federer lost to Safin at AO 05 after having a match point in the forth. Federer missed a shot back through his legs where he could have played a defensive lob. Nearly beating Nalbandian in 5 is not impressive. He has to win to prove the mental strength. Fed lost to Nadal at FO. Federer 0-3 in 5 setters in 2005. 2006: Fed loses to Nadal in Rome final, yet again cannot convert match points. Fed beats Haas in 5 sets (no real pressure though 6-2 in final set). Fed is 1-4 in 5 setters since the start of 2005 (2-4 since 2004 start). I rest my case.


Well if getting aced by a huge server 40+ times like Agassi is regularly is what you think makes the best returner then your choice. Dont look for me to come over to your side of the fence there.

Huge servers to tend to hit aces against many players. Agassi was unfortunate enough to face the probabely the greatest server of all time (Sampras!) in his prime. Agassi hit clean winners off the return like noone else. Agassi took the ball early, hurrying his oponent. Agassi had superb ball striking and hand to eye coordination. There are reasons why players such as McEnroe and Courier desribe Agassi as "the best service returner ever to play tennis".


You say strong, I say the best.
Indeed
 

The Gorilla

Banned
Haas and Gaudio better backhands then Federer!??! You are nuts. Gaudio and Haas do NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING better then Federer except blow snot rockets on court.

Henman did not serve nearly as big as Sampras as you say, and to put Federer's serve equal to Henman's is also nuts.

Haas and Gaudio:
(1)hit as big off the backhand wing as Federer.
(2)Hit more consistently off the backhand wing as Federer.
(3)Have no problem dealing with high bouncing balls to their backhand side on clay.


tim henman serves as fast as pete, if you watch tennis you know this.
 
Haas and Gaudio:
(1)hit as big off the backhand wing as Federer.
(2)Hit more consistently off the backhand wing as Federer.
(3)Have no problem dealing with high bouncing balls to their backhand side on clay.


tim henman serves as fast as pete, if you watch tennis you know this.

Tim Henman does not serve as fast as Pete, stop with the crap. Henman's serve does not compare to either Pete or Roger, speed or anything else.

Haas makes more mistakes on the backhand then Federer on most days, and Federer's backhand is much bigger then Gaudio's. What a bunch of nonsense your comparision is, you really are out to lunch if you think Haas or Gaudio are better then Federer off any shot. Your last point is dumb too since we arent doing a list of who is best at shots just on clay, yeah we know Gaudio is a loser on everything but clay so might do some shots better on clay then others that he cant do nearly as well on any other surface. On every surface but clay Federer's backhand crushes Gaudio's just like every other part of his game. Did Gaudio use his superior backhand to get murdered 6-0, 6-0 by Federer the last time they played. Yeah his backhand really bothered Fed.
 

BeckerFan

Rookie
Regardless, serve quality is not all about speed. That's only one piece of a much larger puzzle.

I know there are posters on this forum who think Roddick has a 'better' serve than Sampras b/c it's been clocked at a higher m.p.h., which is quite sad.
 

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
I know there are posters on this forum who think Roddick has a 'better' serve than Sampras b/c it's been clocked at a higher m.p.h., which is quite sad.

Yeah I think that's odd as well, since Goran, Becker, Rusedski, Philippoussis, Krajicek all had higher mph than Sampras as well.

As Gilbert said, Sampras can hit a dime. I don't think Roddick can.
 
Are you saying that Federer deliberately creates tougher volleys for himself? Come off it. Sampras missed some easy volleys, but as do all players. I have seen Federer miss some sitters too. I have never seen Federer hit a true diving volley. Are you claiming Federer never misses 1st serves on the big points? All players miss 1st serves, that is why the 2nd serve is so important. I have seen Sampras hit countless 2nd serve aces, I cannot recall one 2nd serve ace from Federer. I have been following tennis since well before you were born, and watched Federer since he first made an impact on the scene as a Davis Cup player.

Yes I am saying on big points Federer never misses his first serve. I dont remember him ever doing it. Federer does not need to dive for volleys since his positioning and reflexes are perfect. I agree Federer's 2nd serve is not as great as Pete's but I was ignoring the 2nd serve in my serve rankings anyway.

Safin and Gasquet both have sublime backhands. I belive an onform Safin backhand is better. Nadal beat Federer and Dubai on a moderately fast hard court you know. Safin was rolling backhands past Federer in the AO 05.

So you think 2 matches show everything? How many matches has Federer played in his career now, many hundreds but your example of him not having the best backhand is 2 matches. Now I am even more convinced Federer has the best backhand today and probably of all these great players if that is the best you can do. I have seen matches with Fed and Safin where Fed has outplayed Safin in all areas, including dominating him on the backhand, Hamburg final in 2002, a Davis Cup match that year too. Fed had a mental block vs Nadal around this time last year, which every player has atleast one player they have that against.

The pressure is not really on in straight sets matches. You can always fight again in another set. I am not denying that Federer plays many big points well, but others were better. Federer lost to Safin at AO 05 after having a match point in the forth. Federer missed a shot back through his legs where he could have played a defensive lob. Nearly beating Nalbandian in 5 is not impressive. He has to win to prove the mental strength. Fed lost to Nadal at FO. Federer 0-3 in 5 setters in 2005. 2006: Fed loses to Nadal in Rome final, yet again cannot convert match points. Fed beats Haas in 5 sets (no real pressure though 6-2 in final set). Fed is 1-4 in 5 setters since the start of 2005 (2-4 since 2004 start). I rest my case.

Federer was coming off a huge injury when he played Nalbandian in the 2005 Masters Cup. He pushed himself to even be able to play the event, doctors told him not to. If you saw him play he wasnt anywhere close to being fit and everytime he used his leg-to move, to serve, he was doing it gingerely. To use that as an example against him is cheap, it would be like me using Agassi playing at the French or U.S Open a couple years he played injured against him. Since you bring up that event it is really an example of his incredable mental strength. The fact is he had no business even being in that match with Nalbandian, he was not physically up to playing anymore tennis then it took to play the first 2 long sets, and had nothing in the tank, he showed incredable resilence to get as close to winning the 5th set from way behind as he did, as well as winning 2 3 setters with Ljubicic and Nalbandian in the round robin when he was outplayed in his physically impaired state. Events like that just make me think even more nobody is mentally tougher then Roger.

Yeah Federer chose a stupid shot on match point to end up losing to Safin in the 2005 Australian Open semis. I dont think he showed lack of mental tougness in that match though, he fought back from 5-2 in the 5th to tie it, he showed incredable heart and character that whole match. Safin playing like he did that day would have blown away anybody except Federer.

Fed loses to Nadal at the French Open since Nadal is the best clay courter in the world. It has nothing to do with lack of mental toughness, Nadal is just the best on that surface. Fed is the second best and incredably great on that surface too, and would win many more Frenchs if it wasnt for Nadal and if he improves just a bit more he can start beating Nadal on clay this year. Sampras losing all those early rounds on clay to guys he should beat even on clay is more example of lack of mental toughness then Fed not beating Nadal at the French.

Huge servers to tend to hit aces against many players. Agassi was unfortunate enough to face the probabely the greatest server of all time (Sampras!) in his prime. Agassi hit clean winners off the return like noone else. Agassi took the ball early, hurrying his oponent. Agassi had superb ball striking and hand to eye coordination. There are reasons why players such as McEnroe and Courier desribe Agassi as "the best service returner ever to play tennis".

McEnroe and Courier say alot of other things to, do you believe all of them?
McEnroe picked Agassi to win the French Open every year from 2000-2003 and he lost in the quarters every year, he has always been biased to Agassi, if I am biased to Federer John Mac is just as biased to Agassi as I am to Fed.

Agassi gives up a ton of aces often to all the huge servers I have seen him play. Krajicek, Sampras, Ivanisevic, Phillipousis, Joachim Johansson, I have seen many 40+ matches in aces. Phillipousis, Sampras at 2001 Wimbledon(vs Agassi in 2001-2002 he was still getting a ton of aces BTW), Roddick, Karlovic, cant get nearly as many aces vs Fed though.



Yes you are not going to change my mind and I am not going to change yours. We will just have to think what we want to think. Maybe when Federer has 28 slams when he retires you will see why I would rate him the best of the greats of the last 25 years in almost everything.
 

The Gorilla

Banned
Tim Henman does not serve as fast as Pete, stop with the crap. Henman's serve does not compare to either Pete or Roger, speed or anything else.

Haas makes more mistakes on the backhand then Federer on most days, and Federer's backhand is much bigger then Gaudio's. What a bunch of nonsense your comparision is, you really are out to lunch if you think Haas or Gaudio are better then Federer off any shot. Your last point is dumb too since we arent doing a list of who is best at shots just on clay, yeah we know Gaudio is a loser on everything but clay so might do some shots better on clay then others that he cant do nearly as well on any other surface. On every surface but clay Federer's backhand crushes Gaudio's just like every other part of his game. Did Gaudio use his superior backhand to get murdered 6-0, 6-0 by Federer the last time they played. Yeah his backhand really bothered Fed.



No, Gaudio used his inferior mental game.Gaudio is a headcase, nevertheless he still has a better backhand than Federer.

Tim Henman's serve isn't a quarter as good as Sampras's, that wasn't my point, my point is that he serves in similar mph's, but doesn't get half as many aces.This is because his serve is readable and returners can move just before he strikes the ball, Pete Sampras was literally unreadable, you had to move a split second after he hit the ball, you had to see where it was going so in terms of the time you had to move to the ball it is the equivelant of Roddick serving 170mph.

I remember watching a slo mo replay of Youzhny returning Roddick's serve, he moved while the ball was still halfway between roddicks throwing hand and his racquet, I watched out for this and saw the same from Federer.On aggregate, players have far more time to return Roddick's serve than Sampras',.
 

MTF07

Semi-Pro
Serve:

1. Sampras
2T Lendl
2T Borg
4. mcEnroe
5. Federer
6. Connors
7. Agassi
I have to disagree. Federe and McEnroe both get the nod over Borg and Lendl, imo.

Return of Serve:

1. Connors
2. Lendl
3. Agassi
4. Borg
5T. Federer
5T. Sampras
7. McEnroe
I'd change that to Agassi at number 2, Federer #3, and Lendl at 5 behind Borg.

Forehand:

1. Lendl
2. Federer
3T. Borg
3T. Sampras
5.Agassi,(only just behind!)
6T. Connors
6T. McEnroe
I would put Federer first, then Sampras, then Lendl, followed by the rest.

Backhand:

1. Lendl
2. Borg
3T. Agassi
3T. Connors (very competetive category!)
5. McEnroe
6. Federer
7. Sampras
I give the slight nod to Agassi here. Federer's variation on the backhand has to put him near the top as well.




Net play:

1. McEnroe
2. Borg
3T.Sampras
3T. Connors
5T.Federer
5T. Lendl
7. Agassi
McEnroe should ofcourse be number one, but I have to disagree with Borg at number two. He was solid, but he would be 4th imo. No way Lendl is as good a volleyer as Federer. His poor volleying skills is one of the main reasons he never won Wimbledon. So I'd put Sampras at number two, followed by Federer and Borg, then Connors, followed by Lendl and Agassi.

Mental game:

1T. Borg
1T.Connors
3.McEnroe
4T.Federer
4T. Sampras
6. Lendl
7. Agassi

I have no problems with Borg and Connors at the top of the list, but no way was McEnroe stronger mentally then Sampras and Federer. He's 5th on this list at best.
 

MTF07

Semi-Pro
Winning matches does not show mental strength. He won the matches due to suprior shot making. Federer does not always win tight matches. Federer has a worse 5 set record than any other player on the list. Why would this be, given his fitness, if he did not have a mental weakness?
I think Federerfanatic is a bit biased, but this is just a flat out dumb post. So winning matches doesn't=mental strength then? Well how about a 254-15(94.4%) over the last 3 plus years? Certainly someone who was mentally weak could have achieved such sustained success. Or the 10-1 record in slam finals? I guess he just doesn't get up and play the big matches well then? I think that winning 48 out of his last 49 Grand slam matches is a far better indicator of mental toughness as opposed to playing in just 2 5 set matches in that same time period.
 

MTF07

Semi-Pro
Fed beats Haas in 5 sets (no real pressure though 6-2 in final set). Fed is 1-4 in 5 setters since the start of 2005 (2-4 since 2004 start). I rest my case.
Ah, so now it needs to be 10-8 in the 5th set to count now does it? I'm sure you know very well that there is no pressure in the 5th set of a grand slam match, given your vast experience in grand slam matches.
Actually, Federer is 2-3 in 5 set matches since 05, 3-3 since 04. He is also 2-1 in grand slam 5 setters since 04. You coulden't even get those facts straight.
 

noeledmonds

Professional
I think Federerfanatic is a bit biased, but this is just a flat out dumb post. So winning matches doesn't=mental strength then? Well how about a 254-15(94.4%) over the last 3 plus years? Certainly someone who was mentally weak could have achieved such sustained success. Or the 10-1 record in slam finals? I guess he just doesn't get up and play the big matches well then? I think that winning 48 out of his last 49 Grand slam matches is a far better indicator of mental toughness as opposed to playing in just 2 5 set matches in that same time period.

Clearly winning matches helps mental strength but it is not the only thing. I view Federer as mentally strong, but not the strongest in the last 25 years (as the fanatic argues). Laver won matches and the Grand Slam, but he is not considered a mental giant. This is because he was very tallented and outplayed his oponents. Federer is similar in that respect. Remember just over 10 years ago Sampras vs. Corejta (1996 USO). Sampras vomits on court, is slumped over his racket, but still saves match point with a lunging volley, sets up his own match point with a 2nd serve ace and a amazed Corejta double faults. Sampras was less dominant, so he was more often in these pressure situations, but none the less when Federer has been in these partiularly tight situations he had yet to perform. Borg is the other player I consider mentally stronger. Take aside the noisy crowds and night sessions in the US and you have a perfect mental player. Borg is 26-4 in 5 set matches.

I see my statistics were not fully complete (I was quoting without researching them, my memory did not hold all the statistics). My point about Haas was that obviously there is pressure at the start of the 5 set, but that is not the same as the pressure when you are match point down. Federer lost 2 5 set matches in the last 2 years where he held match points. To be the greatest in the last 25 years he has something to prove to me.
 
When I went over how the 10 of you who made lists, excluding myself, ranked Federer this is what I came across with:

Forehand-8 1sts, 1 2nd, 1 7th, an average ranking of 1.7 per person

Backhand-2 1sts, 4 2nds, a 3rd, a 4th, a 6th, a 7th, an average ranking of 3.0 per person

Serve-6 2nds, a 3rd, a 5th, a 7th, an average ranking of 3.0 per person

Return-1 1st, a 2-way tie 2nd(2.5), 6 3rds, a 2 way tie 5th(5.5), a 7th, an average ranking of 3.4per person

Movement-5 1sts, 3 2nds, a 2-way tie 4th(4.5), a 7th, an average ranking of 2.25 per person

Mental-1 1st, 4 2nds, a 5-way tie 2nd(4), a 3rd, a 4th, a 7th, avg. of ranking of 3.0 per person

Net play-8 3rds, a 2-way tie 5th(5.5), a 7th, an average ranking of 3.65 per person


Out of 7 people the middle ranking per category is 4th so I was pretty happy to see that Federer was below the average ranking of 4.0 in every category, 1.7 in one which is the highest, 2.3 in another which might be highest or second highest, 3.0 in 3 categories which could be the second or third highest, and 3.4 and 3.65 in the other 2 categores which is still below the 4.0 middle ranking.


However then I realized I was discounting my own because of possable extreme bias yet I was counting the category rankings of the two anti-Federer trolls on here-The Gorrilla and the Anointed One. So I decided to redo Federer's ranking average without those two.

Forehand-8 1sts, an average ranking of 1.0 per person(as opposed to 1.7 with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Backhand-2 1sts, 4 2nds, a 3rd, a 4th, an average ranking of 2.1 per person(as opposed to 3.0 per person with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Serve-6 2nds, a 3rd, an average ranking of 2.1 per person(as opposed to 3.0 per person with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Return-1 1st, a 2-way tie 2nd(2.5), 6 3rds, an average ranking of 2.75 per person(as opposed to the average ranking of 3.4 per person with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Movement-5 1sts, 3 2nds, an average ranking of 1.4 per person(as opposed to an average ranking of 2.25 per person with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Mental-1 1st, 4 2nds, a 3rd, a 4th, an average ranking of 2.3 per person(as opposed to an average ranking of 3.0 per person with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Net play-8 3rds, an average ranking of 3.0 per person(as opposed to an average ranking of 3.65 per person with the 2 anti Fed trolls)

Now Fed goes to an unaminous 1st place in forehands with a 1.0, an overall first place in movement with a 1.4, an almost unaminous second place in serve with a 2.1, a close to 2nd place average of 2.1 on backhand and 2.3 on mental game which might be in the running for 1st overall ranking, and a just below 3rd place average ranking of 2.75 on return, with the worst being an unaminous 3rd on the net game.

Without the 2 Federer trolls who ruined Roger's deserved rankings I am very pleased with how you have slated him so far.
 
Last edited:

The Gorilla

Banned
I have to disagree. Federe and McEnroe both get the nod over Borg and Lendl, imo.


I'd change that to Agassi at number 2, Federer #3, and Lendl at 5 behind Borg.


I would put Federer first, then Sampras, then Lendl, followed by the rest.

I give the slight nod to Agassi here. Federer's variation on the backhand has to put him near the top as well.





McEnroe should ofcourse be number one, but I have to disagree with Borg at number two. He was solid, but he would be 4th imo. No way Lendl is as good a volleyer as Federer. His poor volleying skills is one of the main reasons he never won Wimbledon. So I'd put Sampras at number two, followed by Federer and Borg, then Connors, followed by Lendl and Agassi.



I have no problems with Borg and Connors at the top of the list, but no way was McEnroe stronger mentally then Sampras and Federer. He's 5th on this list at best.



federer and mcenroe didn't get half the aces or hit the ball half as hard as lendl, Borg quite clearly served bigger than mcenroe at the time.


Agassi was no good at putting the ball back into play.Borg wasn't a a paticularly great returner.Lendl was an incredible returner, he could hit amazing angles against serve and volleyers.


I disagree about the federer/lendl forehand comparison but you are entitled to your opinion.

Agassi had a two handed backhand, given his relatative slowness this ultimately held him back.Federer's backhand was less powerful and less consistant than lendl's.

Borg won 5 wimbledon's serve and volleying approximately 60-70% of the time, Federer won 0 wimbledons serving and volleying, He got bet by Tim and Goran as I recall.Lendl got to two Wimbledon Finals serving and volleying and was a very consistant competetitor at Wimbledon over the years, serving and volleying off both serves.Pete Sampras was a very average volleyer with an incredible serve.

In 1984 MCenroe was mentally stronger than either of these guys.
 
federer and mcenroe didn't get half the aces or hit the ball half as hard as lendl, Borg quite clearly served bigger than mcenroe at the time.

Agassi was no good at putting the ball back into play.Borg wasn't a a paticularly great returner.Lendl was an incredible returner, he could hit amazing angles against serve and volleyers.

I disagree about the federer/lendl forehand comparison but you are entitled to your opinion.

Agassi had a two handed backhand, given his relatative slowness this ultimately held him back.Federer's backhand was less powerful and less consistant than lendl's.

Borg won 5 wimbledon's serve and volleying approximately 60-70% of the time, Federer won 0 wimbledons serving and volleying, He got bet by Tim and Goran as I recall.Lendl got to two Wimbledon Finals serving and volleying and was a very consistant competetitor at Wimbledon over the years, serving and volleying off both serves.Pete Sampras was a very average volleyer with an incredible serve.

In 1984 MCenroe was mentally stronger than either of these guys.

Honestly are you for real? I cant read any of your posts without bursting out laughing.
 
Serve:

1. Sampras
2T Lendl
2T Borg
4. mcEnroe
5. Federer


Return of Serve:

1. Connors
2. Lendl
3. Agassi
4. Borg
5T. Federer


Backhand:

1. Lendl
2. Borg
3T. Agassi
3T. Connors (very competetive category!)
5. McEnroe
6. Federer


Net play:

1. McEnroe
2. Borg
3T.Sampras
3T. Connors
5T.Federer
5T. Lendl


I just noticed these and looked at them closer, omigod you are nuts! Lendl the best backhand!!! Borg better at the net then Sampras and Federer!?!
Federer even below McEnroe on the backhand side!?!?! Lendl a better return of serve then Agassi, Connors, and Federer, Federer only tied with Sampras on the return of serve!!! Lendl and Borg better servers then Federer and McEnroe??? Could I try some of what your smoking, I am sure the sensation of being that high and feeling that fuzzy headed a sensation afterwords is kewl dude! :p
 

MTF07

Semi-Pro
Clearly winning matches helps mental strength but it is not the only thing. I view Federer as mentally strong, but not the strongest in the last 25 years (as the fanatic argues).

This I can agree with. As to who's the greatest mentally, I would have to say Borg; although he did struggle with the conditions at the US Open.
 

ctbmar

Semi-Pro
Very Sad that Edberg (6 Majors), Becker (6 Majors) & Wilander (7 Majors) are not in the list of best players for the last 25 years.
I don't want to indicate "tie" because it will be meaningless to have ties, even sprint race can determine a winner by a hundredth of a second. So I will indicate points to show how close the differences between the positions.

So my top 10 will be as such:

Serve:

1. Sampras (10.0 pts)
2. Federer (9.5 pts)
3. Becker (9.3 pts)
4. McEnroe (9.1 pts)
5. Edberg (9.0 pts)
6. Lendl (8.9 pts)
7. Agassi (8.5 pts)
8. Borg (8.1 pts)
9. Connors (8.0 pts)
10. Wilander (7.9 pts)


Return of Serve:

1. Federer (10.0 pts)
2. Agassi (9.9 pts)
3. Connors (9.8 pts)
4. Borg (9.5 pts)
5. McEnroe (8.8 pts)
6. Sampras (8.7 pts)
7. Lendl (8.6 pts)
8. Becker (8.5 pts)
9. Wilander (8.4 pts)
10. Edberg (8.3 pts)


Forehand:

1. Federer (10.0 pts)
2. Lendl (9.5 pts)
3. Agassi (9.1 pts)
4. Sampras (9.0 pts)
5. Borg (8.6 pts)
6. Becker (8.5 pts)
7. Wilander (8.3 pts)
8. Connors (8.0 pts)
9. McEnroe (7.5 pts)
10. Edberg (7.0 pts)


Backhand:

1. Federer (9.5 pts)
2. Edberg (9.4 pts)
3. Connors (9.3 pts)
4. Agassi (9.1 pts)
5. Borg (9.0 pts)
6. Lendl (8.9 pts)
7. McEnroe (8.7 pts)
8. Becker (8.6 pts)
9. Sampras (8.5 pts)
10. Wilander (8.3 pts)


Overall movement:

1. Federer (10.0 pts)
2. Borg (9.9 pts)
3. McEnroe (9.8 pts)
4. Edberg (9.6 pts)
5. Sampras (9.5 pts)
6. Agassi (9.3 pts)
7. Wilander (9.2 pts)
8. Connors (9.1 pts)
9. Lendl (9.0 pts)
10. Becker (8.5 pts)


Net play:

1. McEnroe (9.8 pts)
2. Edberg (9.7 pts)
3. Sampras (9.5 pts)
4. Federer (9.4 pts)
5. Becker (9.3 pts)
6. Borg (8.8 pts)
7. Agassi (8.6 pts)
8. Lendl (8.5 pts)
9. Connors (8.0 pts)
10. Wilander (7.8 pts)


Mental game:

1. Borg (10.0 pts)
2. Federer (9.9 pts)
3. Connors (9.8 pts)
4. Sampras (9.5 pts)
5. Lendl (9.4 pts)
6. Agassi (9.2 pts)
7. Wilander (9.1 pts)
8. McEnroe (9.0 pts)
9. Edberg (8.6 pts)
10. Becker (8.5 pts)

So my G.O.A.T List based on the 7 Categories & pts allocated:
1. Federer (68.3 pts)
2. Sampras (64.7 pts)
3. Borg (63.9 pts)
4. Agassi (63.7 pts)
5. Lendl (62.8 pts)
6. McEnroe (62.7 pts)
7. Connors (62.0 pts)
8. Edberg (61.6 pts)
9. Becker (61.2 pts)
10. Wilander (59.0 pts)
 
Last edited:
Looking over your choices it is obvious Federer is hated and disrespected on these boards and it makes me very sad to see a large group of people dont see that he is a great player. It is truly sad to see this and you all are missing out by believing he is some mediocre player which he is so much more then.

Overall it looks like almost all of you had Federer first in the forehand but you did not have a _____ below your Federer: 1. forehand, and the next person. Almost all of you have Federer 2nd in the serve behind Sampras. Then almost all of you have Federer 3rd in the return of serve behind Agassi and Connors. Most of you have Federer 3rd in net game behind Sampras and McEnroe. Most of you had Federer 2nd in backhand behind Agassi and over Connors, with several of you rating him #1 on the backhand over Agassi, and a few #3 below Connors, but on average 2nd between them. Most of you had Federer 1st in overall movement, with a few having him 2nd behind Borg. On mental game he flucuated between 1st and 4th, with Sampras, Connors, and Borg being the others who flucuated in that range in that category, probably he was overall 2nd behind Borg on that ranking by you.

So I see that Federer is totally disrespected on these boards which frusterates me to see, you dont have to like him but respect him, he isnt some mediocre nothing. According to your overall rankings Federer has a very good but not that great of a forehand, pretty good overall movement but not special, a so so serve, a so so backhand, a weak net game, a weak return of serve, and a mediocre mental game. He is much better then that and I look forward to him proving all you haters wrong in the next 6 years. GO FED GO!
 
Last edited:

The Gorilla

Banned
Looking over your choices it is obvious Federer is hated and disrespected on these boards and it makes me very sad to see a large group of people dont see that he is a great player. It is truly sad to see this and you all are missing out by believing he is some mediocre player which he is so much more then.

Overall it looks like almost all of you had Federer first in the forehand but you did not have a _____ below your Federer: 1. forehand, and the next person. Almost all of you have Federer 2nd in the serve behind Sampras. Then almost all of you have Federer 3rd in the return of serve behind Agassi and Connors. Most of you have Federer 3rd in net game behind Sampras and McEnroe. Most of you had Federer 2nd in backhand behind Agassi and over Connors, with several of you rating him #1 on the backhand over Agassi, and a few #3 below Connors, but on average 2nd between them. Most of you had Federer 1st in overall movement, with a few having him 2nd behind Borg. On mental game he flucuated between 1st and 4th, with Sampras, Connors, and Borg being the others who flucuated in that range in that category, probably he was overall 2nd behind Borg on that ranking by you.

So I see that Federer is totally disrespected on these boards which frusterates me to see, you dont have to like him but respect him, he isnt some mediocre nothing. According to your overall rankings Federer has a very good but not that great of a forehand, pretty good overall movement but not special, a so so serve, a so so backhand, a weak net game, a weak return of serve, and a mediocre mental game. He is much better then that and I look forward to him proving all you haters wrong in the next 6 years. GO FED GO!



what makes federer great isn't that he is the absolute best at everything, but that he's in the top 3.Blake and Moya have equally good maybe even better forehands, Nadal is faster, tim henman volleys better,Karlovic serves better, Youzhny has abetter backhand.He's not the best at everything but he's so close that his game adds up to about 20 times everyone elses.
 
Nadal faster? I dont agree but possible. Henman better volleys? In his prime possible, today no. Blake or Moya better forehands? Hell no, Federer is better then Blake or Moya in any shot even their best, the reason Blake will never come close to beating Federer is his best shot by far is his forehand and Federer has the best forehand ever and a much better forehand. Youzhny a better backhand? No way, Youzhny is weaker then Federer in everything too.
 
You are a fool my non-friend, if you deem me not clever I take that as a compliment since if you thought I was clever I would be worried about how ridiculous things I must be saying to get your approval, thankfully I dont.

Look at your ridiculous rankings, mine might be biased to Federer some but yours are pathetic. Lendl #1 in the backhand, and #2 in the return of serve, only a complete fool would ever rank that. Lendl being over Agassi in both backhand and return of serve, LOL! Notice how everyone else had him almost last in both. Saying Sampras in his early years had a much better backhand then Federer, and that having an equal backhand to Edberg is the same as having you have a much better backhand then Federer is just as ridiculous.

If you ask any expert in the game who has the best forehand today they will tell you Federer, you wont hear anyone say Blake or Moya. The forehand is their best shot and Federer dominates both off their same best shot every time he has played them the last 3 years so get a clue.
 

The Gorilla

Banned
You are a fool my non-friend, if you deem me not clever I take that as a compliment since if you thought I was clever I would be worried about how ridiculous things I must be saying to get your approval, thankfully I dont.

Look at your ridiculous rankings, mine might be biased to Federer some but yours are pathetic. Lendl #1 in the backhand, and #2 in the return of serve, only a complete fool would ever rank that. Lendl being over Agassi in both backhand and return of serve, LOL! Notice how everyone else had him almost last in both. Saying Sampras in his early years had a much better backhand then Federer, and that having an equal backhand to Edberg is the same as having you have a much better backhand then Federer is just as ridiculous.

If you ask any expert in the game who has the best forehand today they will tell you Federer, you wont hear anyone say Blake or Moya. The forehand is their best shot and Federer dominates both off their same best shot every time he has played them the last 3 years so get a clue.



The shot itself is not better than Moya's.
 

sandy mayer

Semi-Pro
Taking racquets into consideration and giving 4 categories for mental toughness, the biggest criteria for separating great players, given that tecnical differences aren't that great.

Serve
1. Sampras
2. McEnroe
3. Federer
4. Lendl
5. Borg
6. Agassi
7. Connors

Return of serve
1. Connors
2. Agassi
3. Federer
4. Mcenroe
5. Lendl
6. Borg
7. Sampras

Net play
1. McEnroe
2. Sampras
3. Connors
4. Federer
5. Borg
6. Lendl
7. Agassi

Forehand
1. Federer
2. Lendl
3= Sampras, Agassi
5 Borg
6 Connors
7 McEnroe

Backhand
1. Connors
2. Agassi
3 Federer
4 Borg
5 McEnroe
6 Sampras
7 Lendl

Movement
1. Borg
2= Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Federer
6 Lendl
7 Agassi

Stamina
1. Borg
2= Lendl, Agassi (later career)
4 Connors
5 Federer
6= McEnroe, Sampras

Mental toughness in close matches:
1 Sampras
2. Borg
3. Federer
4. Connors
5. McEnroe
6. Agassi
7. Lendl

Mental toughness when behind:
1. Borg
2. Connors
3. Agassi
4. Sampras
5. Lendl
6. McEnroe
7. Federer (not really tested!)

Mental toughness as a frontrunner:
1. Federer (incredible)
2. Sampras
3. Connors
4. Borg
5. Agassi
6. Lendl
7. McEnroe

Mental toughness on the very biggest occasions:
1. Sampras
2. Federer
3. Borg
4. McEnroe
5. Connors
6. Agassi
7. Lendl
 

Benhur

Hall of Fame
Lendl's mental game

nice list, but Sampras had a better backhand and forehand than Mac.:)
Lendl would not be a #1 for me in the mental department. I would rate him last. Sampras or Fed at #1. Mac should be higher.

You can see it the other way around. For about 8 years, from 1982 to 1990, Lendl's winning percentage is probably the highest of any player in a similar period. And 8 years is about the limit of a players top form. You cannot achieve such consistency without extraordinary concentration. During his very best years (1984-88) I saw countless Lendl matches against top opponents where he barely made any unforced errors at all. And mind you he was not just putting the ball back in play waiting for a mistake by his opponent. He was blasting his opponents off the court from the baseline through sheer power and shotmaking ability, with a smaller racket than most of them. Based on his winning percentage record, the number of weeks as number 1, number of turnaments won, and number of Grand Slam titles, finals and semifinals reached, he probably has no equal. He is in many ways the most underrated of the top players of all time. That being said, I agree he was a bit robotic. But boy could he play! And could he concentrate! Sure he lost a lot of finals. But, other than Cash, he lost them all to other giants at their best. The notion that his mental game was weak is ludicrous.
 

SoBad

G.O.A.T.
Well I would think that firstly player selection criteria would need to be defined, and then some sort of a mathematical calculation would need to be performed, taking into account the different aspects of the different players' serves. I am tempted to take on the task, but the top servers' list might look different from what's presented in this thread, if the entire universe of players is evaluated objectively.
 

JohnMatrix

New User
Agassi should be @ the top of the returners list, he dealt with players who hit 130+ all day and if im not mistaken he returned a roddick 151 mph serve
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
From 90-92 Edberg beat Lendl 8 of their last 11 including 4 out of their last 5 slam finals, so His mental game wasnt too good at that time. By then Edberg well and truly had Lendl's measure. Edberg was around 24 by then. Lendl was around 30, but I don't think lendl's game dropped off due to his age as he reached all those finals, but Edberg was just a bit more talented. I remember watching a lot of these wins. Edberg made lendl come up with pass after pass, and and often the pressure was too much and he'd faulter when it counted.

You can see it the other way around. For about 8 years, from 1982 to 1990, Lendl's winning percentage is probably the highest of any player in a similar period. And 8 years is about the limit of a players top form. You cannot achieve such consistency without extraordinary concentration. During his very best years (1984-88) I saw countless Lendl matches against top opponents where he barely made any unforced errors at all. And mind you he was not just putting the ball back in play waiting for a mistake by his opponent. He was blasting his opponents off the court from the baseline through sheer power and shotmaking ability, with a smaller racket than most of them. Based on his winning percentage record, the number of weeks as number 1, number of turnaments won, and number of Grand Slam titles, finals and semifinals reached, he probably has no equal. He is in many ways the most underrated of the top players of all time. That being said, I agree he was a bit robotic. But boy could he play! And could he concentrate! Sure he lost a lot of finals. But, other than Cash, he lost them all to other giants at their best. The notion that his mental game was weak is ludicrous.
 

OrangeOne

Legend
From 90-92 Edberg beat Lendl 8 of their last 11 including 4 out of their last 5 slam finals,

For the years before that, Lendl dominated the head-to-head, which finished at 13-14. Edberg was 6 years younger, you expect the younger legend to beat the older legend as the older legend reaches the end of their career. Same thing happened with Lendl and Pete. Same with Agassi and Fed, etc etc.

Lendl retired after the UO in 1994, and only made one final (in the January) of that year. So 1992, for example, was his 3rd last year on tour.

He joined the Tour in 1978. He was on the tour for 17 years, and you're suggesting in years 13, 14 & 15 he hadn't started to wane a little?

so His mental game wasnt too good at that time.
He was getting older, full stop. Why you're using this example to show a weak mental game, I'll never know. Want to see a strong mental game? see the example at the end of my post.

By then Edberg well and truly had Lendl's measure. Edberg was around 24 by then. Lendl was around 30, but I don't think lendl's game dropped off due to his age as he reached all those finals, but Edberg was just a bit more talented.
So was Edberg more talented, or was it Lendl's mental failings? In your book, it seems one or the other, in mine... Lendl was reaching the end of a 17 year career.

From atptennis.com - Lendl's Singles Record:
1071 - 239
Oh - Lendl - mentally weak? In his entire career, over a 17 year period, he won more than 4 out of every 5 matches he played. That includes his early years as a youngster, and his later years when waning. More than 4 out of every five! Shows a fair bit of strength in every direction if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

maxply

Rookie
Having seen all of them play this is my 2 cents


serve
1.Sampras=great 1st&2nd
2.Mcenroe=nasty left slice
3federer=great all round
4.borg=great 1st serve 2nd ball could land short.
5. Lendl-can get shaky under pressure
6.agassi=solid
7.conners-lefty-not great pace


4 hand
1.Federer=great all around
2.sampras=explosive flatish ,
3.Borg-LENDL tie borg more steady lendl a bit more power
5.agassi -Really just as good
6 mcEnroe=conners said the most underated shot in tennis
7.Conners=a very good shot but for this list last place


Got 2 go will finish later
 

kaiotic

Rookie
I think Federer is a great server ... and often an underrated one. He undoubtedly has one of the most effective serves in the game today. But there is no way in hell it should be rated higher than Sampras's.
true.

Becker's serve is not to shabby either.
probably the only player to open up a match with four straight aces.
see 1996 Masters Cup Final - Hanover, Germany (Becker v. Sampras)
classic!

two heavy weights going at ti.. served and volleyed, baseline rallies
sick sick sick!
 
Top