Ten male GOATS

[DMP]

As someone who has seen a lot of tennis I find the GOAT discussions often amusing, because I think really they are often about who is the greatest in the ATP era, i.e. since everything settled down in 1989/90 into the format we basically know today. That is also a convenient cut-off point because it marks the first major victory by Sampras. So...if we define GOAT as the Greatest Of the ATP Time, who are the top 10?

If we look at weeks at #1, then the list is

1. Federer 302
2. Sampras 286
3. Nadal 122
4= Agassi/Djkovic 101
6. Hewitt 80
7. Kuerten 43
8. Roddick 13
9. Safin 9
10. Ferrero 8

and Major victories

1. Federer 17
2. Sampras 14
3. Nadal 13
4. Agassi 8
5. Djokovic 6
6. Courier 4
7= Edberg/Kuerten 3
9= Becker/Bruguera/Kafelnikov/Rafter/Hewitt/Safin/Murray 2

so 1-5 look clear cut, but 6-10?

As a matter of interest, here is the ratio of weeks at #1/Major victories

Federer 17.8
Sampras 20.4
Nadal 9.4
Agassi 12.6
Djokovic 16.8
Hewitt 40
Kuerten 14.3
Roddick 13
Safin 4.5
Ferrero 8
Others 0

 

[Ramesh848]

Where's the ratio of FO Won/FO participated?

Where is H2H?

BTE discussions are incomplete without those.

 

[heninfan99]

Cool stats but I can't ignore the GOATS pre-1990

 

[LuckyR]

Cool stats but I can't ignore the GOATS pre-1990

I can. Why? Let's see your take on the following question. Is Jessie Owens a candidate for GOAT in the 100 meter dash? Won the Olympic Gold medal! In Berlin! In front of der Fuhrer! Landmark event!

OTOH his Gold medal time is way way eclipsed by high schoolers at this point...

 

[Russeljones]

Who the hell stated Open Era starts in 1989/1990?

 

[DMP]

Edit: The list of weeks at #1 is wrong. I missed Edberg and Courier. So it should read

If we look at weeks at #1, then the list is
1. Federer 302
2. Sampras 286
3. Nadal 122
4= Agassi/Djkovic 101
6. Hewitt 80
7. Edberg 72
8. Courier 58
9. Kuerten 43
10. Roddick 13

and Major victories

1. Federer 17
2. Sampras 14
3. Nadal 13
4. Agassi 8
5. Djokovic 6
6. Courier 4
7= Edberg/Kuerten 3
9= Becker/Bruguera/Kafelnikov/Rafter/Hewitt/Safin/Murray 2

The ratio of weeks at #1/Major victories

Federer 17.8
Sampras 20.4
Nadal 9.4
Agassi 12.6
Djokovic 16.8
Hewitt 40
Edberg 24
Courier 19.5
Kuerten 14.3
Roddick 13
Safin 4.5
Ferrero 8
Others 0

Since the ATP tour started in 1990 there have been 24x52 + 8 weeks= 1256 weeks, and 24x4+1 = 97 Majors. That is an average of 12.9 weeks/Major available to be #1.

 

[urundai]

Come on, when I read the title, for a second I thought you had included an actual image of 10 male goats (as in animal) for fun.

So much for that memory :-(

 

[merwy]

OP I must commend you for thinking of this great cut-off point! I always hated those GOAT discussions because people always started bringing up players like Rosewall and Laver. It's not that those players aren't any good, it's that tennis was just so much different back then. The guys were playing with wooden racquets, topspin wasn't even invented yet, balls were white, you couldn't enter slams if you were too good(?!?). You can't compare these era's for crying out loud. I think the Agassi/Sampras era is a great cut-off point because the tennis they played looks a lot like the tennis they play today. Also, the slams and the other tournaments pretty much carried the same significance as they do now. Which is essential when we're basing almost everything on those titles and records.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Looks like you have a couple of endorsers, DMP!

 

[timnz]

As someone who has seen a lot of tennis I find the GOAT discussions often amusing, because I think really they are often about who is the greatest in the ATP era, i.e. since everything settled down in 1989/90 into the format we basically know today. That is also a convenient cut-off point because it marks the first major victory by Sampras. So...if we define GOAT as the Greatest Of the ATP Time, who are the top 10?

If we look at weeks at #1, then the list is

1. Federer 302
2. Sampras 286
3. Nadal 122
4= Agassi/Djkovic 101
6. Hewitt 80
7. Kuerten 43
8. Roddick 13
9. Safin 9
10. Ferrero 8

and Major victories

1. Federer 17
2. Sampras 14
3. Nadal 13
4. Agassi 8
5. Djokovic 6
6. Courier 4
7= Edberg/Kuerten 3
9= Becker/Bruguera/Kafelnikov/Rafter/Hewitt/Safin/Murray 2

so 1-5 look clear cut, but 6-10?

As a matter of interest, here is the ratio of weeks at #1/Major victories

Federer 17.8
Sampras 20.4
Nadal 9.4
Agassi 12.6
Djokovic 16.8
Hewitt 40
Kuerten 14.3
Roddick 13
Safin 4.5
Ferrero 8
Others 0

1990 cut-off is arbitary. The ATP took over - but all they did is rename some tournaments as 'Masters'. There is no reason at all that Borg, Lendl, McEnroe and Connors shouldn't be on your lists.

No one will ever be able to convince me that Boris Becker started to play professional tennis in 1990. Hence, if he started earlier - then his 1980's Wimbledon victories and other achievements should count. Why just his post 1990 achievements?

Really the whole 1990 cut off - just doesn't stand. Start in April 1968.

 

[BobbyOne]

OP I must commend you for thinking of this great cut-off point! I always hated those GOAT discussions because people always started bringing up players like Rosewall and Laver. It's not that those players aren't any good, it's that tennis was just so much different back then. The guys were playing with wooden racquets, topspin wasn't even invented yet, balls were white, you couldn't enter slams if you were too good(?!?). You can't compare these era's for crying out loud. I think the Agassi/Sampras era is a great cut-off point because the tennis they played looks a lot like the tennis they play today. Also, the slams and the other tournaments pretty much carried the same significance as they do now. Which is essential when we're basing almost everything on those titles and records.

merwy, topspin was invented in Laver/Rosewall time.

 

[merwy]

merwy, topspin was invented in Laver/Rosewall time.

Yeah I kind of exaggerated there. But there you have another thing: I wasn't even born when those guys played, so all we can find are blurry 240p youtube videos. Hard to talk about players we've never seen play.

 

[Russeljones]

1990 cut-off is arbitary. The ATP took over - but all they did is rename some tournaments as 'Masters'. There is no reason at all that Borg, Lendl, McEnroe and Connors shouldn't be on your lists.

No one will ever be able to convince me that Boris Becker started to play professional tennis in 1990. Hence, if he started earlier - then his 1980's Wimbledon victories and other achievements should count. Why just his post 1990 achievements?

Really the whole 1990 cut off - just doesn't stand. Start in April 1968.

This. A 1989/90 cut-off is a joke.

 

[DMP]

OP I must commend you for thinking of this great cut-off point! I always hated those GOAT discussions because people always started bringing up players like Rosewall and Laver. It's not that those players aren't any good, it's that tennis was just so much different back then. The guys were playing with wooden racquets, topspin wasn't even invented yet, balls were white, you couldn't enter slams if you were too good(?!?). You can't compare these era's for crying out loud. I think the Agassi/Sampras era is a great cut-off point because the tennis they played looks a lot like the tennis they play today. Also, the slams and the other tournaments pretty much carried the same significance as they do now. Which is essential when we're basing almost everything on those titles and records.

Exactly!! I'm glad someone gets it.

 

[DMP]

This. A 1989/90 cut-off is a joke.

No it isn't. See merwy's reply. And I would say it makes a lot more sense as a cut-off point than the other one people throw around - Open Era. Exactly the same players were playing just before the start of the Open Era as when OE commenced, so how come half their careers are supposed to vanish into space?

1990 is a real watershed, both in the organisation of tennis and the mindset of those playing, and far more people writing here have direct knowledge of what has happened since then than they have of long-ago days.

 

[DMP]

1990 cut-off is arbitary. The ATP took over - but all they did is rename some tournaments as 'Masters'. There is no reason at all that Borg, Lendl, McEnroe and Connors shouldn't be on your lists.

No one will ever be able to convince me that Boris Becker started to play professional tennis in 1990. Hence, if he started earlier - then his 1980's Wimbledon victories and other achievements should count. Why just his post 1990 achievements?

Really the whole 1990 cut off - just doesn't stand. Start in April 1968.

Of course 1990 is arbitrary. That is my whole point. And remember, this is not about the Greatest Of All Time, it is about the Greatest of the ATP Time. No more, no less.

 

[Russeljones]

No it isn't. See merwy's reply. And I would say it makes a lot more sense as a cut-off point than the other one people throw around - Open Era. Exactly the same players were playing just before the start of the Open Era as when OE commenced, so how come half their careers are supposed to vanish into space?

1990 is a real watershed, both in the organisation of tennis and the mindset of those playing, and far more people writing here have direct knowledge of what has happened since then than they have of long-ago days.

1980 is not so long ago. Neither is 1970. You want to make this forum a place for people 20 and younger? There is an argument for avoiding wading in the pre-Open Era marsh of hearsay and limited documentation (next to some truly excellent books). But to do this to a period that gave us some of the most outstanding champions and rivalries of all tennis history just smacks of laziness. It seems you're not bothered with learning and want to have a discussion about a snapshot of tennis history. You can do that, but don't pretend like this snapshot is representative and you certainly cannot exclude players from the Open Era who plied their trade before your preferred cut-off point when you want to use the qualification 'GOAT'.