Tennis Channel - The 100 GOAT : 1, Roger Federer. 2, Rod Laver. 5, Pete Sampras.

T

tennissportsrog

Rookie
100 – Michael Chang, M, USA

99 – Ann Haydon Jones, F, GBR

98 – Henry Bunny Austin, M, GBR

97 – Pat Cash, M, AUS

96 – Manuel Orantes, M, ESP

95 – Thomas Muster, M, AUT

94 – Andy Roddick, M, USA

93 – Nicola Pietrangeli, M, ITA

92 – Svetlana Kuznetsova, F, RUS

91 – Shirley Fry Irvin, F, USA

90 – Bill Johnston, M, USA

89 – Dorothea Lambert Chambers, F, GBR

88 – Amelie Mauresmo, F, FRA

87 – Mary Pierce, F, FRA

86 – Tony Wilding, M, NZL

85 – Yannick Noah, M, FRA

84 – Norman Brookes, M, AUS

83 – Jan Kodes, M, CZE

82 – Yevgeny Kafelnikov, M, RUS

81 – Vic Seixas, M, USA

80 – Marat Safin, M, RUS

79 – Gabriela Sabatini, F, ARG

78 – Ashley Cooper, M, AUS

77 – Molla Mallory, F, USA

76 – William Renshaw, M, GBR

75 – Pauline Betz Addie, F, USA

74 – Tony Roche, M, AUS

73 – Jaroslav Drobny, M, CZE

72 – Gottfried Von Cramm, M, GER

71 – Maria Sharapova, F, RUS

70 – Patrick Rafter , M, AUS
 
69 – Louise Brough , F, USA

68 – Helen Hull Jacobs , F, USA

67 – Fred Stolle , M, AUS

66 – Bobby Riggs , M, USA

65 – Pancho Segura , M, ECU

64 – Ellsworth Vines , M, USA

63 – Lleyton Hewitt , M, AUS

62 – Hana Mandlikova , F, CZE

61 – Neale Fraser , M, AUS

60 – Virginia Wade , F, GBR

59 – Margaret Osborne Dupont, F, USA

58 – Alice Marble , F, USA

57 – Jennifer Capriati , F, USA

56 – Stan Smith, M, USA

55 – Gustavo Kuerten, M, BRA

54 – Manuel Santana, M, ESP

53 – Tracy Austin, F, USA

52 – Jack Crawford, M, AUS

51 – Doris Hart, F, USA

50 – Tony Trabert, M, USA

49 – Ilie Nastase , M, ROM

48 – Frank Sedgman, M, AUS

47 – Jean Borotra, M, FRA

46 – Henri Cochet, M, FRA

45 – Kim Clijsters, F, BEL

44 – Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, F, ESP

43 – Lindsay Davenport, F, USA

42 – Jim Courier, M, USA

41 – Guillermo Vilas, M, ARG

40 – Novak Djokovic, M, SRB

39 – Althea Gibson, F, USA

38 – Maria Bueno, M, BRA

37 – Evonne Goolagong Cawley, F, AUS

36 – Rene Lacoste, M, FRA

35 – Pancho Gonzalez, M, USA

34 – Jack Kramer, M, USA

33 – Mats Wilander, M, SWE

32 – Lew Hoad, M, AUS

31 – John Newcombe, M, AUS
 
30 – Martina Hingis, F, SUI

29 – Helen Wills Moody Roark, F, USA

28 – Arthur Ashe, M, USA

27 – Maureen Connolly Brinker, F, USA

26 – Justine Henin, F, BEL

25 – Stefan Edberg, M, SWE

24 – Suzanne Lenglen, F, FRA

23 – Fred Perry, M, GBR

22 – Venus Williams, F, USA

21 – Boris Becker, M, GER

20 – Ken Rosewall, M, AUS

19 – Monica Seles, F, USA

18 – Ivan Lendl, M, CZE

17 – Roy Emerson, M, AUS

16 – Bill Tilden, M, USA

15 – Jimmy Connors, M, USA

14 – Serena Williams, F, USA

13 – John McEnroe, M, USA

12 – Andre Agassi, M, USA

11 – Don Budge, M, USA
 
10 – Billie Jean King, F, USA

9 – Chris Evert, F, USA

8 – Margaret Court, F, AUS

7 – Bjorn Borg, M, SWE

6 – Rafael Nadal, M, ESP

5 – Pete Sampras, M, USA

4 – Martina Navratilova, F, USA/CZE

3 – Steffi Graf, F, GER

2 – Rod Laver, M, AUS

1 – Roger Federer, M, SUI



---------
 
steffi graf and margret court should be co - no. 3, as both has won more than 20 slams and CYGS

ok graf has olympics gold which is lacked by court, but court has won 24 slams compare to steffi 22
 
Just separate the men and women from the list if you want to compare them to the same gender..
 
tipsa...don'tlikehim! said:
Agree with Chico, don't like the idea to put men and women together.

Murray not in the list
Djokovic 40.
Click to expand...

Djokovic has moved up quite a bit now since he's got 6 slams. However, the position remains the same for these players:

Men
1. Federer
2. Laver

Women
1. Graf
2. Martina
 
I saw the show...All they talked about is Number of slams and H2H.
No mention of no of weeks at no 1, WTF's . So much for the TW experts here.
 
Pancho Gonzales, Ranked 35. Thats all you need to know. JOKE list. Pancho is a top 2-3 player ever, male or female
 
Last edited:
TMF said:
Anonymous TTW posters are much more knowledgeable than the experts/historians.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

These are not historians. They are most likely people like Mark Petchey and Jon Wertheim doing the lists. No real tennis historian would have Roy Emerson 11 spots above Pancho Gonalezes. Anyone who knows jack squat about tennis knows that is an epic joke that renders anything else uncredible. Along with the great Elsworth Vines being ranked down at 64th. A true tennis historian like Bud Collins, Dan Maskell, Jack Kramer, or Jon Barrett would have a heart attack if they were alive (well a couple of them still are) and saw those rankings.

Anyway you have insisted Henin is superior to Venus, yet Venus is ranked ahead so I guess even you arent willing to cede your opinions to these great "historians" unless it suits you.

One thing for sure. If the list were redone today Nadal and Serena would be way higher. Probably atleast the 3rd highest man and 3rd highest women on the list.
 
Last edited:
granddog29 said:
Anyway you have insisted Henin is superior to Venus, yet Venus is ranked ahead so I guess even you arent willing to cede your opinions to these great "historians" unless it suits you.
Click to expand...

Right on point--the reason why members with conflicting positions are easy to brush off.
 
And also.... Why exactly would Federer be above Graf as far as resumes are concerned? Her resume put's Roger's to shame

I think we all know what type of Fan made this list ROFLMAO
 
TMF said:
Djokovic has moved up quite a bit now since he's got 6 slams. However, the position remains the same for these players:

Men
1. Federer
2. Laver

Women
1. Graf
2. Martina
Click to expand...

Yes, all sensible observers can see that this is the true order of things at present. Of course, Serena may rise to No 2 (and I hope she does get there, instead of Martina).

In terms of Nadal, he is currently No 6 all-time, and still has to pass Rosewall, Gonzales, Sampras and Laver before he can overcome Federer, the GOAT.
 
Phoenix1983 said:
In terms of Nadal, he is currently No 6 all-time
Click to expand...

Only in your own little planet. NOBODY but you thinks he is that low. Heck even the mostly bogus Tennis Channel list had him at #4 when he was much less accomplished than he is now. I like how you state a stupid opinion on your part that makes you look like an idiot as if it were a fact. That is like me saying "In terms of Federer, he is currently No 12 all-time" and stating it as if it were a commonly accepted fact.

Anyway like I said if Nadal were No. 6, no way in hell would Federer ever be able to be #1 then. Federer would be no higher than No. 4 in that case.
 
Last edited:
granddog29 said:
Only in your own little planet. NOBODY but you thinks he is that low.
Click to expand...

Incorrect - you should visit the Former Pro Player forum, where posters say Nadal is No 8 and does not deserve to be placed among their 'big seven' (chronologically, Tilden/Gonzales/Rosewall/Laver/Borg/Sampras/Federer).

So, I get criticised in that forum for placing him too high, and on this forum for placing him too low!
 
Phoenix1983 said:
Incorrect - you should visit the Former Pro Player forum, where posters say Nadal is No 8 and does not deserve to be placed among their big seven
Click to expand...

In the real World nobody places him outside the top 3 or 4 at this point, and if you are going to godify the Former Pro Posters who place Nadal as low as No. 8 (which are extremely few) those are the same ones who all place Federer 5th and lower, so if that is your representation of "reality" reality would be Federer being nowhere near the GOAT either. Like always you enjoy talking out of both sides to suit your purposes. Actually here is a challenge for you, quote me one poster who has Federer at #1 and still has Nadal as low as 8th. Good luck.

If you really think Nadal is as low as 6th then fine, but dont state it as if that is a commonly believed fact, since that is far from the truth.
 
Last edited:
granddog29 said:
In the real World nobody places him outside the top 3 or 4 at this point, and if you are going to godify the Former Pro Posters who place Nadal as low as No. 8 (which are extremely few) those are the same ones who all place Federer 5th and lower, so if that is your representation of "reality" reality would be Federer being nowhere near the GOAT either. Like always you enjoy talking out of both sides to suit your purposes.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that they represent the majority's viewpoint, but, I was just proving you wrong that "nobody" ranks him as low as No 6, when a number of posters in that forum who have followed tennis for many decades actually rank him lower. Too low, in fact.

They also rate Federer too low, as you have noted. He should be the GOAT (or debatably, below Laver) in everyone's list.
 
So basically you even admit the group of opinions you use to place Federer at #1 is an entirely different group than the one you are using to place Nadal as low as #6 (and the latter would never rank Federer #1 either which you concede). Hence why your initial statement in this thread was flawed to begin with.

As I dont if you really think Nadal is only #6 then fine, but dont state it as if that is a commonly accepted opinion or consensus in reality. Only amongst an excessive golden oldies crowd who generally also rank Federer outside the top 3, and some who even have Federer outside the top 5 as well.

Find me one poster or quote one expert who has Federer at #1 all time and Nadal at 6th or lower (other than a known turd like Monfed). At this point anyone who has Federer #1 has Nadal no lower than 3rd or 4th. I have Federer at #2 and Nadal at #3 personally.
 
Last edited:
granddog29 said:
So basically you even admit the group of opinions you use to place Federer at #1 is an entirely different group than the one you are using to place Nadal as low as #6 (and the latter would never rank Federer #1 either which you concede). Hence why your initial statement in this thread was flawed to begin with.
Click to expand...

Dude, I don't use anyone else's opinions to do my rankings. They are a strong set of rankings though, as I pay due respect to greats from all eras.
 
granddog29 said:
They quite obviously are not, as there isnt a single faction that would concur with them collectively (Federer at #1 while Nadal being down at #6) something even you conceded.
Click to expand...

LOL, you just can't accept that Federer is still 5 places higher than Nadal, if we consider all pre-Open Era greats as well.
 
Phoenix1983 said:
Incorrect - you should visit the Former Pro Player forum, where posters say Nadal is No 8 and does not deserve to be placed among their 'big seven' (chronologically, Tilden/Gonzales/Rosewall/Laver/Borg/Sampras/Federer).

So, I get criticised in that forum for placing him too high, and on this forum for placing him too low!
Click to expand...

lol..excellent point raised by Granddog. You mention an observation of Former pro player fans of "decades" regd Nadal but continue to ignore their ranking of Federer. Then what is the whole point of your point :P
 
Phoenix1983 said:
LOL, you just can't accept that Federer is still 5 places higher than Nadal, if we consider all pre-Open Era greats as well.
Click to expand...

lol...and Federer is 5 places above Nadal because ??? Oh right..the fans of "decades" decided so????rofl
 
chandu612 said:
lol..excellent point raised by Granddog. You mention an observation of Former pro player fans of "decades" regd Nadal but continue to ignore their ranking of Federer. Then what is the whole point of your point :P
Click to expand...

My point was proving him wrong when he arrogantly stated that "nobody" other than me ranked Nadal as low as No 6. That was all.

Point is, guys in that forum rank both Federer and Nadal too low. They put Federer at 4th/5th when he should be GOAT, and Nadal at 8th when he should be 6th.

They are too biased towards old players. I am more balanced and objective in my views.
 
Phoenix1983 said:
LOL, you just can't accept that Federer is still 5 places higher than Nadal, if we consider all pre-Open Era greats as well.
Click to expand...

I dont accept it since it is bogus. It is only YOUR own fantasy World, nothing else. Like I said quote me one poster (who isnt a known twat) or one credible expert who has Federer at #1 all time and Nadal at #6. If you cant do that then your absurd claim has been exposed as the malarky it is.

Federer (wherever he ranks) is no more than 2 places max above Nadal all time at this point. Some credible people whose opinions carry 1000 times more weight than yours like McEnroe, Courier, Navratilova, even consider Nadal better than Federer at this point (not that I am neccessarily agreeing yet, but worth pointing out). Federer as GOAT and Nadal out of the top 5 is only your own wet dream, and will never be anymore than that. Deal with it.
 
granddog29 said:
So basically you even admit the group of opinions you use to place Federer at #1 is an entirely different group than the one you are using to place Nadal as low as #6 (and the latter would never rank Federer #1 either which you concede). Hence why your initial statement in this thread was flawed to begin with.

As I dont if you really think Nadal is only #6 then fine, but dont state it as if that is a commonly accepted opinion or consensus in reality. Only amongst an excessive golden oldies crowd who generally also rank Federer outside the top 3, and some who even have Federer outside the top 5 as well.

Find me one poster or quote one expert who has Federer at #1 all time and Nadal at 6th or lower (other than a known turd like Monfed). At this point anyone who has Federer #1 has Nadal no lower than 3rd or 4th. I have Federer at #2 and Nadal at #3 personally.
Click to expand...

Great post!
 
TTC starts out by pitting the men against the women. At the same time they slight the women in doing this.

Why are Federer's majors more than Graf's who has two career slams?

Whoever thought up this list has got some marbles loose to devalue women to this extent.

So no matter how many majors a woman has, she will never be better than a man?

Sickening.
 
adil1972 said:
steffi graf and margret court should be co - no. 3, as both has won more than 20 slams and CYGS

ok graf has olympics gold which is lacked by court, but court has won 24 slams compare to steffi 22
Click to expand...

If we just add up the numbers (and don't consider anything else), then what's the point, ever, of discussing and debating GOAT rankings?
 
Comparing men's tennis and women's tennis is like comparing apples and oranges. The listings should be seperate.
 
granddog29 said:
I dont accept it since it is bogus. It is only YOUR own fantasy World, nothing else. Like I said quote me one poster (who isnt a known twat) or one credible expert who has Federer at #1 all time and Nadal at #6. If you cant do that then your absurd claim has been exposed as the malarky it is.
Click to expand...

It's not a "fantasy world". It's perfectly justifiable to have Federer as GOAT (although I know you will disagree), then Laver. It's also justifiable (again I know you will disagree, but you must concede it's at least a possibility) to have Sampras ahead of Nadal.

That would put him at No 4.

Then if you consider the greatest of pre-Open Era champs (i.e. Gonzales and Rosewall; I discount Tilden because he played in a very weak era), it's disrespectful to have them outside the all-time top 5.

So, yes, Nadal can be ranked at No 6 at this stage. He will likely move up, but he's not quite top 5 yet, if we want to be fair to the greats of all eras.

PS. It may sound arrogant, but I do think my rankings are better than a lot of experts'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Tennis Channel's "100 Greatest of All Time"
7 8 9
Replies
422
Views
83K
pmerk34
P
Back
Top