Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by 5555, Aug 1, 2012.
What do you think?
Federer vs Nadal
Rod Laver vs Ken Rosewall
Martina Navratilova vs Steffi Graf
Steffi Graf vs Monica Seles
Bjorn Borg vs John McEnroe
Andre Agassi vs Pete Sampras
Stefan Edberg and Boris Becker
Justine Henin and Kim Clijsters
Serena vs Lines people
after 1995 or so, the fields have been more spreadt, so I´d only consider the 2 Williams against each other and Hingis vs Davenport as great rivalries.
Laver vs Rosewall ( their last years of glory with that unforgetable 1972 Dallas match )
Borg vs Connors vs Mac: Just the Golden Era
Mac vs Lendl: the same
Lendl vs Wilander
Becker vs Edberg
Agassi vs Sampras
Federer vs Nadal
Djokovic-Nadal is quite possibly my favourite.
Federer-Nadal is hardly a rivalry.
Cash-Lendl and Becker-Lendl were interestin rivalries. Lendl had difficulty with both players whenever he met em in slams, but leads the slam count against both comfortably
Men: Federer vs Nadal
Sampras vs Agassi
Borg vs McEnroe
Borg vs Connors
Women: Navratilova vs. Evert
Graf vs Seles
and Lendl vs McEnroe for men
LOL, for all of Federer's "shortcomings" in the rivalry, he can still say he is one of only two players to win 2 clay court finals against Nadal. He has won 2 of the 3 5 set matches that Nadal has lost in his career. He is one of only two players to defeat Nadal in a Grand Slam final. He has denied Nadal probably 4 times from winning the fifth biggest tournament of the year. He ended Nadal's single-surface winning streak in the Open Era.
I agree.Interesting rivalries, Lendl vs Becker may be as big as the former mentioned ones.
Lendl and Connors had also a very interesting rivalry.
Mc Enroe and Wilander, too.
All personal rivalries.. THese guys hated each other legitimately.. You can't top that.
5. Pete-Andre. Should have been perhaps at the top but Andre was MIA for a lot of his prime. What made the matches so great to watch was the contrast of styles between the two.
6. Fed-Nadal. Nothing personal or heated. One sided rivalry and out of the 20 times or whatever they have played, they have had maybe 2-3 classics. Overrall the rivalry has pretty much sucked.
7. Pete-Becker. GREAT matches. But the only issue was Becker was at the tail end of his career so it wasn't much of a rivalry in terms of Becker getting any big matches
I agree with you, but as you probably know, Mac and Borg didn't hate each other. They were actually pretty good friends.
Mcenroe and Borg never hated each other. In fact Mcenroe loved Borg and looked up to him. Mcenroe hates Lendl even now. I would stick Becker Edberg instead of Becker and Sampras. You could also make a case for Federer and Djokovic. These two really don't like each other and have had some good matches on all 4 slams. Nadal Djokovic is another that should be on the list.
The contrast in style, in personality. Best serve vs return, etc...
Djokovic-Nadal can be a very good one too. They are just 25 and 26 and are getting closer to the record in amount of matches against each other having produced some epic matches.
Such are the lengths that you will go to defend Federer:
(Tsonga vs Federer, Wimbledon 2011)
I don't know why this quote of mine is so often brought up. It is not like I said, I hope Tsonga gets into a car accident or some other injury off court. I have loved when Federer outlasts opponents and makes them cramp and slow down or get injured. I am not sure what is wrong with this.
I think some stupid journalists, by 1981 or so were writting that mac was insulting Borg during their matches, in order to anger the swede and make him lose concetration...I never believed one single word about that journalistm BShit.Mac and Bjorn shared a lot of funny things in the locker room, with the sericeable help of a friend of both, Vitas Gerulaitis.
Mac always had a kind of young brother relation with Borg.They were really close.
Agree. Fed-Nadal is completely one-sided on clay, has never happened at USO (not even once) and completely one-sided indoor. On grass, they haven't even met in the last 4 years. To me, the most interesting current rivalries are Nadal/Djokovic and Federer/Djokovic. Those are "true" rivalries where one really feels either guy could win and it's not a foregone conclusion. Given the age difference between Djoko and Fed, it may become a foregone conclusion pretty soon but until now, it hasn't been.
Yeh journalist always try and stir things. It's funny how they portray things, which are completely false as well. Over here, Mcenroe was portrayed as the less talented fighter, when in truth he was regarded as the most talented player of all time by most of his peers. I know Connors and Ashe have both gone on record calling him the most talented. Ashe putting his talent above even Laver, though he said Rod was the best. Remember Federer them trying to stir things between Federer and Roddick in 07, but Roddick did not fall for it.
Laver was the role model for as long as Sampras.
I vividly recall, by 1980 or 1981, that all big gurus, from Collins to Elian to Bellamy and so forth were considering Mac the greatest talent since Rod Laver.
How about Federer-Safin
Hamburg, masters and ao were epic moments
And also: agassi-courrier
Agreed. It's very upsetting that Nadal and Fed haven't met at the Open, even after so many French Opens and a handful of wimbledon's, but no Open? I feel that rivalries these days are just not like they used to be. I really enjoy Djokovic vs. Nadal. They've met more times (though compared to early rivalries, they are still far off from the same number of matches), and at they have competed at every single slam.
Maybe not a first class rivalry, but for a couple or three years, Courier vs Edberg offered great, intense matches and a fantastic contrast of play.
Short but excellent were also Agassi/Sampras vs Rafter and Becker vs Agassi/Sampras
I am guessing you are American. In England things were and ARE still different. Mcenroe even now is known for his temper over his talent.
I think quite a few did not consider Laver the greatest talent. Most considered him the BEST and the GREATEST player, but not necessarily the most talented. Mcenroe really underachieved in his career due to off court distractions.
It is like the question of Sampras vs Agassi. I am not sure Sampras is universally considered more talented than Agassi. I definitely do not consider Roddick more talented than Nalbandian, but Roddick is the better player. I guess it's how you use the word talent. I think people usually ignore physical attributes gained by training, mental strength and dedication. Though you can argue these things are talent too.
When I think about contrasting everything, Sampras-Agassi immediately springs to mind
Reasons why (imo) Fed/Djoko or Rafa/Djoko are more interesting than Rafa/Fed: Djoko/Fed and Djoko/Nad have played in every slam, Fed/Rafa have never played at USO. There is only 1 major tennis event where Djoko/Nadal have not met: Shanghai (or 1st fall master). There are 3 events where Fed/Djoko have never met: Hamb/Madrid (or 3rd clay master), Olympics and Paris master. There are 7 events where Nadal/Fed have never met: Olympics, DC, Canada, Cincy, USO, Shanghai (or Madrid ind) and Paris master. How is that even a rivalry on hard court? Djoko/Nadal have met in 16 different events, Fed/ Djoko in 15, Fed/Nadal only in 10. Of the 3 rivalries, Fed/Djoko is the most balanced one result-wise: only 2 events where they played each other more than once and where only 1 of the 2 players won: Monte-Carlo: Fed won twice and Rome: Djoko won twice. By contrast, vs Fed, Nadal has 3 events with all wins: RG (5), Monte-Carlo (3) and AO (2). Fed has 1 event with all wins vs Nadal: WTF (4). Nadal/Djoko are evenly split (in # of events if not in # of wins): Nadal: RG (4) and Monte-Carlo (2). Djoko: Miami (2) and Cincinnati (2)
Yes, Fed-Safin produced some epics. Fed-Nalbandian too.
Separate names with a comma.