What impresses you the most

What is most impressive

  • Sampras's record of 14 majors

    Votes: 20 15.4%

  • Agassi's career slam

    Votes: 10 7.7%

  • Sampras's record of six straight years as the world's top player

    Votes: 21 16.2%

  • Federer's record run of 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals

    Votes: 27 20.8%

  • Rod Laver's 2 slams

    Votes: 19 14.6%

  • Federer's record run of 17 consecutive GS semifinals

    Votes: 15 11.5%

  • Borg`s record of of winning the French and Wimbledon back to back 3 years in a row

    Votes: 12 9.2%

  • Other

    Votes: 6 4.6%
  • Total voters
    130
Gorecki said:
exactly. the most hedious trend in tennis ever... and the way these kids showdown and think nadal invented tennis and would beat anything and anyone is just annoying. nothing against the Player (i actually like his personality, not his game), as i believe he seem to be a good hearted kid.

those kids at the tournment you refer should be if anything using prestiges for the respect of grestest croatian tenis player ever or yonexes because of mario... or wilsons for what matters...
please dont let it happen, we need the croantian wide leg serve stance, and the Split style risk game... if you know what i mean? we need that variety...
Click to expand...

our young players are all claycourters with rather poor serve good footwork etc
and yes ivanišević was a baaaaaad player but rafa is the greatest of all times. one player aged 13 i think was even screaming VAMOS RAFA (omg)
about yonex rackets i dont know how do they look like since i have never seen that racket lol
some of them play with head rackets like goran but still... play tennis a la nadal
they even DONT WANT to serve hard because nadal doesnt hit many aces REALLY I TALKED TO SOME OF THEM and they find it more interesting to play game serving 2 second serves
and i watched semifinals match between 1st and 3rd seed of the tournament (1st seed was ranked about 15 in croatia what is solid ranking)
you know what i saw? lob rallies all the time just lobs lobs and lobs and nothing else (btw 1st seed was from the same club as me on his home tourney :))
and i feel so sad for future of tennis - what happenes. just few days before that i had played a match against same guy (1st seed on tournament) a friendly match on clay. and playing serve and volley most of the time (even though i dont serve more than 170 kmh 1st serve now - lacking power) with wilson ncode i managed to destroy him. guess how - i come to the net he doesnt know anything other than lob and what happenes - he tries to lob me; i smash the ball and here we go point by point
its really sad where tennis is going :(
 
so i forgot to put the conclusion :)

nothing in future of tennis impresses me at all its just getting more and more boring and all matches are becoming terribly boring
im impressed by masters from 90s
 
Cenc said:
i come to the net he doesnt know anything other than lob and what happenes - he tries to lob me; i smash the ball and here we go point by point
its really sad where tennis is going :(
Click to expand...

nothing like a good old air sampras smash to kick some nadaletes loopy ground strokes...
 
Guys, we're way off topic here, but since it brought back memories, I'd like to offer Goran's Wimby title as another option under OTHER category. The first ever to win as wild card and ranked way below 100. Troubling shoulder too. Talk about being inspired and motivated :)
 
oranges said:
Guys, we're way off topic here, but since it brought back memories, I'd like to offer Goran's Wimby title as another option under OTHER category. The first ever to win as wild card and ranked way below 100. Troubling shoulder too. Talk about being inspired and motivated :)
Click to expand...

talk about possible tennis future is never off topic. :)
tennis coaches impress me with their work with children :p

yes, gorans wimby win was amaaaazing
 
1. Sampras's record of 14 majors
2. Rod Laver's 2 slams
3. Borg`s record of of winning the French and Wimbledon back to back 3 years in a row
4. Federer's record run of 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals
5. Federer's record run of 17 consecutive GS semifinals
6. Sampras's record of six straight years as the world's top player
7. Agassi's career slam


This would be my list of the list (though all are impressive).
 
Mansewerz said:
17 consecutive semifinals is a huge feat. It's total consistency. Along with his 10 consecutive finals.
Click to expand...

I understand that. It's just not what's most impressive to me. Semifinals are not finals. That would be impressive, but only it you got there and actually won them.
 
luckyboy1300 said:
you sound more like a fanboy, moron!
Click to expand...

1) which complexes do you have so that you need to call others morons what makes you feel good?
2) i am not a fanboy
3) your post was just to say: yes everything federer did was perfect. its not about number of consecutive weeks at number one, sampras had overall more weeks at number 1 and he finished MORE SEASONS (full seasons) as number one so this argument is... weird?
 
helloworld said:
This is rediculous. 10 slam finals over 14 grand slams... Guys, get over your god Fed. He's done.
Click to expand...

why do we even bother? they are even putting it above carrer slams and year slams...

and nadal fans didnt find this thread yet, because when they do so, it will be about winning this master, and that atp titles back to back and having this or that largest bicep as the greatest achievment of all time... vry sad for tennis to have fans like this!
 
The one that impresses me the most is Federer's 230+ weeks consecutively at #1 although it is not an option.
 
The title of this poll says the most "impressive", not necessarily the most important.

The most important (via common opinion) are the number of slams (& number of years as top player), of course.

The most impressive in open era (to me) is Borg's feat on slow clay and fast grass (not the current slow and bouncier) in about 2 weeks apart for 3 years or so.

The most impressive in pre-open era is, of course, the 2 gland slams by Laver, which probably will never happen again in open era.....
 
Gorecki said:
why do we even bother? they are even putting it above carrer slams and year slams...

and nadal fans didnt find this thread yet, because when they do so, it will be about winning this master, and that atp titles back to back and having this or that largest bicep as the greatest achievment of all time... vry sad for tennis to have fans like this!
Click to expand...

well, somewhere on this forum i found that nadal is the goat because he looks perfect for a tennis player (bicspses) but yea if that makes best players then nadal is surely the goat
fans are really unreal i agree with everything u wrote
some people find 5 nadals slams better than 14 sampras' slams or agassi's career slam and gold medal and tons of other results
not to mention that fed's 3 roland garros finals (when he lost to only real claycourter that currently exists) worth more than all sampras' achievements
 
TheTruth said:
Great poll, Jane!

Sampras's record of 14 majors-To break a record that had stood for so many years in a field where players were bigger, stronger, and had the advantage of better nutrition and knowledge means you excelled above and beyond the norm. With the 14 Pete went where no man went before in an intensely competitive field.

Agassi's career slam-Not that impressive to me because it's just a player winning one extra match. How many people have won all three gs's and missing winning a single match? For that reason I think it's based on the luck of the draw.

Rod Laver's 2 slams-Definitely don't think this is impressive as they where all mostly played on grass, and if that's your best surface, then it's good, but not great.

Borg`s record of of winning the French and Wimbledon back to back 3 years in a row -Impressive, but not the most impressive. Again, it's only taking in a player's best surfaces while ignoring the other two surfaces.


Sampras's record of six straight years as the world's top player-A toss up between this and the number of slams, but the 14 is loftier.

Federer's record run of 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals-That's impressive, but didn't yield ten consecutive trophies, so um uh.

Federer's record run of 17 consecutive GS semifinals-Who cares about semifinals? Sharapova had a few strings of those and was nicknamed Semipova, as in couldn't win the big one. It took her two years from Wimbledon before she broke through at the USO two years later.
Click to expand...

thanks (I had to create new account, but it's me).
I thik the 17 consecutive DS SF are impressive. but should have rather chosen Federer's record stay at No. 1 234 weeks and counting. more impressive (and not for so long).
 
hanks (I had to create new account, but it's me).
I think the 17 consecutive GS semifinals are impressive. but should have rather chosen Federer's record stay at No. 1 234 weeks and counting. more impressive (and not for so long I guess).
 
Thanks (I had to create new account, but it's me).
I think the 17 consecutive GS semifinals are impressive. but should have rather chosen Federer's record stay at No. 1 234 weeks and counting. more impressive (and not for so long)
 
Cenc said:
1) which complexes do you have so that you need to call others morons what makes you feel good?
2) i am not a fanboy
3) your post was just to say: yes everything federer did was perfect. its not about number of consecutive weeks at number one, sampras had overall more weeks at number 1 and he finished MORE SEASONS (full seasons) as number one so this argument is... weird?
Click to expand...

1) which complexes do you have so that you need to call others fanboys because they have different opinion
2) you are a hater from what I see
3) Sampras really finished more seasons at No1 but Fed isn't done yet. At the end the weeks combined will decide who was more dominant.

For the record, I find Agassi's accomplishment very impressive. I'd vote for him.
 
Everyone is underestimating Nadal. What is most impressive is:

1. Clay court domination: He had an 80+ match win streak, and he is undefeated at the French Open.

2. He won the French and Wimbledon back-to-back.

3. He has a dominating record over Roger Federer.

4. He is playing with his left-hand, and he's naturally right-handed! Imagine if he played with his right-hand, he will be unstoppable!
 
I'm sorry, but there's a reason he plays left handed. It's not so hard - my dad also works equally well with both hands. It's about adaptation at young age. Playing left handed sometimes gives him advantage when serving and the ability to constantly attack his opponent's BH. This works quite well versus players with weaker BH.
Yep, the other accomplishments are pretty impressive, can't take that from him.
 
- Sampras's record of 14 majors

Nobody cared about winning as many majors as possible before Sampras's time, so this can't be the benchmark of greatness - and besides, 14 would almost certainly be far short of the true record if it hadn't been for the pro/amateur divide that kept Gonzales, Rosewall, and Laver from competing in the major tournaments during their prime years.

- Agassi's career slam

By my count about 10 players have won either a "Career Slam" or the equivalent to it in their era, so this one doesn't really stand out either from a historical perspective.

- Rod Laver's 2 slams

The greatest record in tennis. Unparalleled. (And really, Laver won no fewer than THREE "Grand Slams" if we count his "Pro Slam" of '67 - probably the best season of Laver's career.)

- Borg`s record of of winning the French and Wimbledon back to back 3 years in a row

Very impressive, especially considering the slower clay and faster grass conditions during Borg's era. Still, the French-Wimbledon combo is only halfway to the Grand Slam... for me this has to take a distant back seat to Laver's achievement.

- Sampras's record of six straight years as the world's top player

This so-called "record" is shared by Tilden (1920-25) and surpassed by Gonzales (1954-60).

- Federer's record run of 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals
- Federer's record run of 17 consecutive GS semifinals

For me the more impressive way of phrasing both of these is that Federer has either won the title, or lost to the person who eventually won the title, at the past 17 straight major events. That is an incredible mark of consistency, with no objectively "bad" losses in a major event for more than four years. I would rate this on par with Borg's feat but well behind Laver's two Grand Slams.
 
I dont know if I am biased or what but I just bought sampras @ wimbledon dvd from their official web page and Im thrilled. I love the guy and his achievements and the way he did it all, the span between slams, the domination, the back to back nr1 for 6 years and so on - that is too much for me to overlook. I remind you guys I may be biased because I grew up waching this guys magic touch .. ;)
 
Nadal-GOAT said:
Everyone is underestimating Nadal. What is most impressive is:

1. Clay court domination: He had an 80+ match win streak, and he is undefeated at the French Open.

2. He won the French and Wimbledon back-to-back.

3. He has a dominating record over Roger Federer.

4. He is playing with his left-hand, and he's naturally right-handed! Imagine if he played with his right-hand, he will be unstoppable!
Click to expand...
Agreed. He should be on this poll. Other is what I picked.
 
Oh, and if nadal played with his right hand, he would not be as good. His balls spin differently then right handers. Playing with his left hand gives him an advantage..
 
Laver's record......if Sampras, Fed, or nadal had achieved the same thing, everyone on their bandwagons would be touting it as the greatest record of all time.

BTW, I'm a Fed fan first but even I can acknowledge that he hasn't been able to match Laver's streak.
 
mcenroefan said:
Laver's record......if Sampras, Fed, or nadal had achieved the same thing, everyone on their bandwagons would be touting it as the greatest record of all time.

BTW, I'm a Fed fan first but even I can acknowledge that he hasn't been able to match Laver's streak.
Click to expand...

I do think some are choosing their favorite players over the actual achievements, but in all honesty since Laver's grand slams were contested mostly on grass, three out of the four I think, it doesn't carry as much weight imo. Because if you happened to be great on grass and you did it over a period of time then you would be an automatic shoo-in because it just so happens to be your best surface. That would be like the French, the AO, and the USO being on clay and Rafa won 2 grand slams because of it.
 
I liked Pete Sampras but was never a fan like I am with Federer. Pete was gifted I would say and Federer is talented. I would rather be talented with some element of being gifted rather than being gifted and have a lesser effect of being talented.

Let me put it this way. Pete is physically gifted with height power and tennis talent. Where he is less talented is in his tactical game. You might argue look at his serve and volleys. But I'd say this, I'd say he was developed especially to do what he could do and do it well, almost like an Andy Roddick who although he has the biggest serve in the game, also brings with him some talent in the technique and tactics department.

Djokovic is another guy to look at. He looks very talented, awesome backhand, stable forehand and good tactical play. But although he is gifted in a sense, he is someone you look at and say he is more talented than gifted.

Rogers the half and half. He's got the talent, he's got the gift, a more balanced type of player than there has ever been IMHO.

Again, this is my viewpoint not to be taken as correct but to be thought about.

Pete had a big serve and a mean volley and most of his service games he won but generally he missed out on all the great things tennis offers like long base line rallys and tactical plays.

In a sense Roger has emulated his game on Pete's but he does battle out his discomfort zones with more talent than Pete could.

I see Pete's achievement as the most significant because he was gifted and because he made a milestone for men's tennis that hasn't been touched.
 
montx said:
.....
Rogers the half and half. He's got the talent, he's got the gift, a more balanced type of player than there has ever been IMHO.
.....
Click to expand...

Yeah, Roger is the most balanced player in multi-dimensions of this game including both physical and non-physical domain. balanced between offense and defense too. He has elements of all different style of game. But he is not necessarily the most complete and gifted players I've ever seen in terms of physical and athletic domain.

But Sampras had that "weighted" balance. He did have all elements of this game but put more weight on more important issues like serve and holding your service game. He was about avoiding situations where you need to rely on very esoteric element of this game. And he put more weight on physical and atheletic domain of this game than others like court visons, tactics, etc... He is still the most complete tennis "athelete" I've ever seen.
 
fastdunn said:
Yeah, Roger is the most balanced player in multi-dimensions of this game including both physical and non-physical domain. balanced between offense and defense too. He has elements of all different style of game. But he is not necessarily the most complete and gifted players I've ever seen in terms of physical and athletic domain.

But Sampras had that "weighted" balance. He did have all elements of this game but put more weight on more important issues like serve and holding your service game. He was about avoiding situations where you need to rely on very esoteric element of this game. And he put more weight on physical and atheletic domain of this game than others like court visons, tactics, etc... He is still the most complete tennis "athelete" I've ever seen.
Click to expand...

Sampras is probably the most physically gifted tennis player ever, but in terms of tactital talent, I'd have to give it to Federer.
 
FlamEnemY said:
1) which complexes do you have so that you need to call others fanboys because they have different opinion
2) you are a hater from what I see
3) Sampras really finished more seasons at No1 but Fed isn't done yet. At the end the weeks combined will decide who was more dominant.

For the record, I find Agassi's accomplishment very impressive. I'd vote for him.
Click to expand...

i dont have any complexes i am amazingly happy with my life unlike some others
fanboy is not an insult, however moron,idiot and similar names are insults
you are fedfan and thats it everything he does is perfect so its not worthy to talk about anything with you
 
i dont have any complexes i am amazingly happy with my life unlike some others
fanboy is not an insult, however moron,idiot and similar names are insults
you are fedfan and thats it everything he does is perfect so its not worthy to talk about anything with you
Click to expand...

Ok, good for you. It's nice to be happy with what you have.
It's an insult to be called something you aren't, especially with this all-knowing overproud attitude. "Oh you are fedfan you are not worthy". Wrong!

Lastly, you only show how narrow you are. The only thing I did was have a different opinion, hello, "opininon"? I agree that at the moment Sapras has more total weeks (well, duh, I should be blindfolded not to agree), but you on the other hand should also agree that Fed isn't done.
And I'm not even close to being a fedfan. I don't know how you came to this conclusion. I guess it's because of me stating some facts.
Have a nice day.
 
Gorecki said:
what else is new here? to you Nadal could fart and you would consider it to Worlds greatest...
Click to expand...
So you don't think winning Hamburg, French Open, Queens, Wimbledon, and Toronto all in a row without losing a match isn't impressive? I guess nothing will impress you when you don't like that player. Btw Agassi's career slam is not deserving to be up there. It took him a long to do that.
 
Cenc said:
1) which complexes do you have so that you need to call others morons what makes you feel good?
2) i am not a fanboy
3) your post was just to say: yes everything federer did was perfect. its not about number of consecutive weeks at number one, sampras had overall more weeks at number 1 and he finished MORE SEASONS (full seasons) as number one so this argument is... weird?
Click to expand...

1. none that i've known of. however you do have a complex of calling someone a fanboy just because his views are different, and a complex for posting stupid, pointless, annoying messages.
2. whatever
3. did that seem that way to you? oh yeah i think i have to agree with a poster above, ie, you're a hater. being number one for 234+ consecutive weeks doesn't mean you have to be perfect. you just have to be above the others most of the time, and show true dominance. and undeniably that was what he did. and imo, federer still has the chance to finish the year at number 1, albeit it will be very slim. and, no indicators are there that federer will not be able to reach the 286 weeks at number 1 that pete had.

and one more note, though the term fanboy is not literally an insult, to me it's a very degenerative term to indicate someone who praises someone for no reason at all.
 
Last edited:
Nadal_Freak said:
So you don't think winning Hamburg, French Open, Queens, Wimbledon, and Toronto all in a row without losing a match isn't impressive? I guess nothing will impress you when you don't like that player. Btw Agassi's career slam is not deserving to be up there. It took him a long to do that.
Click to expand...

Read the bolded part aloud to yourself and it will be clear to you that nothing impresses YOU unless it was done by Nadal and that's what people find fault with. Quite frankly, some of his fans are doing the guy a huge disservice with their behavior that no one before, during and after his appearance ever did or will do anything worthy, to the extent that I'll develop a distinct dislike for the guy and deny him his achievements as you deny others. You may find various options offered more or less impressive and it'll still be fine, but coupling it with insistence that anything Nadal does must be impressive and is above all mentioned is not. It merely indicates that you're not interested in anything that has not been achieved by the Spaniard.
 
oranges said:
Read the bolded part aloud to yourself and it will be clear to you that nothing impresses YOU unless it was done by Nadal and that's what people find fault with. Quite frankly, some of his fans are doing the guy a huge disservice with their behavior that no one before, during and after his appearance ever did or will do anything worthy, to the extent that I'll develop a distinct dislike for the guy and deny him his achievements as you deny others. You may find various options offered more or less impressive and it'll still be fine, but coupling it with insistence that anything Nadal does must be impressive and is above all mentioned is not. It merely indicates that you're not interested in anything that has not been achieved by the Spaniard.
Click to expand...
there was a nice post above this. gorecki posted it. read it :)
 
oranges said:
Read the bolded part aloud to yourself and it will be clear to you that nothing impresses YOU unless it was done by Nadal and that's what people find fault with. Quite frankly, some of his fans are doing the guy a huge disservice with their behavior that no one before, during and after his appearance ever did or will do anything worthy, to the extent that I'll develop a distinct dislike for the guy and deny him his achievements as you deny others. You may find various options offered more or less impressive and it'll still be fine, but coupling it with insistence that anything Nadal does must be impressive and is above all mentioned is not. It merely indicates that you're not interested in anything that has not been achieved by the Spaniard.
Click to expand...

what Nadal Freak (any other avatar would be non suficiently descriptive of his ideas) and other nadal fans are doing with this insistence is turning Nadal into a sitting target (i dont dilike him that much) to any slams possible by posters here.

and to finish this talk i would just ask Nadal freak to wait and see if Nadal will ever get a career slam, just to see if Agassi's achievement is not a impressive goal!
 
Gorecki said:
why do we even bother? they are even putting it above carrer slams and year slams...

and nadal fans didnt find this thread yet, because when they do so, it will be about winning this master, and that atp titles back to back and having this or that largest bicep as the greatest achievment of all time... vry sad for tennis to have fans like this!
Click to expand...


Man, my predictions here are getting seriously correct. it only took a few more posts to nadal fans to hijack this thread...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Most Impressive Achievement
Replies
13
Views
2K
NEW_BORN
NEW_BORN
M
Nadal/Djokovic fans - looking back what achievement of Federer most impresses you as your guy didn't come close to achieving it?
Replies
25
Views
643
The_Order
The_Order
Rafa the King
  • Poll Poll
Will Sinner break Fed’s record for most consecutive wins at HC slams?
Replies
14
Views
356
Rafa the King
Rafa the King
The_Order
So what does Nadal have over Djokovic
2 3 4
Replies
156
Views
5K
Phoenix*
Phoenix*
T
A Brief Sampras vs federer records
Replies
6
Views
966
laurie
L
Back
Top