Which #1 had the most boring personality of all time

Which #1 had the most boring personality of all time

  • Lendl

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Wilander

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Federer

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Sampras

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Borg

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
Which #1 had the most boring personality of all time.

To me it was Lendl. He was absolutely devoid of any personality and just seemed robotic. I think he made it to the cover of time magazine or soemthing as the most boring #1. Does nayone know for sure?
 

newnuse

Professional
Lendl was a classic bad buy... beaning people at the net, giving dirty looks to everybody... far from boring in my book... little robotic but not boring
 

Mick

Legend
newnuse said:
Lendl was a classic bad buy... beaning people at the net, giving dirty looks to everybody... far from boring in my book... little robotic but not boring
Lendl was pretty funny when people interviewed him. He would remember the match statistics better than anybody.
 

hoosierbr

Hall of Fame
Lendl had a pretty good sense of humor, he just didn't share it much. If you read some of his interviews you'll get a taste of it. Unfortunately even that shot him in the foot because a lot of his jokes came at his opponent's expense.

The Swedes who held the top spot didn't seem to be the most engaging of personalities but rather nice, pleasant and well-liked by other players and fans alike. Edberg probably has led cleanest life of them all, never do you read about drugs problems like with Wilander or drugs with women and financial ruin like Borg.

Actually Borg is a fascinating study. The Tennis Channel documentary about him, while quite critical, was very interesting.
 

Gilgamesh

Semi-Pro
I couldn't stand Lendl seriously. He is a great player. A legend of his time and of course I'm a huge McEnroe fan so I might be biased but...

That guy was a poor sport. I'm glad Chang embarrassed him. Gave him a taste of his own medicine.
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
Lendl had a great personality. Every post in this thread so far has been about him---so his personality couldn't of been boring.

I think Wilander was/is boring.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
To be number one you have to have some kind of personality. You have to have something special about you to want to get to the top and to pull it off.

I wouldn't say any of the above were really boring but if I was being picky then yes Wilander would be who I would vote for.
 

Bjorn99

Hall of Fame
Bjorn was Borged and he ended up figuring it out and has literally not spoken much about his career since then. He tried making it without his mind controller but failed miserably. Not too many people are aware of what he went through and feel that he is boring. The story is anything but boring.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
God knows why anyone has voted for Federer, he is one of the most charismatic world number ones ever. He has a great personality and is actually a really funny guy.

Probably Nadal fan boys.
 

DashaandSafin

Hall of Fame
Sampras was just boring. There really isn't anything else to say. Pretty much everyone agrees. Oh sure, you see a Slam Dunk overhead once in a while, but its hardly enough to keep you entertained.

Lendl, he did have some personality. America made him out to look like the Robotic man from East Europe bent on destroying tennis.
 

superman1

Legend
America made him out to look like that, or he made himself out to look like that? I think that if you look like a robot on court and you aim for people's chests when they are at net, you're not exactly helping your cause. Doesn't matter how funny he was in press conferences.
 
Gilgamesh said:
I couldn't stand Lendl seriously. He is a great player. A legend of his time and of course I'm a huge McEnroe fan so I might be biased but...

That guy was a poor sport. I'm glad Chang embarrassed him. Gave him a taste of his own medicine.

same here!!!
 
Feña14 said:
God knows why anyone has voted for Federer, he is one of the most charismatic world number ones ever. He has a great personality and is actually a really funny guy.

Probably Nadal fan boys.


thats a joke right> You can use a lot of words to describe Fed....but Charasmatic is not one of them.

As far as his personality is concerned....he seems like an ego maniac.
 

Mick

Legend
The Pusher Terminator said:
thats a joke right> You can use a lot of words to describe Fed....but Charasmatic is not one of them.

As far as his personality is concerned....he seems like an ego maniac.

haha. Yogi Bera said it ain't bragging if you could do what what you said you could do and Federer is a "can do it" man.
 

Warriorroger

Hall of Fame
newnuse said:
Lendl was a classic bad buy... beaning people at the net, giving dirty looks to everybody... far from boring in my book... little robotic but not boring

Lendl had more class than your countrymen connors and mcnroe. They trashtalked him every chance they got.
 

superman1

Legend
Yeah, let's face it, none of those 80's kings were gentleman. Connors was probably the worst.

Borg might have been the most boring player ever, but you never thought of him as boring because he looked so cool with that long hair and the headband. He was almost meditative out there. That guy was just ice.
 

Duzza

Legend
Lendl. Sampras, Federer and Wilander had great personalities, what are we talking about here? You people who voted Sampras should be ashamed.
 

superman1

Legend
I can't vote for anyone here. These guys are all unique in their own way and none of them were boring. And you can't judge personalities by watching someone hit a ball and reading some of their quotes.
 

pound cat

G.O.A.T.
Sampras.. I can't think of one memorable thing the guy had to say or any insight into what was going on iin his mind the entire time he was on tour. Blah personality.
 

OrangeOne

Legend
The Pusher Terminator said:
thats a joke right> You can use a lot of words to describe Fed....but Charasmatic is not one of them.

Well to split hairs what you say is indeed true.... given that charasmatic isn't even a word. Spell checking is free...

Lendl had a personality, he wasn't a sit-on-the-fence interviewee, didn't just quote the standard lines, etc etc. Anyways - let's face it - most of the 'big time number-1's at their peak' have been very 'business-like', which can come across as robotic. It's a lot of work and fun to try get to the top in anything, but it's often harder work with a different approach to stay there.
 
OrangeOne said:
Well to split hairs what you say is indeed true.... given that charasmatic isn't even a word. Spell checking is free...

Lendl had a personality, he wasn't a sit-on-the-fence interviewee, didn't just quote the standard lines, etc etc. Anyways - let's face it - most of the 'big time number-1's at their peak' have been very 'business-like', which can come across as robotic. It's a lot of work and fun to try get to the top in anything, but it's often harder work with a different approach to stay there.

Wel not really.


_Agassi was very charming

-Jimmy Connors at times was also quite charming

-Mcenroe and nasty nastase may have not been charismatic but they were fun to watch

-Borg had no personality but he looked so good that women would literally attack him and rip his shirt off (as opposed to Fed who may be the ugliest #1 in the history of the game).

- Roddick was pretty darn charming
 

oberyn

Professional
I voted for Wilander for a lot of the reason articulated by an earlier poster. I just don't know that much about him.

I don't think any #1 can be "boring". That includes Stefan Edberg (who, let's be fair, should be on the list).

I'm usually amazed when I read interviews with Lendl and Sampras with just how acerbically witty those two guys could and can be.

I always thought Sampras was dull until the infamous N.Y. Times Magazine piece on Sampras and Agassi came out just before the 1995 U.S. Open.

I'm paraphrasing here, but Sampras defended his ripping Greg Rusedski to the press (after destroying him on court) at Wimbledon. Sampras said that, under ordinary circumstances, even if a guy absolutely stunk, he'd go out of his way to compliment him and point out his positives and how much room he had for improvement. He said that he just got so tired of the British media building up Rusedski that, for once, he was just bluntly honest.

At another point in the article, Sampras went off on Brad Gilbert, who had mentioned a few too many times that he (Gilbert) had a winning record against Sampras. To illustrate his point (that h2h records can be somewhat meaningless) Sampras gestured behind him and said that "this (bleeping) guy has a winning record against me."

The (bleeping) guy in question, was Paul Annacone.

Lendl was the same way. These guys had (arguably) boring on-court personas, but, off of the tennis court, they were far from boring.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
The Pusher Terminator said:
thats a joke right> You can use a lot of words to describe Fed....but Charasmatic is not one of them.

As far as his personality is concerned....he seems like an ego maniac.

Charisma: Possessing great powers of charm or influence.

Roger is a very influential person, he is influential to his fellow professionals and to the people who watch him on tv. He is a charming man with nobody having a bad word to say about him. Everyone in the locker room was hoping he could pull the win off in the final of RG. His fellow players all love him even when he goes out and beats them time in and time out. He has time for everyone on the tour, he does more press than any world number 1 previously, he has time for players if they are ranked 50th or even 500th. He charms the media and his speeches are always from the heart and amusing.

He does work for Unicef and has his own charity. There will never be anyone like Roger again. He is a credit to the tour and a real charismatic leader, he is trying to be the greatest player ever yet still has time for other people. Enjoy him while he is here.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
Roger is Boring said:
federer, definintely..
but why do dominant players have such boring personalities ? Zzzz!!

Nadal would be the one with the worst personality, unfortunately though, he won't reach the number one ranking so he will never get the tag.
 

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
I always thought Sampras was dull until the infamous N.Y. Times Magazine piece on Sampras and Agassi came out just before the 1995 U.S. Open.

I'm paraphrasing here, but Sampras defended his ripping Greg Rusedski to the press (after destroying him on court) at Wimbledon. Sampras said that, under ordinary circumstances, even if a guy absolutely stunk, he'd go out of his way to compliment him and point out his positives and how much room he had for improvement. He said that he just got so tired of the British media building up Rusedski that, for once, he was just bluntly honest.

At another point in the article, Sampras went off on Brad Gilbert, who had mentioned a few too many times that he (Gilbert) had a winning record against Sampras. To illustrate his point (that h2h records can be somewhat meaningless) Sampras gestured behind him and said that "this (bleeping) guy has a winning record against me."

you have a great memory:

http://www.geocities.com/hovav13/art-A_90s_Kind_of_Rivalry.html
 

Tchocky

Hall of Fame
All these guys are pretty boring. You have to be focused and single minded if you want to be the best. There's lot of boring personalities that never cracked the Top 10.
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
All these guys look personable, even more handsome, posing with the trophy week in and week out.

Add to them Laver, Rosewall (who actually appeared afflicted with Narcolepsy and about to nod-off between points) and Edberg.

Also think about the effect these boring guys had on the opponents they faced that no matter how well they played against these champions, they saw no reaction, no panic, no anger and were left to conclude they made no impression and had not gotten to them. Daunting.
 

oberyn

Professional
Moose Malloy said:

Thanks for posting the link. I'm happy to see I was close, anyway.

I thought that was such a great article. I remember when I read it I gained a lot more respect for both guys for completely different reasons.

Pete, because even I, as a fan, thought he was a bit of a stiff. Instead, he could have been one of my friends (we're in the same age group). Sarcastic, lots of expletives deleted. ;)

Andre, because I didn't realize his depth. I thought he was all flash and no substance. I was pleasantly surprised to read otherwise.
 
The Pusher Terminator said:
Which #1 had the most boring personality of all time.

To me it was Lendl. He was absolutely devoid of any personality and just seemed robotic. I think he made it to the cover of time magazine or soemthing as the most boring #1. Does nayone know for sure?


To me it were McEnroe and especially Connors. Two as.sholes. And to me nothing is more boring than as.sholes.

Condi
 

FEDEXP

Professional
"You call it class ...i call it having the personality of my foot".

And I call it another thread created by the pusher man for those who enjoy dissing great tennis players.....
 
FEDEXP said:
And I call it another thread created by the pusher man for those who enjoy dissing great tennis players.....

coming from a guy named FEDEXP...I am not surprised.

Hey dud I voted for Lendl....don't get upset at me! Fed is clearly not as boring as Lendl...but he is pretty boring...and no offense...he's not ....well...the most handsome #1 that I have ever seen.
 

LttlElvis

Professional
I would vote for Lendl too. In Lendl's defense, he was alone and was from a then-communist country so he was always careful of what he said (which wasn't much). He also had to compete with personalities like McEnroe and Connors. Anyone would be boring compared to them.

One night he was on Letterman, and Lendl was actually funny. Letterman is a great sportsfan and knows how to get the best interviews out of athletes. One of the questions Letterman asked, "Have you ever lost a match because you were tired?" Lendl's reaction was so funny, breaking out in laughter, saying something like, losing those types of matches are terrible and wouldn't ever want to experience that again. I was surprised at home much personality he showed that night.
 

Melissa

Rookie
Nadal Hater

Feña14 said:
Nadal would be the one with the worst personality, unfortunately though, he won't reach the number one ranking so he will never get the tag.

Why bring Nadal into a thread about boring # 1's?
Just so you can badmouth him?
Your distaste (hatred?) for Nadal is interesting.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
Melissa said:
Why bring Nadal into a thread about boring # 1's?
Just so you can badmouth him?
Your distaste (hatred?) for Nadal is interesting.

If you read the quote as to which my post was a reply to then I think you wouldn't need to ask that question. It was from "Roger Is Boring" who happens to be a Nadal fan boy who often speaks about his "hatred" towards Federer, his beloved Nadal hasn't even become world number one, when he does, then we can talk about how they deal with the world number 1 tag.
 

superman1

Legend
Interesting article there. Gives me a better hint of Sampras' personality, and I can't say I'm too impressed. I have tons of respect for Sampras' game, but I have much more respect for Agassi all-around.
 

tricky

Hall of Fame
Just my impressions of these boring guys . . .

Federer . . . a little bit tortured when he plays. Flamboyant tennis aside, there's this obsessive, searching element in a lot of his games where I'm not sure whether he's trying to figure out his opponent, figure out his stroke, or his nerves. When he wins, it's almost like a relief from the concentration. And it almost feels like he's violating other people's games. When he talks about his game, I think in a way, he wants to relate to the press this process rather than the technical elements.

Sampras . . . he wants to be respected and stubbornly stuck to the dictum "my actions speak for themselves" onto the public imagination. His style of play is stubborn, macho, but also beautiful and elegant. He was almost idealogical about his game, believing in its purity, and then imposing that purity onto the tennis world. I've never found him boring, just offputting. You tend to either greatly admire/love his game or feel it's a little oppressive (even obnoxious), because it gave no quarter to almost no other player.

Borg . . . best thing about the Royal Tennebaums. :D

Wilander . . . I guess I kinda see him as the Greg Maddux of tennis. And for some reason, I get the vibe that the thing he liked most about the pro career wasn't the titles, but getting sloshed with the other guys after hours. :D

Lendl . . . Dude, Lendl was like the Evil Empire of the Reagan 80s; you had to hate him because, well, he was so "un-American." I didn't think he was an actual, breathing human being until close to his retirement. But he may be the most interesting guy on this list because he seems to just relish irony of playing some kind of vague villain to us yankee yahoos. Everything was just show.
 
Because someone has a different style of speaking or expression doesn't make them devoid of personality or boring IMO Had a great sense of humor as others haven mentioned but more in the eastern european way, not a hardy, jolly Australian way for example.

And classic bad guy? Not just because Lendl was a favorite of mine did I watch and record many of his matches which I still have to this day. Beaning people at net? He was a baseliner in an era of more serve volleyers...ok, one tries to pass them when they come in or go at them and make them miss. Dirty looks? If someone just volleyed a winner off you, one might look at the person rather hard. Can look at things objectively and not exaggerate.

While rewatching Sampras matches, he looked
hangdog most of the time, with few looks or expressions of any kind, but he absolutely blazed those groundstrokes and serve. Borg, Wilander, Federer...2 Swedes, a Swiss guy...not from the most demonstrative nations. Interesting results from the polls though.

Seems most people along the poll are basing replies solely on on-court behavior or movement, but I just assumed it was overall. If you really played in a high profile environment or worked in such a field, you would know that most people learn or unconsciously develop a "public" persona to preserve their private time against those who would sensationalize, deify or vilify their every move. I think that would qualify many 1#'s of tennis.
 

DMich

New User
My immediate response was to vote for Lendl but the more I think about it, i think that was the wrong answer. My gut tells me that if Lendl came around today, while he wouldnt be the most exciting person in the world, I dont think people would view him as so boring per se. I think the media played a great role in this perception. As several have mentioned before, Lendl being no.1, from a Communist country during the 80s and all of its Cold War implications, was victim of the standard, "the Commies are bleak, dour, robots" and the west is full of energic, vibrant, individualism. This has played out many times before.
 

Zimbo

Semi-Pro
My would go to Sampras. So freakg boring. The onlt time it got interesting was when he would cramp up or vomit his insides out. Other then that boring personality on court. Sampras having his mouth opened all the time didn't really happy either. Close your lips damn it.
 

Zimbo

Semi-Pro
tricky said:
Just my impressions of these boring guys . . .

Federer . . . a little bit tortured when he plays. Flamboyant tennis aside, there's this obsessive, searching element in a lot of his games where I'm not sure whether he's trying to figure out his opponent, figure out his stroke, or his nerves. When he wins, it's almost like a relief from the concentration. And it almost feels like he's violating other people's games. When he talks about his game, I think in a way, he wants to relate to the press this process rather than the technical elements.

Sampras . . . he wants to be respected and stubbornly stuck to the dictum "my actions speak for themselves" onto the public imagination. His style of play is stubborn, macho, but also beautiful and elegant. He was almost idealogical about his game, believing in its purity, and then imposing that purity onto the tennis world. I've never found him boring, just offputting. You tend to either greatly admire/love his game or feel it's a little oppressive (even obnoxious), because it gave no quarter to almost no other player.

Borg . . . best thing about the Royal Tennebaums. :D

Wilander . . . I guess I kinda see him as the Greg Maddux of tennis. And for some reason, I get the vibe that the thing he liked most about the pro career wasn't the titles, but getting sloshed with the other guys after hours. :D

Lendl . . . Dude, Lendl was like the Evil Empire of the Reagan 80s; you had to hate him because, well, he was so "un-American." I didn't think he was an actual, breathing human being until close to his retirement. But he may be the most interesting guy on this list because he seems to just relish irony of playing some kind of vague villain to us yankee yahoos. Everything was just show.

Well said Tricky. Greg Maddox huh, right on. The thinking man's player.
 
M

Morrissey

Guest
The Pusher Terminator said:
Which #1 had the most boring personality of all time.

To me it was Lendl. He was absolutely devoid of any personality and just seemed robotic. I think he made it to the cover of time magazine or soemthing as the most boring #1. Does nayone know for sure?

To me, the ones that made me change channels due to boredom are as follows;

1. Sampras
2. Wilander
3. Federer
4. Lendl
5. Borg (since I was too young and the only matches I watched were repeats of him and McEnroe Wimby 1980) Not boring stuff.
 
Top