Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who is the greatest tennis player of all time?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by EPelle
    Sampras concedes that Federer is now the greatest tennis player of all time. Agree with Pistol Pete?
    Its hard to argue with Sampras, Laver and McEnroe.

    Yesterday he showed what makes him so great. It goes beyond his ability to play the game. It is his will to win.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by EPelle
      Sampras concedes that Federer is now the greatest tennis player of all time. Agree with Pistol Pete?
      This is why longevity records don't count for much. You can look at his acheivements and say he's the greatest of all time. But then it's easy to argue he's not the greatest in his OWN time.

      Federer/Nadal

      All Matches: Nadal 13-7
      All Finals: Nadal 11–5
      Grand Slams: Nadal 6–2
      Grand Slam Finals: Nadal 5–2

      When a man can reduce you to tears('09 Australian Open), that says something.

      http://www.wavemagazine.net/arhiva/28/s ... usopen.jpg
      There are no strings on me

      Comment


      • #33
        Most of the Fed Nadal matches have been played on clay.

        I always looked at like this. When Fed is on his game I've never seen anyone play better. But if I needed one match to win the world I'd go with Sampras. I never really saw Laver. To this day I'm still dumbfounded that Borg never won the US Open.

        Comment


        • #34
          IMO, this discussion is no different when discussing the greatest of all-time in other sports. When you take into account different era's, the discussion is objective and not subjective.

          You can argue for Sampras, Laver, Federer, obviously Pete and Roger have the titles to support claiming them. Roger has won on every surface, Pete hasn't, now does that make you the greatest because you have?
          on the road

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by 502CD
            Most of the Fed Nadal matches have been played on clay.

            Barely - 11 of 20.

            Even on non-clay surfaces Federer holds just a one match advantage(Grass 2-1, Hard 3-3).
            There are no strings on me

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by guru
              Originally posted by EPelle
              Sampras concedes that Federer is now the greatest tennis player of all time. Agree with Pistol Pete?
              This is why longevity records don't count for much. You can look at his acheivements and say he's the greatest of all time. But then it's easy to argue he's not the greatest in his OWN time.

              Federer/Nadal

              All Matches: Nadal 13-7
              All Finals: Nadal 11–5
              Grand Slams: Nadal 6–2
              Grand Slam Finals: Nadal 5–2

              When a man can reduce you to tears('09 Australian Open), that says something.

              http://www.wavemagazine.net/arhiva/28/s ... usopen.jpg
              Good points! When ESPN came out with its list of the 50th greatest athletes of the 20th century, the only baseball pitcher that made the list was Sandy Koufax, who retired at the ripe old age of 30.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by guru
                This is why longevity records don't count for much. You can look at his acheivements and say he's the greatest of all time. But then it's easy to argue he's not the greatest in his OWN time.
                I would argue that longevity records DO count for A LOT.

                A player may be great for a couple of years, but because of the way they play, or are built, cannot sustain the level of play for more than a couple years. A large part of what makes Federer so great is his ability to play year in and year out, and always be ready to go in the GSs.

                He now has the number one ranking back for precisely that reason. He can outlast his opponents on the court and in their career.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by guru
                  When a man can reduce you to tears, that says something.
                  Like Federer did to Roddick?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by EPelle
                    Originally posted by guru
                    When a man can reduce you to tears, that says something.
                    Like Federer did to Roddick?
                    Nobody's saying Roddick is the best ever.
                    There are no strings on me

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Nope, but he tried stopping the best-ever from losing his place at the top of the totem poll. In tears, he apologised to Sampras for falling short. Nice seven-page spread in today's print version of Aftonbladet, including the cover.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by EPelle
                        Nope, but he tried stopping the best-ever from losing his place at the top of the totem poll. In tears, he apologised to Sampras for falling short. Nice seven-page spread in today's print version of Aftonbladet, including the cover.
                        Seven pages of a daily devoted to one tennis match :shock: ?
                        "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                        by Thomas Henry Huxley

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Rodney Laver is the man. He virtually invented the modern game. He won the "Grand Slam" when we still thought it meant all the Big Four in the same year -- and he did it twice ('62 and '69 I believe).

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Federer-men

                            Graf-women
                            The fool has said...there is no God. Psa 14

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by 502CD
                              Most of the Fed Nadal matches have been played on clay.

                              I always looked at like this. When Fed is on his game I've never seen anyone play better. But if I needed one match to win the world I'd go with Sampras. I never really saw Laver. To this day I'm still dumbfounded that Borg never won the US Open.
                              And McEnroe never won the French. I think they both came very close.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                As I was saying...

                                http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... fael-nadal
                                There are no strings on me

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X