Top Ten Male Tennis Players Of The Open Era
Posted by Z on August 2nd, 2008
After 252 weeks, Roger Federer will finally lose the number 1 spot to Rafael Nadal. New contributor Hari thinks its a good time to rank the best male tennis players of the open era.
10. Jimmy Connors:
The games first showman, shows up at the top ten rankings as the winner of the maximum number of ATP tour titles. He did manage a couple of Wimbledon titles and was often stopped by the peak performance of Bjorn Borg. Despite Connors never winning the French Open, he could be called an all court player since he did dominate the US Open which was played on clay back then. He is in fact one of the three players, Andre Agassi and Mats Wilander being the others, to have won grand slams on hard courts, clay and on grass.
9. Rafael Nadal:
The charming Rafa makes it as the world’s best ever clay courter and the latest achiever of tennis’ toughest double – back to back grand slams on grass and clay. The mighty Majorcan has also broken the jinx of past clay court titans like Gustavo Kuerten and Sergi Bruguera and adjusted himself to all court play. Rafa’s journey has just started and if all goes well and he avoids injuring himself, we could well be witnessing some historic achievements. Those interested in tennis betting wouldn’t bet against him surprassing many of the other legends on this list in terms of most grand slams won.
8. John McEnroe:
He is given credit for elevating serve and volleying into a fine art and then making centre court more than just an exhibition of tennis talent. Most old timers, lament the fact that tennis has become too much of a gentleman’s game since the exit of the foul mouthed super brat. His grand slam exploits notwithstanding, McEnroe was also one of the greatest ever double’s players. And so if you question his ranking, ‘You cannot be serious!’<
7. Andre Agassi:
While most players start in their late teens and peak in their early twenties, Andre Agassi was the exception, improving as he aged like pure wine. In an era when big servers dominated, Agassi became the world’s greatest ever baseliner and proved his point winning all four majors albeit in different years. Personal troubles led to inconsistent performances in his early career and the tennis world could have actually missed out on seeing his very best
6. Ivan Lendl:
A genuine all rounder, Lendl was no specialist in any court but instead honed his skills to be equally sound on any surface. However, Ivan Lendl ended up the game’s greatest runner up.Winning the Australian, French and US Opens, he made the final of Wimbledon twice, against unheralded (at that time), Boris Becker and Pat Cash, only to choke on both occasions. Had he one any match out of those, his ranking would have been higher than 6 on this chart
5. Ken Rosewall:
Since this is an Open Era ranking, it is easy to forget the all pervasive achievements of the Australian. There were no hard courts at that time but Ken Rosewall was unarguably the best proponent on both grass and clay during the sixties. It was after the Open Era began that Rod Laver stole his thunder . Complications surrounding him being a professional player disallowed him from many key tournaments throughout his career. And so, his open era performances were often on the wrong side of thirty. Nevertheless, Rosewall’s backhand has never yet been equaled, as has his long twenty five year career. Rosewall makes it here as an exception to the Open Era rule since although his best performances might not have been during the Open Era, he certainly did play in it as the second best at a time when the world’s best ever player was king.
4. Pete Sampras : Pistol Pete changed the game like no one else ever has. Apart from the elegance that all the players on this list have, Sampras’ key weapon was his power. Sampras dominated the tennis world for an entire decade, possessed possibly the greatest serve ever and was never beaten at his best. Even those possessing a free bet would have never bet against him! If he ever was, it was attributed to under par performance due to some injury. But his gross underachievement on clay keeps him ranked at 4
3. Roger Federer:
Take the old world charm of a Fred Perry, the baseline skills of Agassi, the poise of Borg and the supreme technique of Pete Sampras, Roger Federer has been often called the most complete tennis player of all time. He also is the fastest achiever of the modern era running up very close to Sampras’ grand slam record in almost half the time. The Sampras vs Federer question is a hard one to answer. I put Federer above the Floridan for him being at least the second best clay court player for most of his career and not having lost at his best to anyone other than Rafael Nadal. And he still has his chances.
2. Bjorn Borg:
The Iceman ruled the courts as a baseliner when serve and volleying was the norm. He used both his hands when self respecting professionals were expected to slice their backhands with one hand. In a world that was fast changing tilting towards power over grace, Borg defied with elegance, chasing down the ball with the rarest of anticipation that one has to be born with, not acquired, returning at angles never again seen, winning points (and hearts) without ever breaking a sweat, Borg made tennis look easy. He ruled grass and clay with equanimity and came excruciatingly close four times on hardcourts. Following two successive grand slam upsets, the impassive Swede silently drew back from competing saying that he did not wish to be number 2. Well, on this list, he is.
1. Rod Laver:
The only player ever to have won the Grand Slam in the strictest sense of the word in 1969 and 1962 (amateur) is almost an automatic choice to be number 1 for most tennis experts. He is renowned for his feather touch serve and volleying, wristy groundstrokes and being the inspiration for a whole generation of players from where sprang John McEnroe and Pete Sampras. Though the latter generation’s power would probably have beaten Laver had they ever met, it is Laver’s dominance at his time that keeps him at the top and not how he would have fared against future generations.
- Psycho(the moderators don’t understand why he wants to be called that!)
If you liked that post, then try these...
What's next Roger? by Leosash on February 9th, 2007
Roger Federer came to Melbourne for the year’s first grand slam – with “insufficient†match practice.
Women's Singles Finals, Australian Open 2007 by Prof on February 3rd, 2007
How things change! It was about 30 months ago that we saw an extremely pretty Russian girl play on the hallowed center court at Wimbledon against the Serena.
Sania crashes out, Roddick to meet Safin by Prof on January 18th, 2007
Sania, disappointment
Sania Mirza disappointed yet again and crashed out of the Australian Open in the second round.
August 3rd, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Really good list. I would have put Borg at #1 for the simple reason that he managed to win both the French and Wimbledon so many times. Two completely different surfaces in less than one month. And just judging by how difficult it has been for players after the 70s to master both the surfaces, puts his achievement in perspective. Plus, the competition was much harder than what others have had to face- Connors and Mcenroe. And when Laver won his grandslams, three out of the four slams were on grass ( if I am not mistaken)
Are you gonna be attempting a similar list for the ladies?! You should!
August 4th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Good justification for Borg, Competition, and yes, different courts (including Hardcourt) may put Borg on a different plane. just that achieving the grand slam, is quite the ultimate achievement for a tennis player.
I would also give Rod Laver a higher “perceived rating”. Borg is quite up there, but for most tennis experts, Rod Laver is still perceived as the quintessential tennis player.
as for competition, I really think that is subjective, how can you call Ken Rosewall or Pancho Gonzalez bad competition as against connors or McEnroe?
And, two grandslams were on grass! (Australian and WImbledon), two were on clay(French and US).. In fact those days Aus was in December and the last grandslam. So yes, Laver did master both surfaces. They never had hardcourts.
I am attempting one for the ladies, yes. The big three are Court, Navratilova and Graf, but beyond that, maybe the Williams, Seles, Billie Jean King, Mandlikova, Hingis (maybe). Defly not Sharapova (:D), and Henin just didnt cut that rank by quitting too soon. There really are two planes. There is no comparison to the big 3, and the remaining 7 are actually quite “ordinary” I feel.
August 5th, 2008 at 6:55 am
You have Lendl the tortoise, but no Becker??!!?
August 5th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Very good list. Guess with some more slams Roger might swap positions with Borg.
Would have placed Agassi above Lendl because Andre could win the career slam.
August 5th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
@Dandsila: I think comparing Becker to Lendl is a bit harsh on Lendl since he won each event at least twice and reached the final of wimbledon making him more complete than Boris. Many people have written in asking for Becker’s inclusion. I personally feel that Becker, apart from in 1985-86, was never really a great player. He or Edberg might put up a fight for no 11 on this list. But, since this a top-10, I still think Becker and Edberg do not match the rest on this list for various reasons, including longevity, completeness, consistency.
@Sash: I guess people are being a little harsh on Lendl :-). Agassi’s inconsistency early on cost him a higher rank. I would actually put them together, all things being same-they both won 8 slams. But then Lendl, was world no 1 for a record 270 weeks and definitely dominated tennis for sometime. Agassi was never dominant, since Sampras was then there. But yes, you do have your point. Agassi did win the slam. He made finals of 3 opens at least twice. I go with Lendl ultimately because of him being a more “dominant” player of his time.
I think with the French Open and keeping the US, Federer could displace Borg yes, but imagine Rafa winning the double again, would place him on 3rd at least! Its an interesting world we have out there.
August 5th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I would’ve thought Agassi would be over Lendl owing to the career slam and also keeping in mind the longevity of the career at the highest level.
I don’t agree with your argument on Becker’s longevity. He did win Aus Open in 2006. But clearly becker was not as consistent as the people who made the list.
While longevity might’ve applied to Edberg, purely from a tennis perspective Edberg is right up there and he could be a serious competitor on both grass and hard courts and he was probably better than Becker on clay.
Interesting to note how everybody commenting is rooting for players who were better on grass than clay given equal prowess on the hardcourts.
August 5th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
@Prof: Yeah I too noticed people rooting for Becker and Edberg, while no one has rooted for Bruguera, a Jim Courier or Guillermo Vilas. Moreover, though we keep seeing Borg beating McEnroe at Wimbledon, we hardly ever see replays of his French Open exploits. That’s one more reason why I want to keep Lendl quite high. Over the years, people who have dominated Roland Garros have done just that and little else. Which goes to prove that clay does increasingly specialized skills and which is probably the toughest slam to win. Lendl, and Nadal of late have been the major exceptions. While Rafa has still not “dominated”, Lendl was able to go beyond these “specialized skills.” Agassi’s French open, I still think, was a one off. This is not to belittle Agassi, but just that Andre was still a shade behind Ivan.
August 7th, 2008 at 2:23 am
I am wondering if Prof is talking about 2006 Australian Open or 1996
October 7th, 2008 at 4:57 am
Wow, pathetic list. Nadal above Connors? Connors has over 100 titles, and over 200 weeks as number 1 in the world. Nadal didn’t achieve half as much as Connors and you put him above Connors… You list is sad, really.
October 12th, 2008 at 4:51 am
Yes.I would prefer nadal’s inclusion after a year. Also as Nick says he should not be preferred over Connors.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:13 am
do you have the top ten french tennis players or not?