Comments on: Top Ten Male Tennis Players Of The Open Era http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/ News, Opinions, Rants and more. Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:38:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: mariskac http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-19868 mariskac Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:13:39 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-19868 do you have the top ten french tennis players or not? do you have the top ten french tennis players or not?

]]> By: Kurt http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-19536 Kurt Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:51:39 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-19536 Yes.I would prefer nadal's inclusion after a year. Also as Nick says he should not be preferred over Connors. Yes.I would prefer nadal’s inclusion after a year. Also as Nick says he should not be preferred over Connors.

]]> By: Nick http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-19426 Nick Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:57:43 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-19426 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. 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.

]]> By: Z http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17087 Z Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:23:39 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17087 I am wondering if Prof is talking about 2006 Australian Open or 1996 :D I am wondering if Prof is talking about 2006 Australian Open or 1996 :D

]]> By: Psycho http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17041 Psycho Wed, 06 Aug 2008 07:55:53 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17041 @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. @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.

]]> By: Prof http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17038 Prof Wed, 06 Aug 2008 05:56:21 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17038 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. 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.

]]> By: Psycho http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17037 Psycho Wed, 06 Aug 2008 05:27:17 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17037 @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. @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.

]]> By: Sash http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17035 Sash Wed, 06 Aug 2008 04:22:15 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17035 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. 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.

]]> By: Dandilsa http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17020 Dandilsa Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:55:45 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17020 You have Lendl the tortoise, but no Becker??!!? You have Lendl the tortoise, but no Becker??!!?

]]> By: Psycho http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17006 Psycho Tue, 05 Aug 2008 07:40:26 +0000 http://www.sportsnob.net/2008/08/02/top-ten-male-tennis-players-of-the-open-era/#comment-17006 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. 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.

]]>