Tennis G.O.A.T?
Comments
-
Shout out to Yannick Noah.0
-
My fav was bad boy Jimmy Connors. I really wanted a space-age metal racket.0
-
What about Ivan lendl? Ice cold and won the European gold/diamond racket thingy. He helped coach Murray too.0
-
I appreciate I am guilty of being too literal but in this instance if discussing GOATs then comparing different generations is exactly what you are doing.pblakeney said:
In the 90s? Yes.Pross said:
But that's just a reflection of the rivalry Nadal and Federer had when they were both at their absolute peak - they have overlapped for most of their career. Would you class Sampras as GOAT on the basis that he had been no. 1 at the end of most seasons?seanoconn said:
Djokovic is about to over take Federer for weeks spent at number 1 and holds the joint record for year ending number 1 (Pete Sampras) with 6. So soon to be the most consistent of all time. 👍Pross said:Of those it's Federer for me. Nadal is a bit of a one trick pony (slightly harsh as he has other tricks but just doesn't do them as well as the other two), Djokovic for me is just not quite as good / consistent. Federer is a pleasure to watch and seems to keep coming back everytime I think he is done.
You can’t compare different generations.0 -
That is why I consider it a waste of time, for any sport.surrey_commuter said:
I appreciate I am guilty of being too literal but in this instance if discussing GOATs then comparing different generations is exactly what you are doing.pblakeney said:
In the 90s? Yes.Pross said:
But that's just a reflection of the rivalry Nadal and Federer had when they were both at their absolute peak - they have overlapped for most of their career. Would you class Sampras as GOAT on the basis that he had been no. 1 at the end of most seasons?seanoconn said:
Djokovic is about to over take Federer for weeks spent at number 1 and holds the joint record for year ending number 1 (Pete Sampras) with 6. So soon to be the most consistent of all time. 👍Pross said:Of those it's Federer for me. Nadal is a bit of a one trick pony (slightly harsh as he has other tricks but just doesn't do them as well as the other two), Djokovic for me is just not quite as good / consistent. Federer is a pleasure to watch and seems to keep coming back everytime I think he is done.
You can’t compare different generations.
You can only reasonably compare things a generation at a time. G.O.T.?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
0
-
Interesting. Federer has the most ATP titles and Nadal has the best record against the other two in grand slams.elbowloh said:Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי0 -
There was certainly something in the Aussie water producing Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe and Court.Wheelspinner said:Rod Laver.
First Wimbledon final I took notice of was Newcombe Rosewall in 70.
In 72 I was gutted when Nastase lost to Smith.
Interest in tennis waned somewhat in the 80s.0 -
To me it makes for fascinating discussions. How would Bradman’s technique stood up to video analysis and properly trained bowlers? Conversely he would have played on covered pitches and played proportionally more tests against canon fodder. To me more so than any other sport he is The GOAT.pblakeney said:
That is why I consider it a waste of time, for any sport.surrey_commuter said:
I appreciate I am guilty of being too literal but in this instance if discussing GOATs then comparing different generations is exactly what you are doing.pblakeney said:
In the 90s? Yes.Pross said:
But that's just a reflection of the rivalry Nadal and Federer had when they were both at their absolute peak - they have overlapped for most of their career. Would you class Sampras as GOAT on the basis that he had been no. 1 at the end of most seasons?seanoconn said:
Djokovic is about to over take Federer for weeks spent at number 1 and holds the joint record for year ending number 1 (Pete Sampras) with 6. So soon to be the most consistent of all time. 👍Pross said:Of those it's Federer for me. Nadal is a bit of a one trick pony (slightly harsh as he has other tricks but just doesn't do them as well as the other two), Djokovic for me is just not quite as good / consistent. Federer is a pleasure to watch and seems to keep coming back everytime I think he is done.
You can’t compare different generations.
You can only reasonably compare things a generation at a time. G.O.T.?0 -
It was simply (i think) a result of the interest and participation in tennis here that started in the 50s which produced the generation of players like them.ballysmate said:
There was certainly something in the Aussie water producing Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe and Court.Wheelspinner said:Rod Laver.
First Wimbledon final I took notice of was Newcombe Rosewall in 70.
In 72 I was gutted when Nastase lost to Smith.
Interest in tennis waned somewhat in the 80s.
As a junior, my club used to do trips out to country towns to play competition weekends. There was a town west (a long way west!) from Brisbane called Chinchilla which back then had a very small population of under 2000. The tennis centre had 50 courts. On weekends, people would drive in from a hundred miles further west to play competition, place was packed.
It was hugely popular here.
Open One+ BMC TE29 Seven 622SL On One Scandal Cervelo RS0 -
I wonder what Laver, Newcombe and Emerson make of Nick Kyrgios and Bernard Tomic.Wheelspinner said:
It was simply (i think) a result of the interest and participation in tennis here that started in the 50s which produced the generation of players like them.ballysmate said:
There was certainly something in the Aussie water producing Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe and Court.Wheelspinner said:Rod Laver.
First Wimbledon final I took notice of was Newcombe Rosewall in 70.
In 72 I was gutted when Nastase lost to Smith.
Interest in tennis waned somewhat in the 80s.
As a junior, my club used to do trips out to country towns to play competition weekends. There was a town west (a long way west!) from Brisbane called Chinchilla which back then had a very small population of under 2000. The tennis centre had 50 courts. On weekends, people would drive in from a hundred miles further west to play competition, place was packed.
It was hugely popular here.Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי0 -
Just as a side note, Pat Cash won Wimbledon in 87. I remember he jumped the stands to get to the box where his team were.Wheelspinner said:
It was simply (i think) a result of the interest and participation in tennis here that started in the 50s which produced the generation of players like them.ballysmate said:
There was certainly something in the Aussie water producing Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe and Court.Wheelspinner said:Rod Laver.
First Wimbledon final I took notice of was Newcombe Rosewall in 70.
In 72 I was gutted when Nastase lost to Smith.
Interest in tennis waned somewhat in the 80s.
As a junior, my club used to do trips out to country towns to play competition weekends. There was a town west (a long way west!) from Brisbane called Chinchilla which back then had a very small population of under 2000. The tennis centre had 50 courts. On weekends, people would drive in from a hundred miles further west to play competition, place was packed.
It was hugely popular here.0 -
As long as you accept that these fascinating discussions will never come come to a definitive conclusion then knock yourself out. A good way to kill time in the pub.surrey_commuter said:
To me it makes for fascinating discussions. How would Bradman’s technique stood up to video analysis and properly trained bowlers? Conversely he would have played on covered pitches and played proportionally more tests against canon fodder. To me more so than any other sport he is The GOAT.pblakeney said:
That is why I consider it a waste of time, for any sport.surrey_commuter said:
I appreciate I am guilty of being too literal but in this instance if discussing GOATs then comparing different generations is exactly what you are doing.pblakeney said:
In the 90s? Yes.Pross said:
But that's just a reflection of the rivalry Nadal and Federer had when they were both at their absolute peak - they have overlapped for most of their career. Would you class Sampras as GOAT on the basis that he had been no. 1 at the end of most seasons?seanoconn said:
Djokovic is about to over take Federer for weeks spent at number 1 and holds the joint record for year ending number 1 (Pete Sampras) with 6. So soon to be the most consistent of all time. 👍Pross said:Of those it's Federer for me. Nadal is a bit of a one trick pony (slightly harsh as he has other tricks but just doesn't do them as well as the other two), Djokovic for me is just not quite as good / consistent. Federer is a pleasure to watch and seems to keep coming back everytime I think he is done.
You can’t compare different generations.
You can only reasonably compare things a generation at a time. G.O.T.?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Yes, there are a few batsmen from the same era, and all eras since with test averages around 60. Then there's Bradman all on his own on 99. Even if you ignore his not outs and not anyone else's, his average would still be 40% higher than anyone else ever.surrey_commuter said:
To me it makes for fascinating discussions. How would Bradman’s technique stood up to video analysis and properly trained bowlers? Conversely he would have played on covered pitches and played proportionally more tests against canon fodder. To me more so than any other sport he is The GOAT.pblakeney said:
That is why I consider it a waste of time, for any sport.surrey_commuter said:
I appreciate I am guilty of being too literal but in this instance if discussing GOATs then comparing different generations is exactly what you are doing.pblakeney said:
In the 90s? Yes.Pross said:
But that's just a reflection of the rivalry Nadal and Federer had when they were both at their absolute peak - they have overlapped for most of their career. Would you class Sampras as GOAT on the basis that he had been no. 1 at the end of most seasons?seanoconn said:
Djokovic is about to over take Federer for weeks spent at number 1 and holds the joint record for year ending number 1 (Pete Sampras) with 6. So soon to be the most consistent of all time. 👍Pross said:Of those it's Federer for me. Nadal is a bit of a one trick pony (slightly harsh as he has other tricks but just doesn't do them as well as the other two), Djokovic for me is just not quite as good / consistent. Federer is a pleasure to watch and seems to keep coming back everytime I think he is done.
You can’t compare different generations.
You can only reasonably compare things a generation at a time. G.O.T.?0 -
And lost some of his best years to the warkingstongraham said:
Yes, there are a few batsmen from the same era, and all eras since with test averages around 60. Then there's Bradman all on his own on 99. Even if you ignore his not outs and not anyone else's, his average would still be 40% higher than anyone else ever.surrey_commuter said:
To me it makes for fascinating discussions. How would Bradman’s technique stood up to video analysis and properly trained bowlers? Conversely he would have played on covered pitches and played proportionally more tests against canon fodder. To me more so than any other sport he is The GOAT.pblakeney said:
That is why I consider it a waste of time, for any sport.surrey_commuter said:
I appreciate I am guilty of being too literal but in this instance if discussing GOATs then comparing different generations is exactly what you are doing.pblakeney said:
In the 90s? Yes.Pross said:
But that's just a reflection of the rivalry Nadal and Federer had when they were both at their absolute peak - they have overlapped for most of their career. Would you class Sampras as GOAT on the basis that he had been no. 1 at the end of most seasons?seanoconn said:
Djokovic is about to over take Federer for weeks spent at number 1 and holds the joint record for year ending number 1 (Pete Sampras) with 6. So soon to be the most consistent of all time. 👍Pross said:Of those it's Federer for me. Nadal is a bit of a one trick pony (slightly harsh as he has other tricks but just doesn't do them as well as the other two), Djokovic for me is just not quite as good / consistent. Federer is a pleasure to watch and seems to keep coming back everytime I think he is done.
You can’t compare different generations.
You can only reasonably compare things a generation at a time. G.O.T.?0 -
Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי0
-
Gonna have to be original and go with Federer here0
-
More personality than I thought.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLoTwzUFqrU&ab_channel=Mokeur%27BestOf 0 -
Fabulous game on ITV 4. French open semi finals, 2 of the greatest duking it out at the moment if anyone’s interested.Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי0
-
Yeah, I have it in the background. I would have to put my money on Nadal to win this and eventually get his 14th!0
-
The most incredible thing with the top three is how they play the big pressure points. Sampras always seemed to be able to do this too.0
-
Djokovic is really up for this, he has to be to live with Nadal on clay. Great stuff.focuszing723 said:The most incredible thing with the top three is how they play the big pressure points. Sampras always seemed to be able to do this too.
Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי0 -
Yeah, he's doing damn well considering Nadal's record in the French.seanoconn said:
Djokovic is really up for this, he has to be to live with Nadal on clay. Great stuff.focuszing723 said:The most incredible thing with the top three is how they play the big pressure points. Sampras always seemed to be able to do this too.
0 -
Well that p1ssed on my chips!0
-
Are you sure it's not parsley sauce?focuszing723 said:Well that p1ssed on my chips!
0 -
No question:
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.1 -
Too busy watching it to post on here.seanoconn said:Fabulous game on ITV 4. French open semi finals, 2 of the greatest duking it out at the moment if anyone’s interested.
Nadal was sweating like a **** in the 3rd. Not a complete surprise result from that point.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Not the best version of Nadal last night but wasn’t the best version of Djokovic in last years final. Should go on to win his second french title, Tsitsipas isn’t in the same league.pblakeney said:
Too busy watching it to post on here.seanoconn said:Fabulous game on ITV 4. French open semi finals, 2 of the greatest duking it out at the moment if anyone’s interested.
Nadal was sweating like a **** in the 3rd. Not a complete surprise result from that point.Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי0 -
Isn't Tsitsipas the favourite of the new breed to break the old guard?seanoconn said:
Not the best version of Nadal last night but wasn’t the best version of Djokovic in last years final. Should go on to win his second french title, Tsitsipas isn’t in the same league.pblakeney said:
Too busy watching it to post on here.seanoconn said:Fabulous game on ITV 4. French open semi finals, 2 of the greatest duking it out at the moment if anyone’s interested.
Nadal was sweating like a **** in the 3rd. Not a complete surprise result from that point.
That said, I possibly need Djokovic to win in order for my prediction of him topping the all time winners to be fulfilled.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Im sure its been mentioned, but my fave player is and always will be Sampras. It's who i modelled my game on and when i used to coach, would tend to lean towards his style of play, with a fair amount of Agassi thrown in. All depends on the person i was coaching granted, but you couldn't go wrong with those 2 to use as role models.0
