Topic: Tennis League All Thread - page 194. (Read 202126 times)

Absolutely right, Marcelo Rios actually took the number one spot from Pete Sampras who otherwise would have continued to celebrate his 7th consecutive year as number one.

Yeah and I think he is the era of rising Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi so it might have been difficult for him to maintain that number one spot. And along the way there are great players in that era, and yet Sampras and Agassi are the two rivals that maintain their rivalry inside the tennis court until the arrival of Roger and then Rafa to continue what they have started. So it's really hard to debate as to who is the best or the greatest.

On the other side of things, I think Marcelo Rios must have been the person with the shortest amount of time as number one in the world, he retired very shortly after

Its hard to disagree with you but how are you basing this? Talent has to show results which
would put many others ahead of him IMO.

Here is another - Player who spent the longest at #1. Navak Djokovic with 373 weeks.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ATP_number_1_ranked_singles_tennis_players

---

Anyone following the tournament at Sofia Bulgaria?
Sonego is in attendance, I wonder how he will fair out after his recent win?

It is always a popular talk to determine the GOAT but as you say, how do you define it? For me, there is no doubt that Federer is the greatest of all time; his natural raw talent, his technique, overall game, ... are too me unmatched even if other people has won more titles or grand slams.

This is a good gauge but it's the question of:

1, The era that they have been playing
2. Opposition and the quality of their opponents
3. It is the numbers or the impact that they have brought to tennis as a whole?

So again, this is going to be a long debate just like in any other sports, and so it's hard to see who will be the GOAT or who is on the Mt. Rushmore.

Exactly my words from a former post. Even Murray would have spent much more time as rank number 1 when he would have had less of the rivalries like Federer, Nadal and Djokovic.

Thinking about it from that perspective, even the three guys have been kept down somewhat in regards to their number of GS titles. Imagine we would have only had Federer and Nadal or only Nadal and Djokovic, they'd probably share +30 GS titles.

I think all of us who were lucky enough to become a witness to this fight between these three tennis players won't see such an era again in their lives. An era where three players dominate the tennis world for almost twenty years and over 60 GS titles shared between them. I mean, think about that! That is absolutely crazy!

We might see Zverev and Tsitsipas win five or seven titles. But three players dominating tennis sooooo hard at the same time? That's out of this world.

You can't even compare it to Formula 1 because there the technology counts so much. Federer can't just get a new racket and win a GS. Hamilton or some other driver can win for as long as the car is competitive. That is why tennis is quite a special sport. There really aren't many excuses. You either are the best because your body and your mind are the best, or you are not. In many other sports, team sports, there can always be arguments about who is the best and why or why not. But in tennis, difficult to argue. I like tennis although I never really played, but I love the conditions that are required for success. You either are the best, or you are not. Not your car, not your racket, just you. Amazing.

That is a question of definition. As aoluain already pointed out, it depends on what. The most titles, the most Grand Slams, the longest time at number 1 and so on. I find it difficult to give an answer to that. Every generation has its favourite player.

According to this list, Djokovic has been number 1 for the longest time.
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=WeeksAtATPNo1
But it does not mean to me that he is my number one.

Boris Becker, for example, was number 1 for only 12 weeks, but he still left his mark on an entire generation. That is why he would be higher ranked in my personal list than, for example, Pete Sampras.

How are we gauging the above answer to your question?

There are only three possible answers:

The player with the most overall titles - John McEnroe with 156 combined singles and doubles titles

The player with the most singles titles - Jimmy Connors with 109 overall singles titles.

The player with the most grand slams - Rafael Nadal with 22.

I wasn't so much into tennis in Sampras time so I don't really remeber any big rivalries for him other than Agassi and he had quite good H2H with him in the end.

Murray would have made so much more in any other time than this. I don't think tennis ever had something similar to level of performaces the big four produced before becoming the big three. Any one of them would have had it so much easier if competition wasn't that good. That is why it is so difficult to compere player from different eras.

Who do you think is the best number one of all time?

Pete Sampras, Jimmy Connors, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer, or Rafael Nadal? (maybe another one?)

Sampras still has the impressive record of being the number one player for 6 continuous years.

I doubt that anyone of us can put pressure on Alcaraz He is the type of player who knows how to push himself to the absolute maximum. It is all about injuries. If he can get away for a long time without any serious injuries, in my opinion he is going to be the player who will dominate the sport in the future most likely.

Of course there could be another player on the rise that we don't know yet. But looking at all the players who have high potential as of now, the one with the best prospects is Alcaraz. Yes he will lose games against players like Zverev, but in the long run I would say he is going to win more against those guys than he is going to lose.

I would have thought that possibly Andy Murray would be retiring before Nadal. It just depends
on how injury free both can be. A serious injury at this stage in the career which results in
a year out can spell a closer step to retirement.

I would also say Alcaraz has more of a style like Nadal. Its also nice to have a different style.

---

On the Laver Cup its been a First Time win for Team World with a final score of 13 - 8.

What a beautiful end of a career  a wonderful sportsman
He has made a history - people loved him and he loved his profession -a very few people reach to such level of respect and love and profesionalism

In every sport you have great rivalries but the rivalry between Federer and Nadal (and Djokovic) was on another level. They made each other better and especially there is also a lot of respect between them. You can have a rivalry on the field but besides that you need to be able to put things aside also. There is always a life besides the sport.

San diego atp final was somehow disapointing for me i expected the game to be more competitive especially after giron great performance in the tournament and the way he handeled daniel evans was enough for me to consider him a threat but giron did not put up much resistance and nakashima  won easily 2 0, congrats to him am sure he will be a great player in the future.

Frances Tiafoe had the honors playing end to end with Roger Federer's in his last career game. He didn't let him win, and in the spirit of sportsmanship had this to say. Read here

Its a valid statement that the outcome of federer game with him did not matter as it cannot write off the years of brilliance Roger has shown in the sport, he is legend and we will all miss him playing on the court professionally.

I also started watching tennis with the big three, and seeing one of them retire is heartbreaking, even Rafael couldn't hold his tears, they shared the spot light and had crazy matches against each other, Nadal also said "When Roger leaves the tour an important part of my life is leaving too" you don't see a lot of players crying for a rival retiring in other sports, but Tennis is special.

There is also a good chance that Rafael Nadal will be the next player to retire after Roger Federer.

Joca97, I also agree with you that Alcaraz's style does not have the elegance that Roger Federer's had in his style.
Nevertheless, it's still early days for him and I don't think we should be too harsh on him at this point since it is still early days.
As a matter of fact, he's only 19 years old and has a lifetime of opportunities ahead of him. There is no doubt that he has a bright future ahead of him.

However, at the same time, I also feel that the void that has been left by the legends is not going to be filled in any way.


regards

duke

Lets not put to much pressure also on Alcaraz, he is only 19 years old. Also Alcaraz will have a low in his performance, that is something that is inevitable. I am sure that Alcaraz will one some more grand slams, but I doubt that he will be able to reach double figures; there is nowadays too much competition and a lot of young talents also want to claim their spot at the top.