- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Unofficial 2018 Australian Open Thread
Posted on 1/26/18 at 10:59 am to Bunk Moreland
Posted on 1/26/18 at 10:59 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
I don't know. I really hurt. I can't walk no more, so...
When a blister on your foot pops open, you can't play. It's actually pretty excruciating. I feel bad for the guy.
2
Posted on 1/26/18 at 11:30 am to MidnightVibe
quote:
When a blister on your foot pops open, you can't play. It's actually pretty excruciating. I feel bad for the guy.
That's it??? No 20 posts in a row?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:10 pm to RedHawk
Interestingly, Laver has said on multiple occasions who he considers the greatest of all time...and it is not himself. Perhaps he is just being humble, but he professes Fed to be the GOAT.
If you ask me, according to my eyeball test, it is hard for me to get past Fed, Rafa and Sampras, the first two in the list are pretty close to interchangeable, with Sampras not far behind. I am just a little young to fully appreciate Laver, though I cut my tennis teeth on the likes of Borg, Mac, Connors, et. al. but when I see the way the game is played these days, I give the nod to the current players. Maybe the older guys get the nod when it comes to creativity and shotmaking, but all things considered, I think the game is played at a higher level these days.
Yes, I understand about racquets and strings, but I think the way the ball is struck and the movement in the modern racquet/poly string era is still superior.
If you ask me, according to my eyeball test, it is hard for me to get past Fed, Rafa and Sampras, the first two in the list are pretty close to interchangeable, with Sampras not far behind. I am just a little young to fully appreciate Laver, though I cut my tennis teeth on the likes of Borg, Mac, Connors, et. al. but when I see the way the game is played these days, I give the nod to the current players. Maybe the older guys get the nod when it comes to creativity and shotmaking, but all things considered, I think the game is played at a higher level these days.
Yes, I understand about racquets and strings, but I think the way the ball is struck and the movement in the modern racquet/poly string era is still superior.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:15 pm to RedHawk
quote:
That's it??? No 20 posts in a row?
Aren't you the guy who questioned whether The Great Great Rafael Nadal retired to avoid battling it out in the 5th set?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:24 pm to BigPapiDoesItAgain
quote:
Interestingly, Laver has said on multiple occasions who he considers the greatest of all time...and it is not himself. Perhaps he is just being humble, but he professes Fed to be the GOAT. If you ask me, according to my eyeball test, it is hard for me to get past Fed, Rafa and Sampras, the first two in the list are pretty close to interchangeable, with Sampras not far behind. I am just a little young to fully appreciate Laver, though I cut my tennis teeth on the likes of Borg, Mac, Connors, et. al. but when I see the way the game is played these days, I give the nod to the current players. Maybe the older guys get the nod when it comes to creativity and shotmaking, but all things considered, I think the game is played at a higher level these days.
I have no issue with that, as I was a Sampras homer and cut my tennis teeth much like you did. I just think his record, until equaled, is what puts him in that category. I do have issue with people who just dismiss the older players because well they don't play now and do not take the time to look at what they did. I also believe that it is so hard to compare eras, but I am doing it. Another argument is who is to say the guys of the past using this technology would not do the same as they did in the past?
I hate how tennis has been homogenized by courts balls and style. It is what it is though, the tour and television wants rally tennis. To me styles make matches and matches now are boring. There IMO truly no differing styles.
ETA:
I truly believe Ivan Lendl is the father of modern tennis. He never seems to get the true credit he deserves in some circles. There are people who claim Connors in 75? was the greatest season of tennis ever. I guess? But it is hard for me to believe when he did not win Grand Slam.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 12:29 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:28 pm to BigPapiDoesItAgain
quote:
Interestingly, Laver has said on multiple occasions who he considers the greatest of all time...and it is not himself. Perhaps he is just being humble, but he professes Fed to be the GOAT.
If you ask me, according to my eyeball test, it is hard for me to get past Fed, Rafa and Sampras, the first two in the list are pretty close to interchangeable, with Sampras not far behind. I am just a little young to fully appreciate Laver, though I cut my tennis teeth on the likes of Borg, Mac, Connors, et. al. but when I see the way the game is played these days, I give the nod to the current players. Maybe the older guys get the nod when it comes to creativity and shotmaking, but all things considered, I think the game is played at a higher level these days.
Yes, I understand about racquets and strings, but I think the way the ball is struck and the movement in the modern racquet/poly string era is still superior
I don't think a question of "how would the older guys do if they actually played today's guys" should be the one that guides the GOAT analysis. The game evolves. Guys get better.
With Laver, you have to look at the context of his career. A statement -- that sms makes every time this subject comes up -- that Laver won two calendar grand slams, doesn't account for the fact that the first one was meaningless. I would put Laver at 6 or 7 on my list.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:29 pm to sms151t
I just sort of set Laver off to the side as a special case and/or call him 1A with Fed. Sure, he might have won 20 majors if he played majors all those years in the '60's. Then again, three of the four tournaments were grass. My rankings are like:
Fed, Laver 1A
Rafa
Sampras
Djokovic
Borg
Tier of Agassi, Mac, Lendl, Connors, Edberg, Becker, Wilander.
There might be some guys I am forgetting and I have no idea where to slot people like Rosewall, Emerson, Budge.
Fed, Laver 1A
Rafa
Sampras
Djokovic
Borg
Tier of Agassi, Mac, Lendl, Connors, Edberg, Becker, Wilander.
There might be some guys I am forgetting and I have no idea where to slot people like Rosewall, Emerson, Budge.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 12:34 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:29 pm to sms151t
quote:
I hate how tennis has been homogenized by courts balls and style. It is what it is though, the tour and television wants rally tennis.
To suggest that styles are dictated by anything other than what is effective in winning matches is absurd.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:30 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Fed, Laver 1A
Rafa
Sampras
Borg
Tier of Agassi, Mac, Lendl, Connors, Edberg, Becker, Wilander.
There might be some guys I am forgetting and I have no idea where to slot people like Rosewall, Emerson, Budge.
Where do you have Djokovic?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:31 pm to MidnightVibe
quote:
A statement -- that sms makes every time this subject comes up -- that Laver won two calendar grand slams, doesn't account for the fact that the first one was meaningless. I would put Laver at 6 or 7 on my list
Let's take away the first one then if you like.
Let me know when Fed, Nadal, Joker, Edberg, Lendl, Wilander, Becker, Borg, McEnroe, Sampras, Aggasi, or Connors has won a calendar slam? They did not .
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:32 pm to MidnightVibe
I knew I forgot someone.
Between Sampras and Borg probably.
Between Sampras and Borg probably.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:32 pm to sms151t
quote:
I truly believe Ivan Lendl is the father of modern tennis. He never seems to get the true credit he deserves in some circles.
He was. I couldn't stand him, but he was great.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:33 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Between Sampras and Borg probably.
He's the toughest to rank, imo.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:33 pm to MidnightVibe
quote:
To suggest that styles are dictated by anything other than what is effective in winning matches is absurd.
To not understand that the weighting and making larger of balls, changes of courts, and etc have changed the style is absurd also.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:34 pm to sms151t
quote:
Let me know when Fed, Nadal, Joker, Edberg, Lendl, Wilander, Becker, Borg, McEnroe, Sampras, Aggasi, or Connors has won a calendar slam? They did no
That's fine, but that's not the end all be all. And djoker held all four, which is just as good as doing it in a calendar year.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:36 pm to MidnightVibe
I am not saying it is the end all...but now add in 9 Major doubles titles for Laver.
What made Mac so revered was not just his singles play but it was also his doubles in Majors and Davis Cup with Flemming.
What made Mac so revered was not just his singles play but it was also his doubles in Majors and Davis Cup with Flemming.
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 12:37 pm
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:36 pm to sms151t
quote:
To not understand that the weighting and making larger of balls, changes of courts, and etc have changed the style is absurd also.
So now it's the weight of the balls? Break down the physics on that for me.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:38 pm to MidnightVibe
Weight of the balls slow the game down as well as adding diameter to them, you know this and we discussed this in US Open thread. We also discussed the change of grass and mowing the grass longer in Wimbledon.
You need to do research.
You need to do research.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:41 pm to sms151t
quote:
I am not saying it is the end all...but now add in 9 Major doubles titles for Laver.
Means nothing. Doubles is a different game. The top guys now don't even play it. Who knows how many doubles titles Rafa would have if he played.
Do you give Mcenroe extra points for winning 9 doubles titles?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:42 pm to sms151t
quote:
You need to do research.
When did the weight of the balls change?
Page 33 of 38
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News