Who do you think?
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Greatest Male Player in the Open Era
- Thread starter gopies1981
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
put me in coach
All Australian
Pistol Pete for me, that said Federer is fast getting to the stage where he could lay claim to the title.
Hon. Mentions also to;
Rod Laver
John McEnroe
and despite his inabilty to play on grass Ivan Lendal
Hon. Mentions also to;
Rod Laver
John McEnroe
and despite his inabilty to play on grass Ivan Lendal
- Banned
- #3
I went Federer purely because he will be. If he were to retire today i don't think that he would be but he is getting close.
Borg was a legend winning 11 Grand Slams by the age of 26. The only blemishes is that he did not win the US Open (5 runners ups) or the AUstralian Open (only once contested it).
McEnroe for sheer ability is up there and Sampras has a great record but i don't think he was in the same category as some of these other guys.
And of course Rocket Rod Laver who won Grand Slams 7 years apart.
Borg was a legend winning 11 Grand Slams by the age of 26. The only blemishes is that he did not win the US Open (5 runners ups) or the AUstralian Open (only once contested it).
McEnroe for sheer ability is up there and Sampras has a great record but i don't think he was in the same category as some of these other guys.
And of course Rocket Rod Laver who won Grand Slams 7 years apart.
i'd love to nominate laver on the grounds that he's the only man to get two grand slams, but one of them wasnt in the open era so he's not an instant selection for 'greatest in the open era'. have to consider sampras despite his lack of french open victories, agassi for his career slam (plus an olympic gold medal), connors for his record wins of singles titles and federer for being the longest running consecutive no.1.
in any case i'd personally say these guys would just about be an automatic top 5 of all time, and certainly all would be in anyone's top 10 of all time without a doubt. in the end, i've let personal preferences nominate my pick and went with agassi.
in any case i'd personally say these guys would just about be an automatic top 5 of all time, and certainly all would be in anyone's top 10 of all time without a doubt. in the end, i've let personal preferences nominate my pick and went with agassi.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Rocket Rod
At the moment, Rod Laver IMO. And Rod says Federer.
Laver was even further above the pack than Federer is now, and here he is playing Borg at the age of 38 in an exhibition, and his volleys are sublime. It took me a very long time to find this video.
http://rapidshare.com/files/21674327/Rod_Laver_vs_Bjorn_Borg.wmv.html
Laver was even further above the pack than Federer is now, and here he is playing Borg at the age of 38 in an exhibition, and his volleys are sublime. It took me a very long time to find this video.
http://rapidshare.com/files/21674327/Rod_Laver_vs_Bjorn_Borg.wmv.html
Borry
Protected Species
- Aug 15, 2004
- 8,738
- 2,173
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- South Sydney
Federer may well be when he's finished up, but ATM Sampras.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
I will assume that you are <20yrs old, becuase that is just that stupid. Come off it Sampras did not win the slam, never won the french, and whilst he is good he is not the best ever. Rod Laver by the length of the Hume Highway with Federer closing in. Bjon Borg is probally 3rd.
Who?
You can't compare players of different eras. The technology has improved so much in Tennis.
But one thing I'm fairly sure of. If Laver had been able to compete in grand slam tournaments for those 5 or 6 years in the mid 60s when he was at his prime, he would have won at least twice as many grand slams as he did (11).
But one thing I'm fairly sure of. If Laver had been able to compete in grand slam tournaments for those 5 or 6 years in the mid 60s when he was at his prime, he would have won at least twice as many grand slams as he did (11).
Thrawn
Premium Platinum
Laver.
Borry
Protected Species
- Aug 15, 2004
- 8,738
- 2,173
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- South Sydney
I will assume that you are an idiot.
Laver played in an era where three of the four grand slams were on grass. It's hard to tell how good he was on hardcourt. Thats why I think Sampras is a strong contender for the greatest male player in the open era even though he had an obvious weakness on clay and failed to win a clay court grand slam.
Federer is closing in on the lot of them and I have a strong feeling that he will retire as the greatest ever.
There is this argument about the fact that the players in the past used equipment and wore clothes which were much more difficult to play tennis with, but has anyone considered that fact that the fitness requirements these days are far higher and that current day players are much more likely to be fitter and stronger.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
You cannot say Sampras was the best ever as he was ****ing hopeless on the clay court. Federer has done more on clay than Sampras. You use the argument that to be rated the best ever you need to perform on all courts..well come on remind me how Sampras did that? Yes he was great on grass, Federer is probally better on grass though and on hardcourt he was ok, but far from the dominant guy on hardcourts. Whilst Sampras was good, no way he should be rated the best ever. Top10, for sure. Not best ever though. Laver gets the cake and 2 "grand slams" speaks volumes to be honest. One is hard enough!
one of laver's grand slams wasnt in the open era. this poll is about the best player in the open era.
put me in coach
All Australian
One of two, still more than any player on the above list (in fact any male player)
agassi was good enough to win a career slam on four different surfaces. thats easily as good as laver's winning a calendar grand slam on mostly grass.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Harder to do it in one year, especially at the time where Laver did his. Remember, Laver did not have the great raquets they have thesedays, and also remember the travel time was substancially higher. Aggassi was good, top 10, possibly top6-7. I'd have Laver, Bjorg, Sampras, Vilas, Becker, McEnroe probally ahead of him. The first 3 I mentioned I would definatly have over Aggasi.
Valid arguments can be made for a number of players , IMO it is Laver who had the left handers advantage + he dominated on indoor hard courts during the 70's definately and possibly during his pro circuit days aswell . Unsure when the indoor "era" commenced .
Sampras and Federer have the no French Open mark against them but have been dominate in the extreme .
I would back Laver at his best to beat either of them on clay and if they were to use the old wooden racquets I would back him on any surface , the power players with the larger racquets might have an advantage in todays game .
As a seperate issue my favourite players to watch were the McEnroe and Vilas .
Sampras and Federer have the no French Open mark against them but have been dominate in the extreme .
I would back Laver at his best to beat either of them on clay and if they were to use the old wooden racquets I would back him on any surface , the power players with the larger racquets might have an advantage in todays game .
As a seperate issue my favourite players to watch were the McEnroe and Vilas .
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
in any case i'd like to mention how shocked i am that federer has picked up so many votes on this poll. why dont we wait until he finishes his career in a few years before we nominate him as the greatest ever? we'll be able to judge on all his accomplishments rather than half a career, whereas everyone else on this list has retired.