Another angle on comparing tennis greats (with a pretty chart)

[El Dude]

I don't know if Blake is overrated, though he seems to be more remembered than his record justifies. But to a certain extent, ALL American players are overrated. If Ivan Lendl is the most underrated ATG, I think Andre Agassi is a good candidate for the most overrated. They have the same Slam count (along with Connors), but Lendl and Connors were FAR greater players. Really, Agassi belongs more in the group with Wilander, Edberg, and Becker - in terms of peak dominance. The main difference is lots of extra years. Padding, in other words. But their peaks were all pretty similar. Agassi (and the others) were great, but just not as great as the common view, imo.

 

[El Dude]

In other words, I don't think it is crazy to say: What's the difference between between Agassi and Andy Murray? Well, Murray had to play alongside three Pete Sampras' - and really, all three were better than Sampras. As far as tennis ability, I'm not sure that Agassi was a significantly greater player than Murray. He just played in an easier context.

I'd still rank them like so: Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Murray. But there isn't a huge gap between these five - not as much as between Agassi and the next player up, Jimmy Connors.

 

[mrzz]

In other words, I don't think it is crazy to say: What's the difference between between Agassi and Andy Murray? Well, Murray had to play alongside three Pete Sampras' - and really, all three were better than Sampras. As far as tennis ability, I'm not sure that Agassi was a significantly greater player than Murray. He just played in an easier context.

I'd still rank them like so: Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Murray. But there isn't a huge gap between these five - not as much as between Agassi and the next player up, Jimmy Connors.

I hate them both, anyway.

 

[Kieran]

In other words, I don't think it is crazy to say: What's the difference between between Agassi and Andy Murray? Well, Murray had to play alongside three Pete Sampras' - and really, all three were better than Sampras. As far as tennis ability, I'm not sure that Agassi was a significantly greater player than Murray. He just played in an easier context.

I'd still rank them like so: Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Murray. But there isn't a huge gap between these five - not as much as between Agassi and the next player up, Jimmy Connors.

The big 3 played in an easier context too, though, so to some extent they’re overrated, while we also can appreciate them as being great. Agassi was great, but he also went AWOL - a lot. Mentality brittle, then sometimes he’d come out fighting. Technically gifted, good hands, obviously the return is one of the three greatest, he’s alongside Jimmy and Novak on that, and he did have a great late surge when Pete left, which was mentioned elsewhere, he became a tighter proposition in his later years, in some ways.

 

[Kieran]

Let’s compare across the eras:

219 reactions · 25 shares | Ricardo Pancho Gonzalez 1928-1995 . Number one in 1948 ( amateur era) @usopen Singles Champion in 1948/49 . Here playing another #tennislegend Lew Hoad from Australia Pancho’ s serve was ahead of the time ! #spatzt

Ricardo Pancho Gonzalez 1928-1995 . Number one in 1948 ( amateur era) @usopen Singles Champion in 1948/49 . Here playing another #tennislegend Lew Hoad from Australia Pancho’ s serve was...

www.facebook.com

 

[El Dude]

Let’s compare across the eras:

219 reactions · 25 shares | Ricardo Pancho Gonzalez 1928-1995 . Number one in 1948 ( amateur era) @usopen Singles Champion in 1948/49 . Here playing another #tennislegend Lew Hoad from Australia Pancho’ s serve was ahead of the time ! #spatzt

Ricardo Pancho Gonzalez 1928-1995 . Number one in 1948 ( amateur era) @usopen Singles Champion in 1948/49 . Here playing another #tennislegend Lew Hoad from Australia Pancho’ s serve was...

www.facebook.com

Pancho is often cited as the old great whose game would have translated best to the modern era.

I thought that was a wooden court, but I think those went out in the 1920s.

 

[Kieran]

Pancho is often cited as the old great whose game would have translated best to the modern era.

I thought that was a wooden court, but I think those went out in the 1920s.

Yeah, I think it was wooden, or it could have been wood-coloured ice. Incredibly fast!

 

[El Dude]

Yeah, I think it was wooden, or it could have been wood-coloured ice. Incredibly fast!

Yeah, I thought it was too. AI lied to me and said the last wood court was in the 20s, but I think they went up through the 60s and even into the early 70s. Ken Rosewall was a bit of a "wood court specialist," I believe.

 

[Kieran]

Yeah, I thought it was too. AI lied to me and said the last wood court was in the 20s, but I think they went up through the 60s and even into the early 70s. Ken Rosewall was a bit of a "wood court specialist," I believe.

@Fiero425 will know when the last wooden court was. These boys also played on Lino. Game was risky then, you might slip on grandma’s spilt tea…

 

[Fiero425]

Yeah, I thought it was too. AI lied to me and said the last wood court was in the 20s, but I think they went up through the 60s and even into the early 70s. Ken Rosewall was a bit of a "wood court specialist," I believe.

Wood court? Well I taught on it; really a gym floor at a YMCA & YWCA back in the 70's! I only played a handful of matches in singles & doubles on it! It was lightning fast needing supreme anticipation! One false move and you were done for the point!

 

[Kieran]

Wood court? Well I taught on it; really a gym floor at a YMCA & YWCA back in the 70's! I only played a handful of matches in singles & doubles on it! It was lightning fast needing supreme anticipation! One false move and you were done for the point!

I can only imagine. Would be safe to wear ice skates. Do you know when the old pro game stopped using them?