your fav tennis player

1-pete sampras. First of all cause of his mental strength and flegmatic personallity. Not to mention the complete all-round game, even Federer lacks an outstanding serve, which is the most important shot. Of course, he holds pherhabs all the most important records, 14 slams, most weeks at no1, most years finished as no1, (6 consecutive years, 1993-98) most money won, etc etc. Roger will pherhabs beat some of those, but i think the competition these days is nowhere near what it was in the 90s.-Sampras, Agassi, McEnroe was still playing, Becker, Edberg, Courrier, Stich, Chang, Rafter, Ivanišević, etc etc. In fact it was a unique era in tennis history, with so many players with charismatic personalities. Look at today-nothing. Nadal is the living proof that Roger can be beaten, he has 9-4 or something like that score against him. And it's not only on clay. He beats him on hard coutrs. If only he was more stable, i'm not even sure on how much he cares at times, except rolland Garros. Plus, of course, there was the Sampras-Agassi rivalty, the biggest in the history of tennis. Andre is the only player in the open era to win all 4 slams, certainly in top 5 all time. And look at Pete against him-he never beat Pete in a slam, except in Australia, Ithink. He beat him in 1995 in the final, after Pete beat courrier in what is considered the most outstanding match in tennis history. Pete found out only earlier that day that his trainer and father figure Tim Garlickson was diagnosed with a brain tumor, Jim was leading 2-0 in sets, Pete came back 2-2, and at 1-0 in games in the 5th he uncontrolably burst into tears. And continued crying while playing! I mean he was playing as he was crying! And serving aces like a madman! One of the most unbelievable things ive ever seen! Andre also beat him in 2000, but it was very close, 3-2. Pete beat Andre 3-0 in 1999 Wimbledon finale, also 3-0 in us open 1990 finale, 3-1 in us open 1995 finale, 3-1 in that unbelievable quarter-final us open 2001, there were no breaks of serve, 6-7 7-6 7-6 7-6, it is regarded as the best match ever, playing-wise. And he beat him 3-1 in us open 2002 final, after not having won a single match in more than 2 years. I remember watching it on eurosport, and everyone had his favorite. One commentator said his is Pete, and said "i can see that some find that COMPLETELY insane, but i thought the same last year, and wasn't far off" (Pete lost in the final, played miserabelly, cause he had 3 monstruous matches right before (Rafter, Agassi, Safin). That was Pete's last match. And where's Roger's "Andre"? If it's Nadal, he has that positive score against Roger, Pete has 20-14, or something like that against Andre. If it's not Nadal, than there just isnt "ANdre" these days. I know it was an exibition, but it's still beyond understanding that Pete, at 36, beat Roger, at 26, 2-0. I saw it, and it was really a regular match, no exibition.

2-mcenroe . I dont even have to comment on this. The most wacked-out man i ever saw.

3-Laver

4-andre-although i dont like his personality, he's a phenomenal player

5-borg

6-roger

From this list I would pick Jimmy Connors as a favorite player, simply because I do not like that much the others mentioned.

Sure, Pete Sampras is a winner with many prices but.. not a favorite, maybe because of his funny outfits. John McEnroe I could pick because he played tennis with George Harrison and also has the winner mentality I like a lot.

My favorites though, also since we talk here various decades, are Ilie Nastase, Michael Chang, Jim Courier, Stefan Edberg and typical Englishman Tim Henman

Originally Posted by FPSHOT

From this list I would pick Jimmy Connors as a favorite player, simply because I do not like that much the others mentioned.

Sure, Pete Sampras is a winner with many prices but.. not a favorite, maybe because of his funny outfits. John McEnroe I could pick because he played tennis with George Harrison and also has the winner mentality I like a lot.

My favorites though, also since we talk here various decades, are Ilie Nastase, Michael Chang, Jim Courier, Stefan Edberg and typical Englishman Tim Henman

He played with George?????

Originally Posted by raul

He played with George?????

http://www.beatlelinks.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=22236

Originally Posted by FPSHOT

http://www.beatlelinks.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=22236

Come to think of it, McEnroe was also a musician. A Hendrix-lunatic. He once said he was fed up being famous, people stopping him on the street all the time. So he decided to wear a Hendrix-wig and fake moustaches! And then he went to a store, and the guy working there said to him "Youre john mcenroe" john: "how do you know?" the guy: "i recognised your voice."

I'm not a big tennis fan but BadLittlekid must vote another one like himself: John McEnroe.

It's Federer for me. He's an astonishing talent and he has such an amazing repetoire of shots. Some of the returns he makes on his forehand and backhand have to be seen to be believed. Federer is also a brilliant server. He doesn't serve at the same pace as someone like Roddick but his serves are deadly accurate. On his day, Federer is totally unplayable and can reduce even the strongest challengers to impotence. He's brilliant to watch. I hope he makes it six Wimbledon titles in a row.

Out of the former players, Borg was arguably the best. He won Wimbledon five times and the French Open six times and it's rare, nigh on impossible, to be consistently good on both clay and grass. Borg's style - baseline tennis with strong groundstrokes - was suited to clay but he was able to translate it to grass and win 41 straight matches at Wimbledon. That is a mark of a great player. He won the French/Wimbledon 'double' three times, which is the hardest combination of Grand Slam events to win.

pete's 14 slams

McEnroe. That guy is a complete jerk and I love it.

sampras-becker wimbledon '95 finale

us open 2001 against andre, proclaimed the best match ever



4th set tie break

Wow. I remember watching Becker when he was a 17-year-old phenon. Now he's retired. I feel old.

Originally Posted by digdad

Wow. I remember watching Becker when he was a 17-year-old phenon. Now he's retired. I feel old.

He's been retired since 1997! Yeah, he's almost exactly a year younger than you. I'm no flower in bloom, either. ...20 days 'til the Middle Ages! What's "phenon"? Phenomononomonopmonom. I think he's STILL the youngest ever grand slam champion, he was 17, with that 1985 wimbledon. I remember it very well, I was in a boaeridg, I mean boarding school in Vienna, when he played Kevin Curren in the final. It was hell. (Not tha match, the boarding school!) I was a big fan, but then Pete came along. I think he respected Pete more than any other great player respected Pete. He was constantly going on and on how Pete doesn't have a weak spot in his game, and is invincible "unschlagbar", as he said it, when he plays in high form.

Originally Posted by raul

He's been retired since 1997! Yeah, he's almost exactly a year younger than you. I'm no flower in bloom, either. ...20 days 'til the Middle Ages! What's "phenon"? Phenomononomonopmonom. I think he's STILL the youngest ever grand slam champion, he was 17, with that 1985 wimbledon. I remember it very well, I was in a boaeridg, I mean boarding school in Vienna, when he played Kevin Curren in the final. It was hell. (Not tha match, the boarding school!) I was a big fan, but then Pete came along. I think he respected Pete more than any other great player respected Pete. He was constantly going on and on how Pete doesn't have a weak spot in his game, and is invincible "unschlagbar", as he said it, when he plays in high form.

I believe Michael Chang was the youngest man to win a grand slam title.

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

I believe Michael Chang was the youngest man to win a grand slam title.

I think you're right. Thanks!

And Michael Chang? Doesn't have his name in the vote list...

Originally Posted by george_on_cloud9

And Michael Chang? Doesn't have his name in the vote list...

I like him A LOT. But, sadly there's the statistics, that French open remained his only slam. Room only for ten. AAAAh I see someone finally voted for Pete, giving him his only vote besides mine. My next goal is to "force" a vote for Palpatine in "the most powerful character in Star Wars". Don't worry, I'll upload two videos that will scare you that much that you'll have no choice. Really, people my not like him, but it's not "your fav character", it's "the most powerful character". He so far has only my vote. Yet Anakin has like 10, ok I'll grant that, but Yoda the like of 8, and Pal only mine? Just don't tell me something personal with me has influenced votes, provoquing a bias.

you CAN NOT be serious!