Are you kidding?!!!
LOLLLL! before you give anyone lessons, you should check out the following link. I'm not gonna give you any lessons cuz it's all there!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Agassi
LOLLLL! before you give anyone lessons, you should check out the following link. I'm not gonna give you any lessons cuz it's all there!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Agassi
No naveed is right. Rod Laver won all four (in a single year I might add) in open era. A lot of those records are however meaningless. The surface and equipment changes are what make them meaningless. Bjorn Borg who a lot of people regard as the most talented player of all time only played at the australian once. He still managed to win an incredible number of 11 slams. And he retired just when he was 26!It's likely that if he had kept on playing he could have at least won a couple of more wimbledons and french opens. You can't really compare the amateur era and the wood racquet era to now though. There is no way to know how those players would perform. Keep in mind that federer with all of his talent still hasn't been able to win the grand slam. That in itself says a whole lot about the agassi "record". Agassi's unique in that he's won all four plus the gold medal. I don't think any other male player has been able to do that.
just going by stats and the skills a player showed Sampras had no challenge between 80's - 2001 . now Federer is turning to be a much improved version of sampras. you can always see that federer is easily capable of taking on player at 80% of his game level ! that is something that samprass (or any other tennis player) couldn't do
I have not seen more than a hand ful of tennis games before early 1980s, so im not gonna comment on the likes of jhon Mcenro (spl??). but honestly federer seems like the only player that not only beats you with his winner shots but also beats you with your own winner shot !!!
all players had one or few winning skill:
Goran Ivanesveich: his serves
Boris Becker: power, tactic
Patric Rafter: pure tactic (won most of his points in less than 4 rallies)
Samprass: acurracy, power, technic...he was too damn good at these , hence 14 GS
Agasi: enough of everything + good judgment....even though he goofed around in early stages of his career he still won 8 GS
......
FEDERER has all of the mentions qualites + some more..he is just a well rounded player.
Bardia
I have not seen more than a hand ful of tennis games before early 1980s, so im not gonna comment on the likes of jhon Mcenro (spl??). but honestly federer seems like the only player that not only beats you with his winner shots but also beats you with your own winner shot !!!
all players had one or few winning skill:
Goran Ivanesveich: his serves
Boris Becker: power, tactic
Patric Rafter: pure tactic (won most of his points in less than 4 rallies)
Samprass: acurracy, power, technic...he was too damn good at these , hence 14 GS
Agasi: enough of everything + good judgment....even though he goofed around in early stages of his career he still won 8 GS
......
FEDERER has all of the mentions qualites + some more..he is just a well rounded player.
Bardia
sly jan, there are going to be a forever legacy of agassi ,20 yeara in a tough sports ,3 decades challenging the best in the world .
it is a sport one can survive in a good period of 10 ,12 years . these people have no time off like other sports .
however federrer is the best now but can he be as good as 35 years andre ? ,or he can win on dirt , he might .
btw andre is only one who won all four grand slams on 3 surfaces ,where 4 others who won 4 grand slams won them in two surfaces .
andre won masters ( about 30 ) ,from 9 of them he won 7 .
his popularity can not be match with any others only the legends like Ali and Pele .
gr
it is a sport one can survive in a good period of 10 ,12 years . these people have no time off like other sports .
however federrer is the best now but can he be as good as 35 years andre ? ,or he can win on dirt , he might .
btw andre is only one who won all four grand slams on 3 surfaces ,where 4 others who won 4 grand slams won them in two surfaces .
andre won masters ( about 30 ) ,from 9 of them he won 7 .
his popularity can not be match with any others only the legends like Ali and Pele .
gr
Thanx for the link, but Olympics in Tennis is a joke, and everyeone knows it, nobody cares about it and even some of the bests don't show up, also it's just once every 4th year which means some might be injured then, some out of shape etc and never get to play in the olympics... Also i think it's a pretty new sport in the olympics if i'm not mistaken...
I think the greatest ever was Sampras. Yes, he made it look boring, but that is because he was very good. Some say he had no competition (of course Agassi was always around), but again that is because he was so good. In Tennins with modern equipment (post 84-85 in my book), Sampras was simply the best statistically or otherwise.
Overall, I think McEnroe was the most gifted of all time, at least the time that I remember. As a person who actually played with a wooden racket, I can tell you that some of the things he pulled off and the control who showed was simply amazing. Personality, well that is a different story.
Overall, I think McEnroe was the most gifted of all time, at least the time that I remember. As a person who actually played with a wooden racket, I can tell you that some of the things he pulled off and the control who showed was simply amazing. Personality, well that is a different story.