The real list: 1. Novak Djokovic 2. Roger Federer 3. Rafael Nadal 4. Rod Laver 5. Pete Sampras 6. Bjorn Borg 7. Ivan Lendl 8. Andre Agassi 9. Jimmy Connors 10. John McEnroe
Seems like it. But many people exclude greats like Rosewall (wasn't light-years behind Laver), Pancho Gonzales (absolutely dominated for 7 or 8 years on pre-open pro tour and had good competition, was basically 40 when let back into slams), let along where do you fit in Murray who likely objectively played wayyy better & more complete tennis than Connors, Agassi, Lendl, etc. but unfortunately had to face the big 3.? Seems we are drawn to aggressive payers who dominated, over longetivity at the top. I have respect for the old greats, & yet still imo doesn't really make sense imo to just rank 10-- top 15 or 20 maybe. And even then what makes "greatness"? Most winning for their era? Best peak tennis? Consistency? Obviously sports evolution is a thing, but many of these Champs imo would've flourished in most any era. Is thought-provoking and fun (to a certain degree) to compare/ rank, but ultimately fruitless to be completely unbiased & objective, the deeper you delve
The real list:
1. Novak Djokovic
2. Roger Federer
3. Rafael Nadal
4. Rod Laver
5. Pete Sampras
6. Bjorn Borg
7. Ivan Lendl
8. Andre Agassi
9. Jimmy Connors
10. John McEnroe
Seems like it. But many people exclude greats like Rosewall (wasn't light-years behind Laver), Pancho Gonzales (absolutely dominated for 7 or 8 years on pre-open pro tour and had good competition, was basically 40 when let back into slams), let along where do you fit in Murray who likely objectively played wayyy better & more complete tennis than Connors, Agassi, Lendl, etc. but unfortunately had to face the big 3.? Seems we are drawn to aggressive payers who dominated, over longetivity at the top. I have respect for the old greats, & yet still imo doesn't really make sense imo to just rank 10-- top 15 or 20 maybe. And even then what makes "greatness"? Most winning for their era? Best peak tennis? Consistency?
Obviously sports evolution is a thing, but many of these Champs imo would've flourished in most any era.
Is thought-provoking and fun (to a certain degree) to compare/ rank, but ultimately fruitless to be completely unbiased & objective, the deeper you delve
Nadal is top 2 easily
Nadal 2
@@hipogresia5908 His big failure was no Tour Finals
@@hipogresia5908 But he won no Tour Finals whereas Federer won a record 6 alongside Djokovic
Great list!
Rod Laver was not really in the open Era
Pete Sampras should be first
Boris Becker?
No but Becker was great for sure.