Who is the greatest tennis player of all time?

Question

????????????

Answer 1

For me the greatest female player of all time is Steffi Graf, though some would argue Margaret Court because of her slam record but I never witnessed her playing so for me just hearing about her record doesn't cut it, I watched Graf play growing up and I've never seen any player like her and to me she's the greatest of all time. As far as the men go I'd want to say Pete Sampras, but I have to think about Federer to because I mean Federer has been number 1 longer than anyone ever has been consecutively and Federer is doing the things Sampras has and hasn't done like reach the French Open finals three years in a row, the furthest Sampras got was the semi's in 96. I know Fed hasn't surpassed Sampras' slam record ....yet, but by being so consistent every single year he's already proven that he is the greatest.

Answer 2

Male = Agassi

Female = Seles

Answer 3

John McEnroe...maybe not the best player, but definitely most entertaining!

Answer 4

It depends on your age, and it depends on what you consider  "great".  Roger Federer is pretty amazing - but hey -he can't win a single championship on a clay court.  Can the best tennis player of all time really not be able to win one single French Open??  In my opinion, no.  And even though I'm too young to have watched Sampras or Bjorn Borg or Arthur Ashe or any of the other great tennis players, I still think that that generation of tennis was truly the best.  One player didn't dominate, there was competition!  And think about the equipment they had compared to the equipment our top tennis players have today!  Back in the day, tennis was played with wooden raquets.  Wooden.  I couldn't last five minutes in a match with a wooden raquet.  If Federer played with a wooden raquet, I don't think he'd be number one in the world.  He really is great, but I think that people today have forgotten the golden tennis days of a past generation.  They were the best of all time.

Answer 5

Mavrick Johnson

Answer 6

Even though there'll never be a decisive answer to this question, in my opinion Sampras was the greatest of all times.  The guy has been at the top the longest of any #1.  286 weeks as #1, 6 year-end #1 finishes, 11 straight years of reaching at least one grand slam final, 12 years of ranking within top 10, winning a slam as a teenager, in his 20's and his 30's and the list keeps going.

Answer 7

Roger Federer

Answer 8

Pete Sampras

Answer 9

Well everyone knows that it is Roger Federer. He has made the record of being No. 1 for consecutive 228 weeks. This is the best evidence to show everyone that he deserves to be World Number One. And *IS* the world number one.

       For Pete Sampras, he got his title snatched a number of times by Aggasi, Leyton Hewitt etc. So Federer is the best player of all time and of the history.

Answer 10

Pete Sampras, because of his record 14 grand slam singles titles.  Until that record gets broken, Sampras is the greatest in my book.

Answer 11

That is very hard to really say.  All the well-known greats were great at their peaks, and in their day.  But they mostly all peaked at different times over the years.  If all the greats could magically play today in the primes of their lives, all with the same level of technology available to them, who is to say which one would win?  Federer is great, no doubt.  But had he and say Sampras or Agassi or Arthur Ashe all hit their primes at the same time, he probably wouldn't look so good.  This type of sports question is notoriously hard to answer, and most people tend to disagree with the choices of others.  That's why you can only say you're the best at something for a certain time frame.  The best football team on the planet this year, or the fastest swimmer in the world this week, or whatever.

Answer 12

ANDRE AGASSI. The guy shot to stardom in 1987 and played at a very high level of tennis till he retired in 2006. Money and fame got to him early so he was screwed up until his late 20s. He played through 3 generations. Connors/Lendl of 80s, Courier/Sampras/ of 90s and Federer/Nadal/Roddick of 2000s. It is not at all easy to play at his level. Federer had to overcome Andre in 2004 US open in 5 sets and 2005 US open final in 4 sets. With a bad back, Agassi was leading federer in 2005 US open.

You just can't reach the final of a mens grand slam event when you are 35. That's like 60 in any other sport.

He still owns a winning record against most players of TODAY but for federer.

5-1 against roddick, 4-0 against Robby Ginepri and 2-1 against Davydenko.

Federer has it easy. All he has to do is beat Roddick, Davydenko to accumulate his Grand slams.

Agassi's grand slams came in midst of crowded past greats like McEnroe, Becker, Sampras, Rafter, Kuerten, etc.

How did agassi win Wimbeldon in 92 ?

By knocking down Boris Becker in QF, John McEnroe in SF and ace master Goran Ivanisevic in Final.

He won the 99 French open by beating the defending champion Carols Moya on his way to the final.

Every year you have red clay owners. Courier, Sergi Brugera, Muster, Moya, Kuerten and today's Nadal.

Federer is not the greatest unless he wins the french. That can only happen if Nadal is injured.

Federer has captured many grand slams in a few years like Sampras did. I'll be curious to see what he's doing couple of years from now.