How good are they still ?

How far into the French Draw or Wimbledon do you think these past Champions would get if they entered this year's French Open or Wimbledon or both would they get?

Steffi Graf - French Open & Wimbledon ?

Andre Agassi - French Open?

Pete Sampras - at Wimbledon?

Jim Courier at the French?

Sergi Bruguera entering this year's French Open?

Boris Becker at Wimbledon?

Steffi would have the best chance i feel.
I think the womens side of things can be dominated easier by a strong woman. I dont know how far she would go but, she could compete.
Pete could still compete at Wimbledon and, maybe even give it a good shake

would love to see Pete back in competitive tennis. Andre at Roland Garros would be interesting. Boris would meet Pete in the semifinal.

Given Steffi has Andre as a perm hitting partner, I'd say she's probably pretty good these days. At RG I'd give her at least a Semis showing. At Wimby, if her backhand slice is as good or better than it was, I can see her getting to at least the Qtrs.

If Andre's back is healthy, I wouldn't be surprised to see him in the Semis of the French and I'd love to see him go up against Rafa.

Pete could go all the way to the Finals of Wimbledon if he is serving good (period).

Jimbo has been taking his Outback Tour very seriously and he doesn't look as if his age is a factor at all. I'd say Jim could make it to the Qtrs but probably Rd of 16 is more realistic.

Sergi was magical on the Red Clay. If he is anywhere near the form he was before, I'd put him solidly in the Semis.

Boris has no speed these days but apparently hits his serves as strong as ever. Unfortunately 2nd Rd for old Boris
______________________________________

I'm most likely wrong on all of these but it would be fun to see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach

Given Steffi has Andre as a perm hitting partner, I'd say she's probably pretty good these days.

---

good point. or maybe Andre's level has dropped to hers:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach

Pete could go all the way to the Finals of Wimbledon if he is serving good (period).

---

no doubt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach

Jimbo has been taking his Outback Tour very seriously and he doesn't look as if his age is a factor at all. I'd say Jim could make it to the Qtrs but probably Rd of 16 is more realistic.

Sergi was magical on the Red Clay. If he is anywhere near the form he was before, I'd put him solidly in the Semis.

Boris has no speed these days but apparently hits his serves as strong as ever. Unfortunately 2nd Rd for old Boris

---

you really gave this some thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawn Tennis

you really gave this some thought.

---

Well of course I did. What would have been the point of simply throwing it out there without it? Generally speaking, 30 yrs is the retirement age of Pro Players. I've often wondered why. I played my very best Tennis in my forties and had terrific stamina. 90% of my matches were on Hardcourts and my body held up nicely. Even today, I'm not suffering from any of the normal conditions that lifelong Tennis Players complain about such as shoulder pain, back pain, bad knees, etc which I'm grateful for of course however my point is, why are these great Stars retiring so early?

I watched Pete Sampras play an exhibition match against John McEnroe a couple of months back and Pete hasn't lost much from his prime days. Although he didn't serve as many aces as I remember, he set up the point very nicely with his serve which is all one can ask from a good serve. Hitting an Ace is just a little added bonus.

It's not that I don't appreciate the newer generation of Players but I sometimes miss the ones that have left the game and wonder how they would fare against this new crop.

To be honest, the quicker the points, the better chance they have. Remember, most of these players spent years beating their bodies to death. They can go out there and hit head to head with anyone as long as the ball is hit to them. However, once they start having to sprint for the ball out wide and come up with major shots, you would see the difference. I love all of these players, but they probably having sore spots and creaking knees now. I don't think that Courier or Bruguera wants to have the 2nd rd. 4.5 hour match at Roland Garros. They wouldn't be able to get rid of the soreness before their next round match. Now, Sampras or Agassi at Wimbledon might be a different story. To be honest though, I did watch Edberg put a whipping on Tim Henman on grass a few years after he retired. And I do mean a whipping. So, who knows..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tennisking1

To be honest, the quicker the points, the better chance they have. Remember, most of these players spent years beating their bodies to death. They can go out there and hit head to head with anyone as long as the ball is hit to them. However, once they start having to sprint for the ball out wide and come up with major shots, you would see the difference. I love all of these players, but they probably having sore spots and creaking knees now. I don't think that Courier or Bruguera wants to have the 2nd rd. 4.5 hour match at Roland Garros. They wouldn't be able to get rid of the soreness before their next round match. Now, Sampras or Agassi at Wimbledon might be a different story. To be honest though, I did watch Edberg put a whipping on Tim Henman on grass a few years after he retired. And I do mean a whipping. So, who knows..........

---

how do you think a veteran tennis pro would compare to somebody of the same age (about 35) who just plays tennis recreationally? What im asking is, do you think the casual player would more easily retrieve angle shots?

The pro would severely beat the recreational player in all aspects. This is not a tooting of my own horn, but, at 36 years old, there is a $100 dollar prize to anyone in the city where I live that can take a set off of me. That includes college players. Noone has won yet. Now, I am a smarter player now, but I was much more explosive when I was on tour. I can't get to balls quite as well as I used to. Now, these guys like Courier, Agassi, etc. were levels ahead of me when I was at my best. I would have tucked my tail against those guys. To sum it up, the pros are still that good, but have lost a step when they are over 30-32 years old. They could probably take out anyone in the first round or two of a major tournament, but then the body aches come and the mental and physical tiredness. Now, to negate myself. Don't forget the Conners U.S. Open run back in 1991. That was phenomenal and he was 40. But, he then played Courier in the semis. That was that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawn Tennis

how do you think a veteran tennis pro would compare to somebody of the same age (about 35) who just plays tennis recreationally? What im asking is, do you think the casual player would more easily retrieve angle shots?

---

thanks for the reply tennisking. and i don't take what you're saying as boastful at all... you're just stating the truth. anyhow, i am still curious about your response to this: how do you feel you would compare to a recreational player of the same age considering just the ability to run to a ball? This recreational player would be in shape and their body would have not taken anywhere near the beating that former pros endure.

I would get to the ball quicker. But please understand, I have trained a ton in my life. I could also outrun most of the players on tour in a foot race (I am 5'9" tall and 165 lbs. and I used to run a sub 4.5 second 40 yard dash time consistently) So, even my ability to get to the ball has been cut a little. I actually got recruited to play a men's 5.0 league one year and by the end of the year, they had booted me out of the league since I had won my 10 matches and lost a total of maybe 7 games. I was 33 years old at the time and had not played real competitive tennis in a couple of years. I would have considered myself a 6.5 rated player back when I was making an attempt at professional tennis. So, in short, I can still get to the ball very well, and you can imagine how well Agassi or any of the other big name pros get to the ball still, but we still have lost a step. Even saying that, the difference between myself and a recreational player is worlds apart. Take a player like Courier, Sampras, Agassi, Muster, etc. it is a different galaxy. And also, I have no doubt that the guys I just mentioned could go out there in the first round and take out a top 20 player, but I am talking about getting deeper in the tournament. After a couple of matches, they are going to be hurting physically. Did you ever see the Bjorn Borg comeback? He got murdered by a guy ranked 60 in the world in the first round. Believe me, Borg, in his prime, has a right to be considered the best ever. He never played a single Australian Open and retired at 26 years old with 11 grand slams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawn Tennis

thanks for the reply tennisking. and i don't take what you're saying as boastful at all... you're just stating the truth. anyhow, i am still curious about your response to this: how do you feel you would compare to a recreational player of the same age considering just the ability to run to a ball? This recreational player would be in shape and their body would have not taken anywhere near the beating that former pros endure.

---

okay, nice clarification.