» Stats
Members: 13,751
Threads: 3,124
Posts: 14,231
Top Poster: Lawn Tennis (1,095)
Welcome to our newest member, RX48
0 members and 248 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 1,232, 11-13-2018 at 12:29 PM.
|
View Poll Results: What's the most exciting men's tennis rivalry of all time??
- Voters
- 7. You may not vote on this poll
-
Rafael Nadal Vs. Roger Federer (2004 to present)
-
Andre Agassi Vs. Pete Sampras (1989 to 2002)
-
Ivan Lendl Vs. Jimmy Connors (1979 to 1992)
-
Jimmy Connors Vs. John McEnroe (1977 to 1999)
-
Boris Becker Vs. Stefan Edberg (1984 to 1996)
-
Bjorn Borg Vs. John McEnroe (1978 to 1981)
-
 What's best tennis rivalry of all time?
What is the best men's tennis rivalry of all time?
"The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I’ll never be as good as a wall."
"Whoever said, ‘It’s not whether you win or lose that counts,’ probably lost."
-
Good question. Sampras/Agassi is my pick. I would imagine a good bit of people here will vote Becker/Edberg. The Federer/Nadal rivalary just doesn't have the long enough points in my opinion. The score is more often more exciting than the rallies!
-
I'm only 17 so I haven't seen enough of Mcenroe, Borg and Connors but I would probably choose Agassi and Sampras. Nadal is one of my favorites and his matches with Federer always live up to expectations but they are similar players. Agassi and Sampras was always interesting because you had Sampras with probably the best serve in the world at the time and Agassi, with the best return ever. Sampras was excellent at approaching the net and volleying while Agassi had a great passing shot. In a way it was like two polar opposites and that was what made it great to watch. Nadal-Federer is also great to watch, but mainly because they are two relatively similar players with slightly different styles trying to assert which style works better
"The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I’ll never be as good as a wall."
"Whoever said, ‘It’s not whether you win or lose that counts,’ probably lost."
-
 Originally Posted by AlexLogan
I'm only 17 so I haven't seen enough of Mcenroe, Borg and Connors but I would probably choose Agassi and Sampras. Nadal is one of my favorites and his matches with Federer always live up to expectations but they are similar players. Agassi and Sampras was always interesting because you had Sampras with probably the best serve in the world at the time and Agassi, with the best return ever. Sampras was excellent at approaching the net and volleying while Agassi had a great passing shot. In a way it was like two polar opposites and that was what made it great to watch. Nadal-Federer is also great to watch, but mainly because they are two relatively similar players with slightly different styles trying to assert which style works better
Federer got to be up there with Agassi in that department.
-
Originally Posted by Lawn Tennis
Federer got to be up there with Agassi in that department.
Well, Agassi has more variety than Federer when it comes to returns and Agassi has that backhand down the line which is the one thing absent from Fed's game
"The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I’ll never be as good as a wall."
"Whoever said, ‘It’s not whether you win or lose that counts,’ probably lost."
-
Originally Posted by AlexLogan
Well, Agassi has more variety than Federer when it comes to returns and Agassi has that backhand down the line which is the one thing absent from Fed's game
right, but the way Fed can chip a 140 mph serve astounds me.
Similar Threads
-
By Coach in forum General Tennis Discussion Forum
Replies: 7
Last Post: 06-12-2009, 08:05 PM
-
By Larrytt in forum General Tennis Discussion Forum
Replies: 4
Last Post: 06-02-2008, 11:26 AM
-
By alexis721 in forum Tournaments
Replies: 0
Last Post: 05-20-2006, 07:24 PM
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Quote
