Tennis

[MuggsyB]

Well, you're at least 4'6, so you got that goin' for ya!

4'6?  Let's not go overboard.

[MU82]

Roger on Rafa:

"A few months ago we were joking about both being on crutches. Amazing. Never underestimate a great champion. Your incredible work ethic, dedication and fighting spirit are an inspiration to me and countless others around the world."

[MuggsyB]

So now Djokovic is getting vaccinated? 

[MU82]

So now Djokovic is getting vaccinated?

If so, good. I'd love to see him challenge Rafa again in Paris.

Here's hoping he's not lying this time.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

So now Djokovic is getting vaccinated?

is he's getting "immunized" and people are reading vaccination?

[shoothoops]

One of the all time greats on and off of the court, Juan Martin Del Potro announced he is likely to retire after Buenos Aires and Rio.

The popular gentle giant has 22 Titles, a Grand Slam Title, Davis Cup Title, Olympic Silver and Bronze. 7 different years ranked in the top 11 or better. First player to defeat Federer and Nadal in the dame major. Only player to win a major other than Federer, Nadal, Djokovic to win a major during an 8 year period.

Few things more enjoyable in tennis than crowd gasps at the crack of his forehand, or a night Delpo match at the grandstand at Corona Park.

Multiple wrist injuries, and surgeries, going back 11 years. 4 different knee surgeries since his knee fracture.

[MU82]

Very good player, and I liked watching him play. Obviously not an "all-time great," though, as anybody who even casually follows tennis could immediate name a dozen male players better than Del Potro.

[shoothoops]

Very good player, and I liked watching him play. Obviously not an "all-time great," though, as anybody who even casually follows tennis could immediate name a dozen male players better than Del Potro.

Lol.

[MU82]

Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, Sampras, Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Agassi, Laver, Lendl, Wilander, Courier, Edberg, Emerson, Murray, Newcombe, Rosewall.

For starters.

[shoothoops]

I think you are confusing great player with best player of all time. (something that doesn't exist) Of course he was a great player in his era, which of course, makes him an all time great player.

[MuggsyB]

I think you are confusing great player with best player of all time. (something that doesn't exist) Of course he was a great player in his era, which of course, makes him an all time great player.

You wrote "one of the all time greats" not "great" player.  Now if that's the case what exactly is your criteria?  GS wins?  Titles?  World Ranking?  If your contention is "one of the all-ime greats" means one of the 100 or so best players?  Maybe.  But I think the number is probably more exclusive in tennis or at least it's perceived that way.

[shoothoops]

You wrote "one of the all time greats" not "great" player.  Now if that's the case what exactly is your criteria?  GS wins?  Titles?  World Ranking?  If your contention is "one of the all-ime greats" means one of the 100 or so best players?  Maybe.  But I think the number is probably more exclusive in tennis or at least it's perceived that way.

Again, you also seem to be confusing best of all time with all time great players. 

Are Hall of Fame tennis players all time great players for example? Yes.

[MU82]

I guess if a person can beat shoot in tennis, he or she is an all-time great.

[shoothoops]

I guess if a person can beat shoot in tennis, he or she is an all-time great.

You're deflecting.

The subject was whether or not Delpo is an all time great professional tennis player. You two confused that with a different subject of whether or not he is one of the greatest tennis players of all time.

I even used the example of the Tennis Hall of Fame to try to help show the difference between the two subjects. Is Andy Roddick an all time great tennis player? Yes. Is a baseball Hall of Famer an all time great baseball player? Yes.

It's pretty surprising to be discussing whether or not Delpo is an all time great tennis player. That one seems pretty obvious based on both his body or work, and, watching him play.

[MU82]

Again, you also seem to be confusing best of all time with all time great players. 

Are Hall of Fame tennis players all time great players for example? Yes.

The Shoothoops Tennis Hall of Fame is the only one I can find that includes Del Potro as a member.

Vilas is the only male Argentine in the Hall. There's another player who was better than your all-time great. And Roddick, whom I forgot, there's another, so thanks for bringing him up. And Ashe. And ...

I said I could name a dozen off the top of my head better than Del Potro. You followed with an Lol, so I quickly named 17 -- and I didn't even include Vilas, Roddick and Ashe. So then you bring up the Hall ... which your all-time great isn't in.

But sure, my friend, define "all-time great" however you want. I'm going to bed.

We Are Marquette!

[shoothoops]

The Shoothoops Tennis Hall of Fame is the only one I can find that includes Del Potro as a member.

Vilas is the only male Argentine in the Hall. There's another player who was better than your all-time great. And Roddick, whom I forgot, there's another, so thanks for bringing him up. And Ashe. And ...

I said I could name a dozen off the top of my head better than Del Potro. You followed with an Lol, so I quickly named 17 -- and I didn't even include Vilas, Roddick and Ashe. So then you bring up the Hall ... which your all-time great isn't in.

But sure, my friend, define "all-time great" however you want. I'm going to bed.

We Are Marquette!

You took something simple, made it difficult, then double and tripled down instead of saying you were thinking of something else.

A celebrated tennis great is possibly retiring soon due to 11 years of off and on injuries. Seems simple enough.

You first named some players who have won among the most majors of all time to somehow say that player wasn't a great player. (Who can forget all of those Roy Emerson matches you watched)

The Tennis Hall of Fame was mentioned to show that players in it are both all time greats, and some, aren't as high on a most majors won list. (that wasn't a thing prior to this era)

Yes, I'm aware Delpo isn't yet in the Tennis Hall of Fame considering he is still an active player. (Feel free to protest when he enters) Sports Hall of Fames were mentioned to point out that there are plenty of all time great players in a variety of sports, (including but not limited to tennis).

I think you're caught up in the recent phenomenon of counting of majors won as the barometer to define great. Roddick for example, also won just one major, the same one, won a Davis Cup, was top ten for nine years etc...and was fortunate to not have the injury extent of Delpo. He's a Hall of Famer and an all time great as well.

[MuggsyB]

You took something simple, made it difficult, then double and tripled down instead of saying you were thinking of something else.

A celebrated tennis great is possibly retiring soon due to 11 years of off and on injuries. Seems simple enough.

You first named some players who have won among the most majors of all time to somehow say that player wasn't a great player. (Who can forget all of those Roy Emerson matches you watched)

The Tennis Hall of Fame was mentioned to show that players in it are both all time greats, and some, aren't as high on a most majors won list. (that wasn't a thing prior to this era)

Yes, I'm aware Delpo isn't yet in the Tennis Hall of Fame considering he is still an active player. (Feel free to protest when he enters) Sports Hall of Fames were mentioned to point out that there are plenty of all time great players in a variety of sports, (including but not limited to tennis).

I think you're caught up in the recent phenomenon of counting of majors won as the barometer to define great. Roddick for example, also won just one major, the same one, won a Davis Cup, was top ten for nine years etc...and was fortunate to not have the injury extent of Delpo. He's a Hall of Famer and an all time great as well.

I think this is debatable and your criteria is being presented as fact.  The Hall of Fame in an individual sport like tennis is much different than say basketball or football. But when you write "one of the all time greats" it connotes an elite list of players, not 100 or so players. 

Now in Delpo's case he suffered a lot of injuries but won 1 GS and made two GS semis.  It seems to me part of the criteria has to be one GS title in singles?  Or do you include doubles as well?  Are the Bryan brothers all-time greats?  My take is in lieu of excoriating MU82 you should perhaps lay out your own personal criteria and look at various players from different eras.  But I will tell you this:  most would not agree with your statement that Delpo is "one of the all-time greats" and your defensiveness doesn't do you any favors supporting your conclusion.

[MU82]

You took something simple, made it difficult, then double and tripled down instead of saying you were thinking of something else.

A celebrated tennis great is possibly retiring soon due to 11 years of off and on injuries. Seems simple enough.

You first named some players who have won among the most majors of all time to somehow say that player wasn't a great player. (Who can forget all of those Roy Emerson matches you watched)

The Tennis Hall of Fame was mentioned to show that players in it are both all time greats, and some, aren't as high on a most majors won list. (that wasn't a thing prior to this era)

Yes, I'm aware Delpo isn't yet in the Tennis Hall of Fame considering he is still an active player. (Feel free to protest when he enters) Sports Hall of Fames were mentioned to point out that there are plenty of all time great players in a variety of sports, (including but not limited to tennis).

I think you're caught up in the recent phenomenon of counting of majors won as the barometer to define great. Roddick for example, also won just one major, the same one, won a Davis Cup, was top ten for nine years etc...and was fortunate to not have the injury extent of Delpo. He's a Hall of Famer and an all time great as well.

I happen to think there is a difference between "great" and "all-time great." You apparently do not.

Michael Chang was a great tennis player for many years. I happen to not think he was an "all-time great." David Duval was the No. 1 golfer in the world at one time and if not for injuries and other things, who knows how good he could have been? He was great ... but I don't happen to think he was an "all-time great" golfer.

But you're free to categorize "Delpo" anyway you want. Call him the greatest ever for all I care.

I'll say he was a fine tennis player for his time who definitely was not an all-time great, and I'll risk being tsk-tsked by you for all eternity.

What a silly debate this has been. Thankfully, hardly any of our fellow Scoopers bother with this thread, so we haven't ruined anything for anybody.

Enjoy your Sunday.

[MuggsyB]

I happen to think there is a difference between "great" and "all-time great." You apparently do not.

Michael Chang was a great tennis player for many years. I happen to not think he was an "all-time great." David Duval was the No. 1 golfer in the world at one time and if not for injuries and other things, who knows how good he could have been? He was great ... but I don't happen to think he was an "all-time great" golfer.

But you're free to categorize "Delpo" anyway you want. Call him the greatest ever for all I care.

I'll say he was a fine tennis player for his time who definitely was not an all-time great, and I'll risk being tsk-tsked by you for all eternity.

What a silly debate this has been. Thankfully, hardly any of our fellow Scoopers bother with this thread, so we haven't ruined anything for anybody.

Enjoy your Sunday.

You've both ruined everything for me.  What's the actual truth here? 

[shoothoops]

I happen to think there is a difference between "great" and "all-time great." You apparently do not.

Michael Chang was a great tennis player for many years. I happen to not think he was an "all-time great." David Duval was the No. 1 golfer in the world at one time and if not for injuries and other things, who knows how good he could have been? He was great ... but I don't happen to think he was an "all-time great" golfer.

But you're free to categorize "Delpo" anyway you want. Call him the greatest ever for all I care.

I'll say he was a fine tennis player for his time who definitely was not an all-time great, and I'll risk being tsk-tsked by you for all eternity.

What a silly debate this has been. Thankfully, hardly any of our fellow Scoopers bother with this thread, so we haven't ruined anything for anybody.

Enjoy your Sunday.

Michael Chang is in the Tennis Hall of Fame. He was a great player in his era. Therefore, he is an all time great player. Seems simple enough.

There's more to being great or an all time great than counting slams in tennis.

[shoothoops]

I think this is debatable and your criteria is being presented as fact.  The Hall of Fame in an individual sport like tennis is much different than say basketball or football. But when you write "one of the all time greats" it connotes an elite list of players, not 100 or so players. 

Now in Delpo's case he suffered a lot of injuries but won 1 GS and made two GS semis.  It seems to me part of the criteria has to be one GS title in singles?  Or do you include doubles as well?  Are the Bryan brothers all-time greats?  My take is in lieu of excoriating MU82 you should perhaps lay out your own personal criteria and look at various players from different eras.  But I will tell you this:  most would not agree with your statement that Delpo is "one of the all-time greats" and your defensiveness doesn't do you any favors supporting your conclusion.

Even here you are somewhat preoccupied with slam counting. I am very aware it's a very common thing in tennis (or golf) to do that these days.

Some people can't rest until they somehow decipher the single greatest player of all time. I understand.

MU82 first defined all time tennis greats as those with the most slams according to his examples, including some that didn't even play in the "Open era." This is even though players play under much different circumstances in different eras.

It's seems a bit contradictory to say player xyz is a great player in his or her era. But oh by the way that same player is not an all time great. Of course they are.

It's not being able to see the forest for the trees. It's being unnecessarily pedantic. There are many all time great players in a wide variety of sports. I think its a preoccupation with terms such as goat etc...(which doesn't exist).

I've already posted several of Delpo's achievements.

It's silly to me that a HOF player in a sport isn't considered an all time great player.

Perhaps I'm just less stingy or more positive. But I also like sports in totality, Men, Women, various levels of a sport.

But it doesn't seem all that challenging to me to say Delpo was a great player and therefore an all time great.

[Uncle Rico]

Good lord

[BM1090]

The Mardy Fish episode of the Untold Docuseries is pretty good.

[shoothoops]

The Mardy Fish episode of the Untold Docuseries is pretty good.

Yes it is.

https://twitter.com/netflix/status/1438283790103678979?s=21

[MU82]

Djokovic says he won't get vaccinated, even if it means he can't play in any majors.

Good. More for Rafa.