The third tier players are not far behind their second tier contemporaries. Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, and Mats Wilander legitimately challenged the dominance of Lendl, Connors, and McEnroe during the mid to late 1980s. Andre Agassi missed five more GS tournaments than Pete Sampras in the 1990s, but still managed to push his rival throughout the decade. If Agassi had not lost most of 1997 due to injury and contended in more Australian Opens, he might have ranked higher in the second tier. He was less dominant but more versatile than Sampras, getting to the quarterfinals of the French Open more than half the time (9 of 17). On hardcourts, Andre was almost equal to Pete, but lost to him in three US Open finals (2002, 1995, 1990). Agassi did beat Sampras twice in the Australian Open (1995 Final, 2000 Semifinal) but never had much luck against him on grass (Wimbledon) with two losses and zero victories, or on the carpet surface (2 wins, 5 losses).
Andre Agassi is definitely the best player in this class, owning a commanding win-loss percentage of 70% (21-9 record) combined against Becker (10-4), Edberg (6-3), and Wilander (5-2). True, these three excelled primarily in an earlier era (1985-1989), but Edberg and Becker were still prominent through the early '90s. Surprisingly, Boris Becker was 25-10 versus Stefan Edberg, not unlike Nadal's 23-10 record against Federer. However, Edberg defeated Becker in some critical matches, including the 1989 French Open Semifinal, as well as the 1988 and 1990 Wimbledon Finals. Wilander's biggest claim to fame is his success in prevailing over Ivan Lendl on three different surfaces in GS finals ('83 Australian Open on grass, '85 French Open on clay, '88 US Open on hard). Boris Becker was even more impressive, going undefeated with a 3-0 record in GS finals against Lendl ('86 Wimbledon, '89 US Open, '91 Australian Open). Wilander was only 3-7 head-to-head against Becker, but somehow won easily in straight sets in all three GS matches against him ('85 & '87 at Roland Garros, '90 Australian Open). It is very close between Becker, Wilander, and Edberg, but I would rank them in that aforementioned order (descending).
Ken Rosewall was basically a poor man's Rod Laver, short in height and slight in weight but compensated for those perceived weaknesses with aplomb and a terrific backhand. He was the oldest male ever (age 37) to win a Grand Slam in 1972, when he won the Australian Open for a second consecutive year, both times in straight sets. He also won the 1968 French Open in four sets over Laver (6-3, 6-1, 2-6, 6-2). Both Rosewall and Laver lost valuable years before being allowed to participate in major tournaments at the start of the Open Era in '68. Rosewall's rating here is mainly based on what he did after 1968, so you could even argue he belongs in the second group with Connors and the rest. But I choose to be conservative in assessing athletes from that time, and while I have a high regard for the second best small man to compete in professional tennis, I think he belongs in this tier. Rod Laver would be at least in the second class with Sampras if I were ranking his body of work, but I am not sure if I would put him in the same group as Bjorn Borg. No matter where you rank Rosewall or Laver, they should be an inspiration for all the vertically challenged tennis players who want to succeed in the future. Many smaller players like Lleyton Hewitt, Michael Chang, and David Ferrer have tried to replicate their feats but fell short (pun intended). Perhaps Kei Nishikori can reverse that trend after garnering momentum from his US Open performance and potential advancement in the ongoing ATP World Tour Finals.
No comments:
Post a Comment