tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 24 Jan 2009 20:38:03
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Bud Collins
Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
started falling already....




 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 16:10:04
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 1:30=A0pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 4:07=A0pm, Aranci...@selin.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 25, 3:38=A0am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > > Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> > > > On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock h=
as
> > > >> started falling already....
>
> > > > Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> > > > it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>
> > > One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is proba=
bly
> > > true.
>
> > Exactly. Fed achieved most of his titles when he was at his prime in a
> > clown era when players his generation were at their primes as well all
> > of them being pathetic clowns like stinkydenko, rodduck, boredo, etc.
> > He cant be considered GOAT by anyone.
>
> I don't entirely disagree with this. But I wonder who else I've ever
> seen could have had results that were that
> consistent. Maybe Pete woulda hammered Nadal on fast grass more
> convincingly than Fed did in 06 and 07, but I don't think Pete had the
> same consistency to make 10 straight Slam finals (winning 8 out of
> 10), for example.
>
> And as far as GOAT talk, Fed is past peak and has a tough *next
> generation* to deal with, so if he can win 2 more Slams he most
> certainly deserves to be considered GOAT.


++ Not sure about GOATness for Fed YET... enough to have him on the
short, short list... he has time to make his case... he's close... :)

P


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 16:07:03
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 12:57=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 3:28=A0am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 10:17=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 1:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> w=
rote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's =
stock has
> > > > > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > > > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or=
at
> > > > > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- =
is his
> > > > > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight final=
s
> > > > > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no =
finals?
>
> > > > > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > > > > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I gue=
ss
> > > > > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> > > > What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
> > > > Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
> > > > reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.
>
> > > Collins' favorite has always been Fingers Fortescue. I bet he's been
> > > growing in Bud's estimation in recent years.
>
> > > Joe Ramirez- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ++ Willie "Handlebars" Renshaw... PMac almost laughed out loud when
> > Bud said Fed was in his top 10... talk about showing your age not your
> > wisdom...
>
> > P- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> There's also a way of looking at tennis history that's different than,
> say, how would Nadal with his Babolat
> do against Borg with his wood Donnay?
>
> Of course Nadal of 2009 would crush Borg of 1978 with the difference
> in racquet technology and other advantages. But the more important
> question is how good were these different players relative to their
> peers.
>
> In that sense, maybe Bud still thinks Fed has something to prove.
> Maybe he's comparing him to guys like Pancho and Tilden, who were
> dominant for longer than what Fed's been dominant for to this point.

++ I agree with you... though, we must remember judging athletes in
their own times gives them a kind of hermetic longevity, against the
winds and wilds and happenstance of time... but... sport tends to
evolve over time as intergrating system(s)... more money, time played,
developmental quality, technologies in equipment, skills utilized,
training, etc and thus the processes of learning the game, playing the
game, competing in the game change over time... no one really thought
Jack Kramer could walk on a court in 1979, reborn into his
youthfulness, with a new racket in his hand or his old one and beat
Borg or Connors... the game had just changed too much, the athleticism
required to be an elite player had changed too much, the speed of the
game, the serving, defensive requirements were greater, etc.

Bud will never put Tilden as GOAT, though he was more dominant than
almost anyone if you take each within the time frame of their
primes... when he was pressed to actually NAME a GOAT in the early
1990s he picked CONNORS... who had won slams on all surfaces (his USO
win on clay made up for French to Collins) and he named him best
defensive player of all time, with solid groundies and the ultimate
fighting passion to win, etc... But developmental factors DO happen
and tennis has changed SOOOOOOO much it looks silly to place Tilden
over Laver, for example... as I have said many times, GOATness is a
fleeting title BECAUSE of the progressive nature of playing within
systems that tend to be dominated/manipulated by greater and greater
athletic forces (faster, stronger players)...

And YES... Fed has something to prove yet!!! :)))


P


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 15:24:56
From:
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 6:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock =
has
> > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
> > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is his
> > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
> > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no finals=
?
>
> > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
> > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
> Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
> reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.

I think Bud's definition of "All-Time" is exactly that - i.e. not just
the Open era.

Bud is a massive Laver fan - he co-wrote one of his books. Elsewhere
he mentions Gonzales and Tilden as possible GOAT candidates. Borg gets
good praise and also Sampras. Not sure about Budge.

Bud tends to move the goalposts around with regard to Federer's
GOATness - originally he said that he definitely had to match Laver's
CYGS, more recently he seems to indicate that winning the FO and
having "longevity" would do it ...





  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 17:46:08
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 25, 6:11 am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>> On Jan 25, 12:39 am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 24, 11:30 pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 25, 12:20 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> RahimAsif wrote:
>>>>>> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
>>>>>> started falling already....
>>>>> I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>>>> According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
>>>> least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is his
>>>> "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
>>>> constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no finals?
>>>> Joe Ramirez
>>> Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
>>> Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>> What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
>> Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
>> reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.
>
> I think Bud's definition of "All-Time" is exactly that - i.e. not just
> the Open era.
>
> Bud is a massive Laver fan - he co-wrote one of his books. Elsewhere
> he mentions Gonzales and Tilden as possible GOAT candidates. Borg gets
> good praise and also Sampras. Not sure about Budge.
>
> Bud tends to move the goalposts around with regard to Federer's
> GOATness - originally he said that he definitely had to match Laver's
> CYGS, more recently he seems to indicate that winning the FO and
> having "longevity" would do it ...
>
>
>



AT any rate what's clear is Fed is obviously not considered goat by any
expert anywhere at present, sensibly because he holds no meaningful all
time records. The goat has to hold 'big category' all time records else
he will certainly fall down the ladder once ceibs wears off.

Future generations will not entertain a goat who has a lesser record
than other greats.


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 13:30:51
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 4:07=A0pm, Aranci...@selin.com wrote:
> On Jan 25, 3:38=A0am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> > > On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> > >> started falling already....
>
> > > Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> > > it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>
> > One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probabl=
y
> > true.
>
> Exactly. Fed achieved most of his titles when he was at his prime in a
> clown era when players his generation were at their primes as well all
> of them being pathetic clowns like stinkydenko, rodduck, boredo, etc.
> He cant be considered GOAT by anyone.

I don't entirely disagree with this. But I wonder who else I've ever
seen could have had results that were that
consistent. Maybe Pete woulda hammered Nadal on fast grass more
convincingly than Fed did in 06 and 07, but I don't think Pete had the
same consistency to make 10 straight Slam finals (winning 8 out of
10), for example.

And as far as GOAT talk, Fed is past peak and has a tough *next
generation* to deal with, so if he can win 2 more Slams he most
certainly deserves to be considered GOAT.


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 13:07:17
From:
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 3:38=A0am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> >> started falling already....
>
> > Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> > it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>
> One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probably
> true.
>


Exactly. Fed achieved most of his titles when he was at his prime in a
clown era when players his generation were at their primes as well all
of them being pathetic clowns like stinkydenko, rodduck, boredo, etc.
He cant be considered GOAT by anyone.


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 11:36:22
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Bud Collins

"RahimAsif" <RahimAsif@gmail.com > wrote
> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> started falling already....

Bud Collins should retire.




 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 01:09:32
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 4:03=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 2:57=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 25, 3:28=A0am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 24, 10:17=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 1:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com>=
wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wro=
te:
>
> > > > > > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed'=
s stock has
> > > > > > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > > > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > > > > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- =
or at
> > > > > > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -=
- is his
> > > > > > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight fin=
als
> > > > > > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe n=
o finals?
>
> > > > > > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > > > > > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I g=
uess
> > > > > > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> > > > > What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw=
?
> > > > > Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-bea=
st
> > > > > reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.
>
> > > > Collins' favorite has always been Fingers Fortescue. I bet he's bee=
n
> > > > growing in Bud's estimation in recent years.
>
> > > > Joe Ramirez- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > ++ Willie "Handlebars" Renshaw... PMac almost laughed out loud when
> > > Bud said Fed was in his top 10... talk about showing your age not you=
r
> > > wisdom...
>
> > > P- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > There's also a way of looking at tennis history that's different than,
> > say, how would Nadal with his Babolat
> > do against Borg with his wood Donnay?
>
> > Of course Nadal of 2009 would crush Borg of 1978 with the difference
> > in racquet technology and other advantages. But the more important
> > question is how good were these different players relative to their
> > peers.
>
> > In that sense, maybe Bud still thinks Fed has something to prove.
> > Maybe he's comparing him to guys like Pancho and Tilden, who were
> > dominant for longer than what Fed's been dominant for to this point.
>
> Well, his reasoning was "weak results on clay". Which basically takes
> Sampras out of the top 10...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree that's a bit harsh considering he's had to deal with Nadal,
but still if we're talking all of
tennis history, then we have to consider Budge, Laver, Perry, Rosewall
and others who won the FO.

Again, it's not that Fed wouldn't win with his modern advantage, but
there are other ways of measuring.

There are some posts by a guy named Chaugnosis on this ng and he does
his top 10. Not sure if Sampras is in
there or not.


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 01:03:38
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 2:57=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 3:28=A0am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 10:17=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 1:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> w=
rote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's =
stock has
> > > > > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > > > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or=
at
> > > > > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- =
is his
> > > > > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight final=
s
> > > > > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no =
finals?
>
> > > > > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > > > > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I gue=
ss
> > > > > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> > > > What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
> > > > Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
> > > > reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.
>
> > > Collins' favorite has always been Fingers Fortescue. I bet he's been
> > > growing in Bud's estimation in recent years.
>
> > > Joe Ramirez- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ++ Willie "Handlebars" Renshaw... PMac almost laughed out loud when
> > Bud said Fed was in his top 10... talk about showing your age not your
> > wisdom...
>
> > P- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> There's also a way of looking at tennis history that's different than,
> say, how would Nadal with his Babolat
> do against Borg with his wood Donnay?
>
> Of course Nadal of 2009 would crush Borg of 1978 with the difference
> in racquet technology and other advantages. But the more important
> question is how good were these different players relative to their
> peers.
>
> In that sense, maybe Bud still thinks Fed has something to prove.
> Maybe he's comparing him to guys like Pancho and Tilden, who were
> dominant for longer than what Fed's been dominant for to this point.

Well, his reasoning was "weak results on clay". Which basically takes
Sampras out of the top 10...


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 01:01:42
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 3:00=A0am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> RahimAsif wrote:
> > On Jan 25, 2:38 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> >>> On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> >>>> started falling already....
> >>> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> >>> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
> >> One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probab=
ly
> >> true.
>
> >> --
> >> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> >> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> > Yes, technically what Bud said is certainly true - with Sampras and
> > Laver above him. After all 3rd all time is also in the top 10...
>
> In that case I'd like to state that Fed definitely is in my top 25
> players of all time.
>
> --
> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"

With due respect, no one cares about your top 25. Or top 5 or top 1...


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:49:07
From: Richard Eich
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
RahimAsif@gmail.com wrote...
> On Jan 25, 3:00=A0am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > On Jan 25, 2:38 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >> Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> > >>> On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock h=
as
> > >>>> started falling already....
> > >>> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> > >>> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
> > >> One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is prob=
ably
> > >> true.
> >
> > > Yes, technically what Bud said is certainly true - with Sampras and
> > > Laver above him. After all 3rd all time is also in the top 10...
> >
> > In that case I'd like to state that Fed definitely is in my top 25
> > players of all time.
>=20
> With due respect, no one cares about your top 25. Or top 5 or top 1...

Or Bud Collins' list either.

--=20
A fight starts when a man reaches the limits of his intelligence.


  
Date: 25 Jan 2009 11:11:37
From: TT
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
RahimAsif wrote:
> On Jan 25, 3:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> RahimAsif wrote:
>>> On Jan 25, 2:38 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
>>>>>> started falling already....
>>>>> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
>>>>> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>>>> One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probably
>>>> true.
>>>> --
>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>> Yes, technically what Bud said is certainly true - with Sampras and
>>> Laver above him. After all 3rd all time is also in the top 10...
>> In that case I'd like to state that Fed definitely is in my top 25
>> players of all time.
>>
>> --
>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> With due respect, no one cares about your top 25. Or top 5 or top 1...

You didn't get the slight jest I made you stupid boy.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 00:57:43
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 3:28=A0am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
> On Jan 24, 10:17=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 25, 1:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wro=
te:
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's st=
ock has
> > > > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or a=
t
> > > > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is=
his
> > > > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
> > > > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no fi=
nals?
>
> > > > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > > > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
> > > > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> > > What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
> > > Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
> > > reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.
>
> > Collins' favorite has always been Fingers Fortescue. I bet he's been
> > growing in Bud's estimation in recent years.
>
> > Joe Ramirez- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ++ Willie "Handlebars" Renshaw... PMac almost laughed out loud when
> Bud said Fed was in his top 10... talk about showing your age not your
> wisdom...
>
> P- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

There's also a way of looking at tennis history that's different than,
say, how would Nadal with his Babolat
do against Borg with his wood Donnay?

Of course Nadal of 2009 would crush Borg of 1978 with the difference
in racquet technology and other advantages. But the more important
question is how good were these different players relative to their
peers.

In that sense, maybe Bud still thinks Fed has something to prove.
Maybe he's comparing him to guys like Pancho and Tilden, who were
dominant for longer than what Fed's been dominant for to this point.


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 00:51:39
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 2:38=A0am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> >> started falling already....
>
> > Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> > it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>
> One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probably
> true.
>
> --
> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"

Yes, technically what Bud said is certainly true - with Sampras and
Laver above him. After all 3rd all time is also in the top 10...


  
Date: 25 Jan 2009 11:00:18
From: TT
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
RahimAsif wrote:
> On Jan 25, 2:38 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
>>> On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
>>>> started falling already....
>>> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
>>> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>> One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probably
>> true.
>>
>> --
>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> Yes, technically what Bud said is certainly true - with Sampras and
> Laver above him. After all 3rd all time is also in the top 10...

In that case I'd like to state that Fed definitely is in my top 25
players of all time.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 00:28:12
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 24, 10:17=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 1:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stoc=
k has
> > > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
> > > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is h=
is
> > > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
> > > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no fina=
ls?
>
> > > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
> > > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> > What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
> > Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
> > reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.
>
> Collins' favorite has always been Fingers Fortescue. I bet he's been
> growing in Bud's estimation in recent years.
>
> Joe Ramirez- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

++ Willie "Handlebars" Renshaw... PMac almost laughed out loud when
Bud said Fed was in his top 10... talk about showing your age not your
wisdom...

P


 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 22:17:53
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 1:11=A0am, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock =
has
> > > > > started falling already....
>
> > > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
> > > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is his
> > > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
> > > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no finals=
?
>
> > > Joe Ramirez
>
> > Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
> > Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...
>
> What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
> Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
> reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.

Collins' favorite has always been Fingers Fortescue. I bet he's been
growing in Bud's estimation in recent years.

Joe Ramirez


 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 22:11:29
From: Pedro Dias
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 12:39=A0am, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock ha=
s
> > > > started falling already....
>
> > > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> > According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
> > least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is his
> > "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
> > constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no finals?
>
> > Joe Ramirez
>
> Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
> Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...

What I was wondering is who exactly *is* in that top ten. Renshaw?
Budge? Gonzales? Because in the usual Open-Era-is-a-different-beast
reckoning, I run out of plausible candidates at four.


 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 21:39:18
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 24, 11:30=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > RahimAsif wrote:
> > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> > > started falling already....
>
> > I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.
>
> According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
> least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is his
> "very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
> constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no finals?
>
> Joe Ramirez

Yes that was pretty weird to hear. If that is the criteria, I guess
Sampras probably isn't in the top 10 in Bud's book...


 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 21:30:56
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 25, 12:20=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> RahimAsif wrote:
> > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> > started falling already....
>
> I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.

According to Collins, the principal knock against Federer -- or at
least the only specific criticism that Colllins articulated -- is his
"very weak" results at the French Open. If three straight finals
constitute "very weak" results, then how would you describe no finals?

Joe Ramirez


 
Date: 25 Jan 2009 16:20:08
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
RahimAsif wrote:
> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> started falling already....


I agree with Bud - Roger is in my top 10 too.



 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 21:24:06
From: Sao Paulo Swallow
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 24, 9:18=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 24, 11:16=A0pm, Sao Paulo Swallow <Sao_Paulo_Swal...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 24, 8:38=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> > > started falling already....
>
> > Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> > it, Wimbledon? Or the French?
>
> Doesn't make sense - that was 3 years ago at the French. He has
> praised Fed a lot since then...

It was a year and a half ago and Bud's been dumping on him ever since.


 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 21:18:18
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 24, 11:16=A0pm, Sao Paulo Swallow <Sao_Paulo_Swal...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> On Jan 24, 8:38=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> > started falling already....
>
> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?

Doesn't make sense - that was 3 years ago at the French. He has
praised Fed a lot since then...


 
Date: 24 Jan 2009 21:16:44
From: Sao Paulo Swallow
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
On Jan 24, 8:38=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> started falling already....

Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
it, Wimbledon? Or the French?


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:48:06
From: Richard Eich
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
Sao_Paulo_Swallow@yahoo.com wrote...
> On Jan 24, 8:38=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
> > started falling already....
>=20
> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?

Yep. What a petty piece of work.

--=20
A fight starts when a man reaches the limits of his intelligence.


  
Date: 25 Jan 2009 10:38:48
From: TT
Subject: Re: Bud Collins
Sao Paulo Swallow wrote:
> On Jan 24, 8:38 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Fed is "in the top 10 of the all time list". I guess Fed's stock has
>> started falling already....
>
> Bud is holding a grudge from when Federer snubbed him ... where was
> it, Wimbledon? Or the French?

One doesn't have to hold a grudge in order to be saying what is probably
true.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"