E-Mail 'Before crowning Roger Federer or Rafel Nadal the GOAT, remember the greatness of Jimmy Connors' To A Friend

June 6, 2011 By 13 Comments

Email a copy of 'Before crowning Roger Federer or Rafel Nadal the GOAT, remember the greatness of Jimmy Connors' to a friend

* Required Field






Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.


E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

Share This Article:

Filed Under: Away From the Action, Featured Column, Tennis Tagged With: jimmy connors, pete samprass, Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Tennis
About Josh Tinley

Josh Tinley writes the Away From The Action column at Midwest Sports Fans, covering all aspects of sport aside from what actually happens on the field, court, or track. Josh grew up in Indianapolis and graduated from the University of Evansville and Vanderbilt Divinity School. He is the author of Kneeling in the End Zone: Spiritual Lessons From the World of Sports and the managing editor of LinC, a weekly curriculum for teens that explores the intersection of faith and culture. Josh lives outside Nashville with his wife, Ashlee, and children, Meyer (7), Resha Kate (5), and Malachi (3). He will not allow himself to die before the Evansville Purple Aces make another trip to the NCAA Tournament. Follow him on Twitter @joshtinley or send him an e-mail.

  • Harry

    Unfortunately tennis was, is and always will be about the Slams followed by Masters Series. Connors racking up 108 titles at small tournaments while playing until he was a 100 years old is a nice and impressive feat but its just that. He doesn't belong with the big boys. The GOAT is between Laver, Fed, Nadal and Pete and no one else currently belongs with them. Connors is in the second tier.

  • Paul

    Roger had 9 Grand Slam titles, not 11, at Rafa's age … so Rafa is actually collecting them at a faster pace than Federer, not the other way around.

  • http://www.twitter.com/joshtinley Josh Tinley

    You're right. I was one year off. I'll make the correction. Thanks for the catch.

  • Lori

    To say that Nadal is 'not quite 26' is also a little disingenuous considering that he turned 25 on Friday. 26 is still 362 days away.

  • http://www.twitter.com/joshtinley Josh Tinley

    I'm having a rough day. I knew that Nadal was 25, but I was thinking of Federer's birthday (August 8) instead of Nadal's (June 3), which is why I made the mistake of thinking that Nadal would turn 26 in a couple months. I'll correct again. Thanks for keeping me honest.

  • http://www.twitter.com/joshtinley Josh Tinley

    Good point. On surfaces other than clay Fed-Nadal are tied 2-2 in Grand Slam finals.

    I probably should have given Borg a closer look. No one else has been so dominant on clay and grass.

  • TylerJ

    I am pretty convinced that if Borg didn't retire, he would be the best of all-time.

  • Michael

    Great article, but a couple of points of contention:

    One thing the algorithms don't take into consideration is the doubles careers, which made up a large part of players like Connors, McEnroe, and the like during their time. In today's game, specialization is more valued and it's not worth it financially for players like Federer, Nadal or even going back to Agassi and Sampras to have included doubles tennis. Thus when you consider doubles as well, it of course throws a whole slew of other questions into the equation. If I were counting doubles as well, I'd say McEnroe turns out to be a greater player than Connors.

    Second, this article probably needs to clarify itself as "the greatest male tennis player of all time." If we're basing it off of stats related to dominance over their era and number of titles won, etc., I would be hard pressed to argue that Connors, or any male player for that matter, is even in the same discussion as Martina Navratilova.

  • carlos

    Your argument for Jimmy Connors is spot on! When seeking to uncover the greatest of all time in any sport, one must not only weigh the titles, but what the player's impact had on the sport overall!! Jimmy Connors single handedly brought big money and exposure to tennis that had never been seen prior to him. Roger Federer brought a sheer dominance that was so extreme that he was virtually "unplayable" during his younger days! Federer brought back the attention to men's tennis at a time when interest was truly spiraling downward. HIs talent and ability made us love tennis again and brought new fans to the men's game. Nadal and Djokovic are doing a great job building on that effect… That's called following the leader. Just as Mac, Villas, Agassi and Sampras did of Jimmy. As for Borg, it was his decision to leave the game so he should not be in the conversation. In the end, Roger and Jimmy are the only two players that should be part of this discussion! Without a doubt, their impact changed the game of tennis and how it would be played forever! So we don't really need a formula we just need to see through the numbers to arrive at a conclusion. Your article was fantastic!

  • Tsunarmy

    One thing that I find very interesting of the Federer v Nadal debate & no one seems to mention is that between Miami 2004 & the French 2006 before Nadal had turned 20 he had Federer down 6-1 in match ups. Yes 4 of these wins were on Clay but 2 were on Hard court. This is amazing considering that Federer was at the peak of his powers having already amassed 7 Grand Slams and dominating the Game, while Nadal was just a pup yet to find his feet in the Game. It irritates me when people say that its not Rogers fault that Rafa was not able to compete during the years that Roger was dominating on the hard courts because Roger had already won 7 of his 9 Hard court slams before Rafa turned 22. & his 8th when Rafa was 22 & 3 months. The sad thing is that I have even heard Roger make this argument. Lets not forget that Roger did not win his first Slam until he was 22 y.o. I honestly believe that Roger is arguably the most talented player to have ever played the game but that does not necessarily make him the GOAT – It often seems that people try to make excuses for Federer's poor record against Nadal (17-8) because they love Rogers style, flair & artistry as I do. However Tennis is not all about poetry, its also about guts & grit, determination, blood & sweat, tenacity, explosiveness, shear will power & a big heart – & this is what puts Nadal well and truly into the GOAT debate. He has competed against the most talented & arguably the Greatest player of all time & come up trumps and he is not yet finished. Bring on Wimbledon.

  • Tsunarmy

    Point of order, "Tennis is not all about poetry, its also about guts & grit, determination, blood & sweat, tenacity, explosiveness, shear will power & a big heart" – Needless to say that these are all attributes that Connors had in spades. He deserves to be among the Greats. But I am not sure about the GOAT.

  • jon

    Longevity? With his immense talent and challenged by all sorts of records, don't expect that he will retire anytime soon or stuck at 16. I think he will do better than Agassi or Connors in his early thirties. He will stay competitive with others and nobody will ever completely dominate him, including Nadal on surfaces other than clay.

  • pcman

    Sampras to me is still the G.O.A.T