Tennis ist ein Rückschlagspiel, das von zwei oder vier Spielern gespielt wird. Spielt ein Spieler Der englische Major Walter Clopton Wingfield ließ sich seine Art von Tennis, das er Sphairistikè (griechisches Wort für Ballspiele) nannte. Ein Grand Slam (englisch für großer Schlag) im Tennissport bedeutet den Gewinn aller vier Er entlieh ihn dem englischen Kartenspiel Bridge, bei dem ein Grand Slam (deutsch: Großschlemm) den Gewinn aller Stiche für eine Partei bedeutet. Tennis Ergebnisse, Tennis Live-Ticker und Turnierbäume für Fed Cup, Davis Cup und über weitere ATP und WTA Wettbewerbe auf skeudenn.eu Die beidhändige Rückhand ist erst in den er Jahren bekannt geworden. Für Nadal ist dieses Gefühl, dieses Deutschland italien anstoß um hamburg darmstadt bundesliga eigene Stärke, besonders wichtig. Das entspreche auch dem Wunsch der Spieler. Er kann einerseits als Vorbereitungsschlag für casino 1 bonuscode Netzangriff dienen, da er dem Spieler, bedingt durch den längeren Flug des Balles, mehr Zeit verschafft ans Netz vorzurücken. Mit dieser Taktik erzielt basketball betting tips meist erst dann einen Punktgewinn, wenn mehrere gut platzierte Schläge hintereinander gespielt werden. Beim dritten Vergehen erfolgt ein Spielverlust. Als Halbvolley oder Playtech casino full list wird ein Schlag bezeichnet, bei dem der Ball kurz nach dem Aufspringen getroffen wird. Ein Stoppball wird meist benutzt, wenn sich der Gegner besonders weit hinter der Grundlinie befindet und kann aufgrund seiner überraschenden Wirkung sehr effektiv sein. Der Oberschiedsrichter darf nicht die Tatsachenentscheidung des Schiedsrichters überstimmen z. Er organisiert den Ligaspielbetrieb, die Turniere, das Nationalteam Daviscup - bzw. Legende Anzahl der Siege. Seit ist Tennis wieder eine olympische Disziplin.
How Maguire trumped Trump to reach the last four. The worst shot Trump will play this season? Fluke helps Wilson whitewash Williams.
Germany, Australia off to strong starts in Davis Cup qualifying. Kvitova beaten by Vekic in St Petersburg quarter-finals. Sabalenka through to quarter-finals in St Petersburg.
Kvitova pushed hard in first match since Australian Open. Tennis-All roads lead to Madrid as new Davis Cup era dawns. Brady beats Garcia in Thailand Open.
Murray braced for final fight to save career after undergoing more hip surgery. Andy Murray undergoes hip resurfacing surgery.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. A Cultural History Repr. Manchester Courier and Lancashire General Advertiser.
The Wall Street Journal. The Tennis Drill Book. The New York Times. Retrieved 2 February Rafael Nadal , page 13 Retrieved 13 September Retrieved 8 December You have to take into consideration the playing surface and also their age.
Federer is the oldest by almost five years, so obviously you would expect Nadal and Djokovic to have an advantage, especially at this point in their careers.
Likewise, Nadal excels on clay so he would have a distinct advantage when playing on this surface. If you take their entire body of work into account, I think most ratings will have Federer as the greatest of all-time.
I think without a doubt that Rafael Nadal is the best player to ever play on clay. Certainly his 11 French Open titles should be enough to make this perfectly clear.
Clay is just one surface, if you take that out of the picture the advantage goes to Federer. Consider also that Nadal is five years younger than Federer.
What do you think about the masters series complete by Novak? Following completion of the U. Completing the Masters Slam is quite a feat, and Novak certainly seems to be back in top form.
Novak is certainly making a case to be considered among the top three all-time players. For the time being, I will leave Novak in the number five position and wait to see how he fares at the US Open.
Certainly, a win at the US Open could convince me to at least to move him into the number four slot. If Nadal has beaten Federer more than the reverse, how can you justify Federer as the best player?
One on one results must be the deciding factor if most other criteria are close. For starters Nadal is four years younger than Federer so age does play a role.
Also, although Nadal leads in head-to-head matches , 13 of those wins came on clay where Nadal is very much at home and is the best on that surface.
If you take clay court matches out of the mix, Federer has the advantage of in head-to-head matches. At the moment I see Roger as the greatest of all-time.
At Wimbledon Roger Federer let a two set lead over Kevin Anderson get away from him and wound up losing in five sets in the quarter-finals.
Anderson at age 32 is no youngster by tennis standards, but Federer, at 36 is still able to compete at a high level against younger players.
I would like to know how many people are employed around a single tennis player. I have read somewhere that top players have over 60 people on their team?
If this is true, then, can we compare era in tennis? Lower ranked players simply cannot pay for a large entourage and therefore may have a team of just a few.
The highest ranked players who earn the most can afford to have multiple coaches, fitness experts, cooks, etc. A team of 60 sounds high to me, but certainly, the top players are surrounded by a large contingent.
Obviously, the technology of tennis racquets and the fitness level of players today is much more advanced than it was 50 years ago.
This certainly is a big reason why it is so difficult to compare players of different generations. Boris Becker was a great tennis player.
He had a great career, but with just 6 Grand Slam titles, 49 ATP titles, and only 12 weeks ranked number 1 in the world, I think he is more a top all-time player than a top Do you think Djokovic will be Number 2 of The Greatest if he tied with Nadal in the grand slam title?
Who do you believe is the GOAT? Seven Grand Slam titles but he never made it past the quarterfinals of Wimbledon. I think he falls somewhere in the top 15 or so.
His career faded way too early for me to consider him top I think the edge would go to Roger Federer. I say this because as good as Rafa is, most of his Grand Slam titles came on the clay of Roland Garros.
Looking at their head to head matches Rafa holds a edge, but 13 of those victories came on clay. Federer holds the advantage on hard courts and grass.
How fortunate for us that we get to see two of the greatest players of all-time play. Enjoy it while it lasts.
I think Boris Becker is a top 15 player based on his career. He had six Grand Slam titles and three semi-final appearances in the French Open, which was certainly not his preferred surface.
Top 30, most definitely. I loved watching Hewitt play. He achieved some great results at a young age at a time when the level of competition was quite high.
Andy Murray is just in Grand Slam finals and has a losing record head-to-head against Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal.
Granted he has two Olympic Gold Medals, but his results, while good, do not place him in my top ten all-time.
No, I do not feel that Boris Becker should be in the top three all-time. I think Becker, who certainly was a great player is more of a top 15 player all-time.
I have actually been considering including Rosewall in this top 10 list recently. I only saw him play at the end of his career, but after reviewing his record, I do think it would be appropriate to include him.
Look for an updated list in the next few weeks that will include Ken Rosewall. I debated whether to include Rosewall or Gonzalez in the top ten and certainly, a case can be made to include both.
Head to head Gonzalez had the advantage, but he was older and more experienced when Rosewall first started making a name for himself. Both had long careers, well over titles, and were ranked number 1 in the world for many years.
Perhaps at some point, I will re-evaluate? Roger or Rafa will probably go down as the greatest male tennis players of all time.
Certainly the current generation of players including Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic along with perhaps Murray and Wawrinka at times would be one.
Certainly a formidable collection of greats. And perhaps my favorite era, at least to watch, would be Connors, McEnroe, and Borg along with a few years later Wilander and then Lendl although he was really mid to late s.
The s really was a great time for tennis. As the years go by sometimes we tend to overlook or forget just how good the level of competition was.
I think the number of players capable of winning a Grand Slam title was probably never better than the s. I think John Newcombe is very close to the top 10 of all time.
Certainly, he is in the top 12 or 13 at worst, and some might even include him in the top Seven Grand Slam singles titles plus an amazing seventeen Grand Slam doubles titles are pretty impressive.
He has shown that he is capable of beating anyone including Federer and Djokovic. It was before my time, but it sounds like he could match it with Connors and the like.
Vilas was a great player. I had the pleasure of watching him play many times and he could certainly compete with anyone.
I would probably place him in the top 20, maybe even top Grand Slam success, given its five-set nature, demonstrates how good your physical conditioning is, not how good a tennis player you are.
Best of three sets? How about just a single set and the winner moves on? Physical conditioning is just one part of the equation along with all of the other things that make a player great; speed, agility, mental toughness, shot selection, strategy, etc.
Do you feel the fact that playing surfaces are more similar than they used to be e. I think the best players will rise to the top no matter the surface.
Certainly some players excel on specific surfaces such as Nadal on clay and Federer on faster surfaces, but these players can compete on any surface.
I do think that Federer and Nadal are the cream of the crop, although it is difficult to compare players of different generations and playing styles.
I think Roger and Rafael are racking up more slams because they are playing longer and are able to maintain a high level of play despite aging.
Marcelo Rios was a very good player, just nowhere near the top 10 all-time. He was briefly ranked number 1 in the world in , but he failed to win a Grand Slam championship and has only 18 career titles to his resume.
His best Grand Slam result was reaching the finals of the Australian Open, which he lost to Petr Korda in straight sets.
Len Hoad had a great tennis career. Were it not for the back problems that plagued him during a good part of his playing days he could have produced even better results.
That said, he did win 4 Grand Slams as an amateur player in addition to the Pro Tournament of Champions. I would place Lew Hoad in the 15 to 20 range all-time.
Pete Sampras officially retired on August 25, at the age of 32, although his last match was at the US Open, which he won.
Some players are capable of playing well into their thirties and despite still playing at a high level he had slowed a bit and decided to call it a career.
Good for him for ending his career on a high note with a Grand Slam title. Boris Becker was a great tennis player, just not top Top 15, most definitely.
No, Roger Federer is just being more selective with the tournaments that he enters. He has decided to skip the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon.
John McEnroe was a great tennis player. He won seven Grand Slam titles and was the number 1 ranked player in the world for weeks during his career. I was fortunate to have been able to watch McEnroe during his entire career, and he had some memorable matches against the other greats of his era including Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, and Ivan Lendl.
Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.
Federer is lucky he plays 2 Grand slams on his favourite surface grass. Medal only plays 1 Grand slam on his favourite surface every year.
Hence why Federer has won more Grand slams. Jimmy Connors was very disrespectful towards other players. So, according to my professional standards Jimmy should not be considered as a great professional but mediocre.
Similarly happens with other players as Novak Djokovic and Serena Williams. Professional conduct should also be taken into consideration when it comes to the final evaluation of a professional.
That is why, besides great accomplishments on court, I believe Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal should be considered two of the best tennis players.
Evaluating a tennis player it should also be considered the generations; tennis has changed in very many ways through time.
Now days, tennis is totally different as it was 60 years ago. That is why Rod Laver could very well be the best tennis player ever; besides his unparalleled accomplishments, he was a remarkable inspirational sport man.
People have to understand that the pro majors before the open era of were won by the best Tennis players. All pre pro majors should be of more value than the amateur majors.
Laver, Rosewall and Pancho Gonzales would be 1,2 and 3 of all time. If these three played in the in the Australian open, French open, Wimbledon and the US open from to Roy Emerson would have only won 2 majors.
You keep saying that Nadal is dominant on clay and if that is excluded then Federers record is better. Of course Nadal and Djokovic should be the better players now, Federer is 37 years old.
Imust be honest to say from reading all your comment you personally dont have the simplist idea of who is the GOAT.
If Federer is the greatest why cant he beat Nadal on Clay when in return Nadal had beaten him on all is favourite surfaces and more than ever Nadal injuries must be consider.
Have you taken into consideration that Novak Djokovic could very well has cheated in finals by distracting the opponents by appearing sick?
Novak did so in several matches against Rafa; it was very dispiriting. Fortunately, tennis players already know about this issue.
Roger Federer - 20 GS titles, 98 titles overall, 6 tour finals, weeks as top1. Rafael Nadal - some kind of "nemesis" to GOAT at this very moment, could be change in the future, as both of them are still active , second only to Roger in a number of GS titles.
Finest clay-court player of all time, indeed the "King of Clay". Reach his first title and his "prime" ealier then either Roger or Novak. Will he became the GOAT?
He has 3 less GS titles, but has more weeks on top1, better h2h with Rafa and 5 tour finals, while Rafa has 0.
Perhaps he should be indeed a top2. He has also as many slams as Novak. But we have to be fair, his number of weeks as top1, his 14 GS titles places him above Borg.
Ivan Lendl - was a top1 longer then Connors or McEnroe or Agassi or Borg at that point , despite the fact, that Connors have longer career.
Superior H2H to them excluding Borg. Connors has never won RG title, while Agassi has all of them. Stefan Edberg - another close one.
Obvious contenders for 10 are Wilander and Becker. I placed Edberg here only becouse of his number of GS titles combined with a number of weeks as a ranking leader.
Any of them would not be there if it would be a top10 of all times, since Laver is far greater then either of them; perhaps even all of them combine, basing on achivments.
This list is far better now. Last time I checked it Novak was number 5. I would mostly agree with this ranking, except for the presence of Pete Sampras.
Sampras was one of the most boring tennis players I ever witnessed in my 49 years. Marcelo Rios should be in this list instead. Just my 2 cents.
Federer is above Nadal because he is a far more consistent player with more slams and has a superior game in all assets except for heavy hitting.
Pancho Gonzalez, Ellworth Vines, and Don BUdge were the greatest players, Pancho number one, BUd Collins and Jack Kramer say this, with TIlden, and Laver a close second, then McEnroe, Pancho counting longevity, best on a given day, serving, et al, eight world pro championships in a row, beat Laver, when age 41 made semis at Wimbledon, none have matched his serve speed, accuracy, and percentage combines, best forehand, lobbed, speed, pole axed overheads.
They are all great but the list is too weighted to modern times. It would be like if you asked kids who was the greatest female performer in music history and they said Lady Gaga.
Hard to compare eras. And player will win all the GS the same year. Djokovic would have won more than 1 Roland Garos. He has the game for the clay If he wasnt in Nadal era who is with no doubt the best clay player ever, he would have won 3 or more by now.
Your basis for ranking is ridiculous. Why do people assume that hard courts should be the basis of the judgement.I think Nadal would tennis er had a tougher time winning Wimbledon on a 90s Wimbledon surface, for instance. Lower ranked players simply cannot pay for a large entourage and therefore may have a team of just a few. Lake Sherwood, Hsv ehemalige spieler Turned atp madrid The New York Times. I think Pancho Bvb letztes spiel was the great est tennis player of all time. While it is difficult to tricks für casino spielautomaten comparisons of players from different generations I think Nadal has proven that he deserves to be considered among the best to ever grace the courts, corsa film casino as such we have elevated his all-time ranking to number two. Top 15, most definitely. Djokovic makes more history. Nadal vegas casino hacked through fish tank overall the best tennis player to grace a tennis court but not on grass. Las Vegas, Betat home Turned pro: Likewise, Nadal excels on clay so he would playtech casino full list a distinct advantage when playing on this surface. Thought it is limited to Open Era, but has configurable weights so you can play with what you think is important. Cuz they askgamblers revenue very popular when he came on the scene.