Stifler with a bad hair transplant

mostly stifler tho

Yeah, mostly Stifler and also a bit of Isner

So many times i have thought the Stifler thing!

Yup stifler

Agreed. Maybe he can take over after Jonny Mac hangs em up.

For sure, everyone loves his charisma - not to mention that he was a top player (while others are more like tennis enthusiasts/analysts but Andy offers the players' perspective)

His analysis is way off

He's a loser, there's not much to learn from him. Just lots of loser self deprecating jokes

@@shynessbreakthroughcommuni826 I never found him charismatic.....I think he was a great player, but he seemed to have a nasty streak. But he is a great analyzer of matches. He's learning how to be more diplomatic, too.

GOAT is just an opinion.....no science in the discussion. what else are you gonna do for tennis news entertainment? andy is being a debbie downer by not wanting to participate in the GOAT discussion.

@@golfmaniac007 cuz he will *NEVER* be on that list! So i don't really know if Andy's being totally objective or just throwin shade.

We can judge them on their accomplishments to this point, as if they hung up their rackets today. If Rog retired today, he would be better than, say, pete and Andre. This will always be the case no matter what he does in the future

Assessing their greatness now is important though, because narratives can get twisted over time. Its important for historiographic purposes.

I think it's impossible to come up with a GOAT. Except for Nole and Rafa most possible "GOATS" play in different age generations. Fed has the disadvantagr that he played so much post prime vs Nole and Nadal. Nole was also at disadvantage playing a prime Federer when he was younger. Nadal was the exception to the rule due to Clay more than anything from early years. The only way to have a GOAT would be to have one single tennis era where all players are at their prime age (which of course is unrealistic) so it's impossible to measure except for GS counts like other sports and their biggest tournanents.

he is also a big dickhead and crybaby when things don't go his way

Im not a huge roddick fan but he showed class against superior competition everytime i saw him

And hes actually qualified to commentate unlike the rest of these clowns.

His knowledge of his own record though is pretty spotty lol. He lost 2 and 1, not 2 and 2 like he states here in the 2012 Wimbledon second round against Djokovic

So much intelligence. Cant say goat till hang up raquet. Ofcoarse not. But by now its very predictable. The race is nearly over. Djokovic will easily win the most slams and debates over. Cmon Andy. Its common sense to predict the obvious. Federer hoping too surpass Connors most titles but looks very very slim

Surely its a transplant and not a wig.

@@uncletony6210 Andy?

Dindt see that comming...

I think he got the Jon Cryer treatment I dont know how the thing is called but is a substance that makes hair looks thicker, like some sword of camuflage. If you look closely his frontal hairline is still pretty receded so I don't think is hair transplant or a wig.

looks too un-natural.

Awesome

Yaa. He deserved it. Andy then wanted to be the centre of attraction... talking shit. Trash taking. Hopefully he has gotten better.

Roddick is great outside of playing, but is kind of a jerk when he is.

@@pergal4 He was just joking. Stop being so butthurt.

@@shafqatishan437 If you consider sarcasm and ridicule the lowest level of humor...ok.

Hey, Andy just awarded the GOAT award to Serena, and she is still playing. IMHO, Novak is the GOAT now, and he's still playing. Roger is second, and he's still playing...Rafa is third. It can change, but as of NOW...and that's the fun part, it keeps changing, although I think Novak is going to pull away from the pack now (July 17, 2021).

@@joemarshall4226 i will put Rafa in front of roger

There's an argument for that....Rafa has the better H2H, Rafa has the higher winning percentage, and Rafa had to play his whole career against Roger and Novak, whereas roger had his best years before they developed. I pick Roger for second at this point, because he has more wins, more tournaments, and Rafa's advantage is mostly on one surface...even the H2H thing is an illusion, because Roger actually leads it on hard courts and grass. They wound up meeting on clay much more often because Roger was the world's second best clay player by a wide margin, and usually made it to the finals, whereas Rafa was not nearly as good on hard courts, and didn't make enough finals to play Roger that often on hard courts. My opinion could change. Also, Roger has WAY more weeks at number one.

@@joemarshall4226 Roger barely leads it on hard,and for the good part of their matchup,Rafa was leading even hard court matches,while Rafa is obliterating him on clay,so it's not an illusion. For example Novak is killing Rafa on hard and Rafa is equally killing him on clay,so they are both holding it's own on their preffered surface,while Roger is barely leading Rafa on hard. Also both of Roger's weeks at no.1 and Majors are about 60-70% accomplished in an era with no other superstar,while Rafa as well as Novak had it wayyy tougher than that.

@@guarana6245 I know these arguments, and they are valid, but so are their opposite arguments: The H2H on hard courts is 12-9 in favor of Federer, including the last 6 when Fed was way past his prime.....34-38 and over....and Rafa was near his peak at 28-32. In the early years, they met on clay much more often, because Rafa wasn't it making it to the finals and Roger was, whereas Roger DID make the clay finals. So Roger was the second best clay player in the world by a large margin...few could even take a set from him....but Rafa was not the second best hard court player....Davydenko beat Rafa 6 times in a row on hard courts before Rafa got his lone hard court victory over Nikolai in a close 3 setter. Rafa had a unique game that handcuffed Roger until roger learned to use a bigger racquet...then he took six in a row on hard courts. Rafa had a unique game that stifled Roger, with the smaller racquet, but the weeks at number one are telling. I don't think Roger should be punished for his dominance before Rafa and Novak came along. He beat the best players in the world, and dominated the tennis world like no one had before or since. By the time Novak reached his peak, Rafa was 30 years old...a tough age to dominate at......his 5 year peak is the best in tennis history for a man....and his career achievements are equally amazing. If he can come back, he could break Connors's marks for total wins and tournaments, and he is second in weeks at number one.

I didn't particularly like Andy. I thought he was a great player, but his attitude annoyed me sometimes. But he won me over that day...What a battle! The Jimmy Connors BH was his secret weapon in that match. Andy made some poor decisions in coaching I think, early in his career. He should have stayed with Brad Gilbert, and continued with Brad's "surf and turf" strategy (Big Serve, big FH) as his bread and butter. He had the game to beat Roger at Wimbledon, but he needed a couple of adjustments.

@@joemarshall4226 exactly...

I always like to say if Federer's parents never met Andy would have 8 grand slams😉

@@joemarshall4226 like what you said. Jimmy is 180° different type player than Andy. Jimmy self admitted knuckle ball pitcher who's assets grinding out from baseline and looking for short balls to pounce and follow to net. Andy should just play the big serve and FH and learn chip n charge off BH slice. Keep it going get better and not try to win as baseline player. But that's a moot point now cause we'll never know. It's poetry.

It's like you read my mind. This is exactly what I was going to write...even the "surf and turf" phrase. I usually rooted against Andy, but not in this match. He played his heart out, and missed that BH overhead that would have put him up 2 sets to one, although it wasn't as easy a shot as they pretended. HOs coach turned him into a grinder, then later on, hehit almost all slice backhands.....it was like he was 3 different players over the course of his career, and he was very effective in all three modes. But losing that big forehand was clearly a big mistake. He had an amazing first serve percentage, considering he had perhaps the biggest inch for inch serve ever, being "only" six foot two (maybe second to Roscoe Tanner, who was six foot even) He accomplished this in part, by hitting most first serves right at the opponent, handcuffing them with 130-150 mph rockets. I thought it was a good strategy.

American tennis doesn't have 4 or 5 satellite or Futures level tournaments within 60 miles of each other as the do in Europe. Ever take a look at the ridiculous places these tournaments are held in the US, scattered all over the country. In Europe, tons of teenagers play these entry level pro tournaments because they are cheap and easy to get to. Playing tough players forges a young player, makes him/her practice better, and results in overall better achievement. The US is complete BS in terms of low and mid level pro tournaments, while you can't turn around in Europe without running into a Futures level tournament or futures level qualification tournament. American developemental tennis, including the mismanaged junior system, insures that only the wealthiest kids, and most disadvantaged kids have any change of playing tennis at a serious level. That leaves out a whole large segment of the population (not wealthy and not socially disadvantaged) that will not ever have a pathway to tennis development. Those that have this pathway (wealthy and socially disadvantaged) are a very very small pool of athletic potential to pick from. That's why American tennis is not represented much in the top 10 for men. It's far to difficult, and/or expensive to seriously become a top tennis player growing up and living in the US. One area of hope was the college system, but if you look closely, the US college have filled their rosters with European players (many of whom were formally paid pros).

Most go to Florida to train. You say European but these are individuals and it so happens that Fed, Joker, and Nadal are geniuses. They have a special talent given by God and developed by hard work. You might expect America to have more because of population but what about India or China? Tennis playing time is way down in the US. Frankly, I don't see it coming back but I don't know what God's plan is.

@@orthopraxis235 Orthopraxis that's one of the best explanations I've heard as to why American tennis is where it is right now. Good job

​@@johnheavner7947 Don't agree most train in Florida. Don't agree with a mysterious tennis gene given by God. And don't agree with anything explained by a "God's Plan." There is just no way to provide evidence for the existence of any of that.

@@orthopraxis235 so what about the time when Pete, Andre and Courier were dominating

This classification is a nice way to see things!

wtf R u on m8?

@Daniel Caskey Djokovic vs Federer and Nadal in 2011 was 10:1. Ofc noone can play every single match on highest level. This is tennis. Novak vs Federer Nadal in 2011 and 2015 combined was 19:4. Federer in 2006 lost 4 times against teenage Rafa. Novak defeated prime Rafa 7 times in a row in 2011 and AO 2012. Federer was fantastic in that Rg 2011 but Novak wasnt such good in that particular match with so many errors and looked little tired after 41 match winning streak which is absolutely normal. FEDERER ELO RATING IS ON 5 PLACE AFTER NOVAK MC ENROE BORG AND NADAL.

Sampras is also goat. Power and speed ( for faster surfaces)

the best singles player is debatable... but not the best player... because u have to consider doubles.. the only player to dominate both singles and doubles is Johnny mac.. he’s the goat.. doubles is also a form of tennis!

His hair is free

I was always a fan of Lindsey. Great champion, no drama, so unlike Serena. You get exhausted watching Serena crying and whining.

He was a great player but at the second half of his career he wasnt playing ir training at the level that he should

if they wait for novak to hang up his racquet and then have a debate then there wo'nt be a debate anymore because novak will march wayy ahead till that time in every aspect one can ever imagine.

And Federer and Nadal are still better. Next.

@@calebcrawford2520 Ok dude - quit hallucinating!

@@heart4yah881 hallucinating...that's definitely the right word...

@@calebcrawford2520 There are three types of Fedtards: 1. Pre-2009 Fedtards who say that numbers matter. 2. 2009-2019 Fedtards who are confused and don't know if numbers matter anymore or not. 3. Post-2019 and present Fedtards who now know for sure that numbers don't matter. 😂😂😂

Very true bro, well said. It's amazing the doors that open when you show a bit of character.

This was well constructed and 100% logical, I agree totally

I saw him in US open final 2006, Fed was in God mode but I rooted for Andy during whole match and everyone around me was getting a kick out of it, what a great guy!

I agree. It looks a little more full up there!

He got hair plugs clearly!

Is there any news or video about Andys transplant?

your thumbnail looks like you're looking at it/saying that.

I’d do the same if I had the money

you might be right. He has already won 2

My prediction Djokovic will win the Golden Slam🍻🍻🍻

He won the hardest one for him RG

Nope!

Greatness is all about compiling stats

Nole is goat, yes

earlier they used to talk about stats which is fair one because novak did'nt had the backing of stats, it was all about he is going to. but now he has done it and that means they are again on that class, love, grace, behaviour shit. behaviour does matter, do'nt get me wrong but a player is defined by his achievements. mcenroe had real temper issues and also he did used to say a lot of shit on court during his meltdowns but you can't deny that he was one of the best player of his time with 7GS.

That’s hilarious, but April Fool’s Day was months ago. 😂🤣🤡

@@calebcrawford2520 people are free to be fools any time they want lol

Facepalm

Suuure...

Needs to lower it by inch as his forehead is too big. Just an observation

@@isaz597 correct

You see what i did there nice dye

You see what I did there: Yeah I see what you did there... Arod 😐

Yeh I always loved roddick people underestimate him as a player I’d go as far too say he’s the most talentless number 1 yet had a better career than so many others.

True, i like him as well though i didn't much like his game.

Des T it is the typical american multimillionaire house in a good climate area

Henin

Graf is the GOAT then it's Martina then Serena.

@@rajusaha855 Graf was great. But possibly not the best of her era. Seles won 7 of 8 majors in a row before the stabbing, something like that. Navratilova was the GOAT in doubles too.

@@swalterstennis era doesn't mean only 2 years. Graf dominate over a decade. Infact no male or female tennis player had a best 10 years period (1987-96) than Graf. BTW during Seles's peak from (1991-93) it's Steffi who leads their h2h with 3-2.

Rodgebi great player but she is no where in the GOAT discussion! It’s all Serena Williams!

If your comparing her to Serena...i understand👌

Shaun S to be fair it’s generally Americans who make that assumption. The rest of the world...

For me Steffi had grace and style which Serena lacks ,,,,, she simply overpowered her opponents ,,,,,,,, and who knows how many slams Seles could have won but for the stabbing incident ,,,,,,, Though I am a Steffi fan gotto admit that during that time Seles was dominating Steffi .......

@@kaala1240 I'd definitely put Steffi over Serena, and Seles and likely even Navatralova over her in their primes. A serious Sharapova or healthy Hingis might be in the picture as well. As has been written, the Williams sisters have never been shot-makers. They are just very physically gifted - hopefully naturally. Serena especially has been kind of a pox on the sport, but at the same time if no one wants to step up and drive her out of the game, the more power to her hanging around to possibly win another few titles. Once she's gone and elegance has returned, I'll go back to watching. I stopped when Hingis retired that first time.

I disagree that being the greatest is just about slam numbers, and don't think you can compare different eras. As for Steffi, great player though she was, she was not better than Seles in my view. Seles eclipsed her winning 6/8 slams and becoming world number one. Steffi could only beat her on the grass. Then that lunatic stabbed Seles and basically ended her career (yes, she came back three years later but was not the same player). No way Steffi wins 7/8 of the next slams, if that hadn't have happened.

@@xav9258 the story between the Steffi vs Seles rivalry has always been one sided with the stabbing taking centre stage (and rightfully so, because it was horrible and should never have happened. Everyone lost. Especially tennis) But in order to talk Steffi vs Seles you need to understand the full picture. Seles NEVER dominated Steffi. After Steffi, Seles is probably my 2nd favorite tennis player of all time. Hence why I followed the rivalry in depth. Let's start with the "changing of the guard" into Seles dominant years and Steffi's decline: 1990 - Steffi was on a 66match winning streak by that Berlin Final in 1990 (when Seles beat her for the first time). Steffi had not lost a single match up till that point and had just made 13 str8 GS finals, winning 9 of them. Then came Berlin 1990. In the semi finals the blackmail scandal broke of Steffi's rather having pregnanted another woman. Steffi was hunted by the media. A day later she lost her match again Seles in the final and said in her press conferences "she count not fight like she used to". 2 weeks later she lost to Seles in the FO final. The scandal broke her so much that Steffi did not make another GS final until 1991 Wimbledon. (Losing to people like Zina Garrison, Sabatini etc) people whom Steffi had dominated over the previous 3 years. Seles didn't make another final that year either btw. The FO being the only final she made. 1990 was 2-0 (clay) Seles. 1991 - Seles dominant years. Seles never faced Steffi in a GS (because Steffi never got that far in GS anymore due to lack of confidence). They played twice before the FO. Both on clay and Steffi won both matches. Seles went on to win 3/4 majors but never having faced Steffi. So 1991 - 2-0 (clay) to Steffi. 1992 - Steffi changed coaches but not racquets yet and started rediscovering her form. They played twice: FO '92 won by Seles 10-8 in the 3rd and Wim '92, won by Steffi in str8. So 1992 was 1-1 and both happened on their fav surfaces. 1993 they played once and it was their first meeting on a surface other than clay / grass. Seles won in 3 sets. Conclusion then is that over the dominat Seles years their h2h was 4-3 in Seles favour. 3 wins on clay and 1 on rebound ace. The narrative that Seles dominated Steffi is just not true. So its plausible to think that even without then stabbing, Steffi would have found form again and challenged for the no.1 ranking again.

Ken Arthur Best second serve most people say Sampras I think:

@@innosanto yes, Pete also had a great one. Would not want to try to return either of their second serves, for sure!

@@innosanto Sampras' second serve was overrated. He actually had a pretty low win % on second serve, and the only reason people praise it so much is because of a few key times where he would bring it out and do the classic "two first serves". Unfortunately he also had a somewhat high double fault rate

Yep, like to be No.1 330+ weeks and win all Grand Slams and Masters at least 2 times EACH, and win 5x Finals ATP Masters (fifth Slam) and to be 6x No.1 at the end of the year !!! You are absolutelly correct ;)

How is Sampras not on this list? Surely he's above Connors and McEnroe.

There are only 3 GOATS you know who they are.....

Just Imo, for fun. Or order I'd have peak/ overall them play for my life 1) Federer (def. Would have multiple rg's if wasn't for prime Rafa, would be more clear) 2) Rafa (transcended the sport's physicality/ ultimate fighter. Even if his consistency was/ is spotty at times, still at peak level absolutely scary, like Fed) 3) Nole (naturally want to put him #2 for how dominant he's been since 2011, still think it's inflated for lack of a generation, saw what happened when powerhouse Wawrinka came along. Cannot be denied he's up there tho 4) Laver 5) Sampras 6) Borg 7) Lendl 8) Agassi 9) McEnroe 10) Murray I get the arguments for Budge, Gonzales, etc. pre-open era greats but cannot be denied the whole amateur/ pro level divide muddies the waters, Australian open basically wasn't a slam for many years/ more emphasis on year end championship (which iirc Connors won some, but still below Mac and Borg in most important matches it seemed), and overall level of play in open era usually much better than pre-open era. Very hard to judge tennis overall GOAT's over such stark changes, basically different sport

🥴🥴🥴

He is only good on clay. Was avoiding federer and djokovic on other surfaces. He is only injured on other surfaces never clay.

So is the greatest grass courter and hard courter right?

@@Nopanop Nope, Federer lost on Wimbledon final 3 times to djokovic. Also, Novak is not so dominant on hard as Rafa is on clay

@@jovanfilipovic5115 but he still the greatest ... Is there anyone better on grass all time? Agree hard court is close.

@@Nopanop Well he might be for now but Novak is coming for that as well, also Pete is 7/7 in finals, So idk maybe for now its roger but its not so clear as for clay

@@jovanfilipovic5115 Djokovic has had the big advantage (for his baseline game) of playing in an era of slowed down grass courts and no great serve-and-volleyers coming at him to knock him out of his comfort zone. His style of baseline grinding never succeeded on fast grass against players like McEnroe, Becker, Leconte, Edberg, Cash, Stitch, Krajicek, Sampras, Rafter and even his coach, Ivanisevic, would have beaten him on fast grass. History shows that on a properly fast grass court a great serve-and-volleyer will nearly always beat a baseliner, no matter how good that baseliner is. In the twenty-one years before the Wimbledon courts were slowed, serve-and-volleyers won nineteen championships and baseliners like Djokovic won only two. Even baseline greats like Connors, Lendl and Agassi could win only three Wimbledons between them in the era of fast grass courts and great serve-and-volleyers. Borg, a baseliner of course - though he changed his game to play serve-and-volley at Wimbledon, he wasn't particularly great at it (7/10) but still, he did it - won five Wimbledons, but we were "between eras" in great serve-and-volleyers in his first four Wimbeldon wins: Laver, Rosewall and Newcombe had all gone, and Nastase wasn't really a serve-and-volleyer as such. We had to wait for McEnroe's arrival for the next great serve-and-volleyer, and although Borg scraped past him in the 1980 Wimbeldon final, McEnroe won their other three Majors finals and was clearly going to best him again and again if Borg hadn't retired.It was confirmation that, on a fast court, a great serve-and-volleyer will nearly always beat a baseliner no matter how great that baseliner might be - Ivan Lendl found that out, but we're in an era of homogenised, mostly medium-paced courts, which favours baseline play and so Djokovic brings his baseline, hardcourt game to Wimbeldon and, in this era, it wins, whereas in previous eras, it wouldn't have done.

Probably the Us open won't be played either

RossBayCult US Open? 😂😂😂😂

Wimbledon canceled. And i dont think there will any other tournament this year.

Kinda silly to host the FO less than a week after the USO ends

HeitorD he won 4 of them. So start crying 😢

Novak can be the 1st guy to reach 30. His mental resilience is from another planet. The way he can break championship points and comeback to win the championship is something we haven't seen before. Look at the recent French open. The number of hours that he has played..