This is very difficult for me because, unlike football, I can look at tennis without any sort of favouritism whatsoever. Which I suppose, is a good thing. And I can’t really comment on anything I haven’t seen.

The first Grand Slam final I ever watched was the 1985 Wimbledon Final between Boris Becker and Kevin Curran. Yes, I know I missed out on Bjorn Borg, ,John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors at their peak, but that wasn’t my fault!

It’s only fair for me to judge whom I think is the greatest on what I’ve seen personally, and for some reason I didn’t like Becker. Maybe it was because I was nine at the time and Becker was 17. I remember Curran was not expected to be even in the final.

'There is an argument rumbling around tennis at the moment that the standard of the game in the Sampras era was of a higher quality than today. I disagree'


I could go through Wikipedia for facts and so on, but again I am doing this from memory, so if I throw in stats that are wrong bear with me.

Although stats are great I think it only fair that my opinion of who is the best male tennis player should be based on recollections of those who really made me sit up and take notice.

I even felt desperately sorry for Ivan Lendl in 1986 because Becker just wiped the floor with him. It was Pat Cash and his headband that caught my eye in 1987, and the fact he was an underdog. I was delighted when he won.

It was the three finals between Stefan Edberg and Becker that really caught my eye. I liked Edberg’s style, his calm and overall demeanour on court.

As I look back now, players like Becker, Cash, Edberg, Michael Stich and Jim Courier were superb, but one man was just waiting to become the most powerful and dominant tennis player I have ever seen – one Pete Sampras.

It was great to watch different players winning tournaments, and then Sampras took a stranglehold on the game. He didn’t have the outward, likeable or rascal-like personality of Becker or Cash or even Andre Agassi.

His game alone was enough. An incredible serve matched with awesome agility for a big man and a whipping top-spin forehand that was incredibly precise. Sampras had it all, and certainly at Wimbledon. Cedric Pioline and Goran Ivanisevic (in his first Wimbledon final) were no match, but 14 Grand Slam victories is amazing.

There is an argument rumbling around tennis at the moment that the standard of the game in the Sampras era was of a higher quality than today. I disagree. As with all sports, the game changes. New styles are adopted and different pressures are involved.

Roger Federer has taken over the mantle from Sampras, yet both are very different. I don’t know how Federer would have performed against Sampras’s main opponents and vice-versa.

Records aside and differing playing conditions and platforms, combined with pressures and so on, I have to admit that I enjoyed watching Cash and Agassi far more than anyone else. But for talent and sheer ability it is between Sampras and Federer.

I remember watching Federer for the first time when he was beginning to make his mark. I thought that I had never seen a tennis player who was simply unstoppable. Invincible. Every shot he hit was perfect. He was unbelievable.

I did not get that from watching Sampras, I don’t know why. Federer’s range of shots left me gob smacked. I enjoyed watching the skills and shot-making techniques of many stars, but Federer has the lot.

This man has taken tennis to unparalleled levels. I truly believe it. He will beat Sampras’s record for sure and I don’t think we will see his like again for a long, long time.