PDA

View Full Version : Courier: Federer Safely Best In Open Era; Comparison Tough To Other Eras


rogerfederer26
06-08-2009, 06:57 PM
JIM COURIER BLOG: FEDERER SAFELY BEST IN OPEN ERA; COMPARISON TOUGH TO OTHER ERAS

NEW YORK, N.Y., June 8 - Tennis Hall of Famer Jim Courier, writing on his blog on www.ChampionsSeriesTennis.com, has labeled 2009 French Open champion Roger Federer as safely the player with the best record in the Open era of tennis (since 1968 ), but says it is impossible to make comparisons with champions of other eras of tennis.

“I think you can safely say that Roger has the best record of any player in the Open era but it is really impossible to compare it with any of the players prior to 1968,” wrote Courier on the official website of the Outback Champions Series, the global tennis circuit for champion tennis players over the age of 30 that he co-founded in 2005. “By winning the French and equaling Pete’s record of 14 majors and joining Fred Perry, Don Budge, Rod Laver, Roy Emerson and Andre Agassi in an exclusive club of men to win all four major singles titles in a career, Roger’s record is right up there against any of the all-time greats.

“He still has plenty of runway left to add to his record if he stays healthy. Looking at Open era achievements, you have to look at Laver’s 1969 Grand Slam, Pete’s 14 majors, Pete finishing the year ranked No. 1 for six straight years, Lendl reaching eight straight US Open finals, Roger’s five straight Wimbledons and five straight US Opens (and still counting in Flushing) and Roger’s semifinal or better streak at a major (also still counting).”

Blue Drop
06-08-2009, 08:36 PM
Safely the best in the open era is right. Comparing the eras is indeed difficult, but there are things that can be agreed upon: The game has changed a lot since 1968, as has the athleticism of the players. In other words, there is no comparison, the the open era is in fact the only point of reference that really matters.

CyBorg
06-08-2009, 08:44 PM
I think it's amusing that Courier mentions Emerson but not Rosewall.

paulorenzo
06-08-2009, 08:51 PM
FAIL! There is not objective single GOAT! There are only "goats" of their respective generations:

- Nadal (Djokovic, Murray, etc.)
- Federer (Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, etc.)
- Sampras (Agassi, Courier, Chang, Rafter, etc.)
- Laver (Emerson, etc.)

80's and 70's are too competitive. You've got:
- Connors
- Borg
- McEnroe
- Lendl
- Wilander
- Becker
- Edberg

are you attempting to argue with the OP? if so, you fail at reading comprehension.
courier stated that there is no way to crown the GOAT. but federer does seem to have the best record of the open era. nothing more. nothing less.
jim never stated federer was the greatest player of all time, or the greatest player of the open era. he simply said, record-wise, he was up there among the top few.

paulorenzo
06-08-2009, 10:39 PM
I may fail at reading comprehension, buy you are an EPIC FAIL at not taking yourself too seriously!

oh man, that was the comeback of the century:
full of insight and factual information.
i'm just kidding, your response was rather weak and seemingly conjured up out of anger.
it had nothing to do with my rebuttal to your flawed response statement about the original post. you even failed to realize what a fail actually is. i was merely correcting you. no need to become defensive, especially when you are wrong, and call people epic fails.

BorisBeckerFan
06-08-2009, 10:41 PM
I thought Clinton Thompson was the GOAT.

Rhino
06-09-2009, 01:17 AM
Another thread ruined by childish replies.

BreakPoint
06-09-2009, 02:34 AM
I think it's amusing that Courier mentions Emerson but not Rosewall.
That's because Courier was only talking about people that have won a career Slam of which Rosewall is not one of them but Emerson is.

Leublu tennis
06-09-2009, 02:49 AM
Safely the best in the open era is right. Comparing the eras is indeed difficult, but there are things that can be agreed upon: The game has changed a lot since 1968, as has the athleticism of the players. In other words, there is no comparison, the the open era is in fact the only point of reference that really matters.Rules of the game took a dramatic change in 1968. Before that Laver and other pros were prevented from competing in major tournaments. So for 8 years Laver trounced every pro player in the world. Thats pro player and you know the difference between pro and amateur in any sport, not just tennis. You could say pros were level 1 and amateurs were level 2. Its like top 20 players competing against top 300 players today. There is no question that Laver was the best. Federer has not had that difficult a competition, for example, and has achieved little by comparison. However, he is probably the best of post open era, when every ATP player is a pro.

todd03blown
06-09-2009, 09:51 AM
Another thread ruined by childish replies.

amen!! that nadal-goat seems to be full of himself..

Oscar
06-09-2009, 02:52 PM
Agree with Courier on the Open era achievements. But he forgot Borg winning back to back FO and Wimby 3 years in a row. That is one of the most difficult things to do in the sport. Only Nadal has made after him.

dh003i
06-09-2009, 03:46 PM
LOL. There are objective GOATs from various time-periods. Federer will be considered the greatest player of this decade. He is greater than Nadal, who's career probably won't last past Federer's.

Nice try, though, to put Nadal in a different "generation" than Federer.

FAIL! There is not objective single GOAT! There are only "goats" of their respective generations:

- Nadal (Djokovic, Murray, etc.)
- Federer (Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, etc.)
- Sampras (Agassi, Courier, Chang, Rafter, etc.)
- Laver (Emerson, etc.)

80's and 70's are too competitive. You've got:
- Connors
- Borg
- McEnroe
- Lendl
- Wilander
- Becker
- Edberg

Mansewerz
06-09-2009, 03:50 PM
He said "best record", not "best". even courier nows it's hard to compare eras (sampras, federer, laver,etc), otherwise, why would he bother making this statement.

wangs78
06-09-2009, 04:58 PM
Objectively, we have to go by the numbers. And Roger's numbers trump everyone else's. Hands down. Maybe some ppl would rather have 7 Wimby's than a career slam. But I think the vast majority of ppl would prefer Roger's record over Sampras'