I'm one of the people who think that Federer's numbers in 2004 to 2007 were inflated due to a vacuum of competition. I do believe that Tsonga, Murray, Del Potro, and Djokovic "of the now" are better than old Agassi, Nalbandian, Davydenko, and Ljubucic. All of that being said, it isn't all about the numbers for me. As a watcher and player of tennis... I can look at Federer, weak era or not, and I see the tennis greatness there. If Federer had stronger players up in the top 10 during his prime, I think his numbers would be less, but it wouldn't reduce his greatness in my mind. I know the guy is greater than Sampras. I know the guy is greater than Borg. I know he's greater than Lendl. I know the guy is Tier-1. It isn't his fault that he peaked at a time when he was playing mostly washouts and old guys. If numbers were all that mattered, then great players in strong eras would never be considered great.