I think this is the translation of a translation Q: Since you finished your career your former rival Roger Federer managed to add two more Grand Slam titles to his list accolades - within half a year. Except for Rafael Nadal on clay he doesn't seem to have any real opponents. What's your take on this as someone who was a professional tennis player for 21 years? A: (laughs). Yeah, I have played against three different generations, haven't I? Although it may depend on how you count. I experienced the play of the McEnroe-Connors era, the play of the ones like Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, the play of Pete Sampras, Jim Courier and Michael Chang up to the next generation of the young wild ones - from Safin to Kuerten and Hewitt to Federer and Nadal. I had the chance to personally experience how the game evolved and it really has gotten so much better over time that it's almost unbelievable. It's incredible how much the game has evolved over the last 10 years. To have such a dominant player (referring to Federer) who is able to distance himself from the field so much when the game has come such a long way is truely a historic process. We haven't seen anything like it before. The 2nd placed in the world rankings has twice as many points as anyone of the others and Federer has twice as many points as him. Even though the rest of the field is better than it ever was before. So the next guy who thinks Sampras is better than Federer despite getting much worse results against much weaker competition, I'll believe once you win 8 slams including the career grand slam, bagelling Federer and Nadal in the process of course to prove how bad they are at tennis.