First of all, Sampras got to ONE semi-final in all his attempts at the French. When he got there, he lost sets 3 and 4 to Kafelnikov by 12 games to 1. He never had the skill to succeed on clay that way Fed has. Federer has been to one semi and FOUR French finals, winning one now. Just that alone puts him solidly above Sampras. Borg could never win the US Open, although he came close. Laver went a bunch of years without winning even one major. Yes, the two calendar slams are incredible, but what about all the other years??? Federer has been MORE CONSISTENT than Laver, has the better serve, better slice, bigger forehand. Who else??? Budge? Come on. Budge was great but did not possess Federer's athleticism. Connors? McEnroe?? Top 7 of all time for both but did not get to double digit slams. Neither could win the French. Mac got to finals once. Fed has been in FOUR finals. Lendl?? Top 7 of all time but could not win Wimbledon and was 8-11 in Grand Slam finals compared to Roger's 14-3. Who else??????? Nadal could be in the mix if he can stay healthy and win the US Open at least once. But that's down the road. THERE IS NO LOGICAL ARGUMENT ANYONE CAN MAKE NOW THAT FEDERER IS NOT THE GREATEST EVER. HE WILL PASS PETE FOR MAJOR WINS BUT HAS ALREADY SURPASSED PETE DUE TO HIS CLAY RESULTS. HE'S ALSO WON MORE MASTER'S SERIES EVENTS THAN PETE. BETTER SLICE THAN PETE. BETTER RETURN THAN PETE. BETTER FOREHAND THAN PETE. BETTER DROP SHOTS THAN PETE. BETTER ONE HAND BACKHAND THAN PETE. DON'T EVEN BOTHER GIVING ME THIS PETE OR LAVER BULLCRAP. YOU SOUND STUPID.