This must've been brought up quite frequently in the past, but, how do you think champions of yesteryear would have competed with those of today? Is there a fair (and accurate) way to make this comparison? My take on it is this- Borg could compete with Mcenroe, who could compete with Lendl, who could compete with Becker, who could compete with Hewitt/Sampras, who could compete with federer. How does this answer my question? I don't really know, except to say that champions of yesteryear could ,at least, be competative with champions of today. I think in making the comparison you'd have to discount any hypothetical considerations in regard to their technique and equipment used. That is , compare the players as they were and are with the techniques and equipment that they used. I'd be interested in hearing other takes on this. I think it would be interesting to have a "tournament of champions of champions" , where these players could play each other at their respective peaks. Maybe someone could to a computer sim. They can simulate anything these days, can't they?