Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by dangalak, Oct 3, 2012.
Was it after he demolished Hewitt?
US Open 2006.
9th Grand slam.
Here's McEnroe saying it (at the end of the point linked below) a couple of matches before the Hewitt demolition
Yeah definitely in his second year of winning majors. After the way he finished 2004, with the 3 majors including the hewitt demolition in new york and the WTF win in Houston, the talk really started to pick up.
And the start of the Federer vs. Sampras discussion began to heat up.
I thought he was the best player I ever saw at Wimby in 2003. I couldn't tell if he would be consistent after that, but to me it was clear that he had reached the highest level of play ever in that tournament: crazy spin on both wings, which made his groundies both powerful and consistent, superb movement, great defense, great offense.
No, it was earlier than that. People were talking about the possibility after his first Major, Wimbledon 2003, on account of his semi-final performance alone. I myself thought this was the best player I had ever seen, despite having seen him many times before and not felt that.
Seeing a few of his rounds in the 2004 Australian Open convinced me finally the he was indeed the best player I had ever seen and was no fluke. The high and consistent level of his technical ability I had never seen before. At that stage I thought he would win more Majors than Sampras.
"Possible" and "could" makes me think 2004 was the year it became clear he could, possibly, be the GOAT. After he won the USO.
By late 2005 there was already certainty. All the fans knew it but the commentators were being P.C. and didn't want to upset retired players. But as I recall, by late 2005 everyone online and everywhere else recognized the skills.
Possibly also after this happened
I think I remember something said like this already after the 2003 masters cup in houston where he demolished agassi in the final.
I remember Mcenroe anointing Federer as possibly being the next tennis phenomenon to break through the existing parity in tennis around the beginning of the 2003 USO. This was during the prelude to Sampras' retirement ceremony at the USO and there was discussion of who could possibly replace Sampras as the dominant force in tennis.
His court coverage in the 9:10 point is amazing. And I miss the fast courts from back then, so much more exciting.
Samprastards must've had it hard after the AO2007
You liars. After 2003 Wimbly, I and everyone else thought "this guy is good, he will win multiple majors maybe as many as Agassi or Borg" NOBODY was expecting him to become goat in 2003, get over yourselves.
2007 AO possibly. It looked like he would convincingly win 15 majors by AO2009 at that point. He didn't, because Nadal pushed him, but he eventually got over that hump anyway.
I thought I'd try and dig up some objective evidence, since that's a lot more reliable than TT posters' recollections. What I found definitely points to the second half of 2004, especially in the run-up to, and immediately after, the US Open. That's when the "could he?" questions relating to Sampras' 14 slams started coming thick and fast:
"Over the last 10 months, his display of shot-making, movement, determination and poise has pundits pegging him as a threat to break Pete Sampras' record of 14 majors."
Douglas Robson, USA Today, September 10, 2004
"A scarce 13 months after his first Slam title, the 22-year-old from Switzerland has sparked the 'best ever' conversation."
Neil Schmidt, Cincinnati Enquirer, August 3, 2004
"After winning his third Grand Slam title of the year, Federer evokes talk of possibly being the greatest player of all time." / "It’s tempting, after watching so thorough a thrashing — the first with two shutout sets in the U.S. men’s championship match since 1884 — to wonder if the self-coached, 23-year-old Swiss might be on his way to becoming the greatest player in history." / "Is Pete Sampras’ record 14 major titles safe?"
Steve Wilstein, MSNBC Sports, September 20, 2004
"Not too early to ask if he is on a trajectory to eclipse the game's best players. Pete Sampras, to whom Federer is often compared, holds the men's record, with 14 Grand Slam singles titles."
Greg Garber, ESPN, September 13, 2004
"He may go down in history – he's getting there – as the greatest player who's ever played."
John McEnroe, quoted on September 12, 2004
Well by 2005 we basically expected him to break all the records, the level of play was insane, so it's definitely earlier than that....the footage posted at 2004 US Open McEnroe already spiting that Fed could be the best ever speaks volumes
Federer was being called the new Sampras before he even beat him at Wimbledon. The racquet, the one handed backhand and being sponsored by Nike accentuated the comparison.
However, it was at 2004 Australian Open when people start to think he could be the GOAT. It was ridiculously early. He only had one slam at that point. He had never been no1 yet, though he was expected to take it at the Australian Open.
Searching for the article where Margaret Court says it is too early to call Federer the best ever like a lot of people were doing at the time.
I knew in 1975
No seriously, after Federer's performance in Wimbledon 2003, a lot of people were saying that was some of the best tennis they had ever seen.
By May of 2004 with only two Majors to his name, people on this very forum were already saying Federer could be the GOAT. I was not a member back then, but I had a look because I was sure some here must have felt as I felt back then. I was right. Pity this forum does not go back as far as 2003.
Check out the link below. Feña14 in post #14 says, "I think that Federer can become greatest of all time". Also, sliceroni in post #31 says, "apparently what we're witnessing is potentially the GOAT".
People were making these predictions because of Federer's unprecedented level of play. No one had seen anyone play the game this well.
Montana Realty in April of 2004 in the thread below talks about being in awe of Federer's game and perplexed by it.
These were common feelings amongst many knowledgeable observers back then.
Wow, puts into perspective TTMRs claims that Federer's game is thoroughly modern, even though people back then, when he was a 2 times champion, were already calling him a savious of classic tennis.
Here is an article from Drysdale saying Federer is the best he had ever seen.
Federer had just two slams at this point.
Tennis Week: You beat Rod Laver in the U.S. Open quarterfinals, you watched Pete Sampras' entire career and now you're seeing the most gifted player of this generation in Roger Federer. Who is the best player you've ever seen?
Cliff Drysdale: Federer is the best player I've ever seen play.
Tennis Week: Right now you would say that? If Federer never played again, if he retired tomorrow, you would still say he's the best you've ever seen?
Cliff Drysdale: Yes. I would say that if you put Federer at his best with any other player in history, that I've ever seen, at their best, that Federer would beat them.
Tennis Week: Cliff, that's a big statement. You've seen almost every great champion. That's a big statement.
Cliff Drysdale: It is a big statement. You know, a lot of your readers are going to disagree with me especially since he hasn't been out there very long. But if you ask me to make a definitive statement in that regard and say: "How would Laver have done against him?" Because Laver is the next most well-rounded, complete player I've seen after Federer.
Tennis Week: I thought you would say Sampras.
Cliff Drysdale: No. Because Pete didn't have great ground strokes.
Tennis Week: His forehand was pretty devastating.
Cliff Drysdale: It was good. His running forehand was pretty good. But if he didn't have the serve — if you take the serve away from Pete — he would be relatively naked.
Tennis Week: Federer's game is very strong and exciting in all phases and I'm very impressed with how well he returns and defends as well as his obvious ability to attack.
Cliff Drysdale: His movement, his transition game, his ground strokes, his volley, his serve — Federer is the most complete player and that's why, when you ask me, in my view Federer is the best I've seen.
Tennis Week: So are you of the opinion that the players of today, the depth of the game, the quality of play is superior to any other era of tennis?
Cliff Drysdale: Yes, absolutely. There's no doubt that tennis, the men's game, is better than it's ever been. It's at its best right now. This is an exciting time for tennis and that's another reason I feel so privileged to be in this position watching these players and the game. It's really a very, very exciting time for tennis in my view.
Lots of other articles about.
As I said before, as soon as he won the Masters Cup 2003 he was hailed by a lot of people as the Best Player they have ever seen. It was at Wimbledon 2003 he usurped Mcenroe's position as the most talented they had ever seen.
... when davey25 changed his username to federerhoogenbandfan. A long time ago in a TW far far away. There were hints that this was probably a once-in-a-lifetime player. Then SoBad went utterly mental and everyone saw the writing on the wall: The GOAT had arrived.
It was known in 1870.
Here is an interview with Richard Krajicek in 2004.
And even earlier in 2003, right after Federer won Wimbledon for the first time.
August 8, 1981
thanks to everyone for searching and presenting those old pearls. very nice
Two thousand years ago, Roger's second coming was predicted and known. But acco to scientific evidence, His GOATness was known from the time of the Big Bang itself.
Is this base on Hindi or Kristlam ? :twisted:
I read this in the voice of a planetarium presentation, "Billions of years ago..."
Don't throw his name around like that...:cry:
Separate names with a comma.