Originally Posted by Rabbit
Truth be told, Federer doesn't play that many events because he doesn't have to from a financial standpoint. In that regard, he owes Laver et al a cut of everything he wins. If the earnings were constant, adjusted for today's dollars, Federer would have to play every week in "Mickey Mouse" events.
Federer doesn't have to play the smaller events and can concentrate on the Grand Slam Tournaments!
Connors, Borg, McEnroe etc regularly missed Grand Slam tournaments in their time (mainly Australian), which they would have won. They are just as great as Federer in my opinion. If they just concentrated on GS's then their numbers would be comparable to Federer. If Federer goes on to win over 20 Grand Slam tournaments after he has retired, then I really will be impressed