Originally Posted by stringertom
Murray>Laver??? I don't care how much "evolution" is argued...one guy won 2 CYGS's and the other hasn't won a SET in major finals. Tennis is and has always been about showing up in big moments. One did, the other hasn't.
We are talking evolution of the game right? Murray will be faster, stronger, quicker, leaner then Laver. Give Laver a 95 inch hybrid shizzle whizzle racquet any he will get destroyed by Murray any day of the week. You should control for that however. The no. 10 of year 2100 will be waaaay stronger, fitter, leaner, quicker than Federer ever was and would destroy him. Does that make him a better player? No. Records and achievements count, not the absolute level of play really.