Originally Posted by aphex
Lol, I'm not upset...he just made a false statement, which I called him out on.
He, then proceeded to "not notice" my post when he was asked for specifics.
The big red letters had the purpose of drawing his attention to my post in case he really did miss it...
PS. He was obviously lying. He made a statement which he knew to be false.
His motive? I don't know...
Actually the statement over a period of time doesn't seem incorrect and I don't believe he was lying. He's comparing Borg over a period of a number of years over Federer over a number of years if I read his statement correctly. He was not saying Borg's individual year is necessarily higher than anything in Federer's individual. This is how I interpret Urban's statement.
I believe Borg over a five year period is better than Federer over any five consecutive year period. So yes Borg is superior to Federer over a period of five years for winning period I believe. If I recall Federer is at 90.7% and Borg is higher by a bit.
Incidentally, just ask the man to explain his statement. Don't accuse a man of lying. And I don't think he was lying.