Originally Posted by forehand_dude
But it was a standard part of the culture not to play the AO back then. To make a fair comparison, if Federer had only played one AO he would have 12 majors. If he had only played one AO and also retired at age 26, he would have 9 majors.
11 > 9, so Borg > Federer
This is incredibly idiotic logic. Borg peaked and was winning majors much younger than Fed. Even if he had stayed on the tour, it's not likely he would have had much success past 26.