Originally Posted by abmk
fed has the better dominance, surface versatility, better in the majors .....there isn't a single surface that both played on where you could say jimmy was clearly better ( decoturf II comes close, but I'd say fed is better ) .....federer was/is better on grass, clay, indoors, HC ... everywhere ...
I'll take Federer on red clay (and okay, blue clay, if I must) .... but I'm really not sure Federer would have beaten Connors on Har-Tru clay, as he played in the '76 USO final. If Connors could beat Borg there, and Borg was already twice a winner at RG (still a level below the claycourter he would become, but obviously already at a Slam-winning level) ... I'm not sure Federer is better. That one looks close.