Originally Posted by TopFH
Why, because he does not agree with you? He's correct by saying the finalists of Federer's slams were the best at that time, if not they could not have reached the final. Just like Rafa was the best at the 2010 USO or Federer was the best at the 2009 RG. Both beat the second best player of the tournament. Not the 2nd ranked, but the second best at that particular tournament, the one who rose to the challenge of reaching a Grand Slam final. Not Rafa's nor Roger's fault the finalist was not who you wanted to see. Case in point, both the slams I mentioned had no #1 or #2 finalists. The champions were the #1 and #2. In 2009, #2 Federer beat Soderling, who had just beaten #1 Nadal. In 2010, #1 Nadal beat Djokovic, who had just beaten #2 Federer. Does this diminish their slams? Of course not.
On paper, no it does not. However, when a broader, more discerning discussion is had with qualitative comparisons and contrasts -- of course it can and often does!