Originally Posted by pc1
So many choices for top level play. Question to ask, can Federer really have a top peak level for one match if you may favor at least one current player over him on many surfaces even when playing his best? To me peak level means no matter what an opponent does, the inevitable loss will happen whether you hit to the forehand, backhand, use junk or anything else.
A good example of this is how Arthur Ashe described Rod Laver from his superb book "Arthur Ashe-Protrait in Motion." "When Laver goes on one of those tears, it's just ridiculous. He starts hitting the lines, and then he starts hitting the lines harder--and harder and harder. NO ONE CAN STOP HIM."
The key words to me here is "No one can stop him."
Now if you argue for a year or a few years, I can go with that for Federer. But if you argue that then clearly Tilden, Borg, Gonzalez, Rosewall and a number of others belong in the equation.
Since many players argue for one match for their life they would pick Pancho Gonzalez I think you may have to put him in the peak level for one match category too.
That is a good post questioning in a clear way all those who still think Fed has a single chance of being considered GOAT
There are two big IFS dominating his whole career
1/What IF he had a good record against main career rivaÁ
2/What IF he played in a tough era instead a very weak one
So many IF mark his whole career....