View Single Post
Old 09-27-2012, 04:58 AM   #1859
The Dark Knight
Legend
 
The Dark Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen View Post
Probably. Perhaps he would have a couple less in his prime, but so would the others, so he would still be in the lead. And then he would be raking in more now, because of his amazing longeivity, so it all evens out.
Ok but he would probably not be considered the goat...for some odd reason most people measure if one is a goat by the number of slams they rack up...(maybe because it's the simplest way?)
Which in Federers case is really not great as a feat as it seems.

Is Federers one of the greatest......Absolutely. Is he the greatest......not in my personal opinion.

By my standards the number of slams one wins is only one factor.

For example.....Borg had more slams than McEnroe ; however before Borg quit McEnroe basically had Borgs number. Therefore I think McEnroe was the better player.

Same thing with Laver. Although Emerson had more slams I think Laver was the better player.

Finally in my book Nadal is the greatest of all time.....Nadal is clearly a better player on clay but Federers is better indoors. That used to not matter but now that two of the four slams are partially indoors it does make a difference.

But the reason I think Nadal is the greatest is the same reason I think laver is the greatest. Laver did not win as many slams as Emerson but Laver did win the calendar slam twice.......by analogy Nadal won the career slam and the golden slam.....Federer did neither in my opinion.

I don't find Federers calendar slam impressive at all......it's only a calendar slam on paper because he didn't go through Nadal. Rafa had a lot of issues that year and skipped Wimbledon......in fact I believe Federers stats are only as great as they are because Nadal was not around.

Feds French open slam is symbolic of his entire career. It's the premise that :
"Federer can only win if Rafa is not around".

Nadals game is more physical and he cannot be around as much as Federer. So Federers is fortunate that Nadal was not around for much of his career. Feds stats only look good on paper.....the truth is Nadal is the stronger player.

Clearly though I think Nadal is the better player in my personal opinion.
__________________
"Federer has to beat Nadal(if he wants) to be considered the greatest ever, certainly in my book." Pete Sampras

Last edited by The Dark Knight : 09-27-2012 at 05:00 AM.
The Dark Knight is offline   Reply With Quote