Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
The only straw clutching is desperate ****s who think winning a slam and briefly being #1 at age 30/31 is an unamazing unearthly feat when Andre Agassi, a total non GOAT contender, recently was winning a slam and being ranked #1 at age 33.
As for winning Navratilova won Wimbledon at 33, and beat Graf and Seles and won tier 1 titles at age 36. Rosewall won Roland Garros and beat Laver to win the WTF finals at age 36 and 37. Anymore excuses in store?
Agassi didn't have any 5-year-younger tier-1 GOAT snapping at his heels. And why would you keep bringing up WTA? ATP is totally different. And about Rosewall
Tennis then was different where there were no great athletes and even grandfathers could win (which is why Gonzales had such a good record against Laver for someone 10 years older). Again, your examples are full of fail. Federer's ascension to #1 is incredibly impressive. You're probably just butthurt that it disproves your silly, "Federer dominated in a weak-era" argument.
And no one claimed it was "unearthly". One guy said it was impressive and you came butting in because you couldn't hold your butthurt anymore
I know you're still ****ed Nadal went out to #100 but hold it in, he'll be back and he'll have his time again. For now, it's Federer who's reigning.