Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands
I can understand, that you have your preferences about a second RG.
But, the bolded part is a bit confusing.
In the option 2, there is no promise, that Federer will achieve more tournament wins (Olympic games plus RG vs. 2 Majors). All other things can be achieved without winning anything else (like I said, DC is not part of the singles career anyway).
His verasitility is as pronounced as it gets. With or without a second RG.
And his time at the top. Well, I doubt, that anyone can question his dominance in the game during his peak years, so, none of this needs to be achieved now.
Everybody has some weaknesses in his resume. Including the great Laver. No need to resort to extremes.
That isn't the point. It was just to demonstrate that there is more to a player's resume than the 'number of Slams'. It doesn't matter if the extra options I stated were specifically in relation to the exact question as they were there merely to demonstrate a point which by extension further consolidates my reasoning also behind choosing option 2 (with ease).
To answer the question more concretely and specifically, option 2 gives Federer more positive elements in his overall resume, as he'd have won almost every title going, have 2 career Grand Slams, and rectified a negative head to head against another all time great (regardless of how big or small people find this point, it does exist and is still a part of the resume that will be judged, and his career is even better with yet another 'hole filled' in).
Option 1 gives him an extra Slam, big whoop about 18 vs 19...
It's time for the current perception regarding the grotesquely lopsided magnitude of Slams to change. Other achievements are being too slighted as a result.