Originally Posted by Cup8489
I think he means greater depth.
Bottom line, those who say one player from one era is greater than another is not fair to either player. We all know that, given the matchup, Federer would probably trounce prime Laver pretty easily. He's just got more firepower, greater fitness... but that all came as a result of the sport's evolution. Laver didn't have that chance.
Who knows if Fed would've been able to do this well if placed in Laver's era, without all the knowledge we have today about fitness, technique etc.
Point being, GOAT is nonexistent.. but Federer is definitely among the best ever, period. That's indisputable, as is Laver's place, as is Gonzalez's.
I can agree, for the most part. The game itself has improved, in terms of technological evolution, fitness etc., but that doesn't necessarily mean that the players of the past are better or worse than today's players.