Originally Posted by lendlmac
don't get all your feathers ruffled..... for the sake of THIS topic only..
You REMOVE Federer's 17 GS titles, leaving him 60 Titles at age 31
You REMOVE Lendl's 8 GS titles, leaving him 81 Titles at age 31
Now, add all the remaining Tourinament Title wins....Roger's is still ongoing...but by age 31, Lendl won nearly 40+ more tournaments by age 31 then Roger has.....(non GS wins)...
that is plain scary-freaking solid, consistent and DOMINANT.
Lendl dominated the 80's era, more than Roger dominated the 2002-2012 era... just saying...
Anyone would trade for Rogers overall career... but remove the GS titles from BOTH players, and EVERYONE would take Lendl's career now over Roger Federer's career...no questions asked.... better opponents, faster surfaces, harer draws, better players.....
just saying.... Roger is #1...Lendl was not and wishes he had Federe's career... we all get that. This OP only talks about removing the GS titles from BOTH players, and Lendl is the MORE dominat player of HIS era...then Roger could ever dream of on a week end and week out basis in consistency and sheer DOMINANCE...just the fact. No one feared Federer like they feared Lendl.... they both were feared...but Lendl frightened people and scared them... LOL
LOL, Lendl never even won the biggest prize of all : Wimbledon. He racked up titles beating midgets in obscure tournaments. Sure he was dominant but about half as dominant as Federer was. Again, why would you disregard Grand Slams? It makes zero sense to disregard THE most important titles in the sport. But again, you don't seem like a very sensible fella so I can't say I'm surprised.