Originally Posted by NadalDramaQueen
I agree with forzamilan90 to the extent that it is nearly impossible to compare players from the distant past to the modern players (in tennis). Some sports have had similar enough structure and technology to make a direct comparison, but I don't believe that tennis is one of them.
That is not to say that past players are better or worse, only that this list of "goat candidates" is getting so large as to be meaningless. There should at least be a dividing line between the open and pre-open eras for goat lists (pre-open era best, open era best). It is unfortunate for the players who played in the pre-open era, but it is just rampant speculation otherwise.
I agree that some of the people being mentioned to be the best ever is frankly ridiculous. Some players are called GOAT after only a few years into their careers. However the list of actual players who can be ARGUED to be the best is very low. Among them are Tilden, Laver, Borg, Rosewall, Gonzalez, and your choice Federer. Kramer was acknowledged as one of the best ever while he was playing and for many decades. He is only forgotten now because the standards are different and he didn't win a lot of majors to fit these requirements. It makes no sense because he didn't have the opportunities to win a lot of majors because in the prime of his career he was a pro and unable to play the majors. He was just beating up on the best playing in the world.
Kramer was no ordinary player. He was a super player.