Henman : Federer is the best player to have ever lived
- Thread starter tennisaddict
- Start date
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Fascinating!
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Amazing that such an overrated player could not win the Grand Slam in his best years.
...or, revealing more than amazing.
If wimby grass would have stayed the same speed as in the 90s then I bet Fed would have amassed 12 wimbys alone by now....would have been like on 22 or 23 gs.
Nadal has to diversify his grand slams no use having 80 percent of your GS Trophies French Open or any one particular slam....Doesnt make you a GOAT or even anything close.
if he would have played rightie the matchup would have been more even between him and fed. Lets not forget only last year the same nadal fans had their tails between their legs when joker was dominating him. Its just the matchup against fed
Let him post the stats of Fed and then talk. No use going on and on about nadal .......hes just a one dimensional hitter with the physique of Zeus. I still would like a blood passport on all the athletes ....I wonder why it aint happening?
Sponsors blocking maybe as many Gods would fall........
Nadal has to diversify his grand slams no use having 80 percent of your GS Trophies French Open or any one particular slam....Doesnt make you a GOAT or even anything close.
if he would have played rightie the matchup would have been more even between him and fed. Lets not forget only last year the same nadal fans had their tails between their legs when joker was dominating him. Its just the matchup against fed
Let him post the stats of Fed and then talk. No use going on and on about nadal .......hes just a one dimensional hitter with the physique of Zeus. I still would like a blood passport on all the athletes ....I wonder why it aint happening?
Sponsors blocking maybe as many Gods would fall........
F
FedererWinsWimbledon2014
Guest
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
and I'd take Andy Murray's opinion over Tim Henman's. Henman never reached the Wimbledon final. Murray actually won it, you know.
Finesse4sum
Semi-Pro
How much do you love that game in FF10? I loved it although I wished certain aspects of it were cleaned up.
ark_28
Legend
The problem is Henman has this image of being a goody goody middle class English guy but in reality he was far from.. The guy was banned from Wimbledom in 1995 for abusing a ball girl and v Nalbandian in Madrid he showed bad sportnamsnship leading Nalbandian to refer to Henman as the "worst kind of rubbish"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ot...01/Henman-worst-rubbish-slams-Nalbandian.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ot...01/Henman-worst-rubbish-slams-Nalbandian.html
Finesse4sum
Semi-Pro
Not as good as this guy! :wink:
Well thats a bummer
I still think a hill is more useful than a street sign.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Well thats a bummer
I hope someday they name a tennis stadium or court after him in Switzerland or anywhere else. He's a legend.
Povl Carstensen
Legend
Povl Carstensen
Legend
Playing alongside Nadal he is to be excused.
It would be a waste of time for him since Nadal's records/streaks are way inferior to Federer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_career_achievements_by_Roger_Federer
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Take your own advice: Federer could not win the Grand Slam, so trivia lists and squealing need not apply. End of story.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Career achievements are any day better than grand slam achievement, which is solely 1 year performance.
We agree Laver was the best when considering a single year performance.
But to be regarded as greatest you need career accomplishments. Last i checked,Laver was still at 11 majors.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal has his own achievements, like never trailing his biggest rivals in the head-to-head at any stage in his career (neither overall nor in majors), beating Federer 8 out of 10 times in majors across 3 different tournaments and surfaces. Nadal also overcame the big Djokovic threat. Nadal is not that many career titles behind Federer at the moment, and he's got more masters series than Federer, plus Olympic singles gold and multiple Davis Cups with Spain.
People who say that Federer was better against the field, fail to explain how exactly Nadal dominates so many head-to-heads. Nadal having many career downs just makes his legacy greater, because it shows just how good he is when he's on a roll.
Last edited:
DRII
G.O.A.T.
and not overly injured...
Mustard
Bionic Poster
There were people in late 2004 already calling Federer the best of all time. Federer was nowhere near Sampras' career records at that time, but that didn't stop many of his fans. Nadal certainly has more of a claim now than Federer did back then.
He's got tendinitis in his knees.
He's got tendinitis in his knees.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Laver won 200 career singles titles. Federer hasn't got half that.
Laver was the best player in the world from 1964 to 1970, which is longer than Federer.
You see, it's not quite as simple as "Federer is GOAT because he has 17 majors" as one might think.
Laver's achievements far best Federer in everyway:
Grand Slams- Won 11 despite being barred for 5 years and won 2 Calendar Slams.
Tournament titles- Something like 200 to 75. A joke.
Time at #1- Laver was #1 from 64-70, Federer only 4 years straight and 5 years total.
Davis Cup and doubles- More blowouts.
Grand Slams- Won 11 despite being barred for 5 years and won 2 Calendar Slams.
Tournament titles- Something like 200 to 75. A joke.
Time at #1- Laver was #1 from 64-70, Federer only 4 years straight and 5 years total.
Davis Cup and doubles- More blowouts.
forzamilan90
Legend
If we were having this discussion pre Federer, I'd agree, but after his career I just can't give it to Laver
forzamilan90
Legend
Federer's 75 titles a joke...you know nothing of the sport!
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
We know what level of competition existed then and now. Tennis of pre open era cannot be compared with now.
Top tennis players just needed to show up then to be in semis and finals. Not the same today , a Darcis or Rosol or Stak can knock the GOAT's if they are not playing at their best. It is insanity that inspite of this the true top 4 has been reaching the semis for the last decade.
forzamilan90
Legend
Pro majors consisted of 4 matches or so from what I read.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Laver himself knows that he did all this when the competition was a big JOKE. That is the reason he himself has acknowledged Fed as GOAT.
All players who are in the GOAT conversation , but not GOAT's like Laver, Nadal and Sampras acknowledge that Fed is the GOAT.
It is only that Nadal fan base cannot accept this , inspite of the greats accepting that.
Compared to Laver the 75 titles of Federer and 60 or so titles of Nadal (even at middle age) are a joke. Those are way below even guys like Connors and Lendl who arent even best ever candidates.
forzamilan90
Legend
Events weren't organized in a unified tour like it today, plus the game wasn't as punishing. In the case of Connors and Lendl there's a lot of smaller tournaments won, A LOT!
Have you see the draws for pre open era slams? The pro majors as well (4 matches and you're champion). It's hardly comparable to today.
Notice a trend that after the 80s amounts of tournaments won by dominating players is much smaller than that in prior eras. More organized tour and calendar, players focusing on mostly larger titles. Not the case back in the day.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
What tennis have you been watching? For example, in '87, Peter Doohan defeated Becker in the 2nd round of Wimbledon. Becker--of all people at that event.
This is not new.
I agree that Nadal have his own achievements, but compare his to Federer his list is a lot shorter, and not as impressive. You might want to compare Nadal's list to Laver or Sampras, his achievements may look more impressive.
Federer Win/Loss Record during his prime years.
2004: 74-6
2005: 80-4
2006: 92-5
2007: 68-9
Federer dominated the sport more than any players. Not Laver, Sampras or Nadal is comparable.
Yes, and keep on telling us that a cherry is as big as a watermelon.
Yes, and tell us more about the 60s is the same as the new millennium - same pool size, global sport, full field = split fields, bigger draw = smaller draw, etc....
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Keep telling us the myth that the sport was not global in the 60's, when players from all over the world were active. But of course, this is yet another sad, poor excuse to justify Federer's lack of talent in not winning the Grand Slam in this era (while at the same time, most of his fanboys use the "he won 3 in one year" as if it was a substitute GS..not gonna happen).
Cup8489
G.O.A.T.
I'd like to see Laver do it in this era. Guarantee it would never happen. or in the 80's/90's for that matter, either.
Blitzball
Professional
It's a ton of fun! Sure the controls are kinda odd and some stats are pointless-- but for being a minigame inside a big game (FF-X is among my top 5 favorite games), it's incredibly awesome.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
I'd to see Federer win the Grand Slam in his own era...oh....wait...he failed to do that.
Next.
Tennis community promotes top players in current era.
It is how much its status endures test of times.
You will need to have unbroken record.
It will mainly depend on how long Federer's slam record will last.
Well, he and Nadal broke a lot of records but it's the slam count mainly.
In the 80s? You must not be aware of an almost 40 year old Laver giving prime or near prime Borg very tough matches on CLAY in the mid to late 70s. Just imagine prime Laver up against Borg and the others from the 80s.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
You guys are totally atrocious. The post was with respect to Pre open era vs current era and you bring out of context Becker's loss.
Your hatred for Federer is so blinded. To discredit him, you will bring everyone and sundry on earth . What next ? Fed did not win US open Golf ?
Last edited:
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Grand slam is single year achievement. Career accomplishment is what matters for being recognized the greatest.
If there was a question who played greatest for a year, then Laver probably is and that too , when not comparing eras.
When Laver has 18 majors, he will be better than Federer.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Incorrect; it was to point out that no matter the era, no matter the player, what happened to Federer & Nadal at this year's Wimbledon is just something that happens--as in the Doohan win over Becker. No need to be so defensive over a historically relevant reference.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Of playing the best players in the world.
rh310
Hall of Fame
He did make five FO finals, however, losing to Nadal.
Without Nadal, I'm pretty sure he had a good shot at 2 or 3 of those, and maybe 1 or 2 CYGS.
If the open era started with Laver, it's pretty much a given that Rod would have landed 2 - 4 more CYGS, and held an insurmountable GS title record. Not the variety of surface, but the number would be the number regardless of being unable to normalize it for today's 3-4 surfaces, equipment, and better training science.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Laver won:
Amateur majors (pre-open era)
1. 1960 Australian Championships
2. 1961 Wimbledon
3. 1962 Australian Championships
4. 1962 French Championships
5. 1962 Wimbledon
6. 1962 US Championships
Professional majors (pre-open era)
7. 1964 Wembley Pro
8. 1964 US Pro
9. 1965 Wembley Pro
10. 1966 Wembley Pro
11. 1966 US Pro
12. 1967 French Pro
13. 1967 Wembley Pro
14. 1967 US Pro
15. 1967 Wimbledon Pro
Open era majors (as a professional)
16. 1968 Wimbledon
17. 1969 Australian Open
18. 1969 French Open
19. 1969 Wimbledon
20. 1969 US Open
forzamilan90
Legend
Still less matches than today though. Extra rounds is extra rounds, more work to do, and now sport has bigger pool of players than ever.
Similar threads
- Poll
