Does Fed really need to win RG to be GOAT......?

[Eviscerator]

haha, sampras or federer will never win the french

Hmm, I wasn't aware Sampras was making a comeback to try and win the French this year. :mrgreen:

 

[boobik2371]

Fed could have completed 2 calender slams if it wasnt for go-nads that beat him in the finals. Then he would most likely be considered the goat by a majority

 

[Eviscerator]

Fed could have completed 2 calender slams if it wasnt for go-nads that beat him in the finals. Then he would most likely be considered the goat by a majority

You cant look at it like that because every great player has their nemesis. Heck look at Emerson, he would have at least 3 more slams if it were not for Laver, or visa versa.

 

[Zaragoza]

So does Fed really need to win RG to be GOAT.? Some say that the only thing standing between him and the title of the greatest player of all time is winning RG (French Open).

Fed has already broken so many tennis records ( both in men's and women's) .....IMO, as long he breaks Pete's all time record of 14 slams, he will be GOAT.

I think it´s a requirement for him to win Roland Garros to be a GOAT contender. If he breaks the 14 Slams record but doesn´t win RG he will be "only" a better version of Sampras, meaning with it that he will be a multiple Slam winner who never won a Slam on clay and even if he is much better than Sampras on clay, history only remembers winners when it comes to the GOAT discussion. If he wins RG and some more Slams then he will be in the same league as Laver which doesn´t mean necessarily that he should be considered greater than him.

 

[Dark Victory]

I kinda agree with the Emerson/Pete career-deficiency analogies.

Which is why personally, I think Federer needs to win the French to be the GOAT.

Otherwise, even given his dominance, I won't be surprised if down the line, he'll be where Emerson was after Pete broke 12 (sans the FO) and when the next guy comes along who'll expectedly do better than the 16-18 slams (sans the FO) most people think Fed will probably get by the time his career ends.

 

[hyogen]

I kinda agree with the Emerson/Pete career-deficiency analogies.

Which is why personally, I think Federer needs to win the French to be the GOAT.

Otherwise, even given his dominance, I won't be surprised if down the line, he'll be where Emerson was after Pete broke 12 (sans the FO) and when the next guy comes along who'll expectedly do better than the 16-18 slams (sans the FO) most people think Fed will probably get by the time his career ends.

exactly. even if Federer wins 20 grand slams, there will ALWAYS be someone else in the future that will beat it. But Again, most likely will not have won all 4 slams. Haha, suckas

It's just like that 4 minute mile. Even the greeks never thought it could be done. It was the time barrier that no one thought could be broken. Only about 30? years ago some dude set a goal to break 4 minutes and he did. The next year a couple more people did it...and the next year another few hundred. :O

I'm not calling Agassi GOAT, but he sure was the best showman and charismatic player of all time in our sport. And the likes of Federer and Sampras will never share in the glory of the elite 5 that have won on all 4 slams.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

I think he's already the undisputed GOAT, if 75% of the slams were played on grass he'd have 20 by now.

this is a Major breakthrough in tennis statistical science...

 

[Nadal_Freak]

You are truly a fool. Djokovic does not even come close to Nadal or Federer on clay. Davydenko is a much better clay courter then Djokovic. Djokovic was only in the French Open semis this year since his draw was a complete joke in the end. Then again no more should be expected of someone who thinks Roddick has shown he can hang with Federer or Nadal from the baseline, or that players like Djokovic, Gasquet, Murray have not shown they can hit Roddick off the court from the baseline, ROTFL! I should have considered the source.

You underestimate Djokovic and how much he is improving. He could very well take out Federer next year at RG if they play. Davydenko on the other hand has no chance in beating Federer.

 

[joebicko]

There will be no question who is the GOAT by the end of the second week of July, 2008. Go figure!!!

 

[barbadosan]

You do not need to be a Laver "diehard" to expect that someone must at least equal a rare feat only accomplished by two men in the sport. In Laver's case, he did it twice, and that alone speaks volumes. Federer might be able to do it and knows he must for many tennis historians to crown him the GOAT.

Given that your argument is a good one, would the share volume of these records (feats) now held or shared by Federer not be a sufficient counterweight even if he does not win the French.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Records_held_by_Roger_Federer

 

[Federafa]

This thing has no end! Assume he wins RG but not against Nadal (let's say Rafa's injured for the clay season). I can predict the threads: "is Fed the GOAT after winning 30 Slams but without defeating Nadal in Paris?". Well, IMO if Fed doesn't retire right now, there's no question: he's the GOAT. I mean he is because he will be (with 99,9999% certainty).

 

[hyogen]

you can't say that unless he wins the french...it's equally a grand slam as the other 3 tournaments......he will NEVER win it! not against nadal or whoever.

 

[Dark Victory]

Federer's put up all these incredible numbers (3 slams a year thrice, no. of consecutive slam finals, 5 wimbledon's, no. of weeks at no.1, etc... etc...)

...and yet, even given all that (and expectedly many more), I still think that he needs the FO. Otherwise, his case is disputable. It's what happened to Pete (whose rep was never higher than when he broke 12).

Federer needs RG not primarily to bolster his case (right now, he already has a considerable one), but more importantly, to overcome the mystique of Borg's multiple (and concurrent) Wimbledon/FO titles, Laver's two calendar slams, etc... etc...

Having 20 slams is great, but if the other guy who won less than that achieved something which (to a lot of people) is more impressive, your argument for GOAT is more prone to challenge.

 

[caulcano]

Federer's put up all these incredible numbers (3 slams a year thrice, no. of consecutive slam finals, 5 wimbledon's, no. of weeks at no.1, etc... etc...)

...and yet, even given all that (and expectedly many more), I still think that he needs the FO. Otherwise, his case is disputable. It's what happened to Pete (whose rep was never higher than when he broke 12).

Federer needs RG not primarily to bolster his case (right now, he already has a considerable one), but more importantly, to overcome the mystique of Borg's multiple (and concurrent) Wimbledon/FO titles, Laver's two calendar slams, etc... etc...

Having 20 slams is great, but if the other guy who won less than that achieved something which (to a lot of people) is more impressive, your argument for GOAT is more prone to challenge.

You will never get 100% of the people voting for just one GOAT no matter the situation. However, the more GS Federer wins then the closer to 100% Federer will get.

 

[hyogen]

Federer's put up all these incredible numbers (3 slams a year thrice, no. of consecutive slam finals, 5 wimbledon's, no. of weeks at no.1, etc... etc...)

...and yet, even given all that (and expectedly many more), I still think that he needs the FO. Otherwise, his case is disputable. It's what happened to Pete (whose rep was never higher than when he broke 12).

Federer needs RG not primarily to bolster his case (right now, he already has a considerable one), but more importantly, to overcome the mystique of Borg's multiple (and concurrent) Wimbledon/FO titles, Laver's two calendar slams, etc... etc...

Having 20 slams is great, but if the other guy who won less than that achieved something which (to a lot of people) is more impressive, your argument for GOAT is more prone to challenge.

very well put. I concur completely

 

[hyogen]

sampras even admitted that he may never be considered the greatest of all time due to not winning the RG

 

[drakulie]

Fed was already the GOAT when he beat Sampras at Wimbledon. Everything since then is icing on the cake.

 

[iradical18]

I think it's kind of a boring argument, it's just been beaten to death at this point. There will always be people coming from different camps and making their point for Laver, Sampras or Fed or whomever. Whether it's because of the level of competition or lack of an FO win, or pre-open era statistics can we all just agree that we'll never agree? Aside from that, it sure is fun to debate over isn't it!

 

[Rhino]

I think it's kind of a boring argument, it's just been beaten to death at this point. There will always be people coming from different camps and making their point for Laver, Sampras or Fed or whomever. Whether it's because of the level of competition or lack of an FO win, or pre-open era statistics can we all just agree that we'll never agree? Aside from that, it sure is fun to debate over isn't it!

Agreed. I know what I think, and I've read all the arguements, I don't need any more 'information'.