GOAT: Federer or Laver?

#1
Warm congrats to Federer for a truly remarkable win and it's wonderful that we continue to witness such a significant piece of tennis history in real time.

Federer now has 20 GS and 96 single titles. But does that elevate him to GOAT?

Laver: 11 GS single titles in Amateur & Open era. 9 GS doubles, 3 GS Mixed doubles, 5 Davis Cup and most importantly, the holy grail....twice: The Grand Slam in 1962 and 1969. Remember when Serena came oh so close a couple of years ago. Laver pulled it off not once, but twice.

He faced stiff competition at every turn: Roy Emerson (12 major titles), Ken Rosewall (8 majors), John Newcombe (7 majors) & Arthur Ashe (3 majors). Plus, there were the likes of Fred Stolle (2 majors) Tony Roche (1 major) & Cliff Drysdale. Laver's era was not a weak era. To the contrary, it was red hot. Plus he won 8 pro tour majors. While they cannot be officially counted, they still matter in context of the conversation, given his competition.

I would also argue that while the game is definitely a lot more physical in Federer's era, Laver & co did not have the drugs & medical advancement like today to very quickly combat fatigue & injury.

Federer is close to GOAT, but I think the title still belongs to Rocket.

Thoughts?
 
#3
“For me, I think Roger Federer is certainly the greatest player that has come along,” Laver said.

“Yes, we’ve got lots of great players — look at (Rafael) Nadal with a record that says ‘I’ve just won 10 French Opens’, and you can’t sort of push that under the mat.

“But I think Roger plays is greatest tennis on the big occasions, on any surface.

“He’s stood the test of time — that’s probably the one thing that puts you in that category of the best ever. That’s one of the things that he has done. He loves the game, and everything he does around his life is somewhere related to all the great (things he has done).

http://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis...r/news-story/1a3fad2bb90c89fe1dbd6a7e96afc740
 
#5
If you add Laver's amateur slams + Open Era slams + Pro slams you get 19. Roger now has 20, so there is no more disputing it. Roger is GOAT.
 
#7
Warm congrats to Federer for a truly remarkable win and it's wonderful that we continue to witness such a significant piece of tennis history in real time.

Federer now has 20 GS and 96 single titles. But does that elevate him to GOAT?

Laver: 11 GS single titles in Amateur & Open era. 9 GS doubles, 3 GS Mixed doubles, 5 Davis Cup and most importantly, the holy grail....twice: The Grand Slam in 1962 and 1969. Remember when Serena came oh so close a couple of years ago. Laver pulled it off not once, but twice.

He faced stiff competition at every turn: Roy Emerson (12 major titles), Ken Rosewall (8 majors), John Newcombe (7 majors) & Arthur Ashe (3 majors). Plus, there were the likes of Fred Stolle (2 majors) Tony Roche (1 major) & Cliff Drysdale. Laver's era was not a weak era. To the contrary, it was red hot. Plus he won 8 pro tour majors. While they cannot be officially counted, they still matter in context of the conversation, given his competition.

I would also argue that while the game is definitely a lot more physical in Federer's era, Laver & co did not have the drugs & medical advancement like today to very quickly combat fatigue & injury.

Federer is close to GOAT, but I think the title still belongs to Rocket.

Thoughts?
If Roger wins a 2nd French Open would that seal the deal for you?
 
#8
That's true. He did. But he also said: When it comes to GOAT, Djokovic is Federer's equal.

Depends what rackets / strings they play with?
There's more to it than the racquet/strings. Superior genetics, new training methods like plyometrics, yoga, weights. New medicine like arthroscopic surgery, stem-cell regeneration, etc...
 
#14
Didn't Laver not play slams for 6 or 7 years because they were restricted to amateurs and he was a professional?
If there was no Nadal, Fed would have probably 30 slams by now, or if Agassi didn't skip all those AO's, he'd have at least 10 slams under his belt. We can only judge the players by history, good or bad and Federers numbers combined with the era he's in makes a compelling case for being GOAT.
 
#15
If there was no Nadal, Fed would have probably 30 slams by now, or if Agassi didn't skip all those AO's, he'd have at least 10 slams under his belt. We can only judge the players by history, good or bad and Federers numbers combined with the era he's in makes a compelling case for being GOAT.
THANK YOU
 
#16
If there was no Nadal, Fed would have probably 30 slams by now, or if Agassi didn't skip all those AO's, he'd have at least 10 slams under his belt. We can only judge the players by history, good or bad and Federers numbers combined with the era he's in makes a compelling case for being GOAT.
Yes, but that doesn't answer the question I put. I just looked it up. It's true that Laver couldn't play Grand Slam tournaments for 6 years in the middle of his career but won 11 slams in total. That doesn't mean that he's the GOAT. What it does mean is that the slam metric can't be used as the exclusive measure by which the argument is assessed.
 
#20
God not another GOAT thread. Federer cemented GOAT status at Wimbledon 2012. His win yesterday hasn't changed anything in that regard. And as already stated you can't compare Federer to old players like Laver. In Laver's era, they used to just swat the ball around with wooden racquets with no top spin. There was no such thing as a top spin backhand down the line. Completely different sport they were playing then!
 
#21
Didn't Laver not play slams for 6 or 7 years because they were restricted to amateurs and he was a professional?
Yes but, you can count pro slams (4 each year), that he played instead.

Even with those 8-player field pro-slams, Rocket has only 19 Slams.

Case Closed.
 
Top