BGod
G.O.A.T.
The sticking points of those who view Guga>Fed on clay point to their one and only French meeting in 2004 where Kuerten beat Fed 6-4, 6-4, 6-4. Fed won their other clay meeting two years prior at 6-0, 1-6, 6-2 while Fed lost in Indian Wells 2003 5-7, 6-7.
All these 3 matches tell me is what you'd expect, Roger was green and Kuerten while on the decline was just more experienced.
I don't buy Federer of 06-07 losing to Kuerten 00-01 and Gustavo in 1997 is very hard to gauge properly. The triple marathons beating Muster, Medvedev and Kaflenikov are eye opening but then he got miracle qualifier in the semis and rolled over a noticeably decline Bruegera who lucked out with his draw.
How do they match-up prime for prime? At all the events, say Kuerten's 00 and Fed's 06/07 (whichever you prefer)?
I certainly doesn't see Kuerten winning Cincinnati or WTF but he probably takes Rome and Monte Carlo. Considering Fed beat him in 02 Hamburg, I take Fed there. I also take Fed at IW and Miami as well as Paris and Shanghai.
All these 3 matches tell me is what you'd expect, Roger was green and Kuerten while on the decline was just more experienced.
I don't buy Federer of 06-07 losing to Kuerten 00-01 and Gustavo in 1997 is very hard to gauge properly. The triple marathons beating Muster, Medvedev and Kaflenikov are eye opening but then he got miracle qualifier in the semis and rolled over a noticeably decline Bruegera who lucked out with his draw.
How do they match-up prime for prime? At all the events, say Kuerten's 00 and Fed's 06/07 (whichever you prefer)?
I certainly doesn't see Kuerten winning Cincinnati or WTF but he probably takes Rome and Monte Carlo. Considering Fed beat him in 02 Hamburg, I take Fed there. I also take Fed at IW and Miami as well as Paris and Shanghai.