NO question...Federer best ever

[FedFan_2007]

Well, it's not very scientific but it's just a way of comparing two players that played in a diffrent era based on achievements.. Giving a number of points for each achievement a player has made...

I'm tired of hearing arguments like Fed will never be better as Sampras until he gets more than 7 wimbledon titles and more than 6 year end's #1 and 14 grand slam like I' ve been seeing on other threads....

I've already stated in another thread that Samparas has the best count of important wins(Slams + YEC + MS shields) - (14 + 5 + 11) = 30.

Federer currently has - (9 + 3 + 12) = 24.

Who doesn't think that Federer will pick up at least 6 more slams/MS shields/YEC before he's done?

 

[prophet34]

I just dont think MS are very important... but still Federer will pass Sampras be it my way or yours in probably 2 years....

 

[FedFan_2007]

I just dont think MS are very important... but still Federer will pass Sampras be it my way or yours in probably 2 years....

I think MS are considered #3 after slams and YEC by 100% of the current players.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

I've already stated in another thread that Samparas has the best count of important wins(Slams + YEC + MS shields) - (14 + 5 + 11) = 30.

Federer currently has - (9 + 3 + 12) = 24.

Who doesn't think that Federer will pick up at least 6 more slams/MS shields/YEC before he's done?

Fed will not win any more slams next year, he will be stopped by RAFA in most tournaments except maybe wimbledon.......:grin:

 

[prophet34]

True, but to evaluate between two greats, master series shields are, in my point of view, less relevant than weeks at no 1, year grand slams, career grand slams I could add that to my stats but the problem is master series are not very old... so for Borg, Macenroe and Connors, it's hard to compare...

 

[prophet34]

Fed will not win any more slams next year, he will be stopped by RAFA in most tournaments except maybe wimbledon.......:grin:

And what makes you think that?

Rafa should concentrate on Blake, Berdych and a few other guys like Roddick and even Safin if he starts thinking strait. Before really thinking about Federer on hard courts...

Rafa still has lots of improvements to make on faster surfaces than clay... That's my opinion...

 

[FedFan_2007]

True, but to evaluate between two greats, master series shields are, in my point of view, less relevant than weeks at no 1, year grand slams, career grand slams I could add that to my stats but the problem is master series are not very old... so for Borg, Macenroe and Connors, it's hard to compare...

That's a good point also. It'd be interesting research to find out what were Tier 3 events(after slams, Tour championship) back before the ATP organized "Super 9".

 

[prophet34]

Also, where would you put Agassi compared to Sampras:

my system : Sampras 1190 pts
Agassi 698 pts

yours : Sampras 30
Agassi 27

Dont know.... I would think, even if I was a Agassi fan in those days that it should be more than 3 diff.. even, I would think that Federer has already bested Agassi....

 

[prophet34]

Ok, for Connors :

2 wimbledons : 100
5 uso : 225
1 Ao : 25
1 YEC : 15
268 weeks #1 : 268
109 titles : 218
1222 wins : 122.2

grand total : 973.2 pts

 

[prophet34]

and Mac :

3 wimbledons : 150
4 uso : 180
2 YEC : 30
170 weeks #1 : 170
77 titles : 154
869 wins : 86.9

grand total : 770.9 pts

 

[bluegrasser]

I'm almost there, but I guy named Pete and the Rocket still stand in the way - but if Federer wins the French, that might cement it for me.

 

[prophet34]

Lendl :


3 uso : 135
3 french : 105
2 Ao : 50
5 YEC : 75
270 weeks #1 : 270
94 titles : 188
1070 wins : 107

grand total : 930 pts

 

[Eviscerator]

Federer simply is the most talented player to EVER walk the face of the earth--bar none. And if you don't believe that, you really don't know the game. I know that will tick some off, but it's the truth.

Your comment about others not knowing the game may have been put in to stimulate posts rather than you really meaning it. However if you meant it then it might very well be you who lacks a good understanding of the game if you think he is already the GOAT.

At this point in his career he cannot be called the best ever. Whether he will go on to be the best ever is another question all together.

 

[prophet34]

now Wilander

1 USO : 45
3 french : 105
3 AO : 75
weeks #1 : 20
titles : 66
wins : 57.1

grand total : 368.1

Edberg

2 wimbys : 100
2 USO : 90
2 AO : 50
1 YEC : 15
weeks #1 : 72
titles : 84
wins : 80.6

grand total : 491.6

Becker

3 wimbys : 150
1 USO : 45
2 AO : 50
3 YEC : 45
weeks #1 : 12
titles : 98
wins : 71.3

grand total : 471.3

 

[prophet34]

So here is the final standings for the open era excluding Laver, Rosewall and everybody before that :

1- Sampras - 1190.2
2- Connors - 973.2
3- Lendl - 930
4- Borg - 778.6
5- McEnroe - 770.9
6- Federer - 714
7- Agassi - 698
8- Edberg - 491.6
9- Becker - 471.3
10- Wilander - 368.1


So Federer is way over Wilander, Becker and Edberg, he just passed Agassi and wil probably pass Borg and McEnroe this year...

 

[Moose Malloy]

That's a good point also. It'd be interesting research to find out what were Tier 3 events(after slams, Tour championship) back before the ATP organized "Super 9".

Hard to say. There wasn't just one tennis tour, but several. Some events that the atp would consider exhibitions today were very important in the 70s/80s.

Just surf around the atp website, you'll see what the big events were(you'll see quite a few 64 draw events, plus events that had best of 5 set semis/finals.

Off the top of my head, these were pretty big events:
US Claycourts(Indianapolis) in the 70s
Dallas WCT-70s/80s
Philadelphia Indoor(ended in the 90s, but lost its luster several years before that)
Wembley(ended in the 80s I think)
Monte Carlo/Rome
Paris Indoor

 

[Zuras]

Semi-finals should give about a third of the total points for a given slam, finals at least half.

 

[ATXtennisaddict]

I would consider Federer the best ever when he reaches at least 12 slams.