What considerations should Federer's style have on his GOAT status?

[axlrose]

Federer's slices aren't all safe though, sometimes they're tough shots to pull off, especially the short slice which everyone complimented long ago. They used to call it one of the unique things about him, because no one else could really pull a short cross court slice as consistently as he could. It was a shot the entire tour had to adjust to get used to, if they wanted to win. No one else really does it.

But I agree in the sense that he didn't use the 90 sq in racket because he wanted it to be harder or anything. Its just what it is. That 90 sq in was an advantage at one point. Only reason it became a disadvantage is because he used it for so long.

To me, its not that all he does is harder. To me, its that all he does is pretty unique and an indicator of intelligence behind his game. He credits a lot of his technique to his coach from when he was growing up. When I watch his game, I don't look at the prettiness of it. I see the brutal efficiency.

I think he used the 85sqi PS for at least 4-5 years since his debut.

Then he switched to the 90sqi around 2002-2003.

 

[metsman]

The other side is Jordan had stacked teams. He didn't even win a single playoff game before Pippen. His teams were 7 all-stars deep (not all in peak form mind you but still) in all 6 of his runs.

Hakeem Olajuwan only won 2 titles but both times he absolutely dragged teams and won it by essentially himself (lead his team in 4 of 5 statistical categories both finals if I recall correctly). Remember now greatest career and greatest talent aren't one and the same. Obviously I won't rate Jordan ahead of Hakeem because the margin is too big but pound for pound I'm taking Hakeem over Jordan for value on my team as a lesser guard like Dwayne Wade is enough rather than having a lesser Center like Horace Grant.

What about the Orr vs. Gretzky discussion? Gretzky has the bar none greatest career but Orr was the better player, hell Lemieux was the better player as well. Both careers cut short.

I think Gretzky was definitely better than Lemieux, although Lemieux had more physical ability. Lemieux put up massive point totals on the powerplay, I don't put nearly as much value in that. Among forwards, Lemieux is clearly #2 though imo.

For peak, I think Orr and Hasek both have a strong case to be above Gretzky simply because they could impact the game in different ways. Different to compare Orr since he played so long ago, and injuries cut his peak super short, while Gretzky's longevity was so good, but Hasek the comparison is easier to make. Of course his peak was somewhat short too, but that's particularly because he was international.

Overall, in terms of peak+longevity Gretzky is definitely #1 though.

 

[canta_Brian]

Nadal and Djokovic are so impressive. The way the run back and forth getting everything back, no matter how good and attacking the opponent. Short of building a wall at the net and having other players hit against it I don’t see how tennis could get any more exciting.

 

[Zebrev]

Nah Fed will always be the GOAT for me unless someone comes along with his flair/style and wins a crazy number of slams like 25+.

Sounds like Felix.

 

[junior74]

Slams adjusted for the difficulty of playing a one handed backhand

25 > 19 > 17 > 15

 

[axlrose]

Murray also uses a 95. Going by Head’s old measurements Safin used an 89.5.

Artfulness and racquet choice aren’t directly correlated. Dustin Brown and the Bryans use pure drives if I’m not mistaken. Kyrgios uses a 98 that’s sort of in between a tweener and player’s racquet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the PT10 has 18x20 sp, definitely less free power than the 16x19 PS90 ))

No, we can't address GOATness based on racquet or shoes ))

 

[Pheasant]

To answer the OP’s question, I cannot give Federer extra credit, simply because I will not move the goal posts on the goat debate. I have a strong feeling that if Federer grabbed the far superior racket at a younger age, then this slam race would already be over. But to be fair, if we do that, then we have to consider other generations.

Imagine if guys like Borg and Lendl had access to a medical team, the best training, the best meds, and slowed down and more homogenous surfaces with large rackets. I highly doubt that McEnroe wins all of those titles over Borg with different conditions. And imagine Lendl with today’s conditions all along? Maybe Borg and Lendl are the co-GOATS under different conditions.

Moving the goalposts changes the entire goat landscape.

Ultimately, I don’t believe that we can truly determine the goat. But right now, the best measuring stick that we have is the slam title race, even though that is far from perfect.

I am incredibly impressed that Federer was able to push the slam title race out this long. He is one tenacious SOB. He has to earn the respect of everybody for his continued success at this late of an age. He is still a threat to win titles, which seems impossible. Fed has been routinely incredible for so long, that nobody even thinks that what he was done at such an old age is a big deal anymore.

 

[Rogfan]

Style of play is huge, when it couples with success, nothing can top it. I remember so well how I first watched Fed play - I was a bit late to the scene, it was 2010 AO final when he played Murray. I couldn’t pick up my jaw after the match. Knowing nothing about the two players and very little about tennis, all I saw in Roger was a gliding ballerina dancing on court, effortless yet so powerful. He killed Murray aesthetically. Murray was groaning, panting, sweating the whole time. I couldn’t believe these two were playing the same sport! I googled Roger immediately and I remember saying ‘damn’ to myself seeing his age. His best is behind him I thought, I got to know him too late.

Of course the rest is history now I’m remembering in 2019 after he won his 100 !