OT- Federer | Page 3 | The Boneyard

OT- Federer

He's none of these, except the #s due to playing against inferior competition for a long stretch.

To reiterate, he compiled yuge #s in a 6-7 year period against weak competition and was average in a period when other top players emerged.

Almost all of the great players played in eras against other great players.

If he didn't have this 2017 resurgence we'd honestly be labeling him as a borderline joke because he was dominated for 5-7 years. 2017 has actually made and saved his legacy.

NielsisGood said:
Fed is the best grass player ever, top 3 hard court ever, and probably top 5 ever on clay. He pretty much only ever loses at slams to other members of the big 4.


And obviously he owns every important record ever, slam wins, finals, semis, most weeks spent being the #1 ranked player, most consecutive weeks at #1, and probably the greatest peak run anyone has ever seen.
Expand ...
 
JSM1970 said:
He's none of these, except the #s due to playing against inferior competition for a long stretch.

To reiterate, he compiled yuge #s in a 6-7 year period against weak competition and was average in a period when other top players emerged.

Almost all of the great players played in eras against other great players.

If he didn't have this 2017 resurgence we'd honestly be labeling him as a borderline joke because he was dominated for 5-7 years. 2017 has actually made and saved his legacy.
Expand ...


Tap out, you're making a fool of yourself. It's never possible to find a consensus GOAT, but any discussion has to include Federer.
 
Last edited:
JSM1970 said:
He's none of these, except the #s due to playing against inferior competition for a long stretch.

To reiterate, he compiled yuge #s in a 6-7 year period against weak competition and was average in a period when other top players emerged.

Almost all of the great players played in eras against other great players.

If he didn't have this 2017 resurgence we'd honestly be labeling him as a borderline joke because he was dominated for 5-7 years. 2017 has actually made and saved his legacy.
Expand ...


Roger Federer - Wikipedia


GOAT. Fed owns the record books. He's the GOAT.
 
I love the tennis debates. I was an avid and competive player and the run of greatness in the game from the late 70's to early 2000's was incredible.

I'd just like to add that a properly trained, fit Agassi in his prime would likely have been the most talented of all these guys. His natural ability with very little training relative to what everyone else did was just incredible. When he finally started trying, he was way past his prime. Nothing was more beautiful than watching Agassi hammer back huge serves for winners off both forehand and backhand. His ability drew a lot of interest to the game because kids wanted to rally and big servers were starting to dominate. Agassi showed that you could combat the huge serve with timing and transferring the power from the serve into laser beam returns. Go watch tape of Agassi winning Wimbledon, just gorgeous tennis.
 
Jsm do you have same feelings about tiger woods? He compiled against a weak field?

It's crazy to think about but we have seen arguably 4 GOATs compete in Their respective sports over the past 20 years

Tiger
Fed
Serena
LeBron (Not there yet but on his way)
 
JSM1970 said:
He has the most GSs, but not the best player

Very consistent and well rounded, not great at any one thing whereas Pete & Djoker relied on high 1st serve %s
Expand ...

Fed is great at every aspect of tennis, click the link and take a gander at all the records he owns singularly. Djokovic isn't even known for his serve, comments like this are why I don't think you're trolling, I think you're actually this stupid.
 
methodology said:
Jsm do you have same feelings about tiger woods? He compiled against a weak field?

It's crazy to think about but we have seen arguably 4 GOATs compete in Their respective sports over the past 20 years

Tiger
Fed
Serena
LeBron (Not there yet but on his way)
Expand ...
Fed and Serena, yes.

Tiger, debateable, but probably a no (#2)

LeBron, still below MJ. Maybe Kareem too (who no one puts in these conversations, but probably deserves to be).
 
I didn't say Djoker is a serve & volley guy or who relies on huge ace #s, just that a guy who needs a good 1st serve %.

My point has solely been in their primes Rodg is not as good as Rafa, Pete or Djoker.

I don't know how that is trolling


NielsisGood said:
Fed is great at every aspect of tennis, click the link and take a gander at all the records he owns singularly. Djokovic isn't even known for his serve, comments like this are why I don't think you're trolling, I think you're actually this stupid.
Expand ...
 
JSM1970 said:
I didn't say Djoker is a serve & volley guy or who relies on huge ace #s, just that a guy who needs a good 1st serve %.

My point has solely been in their primes Rodg is not as good as Rafa, Pete or Djoker.

I don't know how that is trolling
Expand ...

Wow you put Djokovic above Fed without even knowing Novak's game. Still waiting for you to enlighten everyone how any of those guys were better than Fed in his prime.
 
Hard to argue Tiger, not just the 18 vs. 14 with Jack, but Jack had 19 2nds and a total of 48 top 3s

I think Tiger had a stretch when he was more dominant and if he kept it together might have gotten to 18+

Jack had more longevity, he had 11 majors 30 or older, Tiger only had 4

Serena obviously, most dominate female athlete ever and possibly overall athlete

tzznandrew said:
Fed and Serena, yes.

Tiger, debateable, but probably a no (#2)

LeBron, still below MJ. Maybe Kareem too (who no one puts in these conversations, but probably deserves to be).
Expand ...
 
JSM1970 said:
Hard to argue Tiger, not just the 18 vs. 14 with Jack, but Jack had 19 2nds and a total of 48 top 3s

I think Tiger had a stretch when he was more dominant and if he kept it together might have gotten to 18+

Jack had more longevity, he had 11 majors 30 or older, Tiger only had 4

Serena obviously, most dominate female athlete ever and possibly overall athlete
Expand ...

Nope, Serena only won during a weak era. Kim Clijsters, Amelie Mauresmo, Justine Henin, and Victoria Azarenka were all better in their prime. Serena is at best the #5 women's player in the last 10 years, I just don't like her game and think she sucks. She's also full of herself and doesn't seem very likeable. Overrated and not the best.
 
NielsisGood said:
Nope, Serena only won during a weak era. Kim Clijsters, Amelie Mauresmo, Justine Henin, and Victoria Azarenka were all better in their prime. Serena is at best the #5 women's player in the last 10 years, I just don't like her game and think she sucks. She's also full of herself and doesn't seem very likeable. Overrated and not the best.
Expand ...
I think this is a spot on parody, but I do think a case can be made for Steffi Graf, who was better on clay than Serena. And you might be able to throw in Navratilova, who consistently went further into tournaments than Serena. Both of them had tougher players in their respective eras (they overlapped, MN had Evert in her early run, SG had Seles in the 90s).

I'd probably still say Serena, at her peak, was more dominant, but I think its a discussion more than the Federer one is.
 
Wait, we're saying Rodg is the best because he has the most GS wins, but that doesn't apply to Serena.

Got it.

NielsisGood said:
Nope, Serena only won during a weak era. Kim Clijsters, Amelie Mauresmo, Justine Henin, and Victoria Azarenka were all better in their prime. Serena is at best the #5 women's player in the last 10 years, I just don't like her game and think she sucks. She's also full of herself and doesn't seem very likeable. Overrated and not the best.
Expand ...
 
NielsisGood said:
Fed is great at every aspect of tennis, click the link and take a gander at all the records he owns singularly. Djokovic isn't even known for his serve, comments like this are why I don't think you're trolling, I think you're actually this stupid.
Expand ...
It's scary, he's actually not trolling. He's always miserable over on the cesspool but this takes the cake. He's the least knowledgeable sports fan in the history of this forum.
 
JSM1970 said:
Hard to argue Tiger, not just the 18 vs. 14 with Jack, but Jack had 19 2nds and a total of 48 top 3s

I think Tiger had a stretch when he was more dominant and if he kept it together might have gotten to 18+

Jack had more longevity, he had 11 majors 30 or older, Tiger only had 4

Serena obviously, most dominate female athlete ever and possibly overall athlete
Expand ...

Jack? That guy was the ultimate compiler. Anyone can win a dozen majors if they play long enough. Tiger got out when he was on top to follow his dreams of strippers and prescription pills while compiler Jack was still playing when he was a grandpa.
 
I agree. Tiger more dominant for a stretch.

Just looked, Jack had 163 starts and 56 top 5s. 34%.

Tiger had 76 and 38 top 5s. 50%

But somewhat skewed because Jack played some many times over the age of 50 when he wasn't competitive any longer.


Robertelamin said:
Jack? That guy was the ultimate compiler. Anyone can win a dozen majors if they play long enough. Tiger got out when he was on top to follow his dreams of strippers and prescription pills while compiler Jack was still playing when he was a grandpa.
Expand ...
 
Sampras actually played against 'weaker' competition. No disrespect to Pat Rafter and Goran.

Just the idea of thinking Edberg could hang with Federer is pure insanity.
 
JSM1970 said:
He has the most GSs, but not the best player

Very consistent and well rounded, not great at any one thing whereas Pete & Djoker relied on high 1st serve %s
Expand ...
Did this dude really just say Roger Federer is not great at any one thing??

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

You somehow, time and time again, find a way to say something that is the exact opposite from the truth. He's literally great in every aspect of his game. You are either a master troll or a flaming idiot. I'll go with the latter.
 
JSM1970 said:
He's none of these, except the #s due to playing against inferior competition for a long stretch.

To reiterate, he compiled yuge #s in a 6-7 year period against weak competition and was average in a period when other top players emerged.

Almost all of the great players played in eras against other great players.

If he didn't have this 2017 resurgence we'd honestly be labeling him as a borderline joke because he was dominated for 5-7 years. 2017 has actually made and saved his legacy.
Expand ...
"So let's just take out 2002. and 2003, and 2004. And 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010.
Oh and 2017. Yeah let's just disregard half of Federer's career. Now I can say Federer is a joke."

And for Michael Jordan? What a joke that guy is. If you take out 1991, 92, 93, 96, 97, 98, what did that guy accomplish?
 
Martina brought the game to a new level
Loved her. But I don't think she could compete with Serena.
The game evolved.
Don't think McEnroe or Chris Everett could play today's game as champions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
243
Guests online
2,027
Total visitors
2,270
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,078
Messages
4,381,350
Members
10,177
Latest member
silver fox


.
..
Top Bottom