Roger Federer is not the GOAT

Remove this Banner Ad

PhatBoy said:
So was Emerson better than Laver?

Was Kuerten better than Safin or Hewitt?

When the gap is as (relatively - 3 grand slams is not THAT many when one player has 17 and one has 14) close as this one, and the player on the lower side of the ledger has such a superior head to head record, surely there has to be room for debate.

No golfing fanatic would just dismiss Tiger Woods from an All Time discussion because he's won less majors than Nicklaus. Why would a tennis fan instantly dismiss Nadal on the same basis?
Click to expand...

Woods only won majors over a 12-year span. Thats pathetic in golfing terms, he's not even close to GOAT.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

For those using his grand slams.

Laver won 11 including the 'grand slam' twice. He also won 8 pro slams when he wasn't allowed to enter grand slams. That's 19.

Then add in the 9 doubles.

Fed might touch that if he plays to 50.
 
PhatBoy said:
So f***ing what? I don't remember reading this rule that says your wins have to be over a lengthy period to count.
Click to expand...

So you're seriously putting Woods in the same category as Nicklaus? He's probably number 2 and was on the way to number 1, but as it stands he never got close enough for it to be an actual point of contention.
 
Abba Lonie said:
So you're seriously putting Woods in the same category as Nicklaus? He's probably number 2 and was on the way to number 1, but as it stands he never got close enough for it to be an actual point of contention.
Click to expand...


I've never said he's better but there's no way known I'd use such mindless logic as 'his took longer to win' to try and justify it.
 
Longevity is important up to the point where you've proven you didn't fluke it.

Saying woods falls down because he 'only' spent 12 years winning majors is like saying the bulls weren't that great because their six titles were all in the space of 8 years.
 
PhatBoy said:
Longevity is important up to the point where you've proven you didn't fluke it.

Saying woods falls down because he 'only' spent 12 years winning majors is like saying the bulls weren't that great because their six titles were all in the space of 8 years.
Click to expand...

The Bulls as a franchise aren't eligible for best franchise ever though, it's Lakers vs Celtics only and for good reason.

If a boxer was 20-0 with each of those wins being knockouts within the first minute of round one each time, he wouldn't be eligible either.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

bnRMKja.jpg
 
Very well played by Fed but laughable to say case closed with Nadal looking in good condition again
 
pepsi said:
End. Of. Discussion.

The greatest there ever was, has been and will be.

Mr Roger Federer. The GOAT.
Click to expand...

Ive watched every grand slam between these two and honestly once it reached a 5th set tonight thought Fed was no hope. Feds backhand in the last set was extraordinary.
Quite satisfying to see Fed get one back v Rafa after being beaten so many times by him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PonsfordMagpie
Roger Federer - retired
Replies
24
Views
929
spudmaster
spudmaster
Aristotle Pickett
'Blast from the past' thread.
Replies
12
Views
776
Hamingja
Hamingja

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top