That is the best I have ever seen him play!

And so it is set.

Club Fed vs. The Djoker.

He is amazing. While he will never, nor will anyone, play as consistently as he did from 2004 through 2010 when he won around 67% of all grand slams and made ten finals in a row...he was indeed as good as ever today...and is clearly still a threat to win grand slams, likely for another few years.

Greatest player EVER.

(07-10-2015 05:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Greatest player EVER.

Is he? Didn't he just come up at the right time when they competition just wasn't as good?

Pete Sampras at least had Agassi. Federer got big when he had Sampras on the tail-end of his career and Nadal came along halfway through Federer's dominance.

(07-10-2015 06:37 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 05:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Greatest player EVER.

Is he? Didn't he just come up at the right time when they competition just wasn't as good?

Pete Sampras at least had Agassi. Federer got big when he had Sampras on the tail-end of his career and Nadal came along halfway through Federer's dominance.

Point to Lat. While Federer IS great, he lacked competent competition during the prime of his career.

(07-10-2015 06:37 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 05:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Greatest player EVER.

Is he? Didn't he just come up at the right time when they competition just wasn't as good?

Pete Sampras at least had Agassi. Federer got big when he had Sampras on the tail-end of his career and Nadal came along halfway through Federer's dominance.

Regardless of how its argued on a message board, most of his peers consider Fed to be the GOAT.

Even guys like Sampras and McEnroe call him the GOAT. They all say he is the most complete player to ever take the court, and he is the most accomplished and dominate ever.

Sampras:

“I think he was the most complete player we’ve seen,” Sampras told Vancouver’s CBC Radio. “He’s won on all surfaces. He’s tough. He moves well. He’s got a big game. He’s got a huge forehand. He just has the whole package. I think he dominated the game a lot more than I ever did.

“You look at the numbers of what he’s been able to do, you have to say he’s the greatest we’ve seen. The statistics of doing all-around court play, he can do a lot of different things. He can come in, can stay back, and he can do everything. He would be a tough match-up to beat. He’s a great competitive. He’s been ambassador to the sport. He’s done it the right way.”

Federer is amazing. You could entertain arguments for Federer, Sampras, and probably Nadal as best of all time. Nadal is probably going to win at least a couple more French opens at some point. Djokovic probably has a bunch more titles to win and will be in the conversation by the time he retires I bet.

I wouldn't exclude Laver, Newcomb, Connors, Borg, McEnroe & Lendl from the best of all time discussions, especially considering the quality of second tier opponents they had to claw through to get to semis & finals of championships.

(07-10-2015 06:37 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 05:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Greatest player EVER.

Is he? Didn't he just come up at the right time when they competition just wasn't as good?

Pete Sampras at least had Agassi. Federer got big when he had Sampras on the tail-end of his career and Nadal came along halfway through Federer's dominance.

Huh?

Nadal won his first grand slam in 2005. After Federer had won 4 of his ultimate 17. Not quite halfway.

Pete Sampras indeed had Agassi.

Federer had Nadal and Djokovic.

You people will work to diminish anything.

(07-10-2015 06:37 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  Is he? Didn't he just come up at the right time when they competition just wasn't as good?

Pete Sampras at least had Agassi. Federer got big when he had Sampras on the tail-end of his career and Nadal came along halfway through Federer's dominance.

(07-10-2015 07:28 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  Point to Lat. While Federer IS great, he lacked competent competition during the prime of his career.

This last decade is actually considered a golden era in men's tennis.

The whole premise of "no competition" is a grossly overused knee jerk reaction in every single sport everytime a historically dominate player comes along. There really isn't much meat on that bone at all in Federer's case.

Even Aggasi claims Fed is a notch above Sampras. Aggasi calls Nadal the GOAT, which is a more viable argument imo because he has beat Fed so many times. Fed's overall career and skill set is just a lot more impressive than Nadal's though.

(07-10-2015 11:30 PM)RandyMc Wrote:  I wouldn't exclude Laver, Newcomb, Connors, Borg, McEnroe & Lendl from the best of all time discussions, especially considering the quality of second tier opponents they had to claw through to get to semis & finals of championships.

I wouldn't either, but the competition is tougher now imo. Tennis is a much bigger phenomenon world wide.. Federer has been the biggest name in all of sport outside of the US for over a decade.

And none of those guys were as good as Federer on all surfaces, or had the complete skill set he has. If not for Nadal, he would have won 4-5 French opens. It just so happens the greatest clay court player of all time came along right as Fed's career took off.

I honestly don't know who to pick today.

The safer bet would be Novak, but this is Wimbledon and on grass. Plus its hard to see Federer losing to him 2 years in a row in a Wimbledon final. That was an epically close final last year and Federer is playing some incredible tennis right now (better than last year going in).

But he is almost 34, so who the heck knows. lol

#1 vs #2 in the world in a Wimbledon final. It doesn't get any better than this.

Djokovic takes his 2nd strait Wimbledon title.

He has a seriously strong chance to win his 3rd major this calender year at the US open. He is clearly the best player in the world right now and has been since 2011.

I'm a big fan of Novak and I love the passion and fire he displayed today. He is moving up the all time list really fast.

Imagine if Djokavic and Nadal had never came along.....Federer would have won 30 grand slams. He has been the 2nd best player in the world since Novak ascended to the top. Its incredibly rare for a guy his age to be this good this many years after his peak.

Casual fans may not fully grasp the uniqueness of this, but a 34 year old (#2 in the world) tennis player is the equivalent of a 45 year old starting running back in the NFL.

Novak is 28 and still looks as strong as ever. Its very impressive.

Federer is GOAT

(07-13-2015 01:06 AM)tiger1016 Wrote:  Federer is GOAT

Jimmy Conners:

"In an era of specialists, you're either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist, or a hard court specialist... or you're Roger Federer."

Congrats to the Djoker.

He's got nine slams now. And I think he has a chance to pass Federer if he can stay healthy.

Sort of depends how good these up-and comers are.

Nadal and Fed are basically finished, and Novak will beat Murray 8 out of 10 times, me thinks.

You also have guys like Stan the Man.

(07-14-2015 07:35 PM)TIGERBANDIT Wrote:  He's got nine slams now. And I think he has a chance to pass Federer if he can stay healthy.

That's probably a bit of a stretch, he's already 28 and would need to double his current accomplishments.

Hard to see that happening.