Roger Federer is not the GOAT

Remove this Banner Ad

I'm in my mid 50's, have been obsessed with sport forever, work in the industry, and Federer is my ALL TIME SPORTING #1. In every facet of what it takes to be a true champion, he is up there. To have made it to #1 again in the rankings in this era of Nadal , Djokovic and Murray at their peak is an incredible effort as well. He is ALWAYS in a position to be able to contest the finals.

I thought he may have considered retiring after this one, but why should he if he's still potent and enjoying it.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Hunters Host #3 said:
This purported weak generation claim is the biggest fallacy and is quite laughable.
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on.

Great video below on Rogers 287 weeks at number one. As stated in the video and from my understanding, experts within tennis, whose opinions are invaluable, have said that this era is the most competitive of all time. Just goes to show what an incredible achievement it was for Federer to regain his number one title and capture his history making 17th slam. Truly deserving champion.



Thought the video was great to watch, with past champions talking about his success and standing in the game.
 
Hunters Host #3 said:
Found it.
Click to expand...

Gotta love Roddick, always honest.

What I don't like about this discussion is that people are discrediting Federer's opposition between 2004-2007 because he beat them so easily.

That was because Roger was so bloody good. If Djokovic came out and wins every grand slam for the next four years everyone would say "his opposition was weak, Federer was past his prime, Nadal's body was worn out, Murray was British and was terrible.

Bare in mind that if Federer didn't exist Roddick probably would have won 5-6 grand slams and been referred to as a great of the game. Hewitt might have won 4-5 and been regarded the same way. Also Murray would have won 3 grand slams. I think we can all be grateful that Roger prevented that happening.

What possibly the greatest player in history did was make his rivals look completely inferior. That's what everyone tries to do and that's what he achieved for four years. Don't discredit his amazing achievements because he was sooo good.

Also Federer is a gentleman and a top notch guy.
 
Roger rejects the opportunity to carry the Swiss flag at the opening ceremony, because he's already done it. Then give the fantastic opportunity to his mate and doubles partner. Roger - Greatest bloke/mate of all time?

Jacob Wilson said:
I think we can all be grateful that Roger prevented that happening.
Click to expand...
I think this line deserves to be quoted.
 
imadodgyumpire said:
Roger rejects the opportunity to carry the Swiss flag at the opening ceremony, because he's already done it. Then give the fantastic opportunity to his mate and doubles partner. Roger - Greatest bloke/mate of all time?
.
Click to expand...

a gentleman. good athlete and better person
 
Bring back TP.

I want to see him comment on Nadal wearing his body down as many tennis fans (and even one Roger Federer) predicted years ago. The pain one man had to put himself through to stop the GOAT.

PS: Fed has secured the #1 ranking until the Asian HC swing now. Can he reach 300 weeks? :)
 
Butcher32 said:
This is not an intended troll....for serious discussions only.Ok i have a few points to make here .

1.The weak generation argument - this is well supported by the fact that from 2004-2007 his main rivals were hewitt and roddick who had 3 slams between them, prior to Roger joining the party.Its almost a fact that other than Roddick serve, none of them had any weapons which could hurt Roger.Other players include Agassi, Safin and Henman who were nothing but battlers.Seriously, show me one good argument to support Rogers generation and what weapons should hewitt or agassi or roddick should have used to hurt Roger?

2.The decline came with the rise of the new generation .Now Nadals been pushing Roger over even during his peak years.He almost beat him on grass in 2007 and beat him on hardcourts during his prime.Roger did not beat rafa on clay in his prime, didnt even come CLOSE! in 2007 you could see signs that the new generation with bigger weapons is ready to challenge Roger.In 2008 Novak knocked off Roger and then started Rogers downfall..monorer/olderer you name it.When the fact is 26 is the peak age, he should have been able to keep up with his body, which is nowhere near as battered as Nadal at 26 (he turned pro at 16 remember).4 years of dominating minnows and thats it? wow, some GOAT he is.


Finally i would like to say, Novak and Rafa has much bigger weapons which can challenge Roger.This is undeniable.I have repeated said, name a GOAT contender who was owned by his nearest rival? Roger if he keeps playing will make things worse, Novak might end up having 30 wins against him.He was the great player who dominated 2004-2007, won everything in sight but as soon someone took it upto him he folded.

He is not the GOAT, by any stretch of imagination
Click to expand...

but your premise requires the best to play the best, in their primes. And that cannot possibly happen. The metric, or function to discern a best player, needs to be flexible.

But this is a good OP. Need to read the thread. Ta.

Vut Joker might have had the best season of all time?

How does the motif that the blog THASP delineates, influence form and the prime seasons of individuals.
 
Flameboy said:
Edit: and no one expects Nadal to just 'waltz' past 16 Grand Slams. Who said that? I do think it's universally acknowledged however that if he gets to around 14-15 and Federer stays araldited on 16, Rafa will go down as the superior player. (Which I think will happen).
Click to expand...
jod23 said:
Universally acknowledged?? Hahah... so if he ends up winning 1 or 2 less Grand Slams, wins no end of season tournaments which is pretty much the 5th major. Not as many total tour tournament wins and nowhere near as many weeks at number 1. But yeah, universally regarded as better. :D

You're funny.

Roger is the GOAT. I hope he wins Wimbledon and makes it 17.
Click to expand...
Came across this today ...

Nadal doesn't have to win 18 grand slam titles to pass Federer. John McEnroe and Mats Wilander just said winning two more to get to 15 would mean Nadal had a better career than Federer.
Click to expand...
http://www.rrstar.com/blogs/matttro...s-Roger-Federe-as-greatest-tennis-player-ever

I can't find the exact quote but obviously it's out there somewhere. So yeah.

I win? :p
 
Well yeah ... my point at the time was that Rafa doesn't even have to surpass Fed in total Grand Slams to be considered the GOAT. Of course that was laughed off by all the Fed fans, but now look. Wilander and McEnroe both agreeing with me! :D
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

McEnroe said that Courier was going to be the GOAT, then he said Sampras was the GOAT, then he said that Agassi was greater than Sampras, then he said Federer was the GOAT, then he said Nadal was the GOAT, then he said Djokovic had the potential to be the GOAT. It's in the interest of commentators to tell people that tennis is better today than it ever has been, whether that is true or not.

Most of Federer's records, Nadal doesn't have a hope of matching. He can only ever catch him on Slam count, and if he does it will be with mostly French Opens, which will diminish its value as an all-round record. Perversely I think the more Nadal wins the more it will convince people that Federer was the greatest, because the better a player Nadal is the better it makes Federer look.
 
Fed has a ton of records outside of just slam wins too. His end of season wins I think are 7 or 8 and Nadal has none I think or 1. That says a lot considering the final tournament of the season is where the top ranked players play off. Also the amount of time ranked number 1, he is miles ahead of anyone.

Nadal is great though, just not quite as good as Federer. Also I think they are different in the way they play. Tenacity, running, huge tank, desperation, fight, all Nadal qualities. But when you watch Roger, particularly 5-6 years ago when he was at the height of his powers. He just oozed tennis perfection. You would watch him and it was all so easy for him and all done so beautifully and at times you would just stop and say to yourself... how the **** did he do that.

GOAT.
 
It's simple for me really. Roger is the GOAT, Nadal will be the GOAT if he can surpass him in slams.

If they're dead even on slams then things like World Tour Finals, Master 1000's, Olympics, Head to Head will need to be considered.
 
KaaN10 said:
It's simple for me really. Roger is the GOAT, Nadal will be the GOAT if he can surpass him in slams.

If they're dead even on slams then things like World Tour Finals, Master 1000's, Olympics, Head to Head will need to be considered.
Click to expand...

Basically yes. The way we judge a career is slam count. Its like gold. Nicklaus remains the GOAT unless or until Woods or another wins 18 slams.
 
Fed is GOAT. There is no contest. Ask the entire world's population who is the greatest tennis player of all time, and his name will come up far more often than anyone else. His results, records and performances speak for themselves. There is just no argument - but people will debate it just for he sake of finding something to argue about.

Hell, he's probably up there with greatest athlete of all time too.
 
Flameboy said:
Well yeah ... my point at the time was that Rafa doesn't even have to surpass Fed in total Grand Slams to be considered the GOAT. Of course that was laughed off by all the Fed fans, but now look. Wilander and McEnroe both agreeing with me! :D
Click to expand...

Add one Andre Agassi to the list.


"I think it's fair to say that Rafa has a shot at it (passing Federer) and one might argue has a good shot at it.

"I don't see anyone winning the French (Open) for the next couple of years, but him. But that's assuming he stays healthy.

"But this guy I don't think has to win more to prove that he can be argued as the best of all time."
Click to expand...
 
At the moment he is the greatest as he has won the most grand slam titles. I cannot see Rodger winning another grand slam unfortunaltely and has already slipped to no.5 in the rankings. But I think Nadal when he retires will be regarded as the greatest. He is still only 27 has 3 -4 great years left in him and I actually think he will end up having 18 grand slam titles. He currently has 13.
 
pepsi said:
I would just like to revive this thread and make note, there is only one player who can lay claim to be the greatest ever....

Mr Roger Federer
Click to expand...

Was having a discussion with my mate about this last night.

Serena vs Federer?

Edit - For GOAT of course not actually playing each other.
 
pepsi said:
Greatest female ever? I certainly think Serena can lay a claim to that title. Her record is phenomenal as well!
Click to expand...

Just player in general.

Serena. Federer
20GS. 17GS
85.54% 81.62%

Serena also has 13 Doubles GS titles.
4 Gold Medals vs. 1 Gold (not that this counts)
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Roger Federer is not the GOAT

Similar threads

Aristotle Pickett
'Blast from the past' thread.
Replies
12
Views
920
Hamingja
Hamingja

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top