[pharmablogger]

Oh, he's the GOAT but if Rafa can stay healthy and not let his style of play ravage his body, he has the potential to be in the argument in a few years. That's a big If.

The 20 consecutive semi finals is an awfully powerful one to overcome. That's 100 straight victories in GS matches at the QF level or earlier on all surfaces. Absolutely stunning! Someone will ahve to win a lot more than 14 GS titles to have claim to the GOAT.

I know people are sick of the argument but for awhile we Fed fans are going to just enjoy ourselves talking about this. After all we did engage in other debates like Is he washed up? What's wrong with him? Will he ever win a Slam again? Can he even hold #2? After all that Fed trashing it's time the Fed detractors ate a little GOAT

Ah, the good old days.

[slarceSelia]

Promise?

Certainly, but we can't promise your grandchildren won't be old by that time...

[slarceSelia]

Seriously, Roger has the best case at the moment, but you could argue about 3-4 others and not be laughed about.

As for longevity of his current record (14 GS) - it might last some time and it might not. In any case 14 is not a natural limit (that would be ca 20-22) and will be bettered by someone some day. Of course Roger might make it way more difficult by winning another 3-4. I hope he does.

[itititit]

Just so everyone can now enjoy an alternate universe here.....

Do I think that Roger is the best player that I have ever seen? Yes. Top 3 in any GOAT discussion? Absolutely. Do I think that he's conclusively proven that he is the GOAT? IMO- my grade= inconclusive. A GOAT discussion means that you get to be, and I'd say must be, particularly picky. And- I do feel that Roger's record against Rafa is a considerable concern when it comes to a discussion of who might be THE GOAT. Pete, for example, did dominate with his most important rivalries. (And y'all best know that it KILLS me to admit this.) Still- the history of this era of tennis ain't been completed. Roger's got plenty of more time to keep going. So, we shall see.....

[spacecrafty]

Where is "duh" on the voting list?

[tarmpriopay]

Whether you like it or not, there will be tons of GOAT discussions for the rest of Roger's career and beyond, so the media will not be moving on anytime soon.

As for me personally, as for players I've seen play in person, I'd say he's the GOAT. However, even though I was not alive when Laver was playing, I consider him the GOAT. Heck there are really a small herd of GOATs.

I'm waiting for the new Nike spot with Tiger and Roger since they both have 14 majors...any day now I'm sure.

[LkEHaduy]

Just this morning, I have listened to a GOAT discussion on classic radio, albeit not concerning tennis, but musicians.

A professor was asked if he feels that Anne-Sophie Mutter is the greatest violine player of all time and in his answer he compared her to Ginette Neveu (1919-1949). This is what he said:"Now a comparison between two great musicians of their time is not -and cannot be- made to say one is doing everything better or the other one is doing everything worse. In fact, it only shows that there have always been incredibly talented players who all had their predecessors and successors, just as today's great players have and will have theirs. We all know this. Yet, what makes people say that Mutter or Neveu might be the greatest ever, is that when listening to their music, for a moment your heart begins to doubt that anyone ever has or ever will play with such dramatic passion like Neveu or such beautiful purity like Mutter."

I thought it was pretty, so I wrote it down after I heard it and now thought I'd share. It fits music better then sports, of course. Still, when I watch some of Federer's matches, I start to doubt if there ever was someone who could play like this. I don't know it, of course- by the time I started to watch tennis, Sampras was about to retire, while others long have. Federer sometimes makes me doubt it,though, so that's why to me he is the greatest. It is entirely subjective and has nothing to do with records- as rabbit said, if Roger had retired 2 yrs ago or if he had never won another GS, I'd still feel this way.

Still, I love the fact that he completed the career GS and that he caught up with Pete in GS totals. And the consecutive GS semi final record makes me smile. Because for all the subjectivity involved when answering the greatest player of all time question- titles and records are some kind of objective measurement of a player's career. And I think Roger with his win yesterday, Roger surealy has had one, if not the greatest career any player ever had. And the best thing is, that it is not over yet!


(sorry, long post)

[abossakon]

The notion of Greatest of All Time makes no sense to me.

Exactly, me either. Citizen Kane is not the Greatest Film of All Time, no matter how much people say it is. Seinfeld is not the greatest TV show and Moby Dick is not the Greatest American Novel. Many people think they are, but it's such a hopelessly subjective idea that I am continually surprised anyone would seriously state such a thing.

To me, this is like the Hall of Fame debates that happen every year. There's no quantifiable criteria for this with any sort of validity that can please everyone. Can't we just say that he is a supremely talented player among a highly select group of players who have achieved more than any before them?

[GogaMegaPiska]

Just so everyone can now enjoy an alternate universe here.....

Do I think that Roger is the best player that I have ever seen? Yes. Top 3 in any GOAT discussion? Absolutely. Do I think that he's conclusively proven that he is the GOAT? IMO- my grade= inconclusive. A GOAT discussion means that you get to be, and I'd say must be, particularly picky. And- I do feel that Roger's record against Rafa is a considerable concern when it comes to a discussion of who might be THE GOAT. Pete, for example, did dominate with his most important rivalries. (And y'all best know that it KILLS me to admit this.) Still- the history of this era of tennis ain't been completed. Roger's got plenty of more time to keep going. So, we shall see.....

I'm going to keep banging my head against the wall on this one. Roger is 5 years old than Rafa. In tennis, that's a huge difference. I believe that Federer at his peak never played Rafa at his peak.

Nadal is 9-2 on clay which is his best surface and one on which Roger is good enough to make it to finals against Nadal. So Nadal's domination of Federer is largely one on clay because frankly Nadal wasn't yet good enough to get to GS finals on hard court so we never got to see enough Rog vs. Rafa on this surface at the highest level.

Nadal did beat Federer once on grass in "the" match. This was 22 year old Rafa vs. 26 year old Fed. Most GS winners are under 25 so this is Fed slightly past his prime.

They're 3-3 on hard court with once again Rafa's most significant win coming after Fed passed his prime years.

Everyone has an opinion on GOAT and that's fine but ... I believe Nadal's apparent domination of Federer has some significant mitigating factors including age and the fact that Nadal wasn't good enough on non clay surfaces during Fed's peak to really provide any prime time Grand Slam matchups.

[slarceSelia]

I was just reading wiki page about ATP career records and Roger is:

tied for #1 in GS titles won (with Sampras); finals reached (with Lendl); #6 in GS victories (3 behind Edberg at #5 and 58 behind Connors at #1); #2 in GS win percentage (Borg is #1, Nadal #3 and Laver #4)

# 8 in career singles titles won (1 behind Agassi and only 5 behind Pete at #4); #5 in overall match win % (Borg is #1); tied for #3 in TMC titles (Pete and Lendl have one more); tied for 2nd with Nadal for most ATP MS wins (2 behind Agassi)

He also has the longest uninterrupted stay at #1 (237 weeks), but is #4 in the overall list. Needs another stay of 1 year and 1 week to catch Pete.