v2 G.O.A.T The Last 8 Group 1

The last 16 was completed on Friday with the final two groups of the round, group three was dominated by Mohammed Ali who qualified for the next round with 27 votes. It was the battle for second that was the real story in this group with Jordan, Redgrave and Phelps all neck and neck well..neck for the majority of the day, it was Phelps however that eventually progressed by just one vote ahead of Steve Redgrave with 15 votes.

The final group of the last 16 was one of the closest votes of the entire competition with Sobers, Woods, Diego Maradonna and Owens all picking up votes throughout the day, it was Woods and Maradonna however that progressed as joint group winners with 20 votes each to Sobers 19 and Owens 12.

The last 8 (9) starts and ends today with two groups, one of four, one of five with the top two progressing from each group to make up the semi-finals.

Please vote for the participant you believe has achieved the most in sport

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

The first group pits tennis, golf, boxing and football against each other for your votes.

Roger Federer- Tennis- Championed by emancipator

2001, Wimbledon Centre Court; defending and seven time Wimbledon champion 'Pistol' Pete Sampras, the man who had reigned at the top of men's tennis for close to a decade and considered by many to be unbeatable on this hallowed turf is at crisis point. At two sets all, 5-6 and 15-40 down in the deciding set, the ruthlessly efficient Sampras is facing match point.

It had been five years since anyone had managed to beat him in this tournament. His opponent a relatively unknown challenger in the form of Swiss teenager, 19 year old Roger Federer, is considered to be a prodigious but erratic talent. He seems to have all the shots but doesn't know quite how to put them together. His temperament has also been questionable. Today, however, things appear to be different. For nearly four hours the two protagonists have battled. To the surprise of the enthralled on lookers it was Federer who took the opening set. But Sampras hit back as any great champion is expected to do. The audience fully expected him to motor on and over power the youngster, except, as the match wore on, it appeared as if the Swiss was the one getting stronger, whilst Sampras appeared more and more uneasy. By the time the match score had reached two sets all, the tension had become palpable. The Centre Court crowd knew that there were no longer any favourites in this match; this would be a dog-fight, survival of the fittest - and the bravest; reputations would count for nothing.

On countless occasions throughout his career Sampras had bailed himself out of tight spots with his booming, swerving, pin-point accurate serve; the serve universally acclaimed as the greatest in history. He wipes sweat from his brow, places the ball against the racket, looks up, coils himself into the releasing position, then with a seamlessly fluid motion he serves a missile out wide to Federer's forehand and charges towards the net. Federer takes a step towards the ball and unleashes a forehand that whizzes past Sampras for a clean winner. He crumples to his knees in disbelief and celebration. A split-second of silence is followed by an eruption as the Centre Court crowd rise as one to salute a new King. The BBC commentator proclaims the birth of a new star. It is indeed the dawn of a new era.. The Federer era.

Looking back it was a poignant moment in sporting history. The one occasion on which the two greatest champions of the modern era were to play each other, and as fate would have it, on the court most beloved to either of them. It was a reminder of days gone by and a harbinger of those yet to come.

It would be another couple of years before Federer would really hit the heights, and what heights! 17 grand slams from 24 finals, including 7 Wimbledon titles. Over 300 weeks as the number one player in the world, including 237 consecutive weeks at the top spot. 6 World Tour Final victories from 8 finals. 23 consecutive grand slam semi-finals; 34 consecutive grand slam quarter finals (and counting); a run of 24 consecutive finals victories in all tournaments, 65 consecutive match wins on grass, 56 consecutive match wins on hardcourt, five consecutive Wimbledon and US Open titles, a run of 18 grand slam finals out of 19 grand slam tournaments played, 21 masters titles.. and on and on.. all of them records, many of them by a considerable distance. There are at least half a dozen Wikipedia articles dedicated to the career achievements and compiled statistics/records of Roger Federer. Peruse them at your own leisure - if you've got a few days to spare that is

But what makes Federer really stand out amongst the legends of tennis and indeed any sport is his unique game. Everything about his game is beautiful, everything is seemingly effortless. He glides around the court unhurried, with uncanny footwork and balletic grace. A sixth sense for being at the right place at the right time. He plays with perfect technique. Like an artist, Federer creates masterpieces; the court is his canvas. At heart, he is an attacking player who plays the game the right way; always looking to seize the initiative, to hit outright winners, to win spectacularly and brilliantly. He can hit every shot in the book. But he can also grind and play great defense. If it is so required he can switch to plan b, c, d, whatever it takes. In a sport dominated by super athletes, Federer at his peak was as fast and durable as they come. Modern tennis is played predominantly from the baseline (a stark contrast to the tennis of Sampras's heydey which was mainly serve and volley based, with the majority of points won at the net) and Roger Federer can play the baseline game as well as anyone. But he can do so much more. He can mix spins and slices, lobs and dropshots, powerful winners and delicate touch, from the back of the court or at the net. It is this unique fusion of power, skill and aesthetic grace, that has captured the imagination of millions of fans around the world. Federer doesn't just win, he wins with style.

When Federer established himself as the number one player in the world in late 2003 people were already starting to whisper about this potential phenomenon. He emerged from a group of fantastically talented youngsters: Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero, Nalbandian, Roddick, Haas, to establish himself as THE man to beat. As the years rolled by he gathered steam, and the initial curiosity that follows the emergence of any great talent - the excitement of thinking about all the possibilites - was replaced by amazement then incredulity and finally awe. As Andre Agassi said, 'Federer was the guy who came and took the game light years ahead.' He looked like something from the future. The American media even dubbed him 'Darth Federer' (in reference to his super-natural gifts and black clothing) at the 2007 US Open. More than anything else, the Roger Federer phenomenon turned the sport of tennis, which had been suffering a slump in popularity following the years of serve dominated play, into one of the most popular spectator sports in the world. He was and remains to this day, although not to the same extent, a phenom. Or as David Foster Wallace wrote in the New York Times:

""Roger Federer is one of those rare, preternatural athletes who appear to be exempt, at least in part, from certain physical laws. Good analogues here include Michael Jordan, who could not only jump inhumanly high but actually hang there a beat or two longer than gravity allows, and Muhammad Ali, who really could “float” across the canvas and land two or three jabs in the clock-time required for one. There are probably a half-dozen other examples since 1960. And Federer is of this type — a type that one could call genius, or mutant, or avatar. He is never hurried or off-balance. The approaching ball hangs, for him, a split-second longer than it ought to. His movements are lithe rather than athletic. Like Ali, Jordan, Maradona, and Gretzky, he seems both less and more substantial than the men he faces. Particularly in the all-white that Wimbledon enjoys getting away with still requiring, he looks like what he may well (I think) be: a creature whose body is both flesh and, somehow, light."" http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/sports/playmagazine/20federer.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 (By the way - this article by Wallace entitled 'Roger Federer as religious experience' is a great read)

Federer's style and success has allowed him to transcend the sport in a way that few sportsmen in history can match. He is a record four time winner of the prestigious Laureus Sportsman of the Year Award. In a recent poll conducted across 25 countries with 51,000 participants he was voted as the second most trusted person in the world after Nelson Mandela. During the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony, Federer received the loudest cheer of the night when he carried the Swiss flag into the stadium https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddojLWIjKK4 At the London Olympics Federer's pre-Olympic presser had more than 700 journalists, more than any other star at the games. He was mobbed by crowds during his recent tour of South America with political and sporting dignitaries (including Pele and Maradonna) feting him. He has the most impressive endorsement portfolio in all of sports including blue chip companies such as Nike, Mercedes-Benz (global ambassador), Wilson, Rolex, Credite Suisse, Gillette, Moet & Chandon etc.

But despite all the accolades Federer has remained a likeable, down to earth person. His fellow tennis professionals have voted him the winner of the annual Steffan Edberg Sportsmanship award a record eight times. He is the President of the ATP players council and in this capacity has campaigned for the benefit of all the players on the tour, including negotiating a fairer distribution of prize money for players who lose in the earlier rounds of the slams. The Roger Federer foundation is a charitable organisation with the stated mission of empowering children through education; it is involved in numerous projects throughout Africa.

It is incredible that with so many distractions (he's married with two young children to boot) Federer has still managed to stay at the top of such a global and competitive sport. As things stand he is the number 2 ranked player in the world and indeed was, just a few short months ago, the number one player in the world. Tennis has traditionally been a young man's sport but Roger Federer has redefined the parameters. I firmly believe that Federer is one of the outstanding candidates for the greatest sportsman of all time accolade. He fits all of the criteria: a sporting phenomenon, unmatched in his sport, an incredible record in a globally competitive sport which is both physical and skill-based, a global sporting icon who is one of the most popular sportsmen on the planet and a great role model, who plays hard but fair. But of course the Federer story is not over yet. He has declared his intention to play until the 2016 Olympic Games. There may yet be a few more pages to add to Wikipedia


Some quotes:

""[In the modern game], you're either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist or a hard court specialist ... or you're Roger Federer"" - Jimmy Connors

""He is the most naturally talented player I have ever seen in my life"" - John McEnroe

""He moves like a whisper and executes like a wrecking ball"" - Nick Bollettieri (legendary tennis coach)

""He is the most perfect machine I have ever seen playing tennis"" - Diego Maradonna

""Federer is capable of playing shots that other players don't even think of"" - Ivan Lendl

""We are witnessing history. This is the most dominant athlete on planet earth today"" - Jim Courier (4 time grand slam champion)

""Federer is the best player in history - no other player has ever had so much quality"" - Rafael Nadal

""Roger's got too many shots, too much talent in one body. It's hardly fair that one person can do all this—his backhands, his forehands, volleys, serving, his court position. The way he moves around the court, you feel like he's barely touching the ground. That's the sign of a great champion."" - Rod Laver

""He's the best I've ever played against. There's nowhere to go. There's nothing to do except hit fairways, hit greens and make putts. Every shot has that sort of urgency on it. I've played a lot of them [other players], so many years; there's a safety zone, there's a place to get to, there's something to focus on, there's a way. Anything you try to do, he potentially has an answer for and it's just a function of when he starts pulling the triggers necessary to get you to change to that decision."" - Andre Agassi

""He's a real person. He's not an enigma. Off the court he's not trying to be somebody. If you met him at McDonald's and you didn't know who he was, you would have no idea that he's one of the best athletes in the world"" - Andy Roddick

""Today I was playing my best tennis, trying lots of different things, but nothing worked. When you're playing like that and he still comes up with all those great shots you really have to wonder if he's even from the same planet"" - Novak Djokovic



emancipator

Mohammed Ali- Boxing- Championed by 6oldenbhoy

"When I offered to take part in this exercise I was originally asked to champion another fighter. I had my reservations as, in my opinion, this man’s aura was built more on the reputation he had acquired rather than his in ring achievement (though I must admit he did achieve a heck of a lot). I had no such qualms with the second option, the self proclaimed ‘Greatest’ Muhammad Ali. At this point I must admit that, although I have been a fight fan for many years, some of my earliest memories are of watching Michael Carruth and Wayne McCullough in the Barcelona Olympics and no Saturday night was complete with watching the boxing on ITV, I have never been a massive fan of Ali. I have seen almost all of his fights, viewed all the major documentaries and read various articles on the man but I've always had an almost take it or leave it attitude towards him. However, upon undertaking this activity, I have found an admiration and respect for the man who would be a worthy winner of this accolade. His career encompassed everything, monumental highs, catastrophic lows, triumph in the face of adversity, not to mention controversy all now tinged with tragedy. To fit all of this into an article would be an impossible task, such was the effect he had on Boxing and the World around him.

Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr was born on the 17/1/1942 to a Methodist father and Baptist mother. Few could have predicted what this child would go on and accomplish. The story begins when at the age of twelve young Cassius had his bicycle stolen. A thirst for revenge drove him to his local boxing gym where he should such aptitude for the sport that in a mere six years he was crowned Olympic Light Heavyweight Champion in Rome in 1960. Nino Benvenuti, the darling of his home crowd, won the Val Barker Trophy but many thought this accolade belonged to Clay.

Upon returning home he promptly turned profession under the tutelage of Angelo Dundee. He quickly developed into a boxer fleet of foot with a stinging jab,lightning reflexes and with more than adequate power. Nineteen straight wins led to a title shot against the fearsome Sonny Liston. Going into the contest Clay was a 7/1 underdog, but won the title when Liston retired on his stool at the end of the sixth round. The rematch wouldn’t last as long, Liston going down in the first. Some claimed Liston took a dive, others claim it was a legitimate punch. The fight did create one the most iconic sporting images of the twentieth century, where Ali (shortly after the Liston fight he had changed his name to Cassius X, then to Muhammad Ali) stands over his fallen opponent screaming at him to continue. Ali went on to defend the title a further eight times.

Muhammad was stripped of his title soon after his final defense against Zora Folley. His boxing license was also revoked and was sentenced to five years in jail. He appealed and remained on bail but was unable to box for three and a half years. Eventually given a license to fight in Atlanta, Ali won the first of two comeback fights before challenging Joe Frazier for the undisputed Heavyweight Championship, in a bout now known as “The Fight of the Century”. It was a thriller from start to finish, Ali starting the faster, but Frazier slowly walked him down. Frazier was ahead on all scorecards going into the final round when he unleashed a tremendous left hook that put Ali on the canvas. Ali bravely rose and heard the final bell but lost a unanimous decision. It was noted that Ali did not have the usual bounce in his step and one could argue showed the effects of three and a half years out.

Ali would not challenge for the World title for another three years. He won thirteen of his next fourteen fights, avenging the only loss he suffered in this period. A win over Joe Frazier set up a bout with Big George Foreman. This was to be Ali’s finest hour. Going into the bout, entitled the “Rumble in the Jungle”, nobody was giving Ali a chance. Ali had suffered losses to both Ken Norton and Joe Frazier whereas Foreman had knocked both of the out in them in the second round. Ali started brightly enough, but then adopted a tactic of lying on the ropes and absorbing punishment from Foreman. Foreman punched but Ali blocked them, shooting out counters of his own at every chance. This tactic, which Ali would later describe as “Rope-a-Dope” would have been seen to be suicide to many but becoming increasingly effective as Foreman threw haymaker after haymaker to down Ali, but Ali took them and answered back with his own. Entering the eighth Foreman was visibly exhausted. Ali pounced, trapping him on the ropes pummeling him with a barrage of blow that put Foreman down. He was unable to answer the count and a New Champion was crowned. Ali defended the title a further three times before facing Joe Frazier in the final installment of their classic trilogy.

The “Thrilla in Manila” took place, funnily enough, in the Filipino capital in front of crowd of 28,000. What followed was fourteen rounds of unsheathed brutality before Frazier was retired on his stool. Frazier’s eyes were so badly swollen that he claimed he couldn't see the punches coming, yet still protested when Eddie Futch withdrew him from the contest. Ali led from the front punishing Frazier with hooks, jabs and uppercuts wobbling Frazier frequently. Frazier gamely fought back every time and in the mid rounds unleashed one of his trademark left hooks right to Ali’s jaw. This punch looked like it could have felled a tree, yet Ali took it and stayed on his feet. By the end of the fight Frazier was taking continuous punishment. In the fourteenth, Ali landed punch after punch on a more and a more helpless Frazier. It was a mercy when the fight was stopped. Ali described the contest as the closest thing to dying he had experienced, whilst showing humility, describing Frazier as the toughest man alive. A further six defenses of the title followed before he lost the title to “Neon” Leon Spinks. He won the title back in the return before retiring. A brief comeback last two fights, both defeats, though Ali was a shell of his former self by this stage.

When people talk of athletes transcending sport, Ali is the one who first comes to mind. When you ask the common man or women on the street who they most associate with the sport of Boxing, Ali’s name will be said most frequently. As big a fan as I am of the Klitschkos, the average person on the street would struggle to name either of them as Heavyweight Champion of the world. When Ali was Champion, it was the exact opposite. He was one of the most recognized faces in the world, never mind sportsmen. This was the reason Sports Illustrated named him Sportsman of the Century, as did the BBC. The Heavyweight Championship of the World was once talked of as the greatest prize in sport and it was fighters like Muhammad Ali that made it so. This is a sport that has so little margin for error. Moving your head even fractionally may have devastating results. As former Heavyweight title challenger Tex Cobb once said ""If you screw things up in tennis, it's 15-love. If you screw up in boxing, it's your ass."" Ali excelled at this sport even when he had returned a faded fighter physically from his imposed exile. However like all greats at any sport he found other ways to win. His in ring intelligence set him apart from his contemporaries when he had lost the bounce in his step and his reflexes had dulled. It must not be forgotten that he displayed all these skills and attributes in what was the golden period of Heavyweight boxing. While he is remembered for his talents by some, others will recall him for his mouth. Ali was the ultimate showman. The press loved him and although he could be vulgar and downright disrespectful to his opponents at times, it could be said that this hyped fights and helped him to get that mental edge on his opponent. As I alluded to in my opening paragraph, I had my doubts when I was asked to champion another fighter due to his record, I find Ali to be the complete package. His record stands alone as far as Heavyweights go, while he had the showmanship and charisma that contributed to his everlasting legacy on sport. Long after we are all gone people will still talk of Ali. The Ali of today has been ravaged by Parkinsonism, an unwanted souvenir of a career spanning twenty one years inside the ring. Yet to see him light the Olympic flame at the Atlanta games was a one of the most iconic moments of the 20th Century. To this day he continues to battle his condition with just as much courage as he exhibited throughout his career in the ring. It takes a brave man to step through those ropes and Ali has shown both through his career and the aftermath, that he is right up there with the bravest of them all.

Diego Maradonna- Football- Championed by Hero

"One day, Lionel Messi will possibly prove to be the global game's greatest player, but not yet, and certainly not just because he has blown the all-time number of goals in a calendar year. Messi may be scoring goals at a rate rarely seen since Dixie Dean's heyday, but he does have the advantage of being at the sharp end of probably the greatest club side of all time. Take Messi out of Barcelona and what do you have?
We already have an answer.
In the last World Cup Messi failed to score in five matches as Argentina lost in the quarter-final to Germany whilst his Barca teammates have lifted the Euro twice and the World Cup. It is argued that the Champions League is now a higher standard than the World Cup (not that the presence of Apoel Nicosia in the quarter-finals adds much weight to that view). Whether it is or not is irrelevant when judging Messi because he is playing for the best team in the competition, a team which even without him would be formidable. A truly great player is capable of turning a moderate team into a winning one. Like Diego Maradona.
English attitudes towards Maradona are understandably coloured by the ""Hand of God"" goal but his notoriety should not obscure his greatness. Maradona turned base materials into gold on both the club and international stage. Napoli were a shambles when they somehow found the cash to buy him in 1984. Fighting relegation had become a way of life with the club surviving by a point the previous season. Maradona turned them into title contenders and in 1986/87 they won the first scudetto in the club's history. A second Serie A title, and Napoli's first European prize, the Uefa Cup, followed. Since Maradona left, the club have not won a trophy.
Maradona was similarly central to Argentina's 1986 World Cup success. Ten of their 14 goals were scored or created by him, and his five goals included superb ones against England and Belgium of the type now associated with Messi. In the final, after West Germany had come back from 2-0 down to level, he supplied the pass for Jorge Burruchaga to score the winner. All this while carrying a knee injury which had threatened to rule him out of the tournament.
Brian Glanville, in The Story of the World Cup, his history of the competition since 1930, wrote: ""It will always be remembered as Maradona's World Cup, seldom has a player, even Pele, so dominated the competition. In an era when individual talent was at a premium, defensive football more prevalent than ever, Maradona – squat, muscular, explosive, endlessly adroit – showed that a footballer of genius could still prevail.""
This context is another factor in Maradona's primacy. He formerly played in an era when the tactics were negative and the tackling brutal. Maradona's relative lack of impact at Barcelona, and later decline, had much to do with the injuries he suffered including the notorious ankle-break by Andoni Goikoetxea, the ""Butcher of Bilbao"". Only after the 1990 World Cup, when Maradona carried to the final an Argentine team which was as guilty of these sins as any, did Fifa begin the crackdown which has allowed players like Messi to flourish.
Simply put Maradona was the best player in the most global sport and therefore rightfully should challenge for the biggest prize of all, the G.O.A.T.
"

Ali, all day long. Best sportsman of all time, best sports entertainer of all time, and most important sportsman of all time. Simples.

Federer, without doubt. We are talking about achievements. Ali is not even the GOAT in boxing, if you just take on-field achievements. His iconic status, his off-field activities should not influence the vote here.

Ahh the business end at last.

Despite earlier internal monologues having Ali Vs Pele for the title in my mind, I find myself having voted for Federer.

The boxing afficionados input have swung me away from Ali over the course of the competition. Tennis is athletic and skillful and so hits my criteria for GOAT way ahead of golf, ruling Jack out. On that basis my head to head has Federer against Maradona. Federer is better at his sport than Maradona was at his and has achieved more to me.

Really tough group.

Discounting Maradona on the grounds that he isn't for me the footballing GOAT (Pele was a more complete player with greater legacy and iconic status).

So two guys who are objectively the GOATs of their sports (Federer and Nicklaus) against the most iconic sports star of all time (noting that Ali is generally considered the best heavyweight boxer ever, but probably only around the 5th best pound for pound fighter).

For pure sporting excellence I'd rank Ali third best in this group, but the question is whether the 'extra' he gave merits pushing him up.

I can't vote for Nicklaus, as while he is objectively the GOAT, he had weaknesses in his game (pitching / chipping / bunker play) that would make him less effective against the contemporary field. Also, while I have no issue with golf being considered a sport, I do think that the sporting GOAT should be from a sport that involves some combination of athleticism and skill.

Which leaves me with Federer. For me, not only the objective GOAT in tennis but subjectively one of the most pleasing players to watch and one of the most outrageously talented sportsmen ever - the problem is his record against Nadal, and in particular that he has not been the dominant player on one of the major surfaces throughout his career.

So I'm torn as to whether Federer's sporting excellence is sufficient to put him ahead of Ali's not quite so good sporting excellence but greater status.

As a personal bias, I've always preferred those sports stars who have that extra ability to make the near-impossible look easy - for this reason I just give the edge to Federer.

The poll asks us to 'vote for the participant you believe has achieved the most in sport' - in 100 years time, Ali's name will still be lauded. I doubt whether in 100 years Maradona will be feted as it currently is. Federer maybe, but 100 years is a long time in tennis and there's usually someone in each generation who wins everything (this time there's two). Nicklaus will go down in history more for his sportmanship and class than for his accomplishments.

But it's Ali who will be remembered, not the others. And I believe THAT is a bigger achievement, not individual accomplishments.

No one cares about 100 years from now, it's about up until now, and we can take licence with who we think has achieved the most.

I don't think interwar and post war cricket represented the best a sport can offer up unto the present day so I have to take Cucumber Bradman out. Nor do I consider Golf a sport worthy of having a GOAT amongst proper sports.

The fact Ali is still heralded now says something for the longevity of his name. If it wasn't for this tournament I'd have forgotten Jack Nicklaus ever existed, even when watching the sport. And Federer gets a bye on that because he's currently playing.

I believe Ali achieved the most in sport - but it depends on what we're looking at, titles / records or other, less tangible things like improving the popularity of the sport they're in / building a legacy for the sport / bringing it's standards up to modern times. Ali may not have the titles, records or performances to make him the boxing GOAT in 'measurable' terms, but he's by far and away the boxing GOAT when it comes to the less tangible but (for me) more important side of it.

So your GOAT is more MFOAT (Most Famous of All Time)?

It's like saying Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt are the GOAT actors because they are the most famous.

Not remotely. In my opinion it is a greater achievement to be remembered through the ages as a great sportsman in your field than it is to win a few things but not be remembered. Who would have known about Fangio if not for Schumacher passing his records? Only a very few F1 followers I'd imagine.

If I was a tiddywinks player I'd rather be credited with making the sport popular and modernised than win 6 world tiddlywinks titles.

And that's brushing aside all the things Ali did actually achieve in the ring. He was truly remarkable.

I sort of see your point Azzy, I just don't agree with a non sporting element.

Personally I doubt Ali will continue to be remembered to the extent he is at present. It's a generational thing. I've no idea what he achieved. I've had it forced down my neck that he's the greatest, but as with the previous generation who decided he was the greatest, my own generation will make our own minds up, as will the next. When he's passed from living memory, the process of being forgotten will commence. For my generation, the definining sports people of the 21st century (and late 20th c) to date are Woods, Federer, and Bolt to a lesser extent. These guys get a raw deal in this company, as they are up against a hardened rose-tinted spectacle brigade of yester-year. The older generations on this board will always speculate that their time produced the greatest sportsmen - as probably will we when we are looking back 30-40 years from now.

Barragan - that's a strong reason for voting for Bradman on the other thread. Few of us were born when he retired, let alone saw him play. However, he remains the GOAT of his sport for so many.

I was going to go for Federer but his record against his main opposition in Nadal is very poor. Ali for me, i'm no great fan and i think a lot of poor performances get overlooked but he did transcend the sport and beat three ATG heavies against the odds.

I'm generally not a fan of watching tennis, but I'm a purist when it comes to racket sports, and I like the fact that a guy with a one handed backhand, whose more than just a baseline grunter has proved himself to be the best tennis player ever. Longevity, athleticism, talent, honours. Some very big ticks. On the downside, he won many of those in a pretty uncompetitive era (you could argue he made it uncompetitive, but objectively no serious rival came along until nadal). So here's the rub, did he really make himself head and shoulders above when nadal and djokovic came along. Maybe he was slightly past his prime, so perhaps its not a fair comparison, but How great a competitor was he? I see a guy whose A game is better than there's but does he bring it often enough? These are harsh questions but we're at the business end.

Nicklaus is the other end if the spectrum, he dragged every ounce out if a less prestigious talent, but you had to hold your nerve to best him because you knew he would. But he never dominated an era like woods did.

Maradona, the best footballer I've seen, and a guy who clearly made the difference in the sides he played for, but those that saw more of pele say pele.

With Ali, its not about his record, its who he beat and under what circumstances. Some of the boxing board will tell you he's not a top 3 pound for pounder. That's not a complete consensus view, but it tells you that others maybe compiled more impressive records. What nobody else really did, was beat 2 monsters who were both considered unbeatable. One when he should have been too young, one when he was definitely too old. He proved himself the best of what is considered to be the best talent pool of heavyweights ever, and he did it when he past past his prime. In his youth he outclassed his opponents and when he aged he beat them with cunning and heart. And yet, we never got to see his prime.

All 4 worthy quarter finalists, and all whose 'greatness' is defined in different ways. I'm going with Ali, because he coukd pull the rabbit out of the hat... and maybe it shouldnt count but he was a genuine maverick and a charismatic entertainer. Normally those guys aren't winners too.

milkyboy wrote:With Ali, its not about his record, its who he beat and under what circumstances. Some of the boxing board will tell you he's not a top 3 pound for pounder. That's not a complete consensus view, but it tells you that others maybe compiled more impressive records. What nobody else really did, was beat 2 monsters who were both considered unbeatable. One when he should have been too young, one when he was definitely too old. He proved himself the best of what is considered to be the best talent pool of heavyweights ever, and he did it when he past past his prime. In his youth he outclassed his opponents and when he aged he beat them with cunning and heart. And yet, we never got to see his prime.

That's a great quote, it really makes you think.

Roger Federer all day and night. The guy re-defined the sport. Jack a close second.

Has to be Ali for his boxing achievements and enduring legacy way beyond the ring. Honourable mentions to Nicklaus and Federer who for all their success remain a few rungs below on the ladder. As I would like my GOAT to be some form of role model, Maradonna doesn't get a look in.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Roger Federer all day and night. The guy re-defined the sport. Jack a close second.

How did Federer 're-define' tennis? All he did was come along and play better than other players, he's hardly changed the way players train / prepare / bring it out of a period of doldrums. I'd love to know what you're classifying as 're-defined'.

That's a good challenge Azzy, I was thinking the same. Tennis has changed during Federer's tenure at the top but I'd say that's due to court conditions more than anything.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Roger Federer all day and night. The guy re-defined the sport. Jack a close second.

How did Federer 're-define' tennis? All he did was come along and play better than other players, he's hardly changed the way players train / prepare / bring it out of a period of doldrums. I'd love to know what you're classifying as 're-defined'.

Guys decided to get fitter as they couldn't live with the guy. Players had adapt new ways to win. Upcoming players try to emulate his play tried to mirror his footwork and his technique. Commercially he opened tennis to a new audience and even championed fairer distribution of prize money amongst the lower ranked players on the player council.

Done more than Ali!

Heavyweight time I see???

Now it gets interesting.

4 brilliant sportsman.

I have to go away from my heart in this case. And vote for the chessy swiss.

A True undisputed GOAT from Tennis.

Tennis is a sport that is ideal for this comp.

It truely has a global patrticiaption and appeal. It has the perfect balance between skillz and fitness.

It has also become a very fair sport. It has embraced tech and it is better off.

I am one of very few Golf fans that have been playing and fololwing the sport pre tiger - yet still thins that Jack and him are head to head. And although I feel that Golf is the pinnacle game. Tennis pips it as a 'sport'. I also think Fed is a slimey cheese ball with no taste. But he is my GOAT and needs to go to the final and I suppose he is a decent bloke, Just swiss.

Not sure I'd call Federer a slimey cheese ball, yes he's pretty smug and his wife is no oil painting and fond of the biscuit barrel but that's about as much as you could criticise him for.

He is cheesy dude. He wears council estate tracksuits with gold trim.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Guys decided to get fitter as they couldn't live with the guy. Players had adapt new ways to win. Upcoming players try to emulate his play tried to mirror his footwork and his technique. Commercially he opened tennis to a new audience and even championed fairer distribution of prize money amongst the lower ranked players on the player council.

I'll take that one point at a time:

- "Guys decided to get fitter as they couldn't live with the guy" - happens in every single sport in the world. Football teams decide to get fitter and pass the ball better because Barcelona do. They try new tactics to counter Barca. It doesn't mean that Barca have re-defined football, it means they're the best at it right now.

- "Players had adapt new ways to win" - same thing, and I'd argue this happens in almost every sport every day across the world. Playing 4-2-3-1 at Old Trafford? Make a few subs to change things up. Hardly re-defining.

- "Upcoming players try to emulate his play tried to mirror his footwork and his technique" - I'd dispute this. I see far more Nadal / Djokovic type players than Federer-type players.

- "Commercially he opened tennis to a new audience" - as did Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Sampras and Agassi before him.

- "championed fairer distribution of prize money amongst the lower ranked players on the player council" - that I accept, good for him.

Nothing you listed makes a case for Federer re-defining the sport of tennis. It makes the case for him being the best at it, but none of that is re-defining.

Well those answers on how Federer re-defined Tennis weren't worth waiting for. Absolutely nothing of any substance to any of them.

People got fitter - that's an inevitability in all sports
People upped their game to try and compete - see above
People copied his technique - don't see any evidence of that myself
Opened Tennis to a new audience - did he heck
Championed fairer distribution of money - easy to do when you are a multi-millionaire, very noble of him.

Again, in the interests of consistency, I'm going to look outside of Ali's wider appeal, personality and life & times and focus purely on sporting achievement here.

With that being the case, I feel very comfortable opting for Federer here. Such a devastatingly complete player, fantastic longevity in tennis terms, holds a plethora of significant records and has done all of this in a sport which ranks pretty damn well in terms of world-wide appeal, participation numbers and how demanding it is physically.

You have different criteria than me then Chris - I'd rank Ali's out-of-ring accomplishments for the wider boxing world much higher than his in-ring accomplishments, fine as they were.

And I'd rank Navratilova and Serena Williams above Federer in terms of tennis GOAT too.

88Chris05 wrote:Again, in the interests of consistency, I'm going to look outside of Ali's wider appeal, personality and life & times and focus purely on sporting achievement here.

With that being the case, I feel very comfortable opting for Federer here. Such a devastatingly complete player, fantastic longevity in tennis terms, holds a plethora of significant records and has done all of this in a sport which ranks pretty damn well in terms of world-wide appeal, participation numbers and how demanding it is physically.

Chris, you just described Larry Holmes. Federer, flat track bully. No cojones

finally, we get down to the nitty-gritty of the tournament, and two of my top 3 - Ali and Federer - are in this group. I expect both to get through fairly comfortably, but at the moment I'm struggling to split them. The problem with Federer is we can't judge his legacy yet, whereas it's a huge part of the case for Ali. I'm really torn on this one, so shall sit on the fence a while longer...

Ali for me, quite an easy vote actually!

As things stand, it looks like Federer v Bradman, and Ali v Pele in the Semi's, though Woods could still spoil the Bradman choo choo.

milkyboy wrote:I'm generally not a fan of watching tennis, but I'm a purist when it comes to racket sports, and I like the fact that a guy with a one handed backhand, whose more than just a baseline grunter has proved himself to be the best tennis player ever. Longevity, athleticism, talent, honours. Some very big ticks. On the downside, he won many of those in a pretty uncompetitive era (you could argue he made it uncompetitive, but objectively no serious rival came along until nadal). So here's the rub, did he really make himself head and shoulders above when nadal and djokovic came along. Maybe he was slightly past his prime, so perhaps its not a fair comparison, but How great a competitor was he? I see a guy whose A game is better than there's but does he bring it often enough? These are harsh questions but we're at the business end.

Would just like to address this, obviously without taking you to task milkyboy. It's an ongoing debate in the tennis world, and one that I think will increasingly come out of the woodwork once Federer retires and people perhaps begin to forget about what he was like in his prime, and focus slightly more on the end of his career. However, the fact that he's still competing and very much a threat at his age speaks volumes - he's currently the world #2, even at 31 and with guys like Nadal, Djokovic and Murray around. I'd actually agree with you and say that there's some excellent discussion to be had regarding his record against Nadal and Djokovic, and whether Federer would've got all those slams if they were all at their peak at the same time - you could ask 20 different people on the tennis board and get a different answer every time, and that's without getting involved in topics like court speed.

I have to say though, despite his slightly iffy five-set record, I never understood the argument that he's not a great competitor, and in recent years he's actually expanded his game so that he might try and grind out a result using variety if his game's a little wayward on the day. After watching him for many years, I can't deny that he has some serious fighting spirit, though it often doesn't get attributed to him due to the presence of Nadal and Djokovic, who are absolute titans in that regard. I do think your questions are relevant and should be asked though, especially at this stage of the competition!

As for the topic, I'm really struggling to vote. Federer, Ali and Nicklaus are all very close in my eyes...might wait for a while and see how things develop.

Fair points all silver, some of which i caveated my views with. He doesnt wear his heart on his sleeve like nadal, but that doesn't mean he isnt a competitor. I just feel he gets in a position to win and doesn't too often though. When we're talking goat across all sports, they're all sublimely talented, so we're looking at small differentiators. no-one with his record could ever be called a choker, but to me its a chink in his very substantial armour.

True, when Federer first started tearing through his opponents in the big, big tournaments in the second half of 2003 and 2004, there weren't a great deal of utterly top class players around (although Safin was one of the great talents and, on his day, an absolute genius who is too readily forgotten in that respect, and Federer spanked him at the Australian Open in 2004 and beat him at the year-ending Tennis Masters Cup, too).

However, it's interesting to note that Nadal started winning Grand Slams in 2005, was making Grand Slam finals outside of his 'home' French Open by 2006 and, by 2007, had developed in to a really top class player across all surfaces, retaining his French Open title, making the Wimbledon final and winning multiple Masters Series titles on hard and indoor courts. These years coincided pretty much with Federer's peak and, during that time, he kept the young, fresh and fearless Nadal pinned at the number two spot in the world rankings for a staggering 160 weeks.

Puts paid to this idea that he couldn't hack it or win as frequently against top class opposition or in the face of serious, long-standing rivals; the years of 2005-2007 yielded eight 'Slams from a possible twelve, with two runners up spots. When Federer was at his peak (so around the age of 23 to 26, which is in line with when most male players hit their zenith) then, he remained by far and away the best player in the sport despite having a legitimately great Nadal to challenge him.

It's also telling that, despite Djokovic not really getting to that truly 'great' level until his wonderful 2011 (he'd just been a shade off that 'Fedal' level beforehand) by which time Federer was clearly past his best, it's still Federer who leads their head to head.

To regain his old Wimbledon title as well as the world number one ranking at the age of 31 was just a further seal on his legend, for me. Federer is an old man in tennis terms and managed to get back to top spot despite having played more than 1,000 ATP matches . Compare that to Sampras, for instance, who played 984 across a whole career spanning 1988 to 2002 but who was never ranked as the number one anytime after hitting the circa 850 mark.

I'm not trying to denigrate Sampras, who was a sporting hero to me when I was a kid - just emphasising how remarkable Federer is.

Roger Federer humble as a human and dominant as a champion, name few qualities required for a champ on and off the court, and you will see everything on Roger's CV.

A great human being off court and great Champion on court.

88Chris05 wrote:True, when Federer first started tearing through his opponents in the big, big tournaments in the second half of 2003 and 2004, there weren't a great deal of utterly top class players around (although Safin was one of the great talents and, on his day, an absolute genius who is too readily forgotten in that respect, and Federer spanked him at the Australian Open in 2004 and beat him at the year-ending Tennis Masters Cup, too).

However, it's interesting to note that Nadal started winning Grand Slams in 2005, was making Grand Slam finals outside of his 'home' French Open by 2006 and, by 2007, had developed in to a really top class player across all surfaces, retaining his French Open title, making the Wimbledon final and winning multiple Masters Series titles on hard and indoor courts. These years coincided pretty much with Federer's peak and, during that time, he kept the young, fresh and fearless Nadal pinned at the number two spot in the world rankings for a staggering 160 weeks.

Puts paid to this idea that he couldn't hack it or win as frequently against top class opposition or in the face of serious, long-standing rivals; the years of 2005-2007 yielded eight 'Slams from a possible twelve, with two runners up spots. When Federer was at his peak (so around the age of 23 to 26, which is in line with when most male players hit their zenith) then, he remained by far and away the best player in the sport despite having a legitimately great Nadal to challenge him.

It's also telling that, despite Djokovic not really getting to that truly 'great' level until his wonderful 2011 (he'd just been a shade off that 'Fedal' level beforehand) by which time Federer was clearly past his best, it's still Federer who leads their head to head.

To regain his old Wimbledon title as well as the world number one ranking at the age of 31 was just a further seal on his legend, for me. Federer is an old man in tennis terms and managed to get back to top spot despite having played more than 1,000 ATP matches . Compare that to Sampras, for instance, who played 984 across a whole career spanning 1988 to 2002 but who was never ranked as the number one anytime after hitting the circa 850 mark.

I'm not trying to denigrate Sampras, who was a sporting hero to me when I was a kid - just emphasising how remarkable Federer is.

Can't put forward a case better, very well written article

His winners speech after he beat Roddick at Wimbldeon was a little patronising, I thought.
Still a great champion though and a top four GOAT.

TBH I think the whole "humble" gets overstated with Federer: I've always found him to be fairly arrogant really. Not that I hold it against him, I think sportsmen need that bit of arrogance to succeed, they need to deep down believe they are the best. Those that come across as humble just do a better job at hiding it. Federer was always pretty good in victory, but some of his comments in defeat have been ordinary. Again, wouldn't hold it against him, he doesn't like losing, and I daresay wouldn't have been nearly as good a tennis player had he been different.

milkyboy wrote:Fair points all silver, some of which i caveated my views with. He doesnt wear his heart on his sleeve like nadal, but that doesn't mean he isnt a competitor. I just feel he gets in a position to win and doesn't too often though. When we're talking goat across all sports, they're all sublimely talented, so we're looking at small differentiators. no-one with his record could ever be called a choker, but to me its a chink in his very substantial armour.

Yeah, you're definitely right, I do think that these days he doesn't close matches as well as he should do - it's a notable weakness. Your post was very fair to begin with! As you say, at this level even the tiniest cracks get exposed due to the level of competition

Edit: To add to Chris' post, I think Federer won 13 of his 17 slams after Nadal won his first.

Milky & Silver

The 'how good was Federer at his best?' debate is always going to be a difficult one, and depends very much on how highly you rate the guys that were at the top of the game between the decline of Sampras and the emergence of Federer as a dominant force - that means primarily Roddick, Hewitt and Safin. Agassi was past his prime although still hung in near the top of the rankings.

The problem is that once Federer emerged as a true star in 2004, he only lost a handful of matches a year for 3 years, so was clearly far better than anyone until the emergence of Nadal as a force across all surfaces (and as has been discussed previously, Nadal's game is a particularly bad match up for Federer). Djokovic ddn't really start to beat Federer regularly until the last couple of years, when even Fed's biggest fans would accept he isn't quite as reliable a player as he was. Actually, his record is poorer against Andy Murray, who is the only active player other than Nadal who holds a H2H agains Federer - the only thing is that Federer has won the most important matches (their slam finals) consistently.

The almost unanswerable question is whether Federer's dominance was because he was exceptionally good or because the opposition was relatively weaker. It's not a clear-cut story - Safin was a fine player on his day but was nuttier than a bowl of muesli, so lacked consistency and application over his career, Hewitt was badly affected by injuries from about 2005, so his career amounted to less than looked likely early on, while Roddick continued to be a decent to good player but his opponents worked him out a bit and conditions moved away from favouring his big servig game.

Honestly, i think its a bit of both. Despite what you might think, i am a fan!

milkyboy wrote:Honestly, i think its a bit of both. Despite what you might think, i am a fan!

I think that's a reasonable assessment. Clearly Federer is exceptionally good, but he did come along at a time where there was a bit of a transition at the top of the game and his record has been enhanced partly by this and partly by the narrowing of playing conditions and styles (i.e. his aggressive baseline game made him the best on grass, indoors and on faster and slower hard courts while mostly the 2nd best on clay).

I still think the active streak of 35 consecutive Grand Slam quarter final appearances is staggering in showing both his consistency and durability - there aren't that many players who manage to compete in 35 consecutive slams, never mind always winning through to at least the last 8...

Federer's going to win this whole thing isn't he. Not saying he doesn't deserve to be near the top, but it will more a triumph for how much grown men can fall in love with a sweaty man in shorts than anything else. The comments on the Tennis board about him can be truly vomit inducing!

I certainly am not in love with him.

Its just the way this debate has turned out I suppose.

There are simply no question marks against tennis. And he has won the most slams..

He is also in this at a good time. He is still going but at the end of his carrer- so has fullfilled most of his potential allready.

Also (bar my issue with his gold trim and his occasional cockiness) Everyone seems to like him..

Voted for the Fed express. He just pips Maradona and Nicklaus for me. How Ali can compare I don't know.

Not referring to you Oakey. You were on the Tennis board last Wimbledon, you must know what I mean. I'm still mentally scarred by the experience and trying to debate with all the Federer/Man U fans on there!