v2 G.O.A.T The Semi Finals Match 2

The second of todays semi finals pits Roger Federer vs Pele

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

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

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

Pele- Football- Championed by paperbag_puncher

"Only when I sat down to write this article did the sheer scale of what I was attempting to do hit me. This article should really write itself, yet there are no words that can accurately describe the greatness of 'The King of Football' There are few human beings throughout history in any walk of life who have reached the iconic status of Pele.
“My name is Ronald Reagan, I’m the President of the United States of America. But you don’t need to introduce yourself, because everyone knows who Pele is.”
Ronald Reagan

Like most young boys I grew up hearing stories of this mythical man from Brazil who could create magic with his feet. I’d always been told of his greatness and happily accepted it but I was doing the man a great disservice by simply accepting it. Only as I got older and researched further did I realise how great he actually was. I am genuinely grateful that I have agreed to write this piece as it has given me the opportunity to revisit and explore the career of arguably the greatest sports person to have graced this earth.

There is no doubt in my mind that Pele was the most complete player of those who are generally mentioned in the greatest ever debates. Blessed with an unbelievable combination of pace, power, balance and close control he beat defenders at will making everything look effortless. Capable of the unpredictable and the sublime he was very much ahead of his time. Two footed and lethal in the air he was the ultimate goal scorer. The famous stat of 1281 goals in 1363 games is testament to this.

Pele said in 2006: ""For 20 years they have asked me the same question, who is the greatest? Pele or Maradona? I reply that all you have to do is look at the facts - how many goals did he score with his right foot or with his head?""

Pele made his debut for Santos at the tender age of 15 scoring on his debut in 1956. By the time the 1957 season came around he was a first team regular and finished as the league’s top scorer. Just 10 months later he was called up to the Brazilian national team scoring in a 2-1 defeat to Argentina making him the youngest ever international scorer at 16 years and 9 months. He would go on to become and still is Brazil’s top goal scorer with a remarkable 77 goals in 92 games.

1958 was Pele’s breakout year and he announced himself to the world in style. He won his first major title the Campeonato Paulista with Santos scoring a record 58 goals along the way (a record that still stands) He was selected for the 1958 World Cup at the insistence of of his team mates despite being injured, which shows the regard the 17 year old was already held in. He played a pivotal role scoring the winner against Wales in the quarters, a hat-trick against France and another brace Vs Sweden in the final on his way to becoming the youngest ever World Cup Winner.

Brazil repeated the trick in 1962 but did it without Pele who injured himself in the second game having looked ominously bright in the opening game. The 1966 was even worse for him. Pele was ruthlessly and cynically targeted by opposing defences meaning he missed the loss to Hungary and was never at his best for the two games he did play. Without their talisman the defending champions were eliminated in the first round.
He got his redemption in 1970 inspiring perhaps the greatest team of all time to a third world cup success. Pele at the peak of his powers won the player of the tournament and provided us with two of his most iconic moments. Had his lob from the half way line against the Czechs or his audacious dummy to round the Uruguayan goalie resulted in goals they surely would have been 2 of the greatest in World Cup history.

At one stage it was universally accepted that Pele was the greatest footballer of all time. In recent years it has almost become fashionable to dismiss his claim and achievements in favour of two little Argies. There are two sticks that are usually used to beat him which are contradictory for me. True he never tested himself in Europe. Having been named a ‘national treasure’ by the Brazilian Government and not being allowed to be ‘exported’ he spent his best years in his native land. However, we do have some clues as to how he would have fared had he moved to a big European club. His goals record and performances at international level leave me unequivocally convinced that he would have burned it up in any league. Also Santos (mainly to be able to afford his wages) regularly toured and faced the biggest clubs in Europe where Pele showed he was still on another level. The other criticism is that he was part of the greatest international team ever and had world class team mates around him which somehow should dilute his success. Many of these same team mates also predominantly played in Brazil yet this isn’t held against the likes of Garrincha, Rivelino, Tostao or Jairzinho who regularly had to play second fiddle to Pele and his Santos team. Nor is it held against one Lionel Messi who is a part of the greatest team I have ever seen. Like Messi now, Pele was the undoubted jewel in a beautiful crown.

For me, to be worthy of being called the greatest sports person of all time you need to tick several boxes. You must be supremely talented and have a strong argument to be the GOAT in your own sport. In my opinion you also have to have transcended your own sport and have made a widespread universal and lasting impact. With all due respect to the big hitters who have been voted through so far, most people have no idea who Bradman, Merckx etc are. While this may not be a popularity contest Pele’s notoriety and worldwide acclaim stemmed solely from his prodigious talent and countless achievements. He wasn’t a character, he wasn’t a loveable rogue. He did all his talking with his feet and his reputation is a product of his talent alone.

I have used a lot of words despite originally stating words could not do the great man justice. Still for me Pele is a treat best enjoyed visually. Watching him nutmeg two defenders and rounding the keeper or seeing him effortlessly flicking the ball over a defender’s head and volleying home is still jaw dropping even today. I will leave you with some quotes from his peers and contemporaries who say it a lot better than I ever could.

""I told myself before the game, 'he's made of skin and bones just like everyone else'. But I was wrong.”
Tarcisio Burgnich, the Italy defender who marked Pele in the Mexico 1970 Final

“The difficulty, the extraordinary, is not to score 1,000 goals like Pele – it’s to score one goal like Pele.”
Carlos Drummond de Andrade, Brazilian poet

“The greatest player in history was Di Stefano. I refuse to classify Pele as a player. He was above that.”
Ferenc Puskas

“After the fifth goal, even I wanted to cheer for him.”
Sigge Parling of Sweden on a 5-2 defeat by Brazil in the 1958 FIFA World Cup Final

“I arrived hoping to stop a great man, but I went away convinced I had been undone by someone who was not born on the same planet as the rest of us.”
Costa Pereira on Benfica’s 5-2 loss to Santos in the 1962 Intercontinental Cup in Lisbon

""Pele was the greatest – he was simply flawless. And off the pitch he is always smiling and upbeat. You never see him bad-tempered. He loves being Pele.”
Tostao
“When I saw Pele play, it made me feel I should hang up my boots.”
Just Fontaine

“Pele was one of the few who contradicted my theory: instead of 15 minutes of fame, he will have 15 centuries.”
Andy Warhol

“Pele was the only footballer who surpassed the boundaries of logic.”
Johan Cruyff

“His great secret was improvisation. Those things he did were in one moment. He had an extraordinary perception of the game.”
Carlos Alberto Torres

“I sometimes feel as though football was invented for this magical player.”
Sir Bobby Charlton

""Pele played football for 22 years, and in that time he did more to promote world friendship and fraternity than any other ambassador anywhere.”
J.B. Pinheiro, the Brazilian ambassador to the United Nations

Malcolm Allison: “How do you spell Pele?”
Pat Crerand: “Easy: G-O-D.”
British television commentators during Mexico 1970

Pelé is the greatest player of all time. He reigned supreme for 20 years. All the others – Diego Maradona, Johan Cruyff, Michel Platini – rank beneath him. There's no one to compare with Pelé.
—West Germany's 1974 FIFA World Cup-winning captain Franz Beckenbauer

The best player ever? Pelé. Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo are both great players with specific qualities, but Pelé was better.
—Real Madrid legend Alfredo Di Stéfano
"

This will certainly be a close one.

Indeed, neither person is the GOAT of their sport in my opinion, so I will be abstaining. I really don't want either to go through.

The two guys I voted through from their respective QFs.

I do though have some reservations about Federer - clearly the tennis GOAT (at least when looking objectively at the Open Era records), but for much of his career prime his closest rival (Nadal) has been able to beat him with quite surprising consistency. I've slightly less of an issue with the clay court H2H, as I think almost every sane tennis fan thinks Rafa is in the top 2 clay court players ever (probably now surpassing Borg as THE best) and that Fed was the 2nd best clay court player of the noughties. The bigger concern for me is quite how dominant Nadal has been in the Grand Slam meetings - iirc, it is something like 8-2 in Rafa's favour, with Federer's only wins coming at Wimbledon. Of course the counter argument is that Federer was ranked #1 and Nadal #2 consistently for something like 3 and a half years, and that Fed has won more Grand Slam titles than Nadal since Nadal's first slam in 2005, suggesting that Federer has the greater consistency across all surfaces.

Pele - to be honest, I don't see an obvious weakness in his GOAT credentials. Was the dominant factor in two World Cup winning sides essentially book-ending his top level career and is widely considered the best (or equal best) player in the most global sport around. Some have questioned whether his club record amounts to anything, but they are attempting to judge against modern criteria that only really apply over the last 30 years where all the best players transfer to the European super-teams early in their career. During the 60s, Santos was a super-team, and their occasional trips to Europe showed just how good they were. Also, Pele is probably the most iconic footballer the world has ever seen.

Of this pair, Pele for me has the better GOAT credentials

Went for Federer. Both have exceptional records but Federer played with grace and for a non tennis fan like myself, made me watch it.

Pele for me. Both are legends and icons, but Pele slightly more so. The name Pele is just ingrained in me somehow as being synonymous with true greatness. I can't place Federer above that.

Federer has never scored an OHK from the half way line in a WW2 movie.

I can't believe that Federer is still in it!! After all the question marks over Bradman and the era he played in, then the same has to be leveled at Federer with knobs on!! Superb player though he is, he's no Pele. Maybe in thirty years time we will talk about him in the same way, but I can't see it.

Stella wrote:Went for Federer. Both have exceptional records but Federer played with grace and for a non tennis fan like myself, made me watch it.

Seconded. (Voted Federer).

FED

Great match up this, wont be disappointed to see either progress. My vote though goes to Pele.

Pele was my original firm call at the outset.

Pele remains so.

I have had a significant boost in respect and admiration for Federer throughout the process and had crookies crumbled elsewhere I now think this probably should have been the final. It isn't and while the initial gap between them has been eroded (significantly) in my mind, Pele is still my GOAT.

Big fan of federer, love the way he plays the game, i'm not convinced, though, he'd have got quite as far as this without this site having such a strong contingent from the tennis board.

Personally, i've never seen quite what all ths fuss was about pele, i.e. the available footage doesnt seem to show him in the light he was portrayed in by both peers and commentators alike. He's considered the greatest ever in the world's most popular sport though, and one of the two most famous sportsmen ever. Fame in itself shouldnt count, but he didnt get it by accident. Too much for Fed in my view.

Fed for me. Dismantled most records in Tennis. Plus, and most importantly for me (if entirely subjective), done it in a way that makes you actually want to watch the game. Which unfortunately cannot be said about the game that most of the top players have these days. I genuinely don't see another player with a game similiar to Fed making their way into the upper echolons of Tennis nevermind dominating in a way that he has.

Wot Johnnyjeep says....

Federer gets my vote - his many achievements have been listed previously but he brought me back to watching tennis after McEnroe departed, he's feted around the world and rightly so for his presence, warm personality off court and above all, SUBLIME SKILLS...and Pele likes him!!!

Okay so I've voted tactically and gone for Federer. No way can he beat either Bradman or Ali, whereas Pele's name alone might sneak him the win.

Somebody called best of five, comes in with his first ever post to vote for federer. I can smell something... I think it's rat!

You don't sign up for a new forum and post in a GOAT thread, you sign up here for a particular sport and post there first. Very dodge.

Hi Hans

Azzy Mahmood wrote:Okay so I've voted tactically and gone for Federer. No way can he beat either Bradman or Ali, whereas Pele's name alone might sneak him the win.

I have fed as fav..

I would only give you even money on him!

You see, now there's a book open on it, corruption is inevitable. Best scrap the whole thing and start again... Give Gavin Hastings a fair crack of the whip

1000/1 on Gav

1000:1 .... Sounds like a challenge to the pasta muppets

Pasta muppets

Has to be Pele.
Probably the greatest and best known player in the history of the most popular sport on the planet.

Messi = Pele *5

Hoggy, hate to burst your bubble, but ping-pong is the most popular sport on the planet, played by over 440m people. Football doesn't even come close in participation terms.

440 million doesnt seem that high to me. Im pretty sure more than that number would play football, 3.5 billion apparently play or watch. Most people who go to footie play a bit of 5 a side or have played.

Federer, no doubt out of the four left he is the best sportsman of all time in my opinion.

I'd say that only a small proportion of those who go to footy actually play as well.

At Albion, c.25% are over 60 and likely wouldn't play. 10% are women, ditto for them, then you have people like my step dad who make up the vast proportion of supporters who are also too old to play.

I reckon only 10-15% of Albion fans are even eligible to play, through age or interest, so if you take that as an average over the 3.5bn (if that's true), that's less-to-the-same as ping-pong.

Now THIS is a topic worth discussing

Federers record is amazing, but if he where to win Id kind of feel...really, Federer the greatest sportsman ever ?
I guess the big problem is he's just not been dominant against Nadal or Djoko or even Murray. I know he is older but is he any worse now. Probably but its open to debate.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:I'd say that only a small proportion of those who go to footy actually play as well.

At Albion, c.25% are over 60 and likely wouldn't play. 10% are women, ditto for them, then you have people like my step dad who make up the vast proportion of supporters who are also too old to play.

I reckon only 10-15% of Albion fans are even eligible to play, through age or interest, so if you take that as an average over the 3.5bn (if that's true), that's less-to-the-same as ping-pong.

Now THIS is a topic worth discussing

Id imagine it comes down to how often you have to participate to count as a player. Doing a bit of Googling a recent FIFA report says about 267million are actively involved in playing the game, which I guess doenst account for just casual kick about people who play after work with mates.
From what I see the number for table tennis is 300 million but would seem to be an estimate based on including casual fun particpants...or at least thats how I read it.
Anyway a lot for both, I know in the UK you keep seeing these temporary table tennis tables all over the place, we have them in the squares in central London and in my home town of Brighton..though by the sea its a bit windy ! Think there is a big push right now to popularise the game in the UK.

the big elephant in the room with Federer of course is Nadal, or specifically, Nadal on clay. Now of course you can argue that struggling against the world's greatest ever clay-courter shouldn't be held against him too harshly, but now we're down to the last few it is something that needs to be discussed and taken into account. Ultimately, clay-court tennis counts for something like a third of the tennis season (the main swing that is, not the "smaller" tournaments played on clay all year round), so the question is: can we ignore a potential GOAT's relative struggles over (roughly) one third of his career, even if it is only against one man?

For a cricket analogy, if say one particular bowler had had great success against Bradman, even in particular conditions, could we safely ignore that? Surely Federer never finding a way of dealing with Nadal on clay has to count against him?

Of course, as the Fed fans will undoubtedly tell you, there are very good reasons for why Nadal (nearly) always beats Federer on clay, mostly due to it being the worst possible match-up for Federer, but it still needs to be discussed IMO.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

Of course, as the Fed fans will undoubtedly tell you, there are very good reasons for why Nadal (nearly) always beats Federer on clay, mostly due to it being the worst possible match-up for Federer, but it still needs to be discussed IMO.

Isnt it just a bit like saying that Federer is the worst possible match up for everyone that he beats on grass and hardcourt ? Its a bit irrelevant when push comes to shove, Nadals a much better clay court player than Federer. Evene if you were to include Federer in an all time top 5 clay court list (generously) he is so far off the top two in Nadal and Borg that its like comparing say Sampras to Hewitt on grass.

Taking Nadal out of the equation on clay Federer would have won 20 plus slams.....Federer is a class act on clay, it is just that he came up against the most invincible player ever to play on clay, you will find it difficult to name players who have beaten Nadal on clay on more than one occasion....I can only think of one other ie Djokovic....

From 04-07 Federer was pretty much unbeatable.....His level of dominance in that period can only be compared to a Woods or a Navaratilova.

Take Frazier out of the equation and he would have had a better record. Bad match up. Take Watson out of the equation and he'd have won more majors.
I just dont really think you can do that personally, Federers career is his career.
Its brilliant but its flawed, including 2004-2006.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:Hoggy, hate to burst your bubble, but ping-pong is the most popular sport on the planet, played by over 440m people. Football doesn't even come close in participation terms.

Whether that's true or not (and I think more people have probably tried their hand at football than table tennis), I'm not talking simply in terms of participation, but in terms of most watched, best supported, most widely spread in global terms (how many of those 440 million ping pong players live in China?).

How many sporting stars in the world have no weakness at all....and Federer vs Nadal on clay is just a minor one for Federer to say his career is flawed for having a bad record on clay against Nadal is wrong in my opinion.

I'm not sure , Is say that not overcoming Nadal meant he failed the biggest single test in his career, IMO anyway.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Whether that's true or not (and I think more people have probably tried their hand at football than table tennis), I'm not talking simply in terms of participation, but in terms of most watched, best supported, most widely spread in global terms (how many of those 440 million ping pong players live in China?).

Well then you could have said that, as I read it the other way

Regardless of where the ping-pong players originate, it's apparently the most-played sport in the world, ahead of football. The fact that 3.5bn watch/play owes far more to the TV deals than it does to the people playing the game. Considering that there are 6bn people on the planet, I don't believe that more than half of them watch or play football. That's absurd. I wish there was some way to quantify that!

it's not minor really though is it? the problem rather than Nadal being a weakness is just how big of a weakness it is (0-5 on clay in slams, 2-8 overall in slams). Every sportsman has weaknesses, Bradman for instance comparatively struggled against bodyline, but still averaged 56 in that series, which is about as good as anyone else has averaged over a career.

While flawed may be a little OTT, it's just too easy to dismiss it out of hand...

I understand where you are coming from and people who doubt Federer will always mention his poor record against Nadal but I think it is one small aspect of his career he never managed. Still time for him to get his record against Nadal closer.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:it's not minor really though is it? the problem rather than Nadal being a weakness is just how big of a weakness it is (0-5 on clay in slams, 2-8 overall in slams). Every sportsman has weaknesses, Bradman for instance comparatively struggled against bodyline, but still averaged 56 in that series, which is about as good as anyone else has averaged over a career.

While flawed may be a little OTT, it's just too easy to dismiss it out of hand...

But how good would Bradman have been in another era though!?

mystiroakey wrote:Pasta muppets

. Spaghetti and the friends on his head

sirbenson wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:it's not minor really though is it? the problem rather than Nadal being a weakness is just how big of a weakness it is (0-5 on clay in slams, 2-8 overall in slams). Every sportsman has weaknesses, Bradman for instance comparatively struggled against bodyline, but still averaged 56 in that series, which is about as good as anyone else has averaged over a career.

While flawed may be a little OTT, it's just too easy to dismiss it out of hand...

But how good would Bradman have been in another era though!?

that's as impossible to answer as the question: how good would Federer have been in another era? I suspect going by pure statistics that Bradman would have been similarly head and shoulders above his opponents in any era, but that's pure guesswork. Then, as to whether he'd have averaged 70-80 or 120 is just impossible to tell. Sport has moved on: Bradman hat to bat on uncovered pitches, with far less protective equipment and using far less good bats which made run scoring harder. On the plus side though he faced less quick bowlers, less diverse opposition and conditions, fielding was taken less seriously, and no video analysis (though that last one works both ways).

What would Federer's record have been like had he played in say Borg's day? Would he have cleaned up? or would Borg have stopped him winning Wimbledon consistently? impossible to tell for sure, but once again I suspect Federer would have been the best player of all time in any era.

sirbenson wrote:I understand where you are coming from and people who doubt Federer will always mention his poor record against Nadal but I think it is one small aspect of his career he never managed. Still time for him to get his record against Nadal closer.

doubt it. He hasn't beaten Nadal in a slam since Wimby 2007. I just disagree with the "small aspect of his career" bit. He lost to the guy in FIVE RG matches and 8 slam matches overall, that's half his total of slams.

I know it is kind of stupid to compare era's like I did.

Outside of clay though it is a 50/50 match....and you would have to think if they play on a surface outside of clay...Fed would be favourite due to Rafa's lack of confidence with his knee injury.