Tennis - G.O.A.T - Federer vs Laver (1 Viewer)

[Sanical]

I don't think the amount of titles should determine whether you are G.O.A.T or not because of one thing:
- The competition you faced to get those titles.

If you were in a weak era with barely any competition then the feat of many grand slams will be much easier.
If you were in a strong era with tight competition then the feat of many grand slams will be considered as a great achievement.

When you look at Laver's era, many tennis players were in for recreation rather than competition. The competition wasn't as fierce as it was today.

Yes, that's a good point to add. No doubt Federer's achievement is great for being able to fend off Murray, Djokovic and Nadal and still being able to win grand slams.

Although Laver has won 5 less grand slams than Federer, Laver has achieved a LOT more considering that he was unable to attend grand slams for 5 years (due to the transition to the open era) meaning there's 20 grand slams he's missed. And these aren't any random 5 years. These are 5 years while he was in his twenties - his prime age to play AND while he was on his winning streak. He was around 31 years old when he managed to win 4 grand slam consecutive wins and this was after the five year break - something no else else can ever achieve at this age (even Federer is currently 30). So although his grand slam count is less, you must factor in that he missed 20 grand slams due to the movement to open era. As for opponents, its hard to determine because of that time gap but there's Ken Rosewall (who also achieved a lot considering he had to miss 45 grand slams) and Roy Emerson.

Also, I just had a look at what Laver was playing during his 5 year Grand slam absence and the substitute seemed to be the "Pro Slam Tournament". Out of the 16 matches he played, he was the winner in 9 of those matches and runner up in 6 of them . Pretty outstanding.

It's hard to say, Federer has done very well considering his opponents. Laver has done very well considering he had to miss 5 years of tennis while at his prime. I still say Laver has achieved more .

 

[RivalryofTroll]

It's hard to say, Federer has done very well considering his opponents. Laver has done very well considering he had to miss 5 years of tennis while at his prime. I still say Laver has achieved more .

Laver would have been the GOAT for sure if he played more, I definitely agree with that.
Federer would have been the GOAT (no arguments) if he won the French Open more often and didn't have a losing H2H record to Nadal.
Sampras could have been the GOAT if he didn't ignore the importance of the French Open.
Though, I think when Fed was in his prime/peak, he was playing in a weaker time compared to these more recent years.

Though, what I hate about the Djokovic-Federer-Nadal era is that it is oftenly way too predictable. The moment Djokovic and Murray stepped in, dark horses like Berdych, Tsonga and Del-Potro find it even harder to win anything. You will most likely always have to face 2 or 3 of the big 4 - Djoko, Fed, Nad and Murray if you ever wanted to a win a slam nowadays.
You will most likely meet one of them in the Quarter finals (you have to pull off the first upset) then meet another in the semis and face another in the finals.
Upsetting 3 of the big 4 in a row has a very slim chance of happening.

Del-potro was the only man ever to upset both Nadal and Federer in the same slam tournament. US Open 2009.
I don't think that type of run in a slam will happen again anytime soon.

I think Federer still has a few things to prove before he can actually become an even better G.O.A.T but he is past his prime so all he can do is keep hoping to win as many titles as he possibly can.
Nadal will never be the G.O.A.T if he keeps breaking down against Djokovic.
Djokovic is G.O.A.T material but he needs to dominate the FO and de-throne Nadal.
Murray will never be the G.O.A.T unless he somehow pulls off multi-slam wins per year (the first challenge is winning at least 1 slam). Murray also needs to stop the DJokovic dominance.

I'm really excited for the FO results this year and to see whether Nadal can still remain as the FO champion or will Djokovic or Murray dethrone him.
As for Fed, I hope he can win one more slam before his retirement.

 

[JINOUGA]

Imo federer achieved more than laver, but laver actualy had the potential to achieve more and is robbed with those 5 years

 

[Demento1]

Laver would have been the GOAT for sure if he played more, I definitely agree with that.
Federer would have been the GOAT (no arguments) if he won the French Open more often and didn't have a losing H2H record to Nadal.
Sampras could have been the GOAT if he didn't ignore the importance of the French Open.
Though, I think when Fed was in his prime/peak, he was playing in a weaker time compared to these more recent years.

Though, what I hate about the Djokovic-Federer-Nadal era is that it is oftenly way too predictable. The moment Djokovic and Murray stepped in, dark horses like Berdych, Tsonga and Del-Potro find it even harder to win anything. You will most likely always have to face 2 or 3 of the big 4 - Djoko, Fed, Nad and Murray if you ever wanted to a win a slam nowadays.
You will most likely meet one of them in the Quarter finals (you have to pull off the first upset) then meet another in the semis and face another in the finals.
Upsetting 3 of the big 4 in a row has a very slim chance of happening.

Del-potro was the only man ever to upset both Nadal and Federer in the same slam tournament. US Open 2009.
I don't think that type of run in a slam will happen again anytime soon.

I think Federer still has a few things to prove before he can actually become an even better G.O.A.T but he is past his prime so all he can do is keep hoping to win as many titles as he possibly can.
Nadal will never be the G.O.A.T if he keeps breaking down against Djokovic.
Djokovic is G.O.A.T material but he needs to dominate the FO and de-throne Nadal.
Murray will never be the G.O.A.T unless he somehow pulls off multi-slam wins per year (the first challenge is winning at least 1 slam). Murray also needs to stop the DJokovic dominance.

I'm really excited for the FO results this year and to see whether Nadal can still remain as the FO champion or will Djokovic or Murray dethrone him.
As for Fed, I hope he can win one more slam before his retirement.

+1 (see what I did there rivalry?)

 

[RivalryofTroll]

Imo federer achieved more than laver, but laver actualy had the potential to achieve more and is robbed with those 5 years

That is true. But laver achieved what Federer couldn't do due to a certain Nadal. The calender year 4 slam.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

+1 (see what I did there rivalry?)

hahahaha

I just realised that was one of my longest posts in awhile. Talkin' about tennis is so fun.

 

[JINOUGA]

That is true. But laver achieved what Federer couldn't do due to a certain Nadal. The calender year 4 slam.

Hahaha true, but to be fair, I doubt laver would have beaten nadal for the FO either

 

[Demento1]

hahahaha

I just realised that was one of my longest posts in awhile. Talkin' about tennis is so fun.

I respect the fact that you took the time and effort to type up a good worthy post ^^.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

I respect the fact that you took the time and effort to type up a good worthy post ^^.

Hahaha true, but to be fair, I doubt laver would have beaten nadal for the FO either

Someone needs to de-throne Nadal already. He's role as the greatest clay court specialist of all time is nearing its end.
Who's the man who can do it? DJOKERRRR!

 

[JINOUGA]

Soderling could be a decent clay court force

 

[Sanical]

I'm not really into speculating grand slams since there's so many good competitors out there that can cause an upset . If Nadal heals his knee injury he should win the FO.

Anyway in summary, my opinion for GOAT: Laver --> Borg --> Federer.

Anyone disagree with Borg's placement?

 

[RivalryofTroll]

I'm not really into speculating grand slams since there's so many good competitors out there that can cause an upset . If Nadal heals his knee injury he should win the FO.

Anyway in summary, my opinion for GOAT: Laver --> Borg --> Federer.

Anyone disagree with Borg's placement?

IMHO, Laver > Federer > Borg
But, it's probably because I'm a vivid Federer fan. (bias and all)

Even if Nadal heals his knee, the question is:
Can he overcome Djokovic's dominance and snap out of his present state?

Murray and Djokovic are potentially able to de-throne Nadal with their current form.

 

[Sanical]

Yeah I think Djokovic will take the slam if he went against Nadal considering he's beaten Nadal the last 2 times they've met on clay.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

Yeah I think Djokovic will take the slam if he went against Nadal considering he's beaten Nadal the last 2 times they've met on clay.

Basically, Nadal has nowhere left to hide from Djokovic. He never once had to fear the loss of his throne on clay (because Federer could never overcome Nadal at the FO) until Djokovic reached his PEAK last year and is now within his prime.

Nadal is probably hoping that Federer takes out Djokovic again in the semi finals but with the current rankings:
A most likely semi-finals line-up at the FO is:

1st vs 4th
2nd vs 3rd

Djokovic vs Murray SEMIS
Nadal vs Federer SEMIS

So Nadal has to do his usual job of crushing Federer on clay and finishing off the tournament with a win against Djokovic (whom he has lost to for 7 or so consecutive finals).

Murray MAY be able to upset Djokovic if Djokovic played like he did in Dubai. But then the question is:
Can Murray defeat the King of Clay on clay?

IIRC, Lendl won his first slam at the FO? So can Murray do so as well?
Sampras won US Open for one last time after having loss 8 slams in a row, so can Federer do so as well (Federer has not yet won a slam for 8 slams in a row atm)?

Personally, I'm cheering for Federer and Murray.
I'm sick of Nadal vs Djokovic finals.
I hope Isner upsets Djokovic at the FO and Del-Potro/Soderling upsets Nadal at the FO. But that is obviously, wishful thinking :/

 

[barbernator]

federer has also never won gold at the olympics, i know there are much bigger things to do in the sport, but that's something he may want as well.

 

[kaz1]

federer has also never won gold at the olympics, i know there are much bigger things to do in the sport, but that's something he may want as well.

he actually has technically

 

[RivalryofTroll]

he actually has technically

in doubles... Ha!

 

[Realista]

lol tennis. fun to watch but not for 5 hours straight. 1 hour max

 

[RivalryofTroll]

lol tennis. fun to watch but not for 5 hours straight. 1 hour max

Players like Djokovic and Nadal take wayy too long in between serves which causes matches to last long.

While, players like Federer and Murray are quite quicker in comparison.

 

[Sanical]

lol tennis. fun to watch but not for 5 hours straight. 1 hour max

I sorta agree. Time does fly but I REALLY hate the ads they always shove in between every game break. It does begin to get quite tedious. That's why there are people like Gael Monfils