| Author | Message | ||
     Factoid Pilla Bewarse Username: Factoid Post Number: 801 Registered: 04-2006 Rating: N/A |
Yeah numbers might speak and it all depends on how media or some tennis commentators, so called experts project. But the truth is, it's impossible to pin point one player as a GOAT. Rao garu even in the video you shared, that person there he just picked the parameters he liked and that are commonly discussed among the crowds. If it's done by me, I would have included few more factors like the court speeds, the way the surfaces have changed over the years, the racquet technologies, the number of years consistently reaching the quarters, semis, finals, no of years staying not just in top 5,but 10,100 , generation differences etc and would have ended up concluding Fed as the GOAT. It all depends on how you use the stats. You can't use these to compare the generations imo Where do you rank Laver who's won the calendar slam not just once but twice -and a player like Borg whose won a number of slams when he was just 26 and retired? It's all what you want to say and what you want to believe. To me it's still incredible to see Fed competing still at 40 and reaching quarters of a slam playing against what 20 or more younger players, by hardly playing less than 10 matches in a year. He is once in a generation athlete where you can relate all the prime qualities - talent, consistency, dominance, class etc. It's just that his personal qualities of being humble, playing fair and being respectful to the opponents which was hardly seen in the previous generations, added to his resume. All these reasons added up and that's why he's regarded the greatest player the game has ever seen even by his peers. |