I don't disagree that he is one of the greatest in boxing, but his legend is also tied to his political and social activism, which can't really be quantified in sporting terms. Federer is the greatest Tennis player ever and certainly belongs in the conversation of the greatest sportsman ever. He could really cement his status if he can somehow catch Jimmy Connors' tournament record in the next couple of years.
Roger Federer
- Thread starter Gandalf Greyhame
- Start date
I don't disagree that he is one of the greatest in boxing, but his legend is also tied to his political and social activism, which can't really be quantified in sporting terms. Federer is the greatest Tennis player ever and certainly belongs in the conversation of the greatest sportsman ever. He could really cement his status if he can somehow catch Jimmy Connors' tournament record in the next couple of years.
I adore sports. I did a degree in sport. I've played and/or coached ice hockey, tennis, lacrosse, American football, soccer, rugby league and possibly more at a competitve (organised) level and tried my hand at countless others...
I've long put forward the argument that Federer is the greatest sportsman of all time.
There are lots of guys who get to "the top" Federer got to GOAT status and then went way beyond that. The drive it takes to be better than anyone ever was and then still go further is not human.
It so hard to put it into the perfect words but the guy is peerless. Phenominal.
Its also very hard to stay on top in Tennis once you hit 30. Most #1 players have historically been in the mid 20s. For Federer to do it at 36/37 is just unbelievable. The body just does't respond as it did in one's 20s and yet he is still making it look easy.
I forgot to mention as well that individual sports are absolutely brutal mentally. There's nowhere to hide - every loss is your own fault - you can't ever coast - you have to be on your game every single time you play.
What Federer has done is staggering.
[Fergie voice] "Lads....it's Dimitrov."
How do you define greatness? You seem to be confusing greatness as an individual with greatness at the sport itself.
Honestly, my top criteria is the first face you see when you mention the sport. If you me tion sport as a whole, you sure as hell won’t see Federer’s face first.
Who you see first is up to you and you alone. It would be an endless debate to argue over who's the greatest sportsman of all time but Federer is definitely in the running as much as anyone else imo. I don't really see how you can pretty much claim it as fact that he isn't.
That's a strange and murky way to approach an already strange and murky debate.
That's odd. Do you mean "mention sport" or "mention the sport" ( so, tennis or boxing for example).
That is an absolutely bonkers choice of top criteria
Connors vultured a lot of 250 type of events nowadays to claim that record. He was playing in a challenger level of draws and I wouldn't really put that achievement that high on the list in terms of greatness.
He's now at 97. 13 titles more is a tough ask. I doubt he'll be playing 250 level events in Bogota just to break that record. He has the chance to do so going after the big ones in the next 2-3 years time, but things in tennis change way too quickly. Not long ago Djokovic was looking set on to win back to back calendar slams in the next few years, yet he got lost in oblivion just in the course of half an year..
Agreed, and frankly I can’t see Federer staying on top beyond this year, after which he will be in his late 30s and face a rapid loss of top five form.
Probably depends on Mirka and the kids, as he said it couple of times. As long as the pro tour is not a burden on his family life he no doubt will be up there and enjoying it. He has gas left in the tank, not to dominate of course like he used to but always to be dangerous in all tournaments he enters, bar clay.
The pressure is truly off I reckon and his gazelle like movement will allow him to age a bit like Rosewall and stay relatively in form and injury free most of the time, along with his smart scheduling.
The rivals are also not up to par with Nadal, Djokovic, etc still the main players to beat in big tournaments. The young guns are just not delivering in terms of pushing those older guys off the throne, not to mention the lost generation (Nishikori, Raonic, Dimitrov, etc) who I thing didn't live to the expectations.
Once again, Mirka and the kids are the biggest factor in his late career - not only now but after 30. People don't talk about that usually, but the support he's getting from his family to concentrate solely on his pro career is immense..
Yep. It also depends on whether or not a younger player emerges to seize the ATP reigns in the next year or so. Fed has played well of late, but he's also benefited from a perfect storm of sorts where Djokovic is out, Nadal is back but not quite at his old peak form, and other than that, the rest of the top 10 are pretty weak at the moment. This feels a bit like 2002 when Sampras and Agassi both made a final late career push before tailing off just prior to Federer's emergence.
As a sportsman? I'm not that interested in his off the field 'greatness'.
Interesting.
It is more unanimous than Pele being the greatest footballer, and as unanimous as Jordan being the greatest basketball player.
In fact, there is more debate on whether Ali is the greatest heavyweight rather than SRR is the greatest boxer.
Genuinely didn't know that. Based on the little I've read here I understood that Ali's position at the top was debatable but not that SRR's was actually unanimous.
It is funny considering that we discussed the same thing a few years back and you were really surprised back then too. It is somewhere in the boxing thread IIRC.
Anyway, from a quick google search:
ESPN: Ray #1, Ali #2
The Sportser: Ray #2, Ali #1
Bleacherreport: Ray #1, Ali #4
Telegraph: Ray #1, Ali #6
Thoughtco: Ray #1, Ali #2
Sporteology: Ry #2, Ali #1
The Ring: Ray #1, Ali #3
BoxRec: Ray #2, Ali #6
I omitted the fan made lists. On credibility, I think that The Ring and ESPN are by far the most important ones. BoxRec if I am not mistaken is based on stats and have Floyd in top spot (he doesn't make top 10 in any other list).
I'll have Ray #1, Ali #2, for what it matters.
Last edited:
So it's not as unanimous as Jordan then....
Clearly the Federer thread is the right place to discuss Pound-for-Pound-Rankings and Jordan's claim to basketball-goatness.
I knew he had one more slam in him and had a feeling it might be 2017 but didn't expect him to get so good and get back to number one with multiple Grand Slams
At this rate he may have another one or two left in the tank. No one will ever catch up with him if he does that.
At how he's going and the others are dropping, he probably has one or two more grand slams titles this year alone.
Wimbledon is a good chance. The US Open will be a bit harder since he will be exhausted by then. Unless of course he completely paces himself to only play slams.
I think that's pretty much what him and his fitness team are doing. Only playing tournaments for their sponsors as well as key warmups for the slams.
Keeps him healthy and relatively sharp throughout the year for the slams.
He got injured a bit before last year’s US right? If Nadal isn’t up and running then Fed must be the favourite for Wimbledon at least.
Can't recall if he was carrying a minor injury or exhausted (or both). If he paces himself and listens to his body, he should be able to make it through the year and play in at least 3 slams.
Yeah, I think so too. Seem to remember him picking up a knock in one of the pre-US Open tournaments in America. Cincinnati or something.
Edit: checked it, he got injured in Montreal and pulled out of Cincinnati.
He threw his back out in Montreal a few weeks before, took him a while to recover.
Nadals a non factor at Wimbledon anyway. He's probably going to be a non factor the entire season this year. Almost every single one of his great seasons follows an injured slump the following year. 2009 he was out, same for 2012.
He's had pretty poor management throughout his career. There was no need for him to play beyond the US open, he'd secured world number 1 and he could've rested up and rehabbed for the AO. But he didn't and he'll probably carry it through the Grand Slam season now.
Yeah that's right. I believe that was the tournament that Shapovalov did well in.
Not sure I can see Federer winning in Flushing, for the same reasons others have said above, but also because I think it's entirely possible that one of Djokovic, Murray and Wawrinka may be a real factor by that point and it just adds massively to the task. It's not that he can't beat those guys, but that, at his age, beating two or three of them over a two week tournament might be a big ask at the end of the season.
In terms of the others, I don't see any great value in him playing the French, as I reckon it might kill his chances at Wimbledon, which he has a great shot at. Particularly if Djokovic and Murray are not fully recovered and match sharp by then.
In terms of the others, I don't see any great value in him playing the French, as I reckon it might kill his chances at Wimbledon, which he has a great shot at. Particularly if Djokovic and Murray are not fully recovered and match sharp by then.
I completely forgot that Andy Murray existed.
Federer’s biggest threat at Slams right now is his back. As long as he is fit, none of Nadal/Cilic/DelPo is favourite against him in a match up.
Of course, you can’t rule out him being Donskoy’ed, Haas’ed or Goffin’ed occasionally, and tough luck if it’s a Slam match. As good as he is now, the guy no longer has his machine-like consistency of 05-07.
Of course, you can’t rule out him being Donskoy’ed, Haas’ed or Goffin’ed occasionally, and tough luck if it’s a Slam match. As good as he is now, the guy no longer has his machine-like consistency of 05-07.
Wawrinka is shot mate. Don’t see him return on top of his game at this age and the state he’s currently in.
He might turn up occasionally for a masters or something but even there he wasn’t too much bothered throughout his career.
Dude just won the Laureus Comeback and World Sportsman of the Year award.
I personally would still put Jordan ahead of him - and that isn't to indicate any lack of appreciation for Federer's achievements or greatness.
As has been stated a few times, there aren't many athletes who are pretty much undisputed as the greatest ever within their sport. Even with Federer, some people will still say that Novak or Rafa at their peak might be better (I personally don't agree with this, but I have seen it stated a number of times). There have already been some posts regarding Ali versus Sugar Ray Robinson as to who was the greater boxer.
With Jordan, there is much less debate. He is pretty much unanimously considered to be the greatest basketball player ever. You can also consider his global reach and impact - and just because basketball is not as big in the UK should not blind us to his level of global awareness and recognition.
I think what you said about Fed and his drive to never stop improving and getting better is certainly also true of MJ. I actually wrote my dissertation on Jordan
and looked at his sociological impact within sports and beyond.