Reem With A View

"Names and attributes must be accommodated to the essence of things, and not the essence to the names, since things come first and names afterwards." – Galileo

Pete Sampras confirms Roger Federer is “the greatest player” ever in history.

For a long time, Pete Sampras believed Rod Laver to be the best tennis player in history. Laver was the last man to win all four Grand Slam titles in a single season, a feat he accomplished in both 1962 and 1967 (Open Era). Laver, however (and compatriot Ken Rosewall) was barred from competing in those tournaments from the time he turned professional in 1963 to the start of the Open era in 1968.

But Sampras now believes that Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player of all time to have ever played the game.

Roger Federer Wins French Open 2009

Roger Federer Wins French Open 2009

“Now that he’s won in Paris, I think it just more solidifies his place in history as the greatest player that played the game, in my opinion.”

“I’m a huge Laver fan, and he had a few years in there where he didn’t have an opportunity to win majors. But you can’t compare the eras, and in this era, the competition is much more fierce than Rod’s.”

“What he’s done over the past five years has never, ever been done — and probably will never, ever happen again. Regardless if he won there or not, he goes down as the greatest ever. This just confirms it.”

– Pete Sampras.

Source: CBS Sports,  7 June 2009

Advertisements

Filed under: Sport, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Will Nadal burn out at age 26 like Bjorn Borg?

I found interesting similarities in the Grand Slam runs between Sampras and Federer as well as Borg and Nadal in terms of their Age vs Slams won!

(Note that have taken 31 yrs as maximum age considering Sampras retired at that age for apples to apples comparison for the 14 slam win rate).

Some important pointers:

1. Pete Sampras had only 3 wins in his last 16 slams.

2. Roger Federer needs only ONE win in his next 15 slams to equal Sampras and just 2 to break the world record.

3.  Nadal has more than 35 slams to beat Sampras, and is close to beating Borg’s slam total by age 23

4. Borg had the highest rate of slams by age 23 and played only 3 slams a year. He never played a lot of Aussie opens (except early on in 1974 types ) as he kept losing US Opens . Borg didn’t feel Aussie Open was important unless he won the US Open.

Nadal seems to be slightly behind Borg’s run rate. And Federer’s win rate is next to Borg despite playing way longer schedules. Unbelievable.

Nadal too may burn out like Borg especially because his game is more Physical than Federer’s and the body takes punishment on hard courts. Nadal also won’t be able to maintain the speed and power beyond age 25-26…as the tennis schedules are too long now days. Federer’s game like Sampras suits long term play.

Grand Slam wins

Grand Slam wins

But I feel even if Nadal wins 15 slams and Federer wins the French, they can still be called greatest only of the MODERN era as people forget Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall were banned for more than 44 Slams due to them turning PRO… Rosewall lost peak 11 years of his life. It was Laver and Rosewall’s efforts which led to the Open era in the first place and modern players from Borg to Nadal and Federer have to be thankful for them. Between them, Laver and Rosewall would have won 20+ slams if allowed to play as there was no one close to them. And it isn’t their problem that Hardcourts weren’t provided for Slams, as either would have won for SURE if there was that surface provided.  It is for this reason, that historians will ALWAYS place Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall as the Greatest Tennis Players of ALL TIME.  To beat them, the minimum no. of slam which Federer or Nadal must win are 20, else there is no comparison for the unfair way in which Laver/Rosewall were prevented for 44 Slams simply because they turned Pro.

For a detailed perspective, please also read the following article:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/119898-the-hall-of-goats

Filed under: Sport, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Never mind the French Open…

ROGER FEDERER is most definitely the GREATEST tennis player in the history of the game.

He lost one match…big deal. 3 French Open Finals in a row and 4 French Open Semi-Finals in a row is enough testament to his Clay Court ability. Nadal is the greatest Clay Court Specialist… so its only fitting that Rafa won the French 4 in a row. Think about this: it takes a NADAL to beat Federer on clay..Federer is that good (regardless of the 3 set drubbing).

But FEDERER has won the AUSTRALIAN, WIMBLEDON and U.S.OPEN title in the SAME calender year..THREE TIMES!!! Not Laver, Not Borg, not Sampras, not McEnroe, Not Becker, Not Edberg, Not Emerson, Not Lendl, Not Wilander Nor Agassi…no one has ever come close to this feat. One is good, Two is superb, but Three is just GREAT.

NOW add the 3 French Open Finals in a row to the 4 US Open titles in a row and 5 Wimblesons in a row, and you can understand why Roger Federer is simply, the Greatest tennis player in the history of the game.

 

 

Filed under: Heroes, Sport, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ReemTweet

Archives

%d bloggers like this: