2006-12-05 13:11:19 · 11 answers · asked by saffa20 1 in Sports ➔ Tennis
probably....no other player has been so dominant..not even sampras
2006-12-05 14:00:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
IT is probable that they may call him the best ever his prowess on the court is outstanding. He currently has 9 Grand Slam titles whereas Pete Sampras has 14 Grand Slams. As of right now he can most likely beat any player yes including Sampras. This is because he like tennis has matured as tennis has matured. And it is relatively difficult for anyone to compare but as of right now he is the best and he will most likely be the best for a long time. Mind you not too long Sampras retired 3 years ago and 3 years ago they were calling him the Greatest Ever. So we will just have to see who suceeds Federer.
2006-12-05 14:20:47 · answer #2 · answered by xhbvi3tboix 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes !!!
Never easy to compare great players across the generations but with the passing years have come advances in athleticism, equipment and technique. Guys like Borg, Roche and Laver were fantastic players but things have moved on and Federer is living proof of just how far. It's just the way with sports that standards tend to advance with the years.
2006-12-05 13:31:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He may be, and it's looking like he will be, but he still has to fill out his career first. I think he's at 12 majors now, and Sampras had 18 I think... my numbers may be fuzzy, but I think that's right... anyway, McEnroe believes he is, and I respect that opinion, given how gifted he was. At minimum, Federer is the most dominant player of this decade (which is indisputable), and one of the best players ever (indisputable), but the best, for that we will have to wait and see how long he continues.
2006-12-05 13:26:01 · answer #4 · answered by Dave 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. If using time travel technology he were to play any other player in history at their peak, he would probably beat them.
simply because tennis like any other field of human endeavor (most of them anyway) is constantly developing and advancing forwards. Hence, the players of today are fitter, have a greater range of shots and skills, are more tactically sophisticated, and have better equipment than the players of the past.
Of course you can only beat who is put out in front of you, and so because you can't remove players from the context of their time, the Fred Perry's, the Billy Jean Kings, the Boris Beckers etc. still take their place in the Pantheon of Greatness.
2006-12-05 13:27:12 · answer #5 · answered by richy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
At this point, he is at least top 5. John McEnroe called him "the best ball-striker I have ever seen". His easy forehand is a killer. As he still has many years left in his career and no serious competition all-around, he has a very good chance at becoming The Best Ever in the coming years.
Sadly, America's best, Andy Roddick, hasn't solved the King Roger puzzle. I don't think he'll do it soon.
2006-12-05 13:27:24 · answer #6 · answered by RolloverResistance 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes he is , the debate has ended . If he gets injured tomorrow it would not matter. Yes we are in a countdown for him to catch Sampras's total of majors, but anyone who says he is not the best does not know the sport and is living in the past.
2006-12-05 16:28:11 · answer #7 · answered by messtograves 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes
2006-12-05 18:59:58 · answer #8 · answered by john 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
boris beckmen rules
2006-12-05 13:14:20 · answer #9 · answered by lullaby 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Im sorry but he's the biggest loser I ever laid my eyes on.
2006-12-05 13:14:23 · answer #10 · answered by Alan 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋