What would Fed have to do to persuade them that he's the GOAT? It seems to me that they want to rig the argument against the guy:
Federer loses ---> Proof that he sucks
Federer wins easily ---> Proof of a weak era, he sucks
Federer wins after a struggle ---> Lucky, the Slam fell into his lap, he sucks
Let's look at his career.
- When he was barely out of nappies he beat Sampras at Wimbledon and bagelled Agassi.
- He then easily crushed his own era, destroying the careers of Roddick and Hewitt (the latter having dominated Sampras).
- Now he's breezing past guys much younger than him.
So we seem to be talking about THREE "weak eras" here, not just one.
Yes, he's had a few problems with Nadal. Well, quite a lot of problems actually.
But who's perfect? Not Nadal himself, who always loses to the same players who get dominated by Fed. And not dull ballbasher Sampras either.
So the question is: What does Federer have to do for you guys to stop hating on his achievements?