Originally Posted by Champion number 1
Of course Fed is possibly the best tennis player ever, but it would be like saying he is just another 2 gears up on Sampras if we say these things.
Im not sure if Federer is just this out of the world because he is just this superhuman tennis robot or if he just doesnt have the opponents that the likes of Sampras had.
Nadal defends, but he plays a smart game, heavy top spin to Federer's high backhand makes it difficult for Federer and Nadal is also good enough to grind out points unlike nearly every other player in this world... which brings me back to this point of whether or not there are enough challengers to Fed.
At the moment no. He's simply better than the rest, plus he's got a huge versatility in a time of uniformity in the game.
HE would have been more challenged in the past regarding the game purely (not the athleticism/professionnalism)
Here is what Blake says about him on si.com:
SI.com: Is it a weird time in men's tennis?
Blake: Yeah. Even when Pete Sampras dominated, he wasn't consistently winning three Slams a year like Roger. It's strange because people outside tennis don't always get it. They say, "You're No. 6? Only a few spots and you'll be No. 1." I don't think you understand the guy ahead of me. What he's doing is just incredible. It's like the years of frustration for the other teams when Michael Jordan was in the NBA.
SI.com: What do you do?
Blake: When someone's dominating, it can change on one match. Look at Björn Borg and John McEnroe, who were so dominant and faltered so quickly -- not that Roger will have the same kind of vices. But you never know. Rafael Nadal had his number for a little while. Maybe Federer loses some confidence and comes back to the pack. But it's nothing where the rest of us can make a few adjustments and we're right there. This is tough to say as a competitor but, honestly, he's head and shoulders above the field right now.