Thank you for the explicit reply, WB, although we'll agree to disagree about certain things (Courier was at least as good as Roddick on fast courts, with at least finals of every Slam, Rusedski's time in the sun came in the twighlight of Pete's career, Rafter was just as much of a factor at OZ as Nalbandian with a 5 sets loss in the SF to Agassi - arguably the best ever on Rebound Ace - and made SF of every Slam, and also my guess is that Ancic right now is as good as he'll ever be, no surprises from him ahead of us).
Anyway, I might not be qualified to pass an objective judgment since I hate to admit today's game is basically a baseline-double-hander-game, with no exceptional Serve-Volleyers with distinguished skills like Edberg, Becker and Rafter (granted, the ATP brought it upon us fans with its atrocious Slowing-Down policy).
well consider the fact that roddick isnt done yet...he has three gs finals lost. courier disappeared off the map after he had some initial success, so unless the same thing happens to roddick, i would bet that roddick will end up being more successful on fast courts. he is younger than federer after all, not by much i know.
its easy to compare rafter's finished career with david's still current one. Rafter has two usopen finals more than david. i give david another 3 years to match that. now remember that we cant count gs wins, because that falls into the argument of whether fed's competition is weaker or he is stronger...this is precisely what we are trying to analyze. david also has an two rg semis? So if david reaches another final only to be beaten by federer, he will become equal.
i agree that i dont see ancic troubling federer, but this is a testament to federer. ancic is almost a carbon copy of krajicek.
ancic has better grounstrokes, slightly worse volleys and a comparable serve. In this day and age with courts slowing down, he is the analogue of krajicek.
now in my previous post, i compared players who had similar results and some element of similar game style with the chronology of both eras as well, which is why i didnt compare ancic to krajicek. i believe the age difference is more between ancic and federer than it is between krajicek and pete.These players have similar game style, but i found the analogies on the whole to be better if i compared safin to krajicek and goran.
rusedski and rafter were succesful during similar times (usopen final)...if we say that rusedski emerged in the twilight of pete's career...we must say the same about rafter. rusedski did play pete indoors in paris...ivan has already gone further by getting to madrid and paris. so ivan came in the peak of federer, then this should not be used against him because he still has been able to achieve similar results. goran is not comparable because his haven was grass.
another comment is that much of agassi's success on rebound ace came during pete's decline. Nadal on the other hand is giving it to federer in his prime years. agassi played who? shuettler, kafelnikov. yes he beat some great ones like pat, and pete. but he's also lost to some not so great ones. agassi is for sure by record the best on rebound ace(not sure?) but he has played his fair share of not so strong players. if the only points we disagree with are the ones in your post, then i think we agree on more things than not.
throw in the fact that during andre's peak on rebound ace, he fell to both federer and safin, and we have some interesting context for the generations.