Sporting Debates

[HH]

With Roger Federer's win today at Wimbeldon it made him the most decorated player in men's tennis with 15 Grand Slam titles. The debate of him being the best mens player of all time was already in the air but do we all agree? The same could be said with the Venus and Serena with how they have just dominated and changed the womens game.

There are other debates out there, like will American Football ever reach out to a global audience? Is Ali still the best boxer in the history of the sport? Will anyone have an impact to their sport the way Michael Jordan did for basketball?

There are so many topics to talk about, so lets gets started.

[50!]

Surely Tiger Woods has to be in with a shout for making an impact to their sport. He made golf "cool" to a much younger generation of players when it was traditionally regarded as a posh old mans sport and dominated a sport which is very hard to consistently perform well at. You could say Jack Nicklaus is the best golfer of all time though and if you want someone that completely revolutionised a sport possibly Don Bradman would be a candidate.


I think its hard to comment on the "all time" greats in any sport unless you actively follow it which isn't he case for Tennis. I only usually watch Wimbledon and the latter stages of the majors. Its hard to say Federer is the best ever when theres been so many other great players that have dominated the sport and played in diffeent eras. Obviously the cold hard facts are definitely leaning towards Federer now and if he can continue his consistency for the next 2-3 years then he will be on a completely different level from the others.

[Barry]

Was Ali ever the best boxer ever anyway=

Various of the tennis greats have said Federer is the best, and I for one think it isn´t even a debate anyway.

EDIT± Some keys appear to mixed up for some reason.

[Dale C.]

Well Sampras won his 14 majors during a period of what, 12 years or something?

And Federer has won 15 in something like 6-7 years? For me thats where the argument ends. I had always regarded Sampras as the best (Even though I liked Agassi more, especially when he had hair :D) but to beat his number of majors, in half the time, is immense.

In regards to the Ali thing, I have never regarded him as the best. Most of the fights ive seen with Ali in them, have played out generally by Ali dancing around the ring, ducking and diving, and wearing his opponent out. It was mainly a stamina/speed thing, rather than amazing boxing skill. From what i've seen anyway.

[Baddar]

Well Sampras won his 14 majors during a period of what, 12 years or something?

And Federer has won 15 in something like 6-7 years? For me thats where the argument ends, to beat his number of majors, in half the time, is immense

This.

Federer's only 27 and I can see him still playing for another 5 years at least. The only two guys who seem to come close to Federer are Murray and Nadal, on a consistent basis, at least, and I still rate Federer higher than both of those players.

I can honestly see him reaching 20 Grand Slam's before he packs it all in.

[Rainey]

From what Ive heard from others Bjorn Borg is the greatest, the man retired at the age of 25, sure has hasnt won the US or Australian Open, but in my eyes the french and wimbledon are the two biggest ones, and he one these 11 times.

However the greatest player ive ever seen is defintely roger

[HH]

On the Ali issue, I think because he had battles with other great heavyweights, he can be put into the arguement. I personally feel think that Marvin Hagler was the greatest of all time and if Pacquiao beats Mayweather, has to be included in the same talk.

[Nifty1Pound50]

The reason Roger Federer is considered the greatest, by many, is not the fact that he has won more Grand Slams than anyone else. It is his manner of playing the game.

He makes the game look so much easier than any other player has done in history. You could argue that technology and improved training methods have made this more possible - however, his opponents have had these same 'improvements' to work with.

For every shot Federer was able to hit with more power (doing less of the physical work due to the racket doing a bit more) than Bjorn Borg, he also had to face a heavier serve or shot from his opposite number.

Without trying to taint the debate about raw ability too much, his manner on court is worth as much as his smooth backhand. When you see how gracefully he plays a shot, without even straining, it makes you realise just how talented the man is.

In that regard, he is so opposite to Nadal. Here is a man who clearly puts everything into every shot; who works so hard in every point; who leaves it all out on the court. Nadal will surely win plenty of tournaments, as Federer fades he will be the dominant force for years to come. Will he ever be as graceful as Roger? No.

[Rainey]

Yeah, Roger is so elegant and graceful on the court, much like kaka is on the pitch.

[Bish]

Federer is elegant, but when it comes to the greatest player ever, I'm disgusted no one has mentioned Jeremy Bates.

[HH]

I walked into NikeTown London a few days ago and the theme was Federer's legacy. Posting him as the greatest ever, Nadal had one banner upstairs :lol:

Im sure Nadal's time will come when he will be entered into the talk of being the greatest if he takes care of his knees.

[HH]

How do you guys feel about the importance of the captaincy role? Are they really needed now, in the days where managers/coaches are either strong disciplinarians or a 'players' manager? Of course in some sports, the role of the captain is more valued than others, I personally think captaincy in football is becoming less and less important, sure it is given and the role is recognized, but there are a good amount of these captains that fail to show the commitment and the leadership for the team.