[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
I am not sure if US open was grass in 1962 or 1969. It should be in hard court.

Well, it wasn't. Read the following:

The U.S. Open was originally played on grass until Forest Hills switched to Har-Tru clay courts in 1975. In 1978, the event moved from Forest Hills to its current home at Flushing Meadows, and the surface changed again, to the current DecoTurf hard courts.

The point for Roddick, Blake, Hewet, Safin was made to show you how faka the field is now.

I don't buy it. I explained why.

You may not buy it

Nope.

but there is an arguement equal to yours Aggasi's winning the french.

Er, no. Agassi, for example, did not rack up three French Opens in a row. Federer on the other hand has won 3 Australian Opens, 4 Wimbies (in a row) and 3 USOs (in a row). Agassi's winning the French Open only once in his entire career is not the same as Federer winning so many slams on different surfaces against different opponents in three years.

The field cannot remain depleted for more than three and a half years. The same Hewitt, Safin and Roddick won slams before Federer came to prominence, and they are all in the same age bracket as Federer. The obvious conclusion is that Federer in his prime is too good for these players.

You don't have to buy my arguements, I just want you to see how weak your arguements are.

I don't think they are weak. I have put plenty of thought into them.

Greats didn't become great without humbleness. Pete, Rod, Roy would never admit they are the greatest of all time. Just as Tiger would say Jack is, Jack Nicholas would say he is not the greatest but Byron Nelson is or Byron would say Bobby Jones etc. Humbleness makes the greats greater than others and the fans decide that cause in reality in any sports measuring two players from era is impossible.

Ok. Federer is probably one of the most humble champions in a long time. Everybody loves him.

As I said there is no doubt Federer is a great player and the best in current game, but for him to be the greatest he must win French (at least in my book). I wouldn't require him to win a Calendar Slam to put by Rod Laver, Just a french open would do for me. But as long as he don't have that he is not the greatest of all time. 4th at best.

Federer's career is not over yet. He is in the middle of his career. By the time he's done, he will probably end up winning much more than Sampras, Emerson, and Laver of course. If he pulls off a Calendar Year Grand Slam, he will definitely be remembered as the greatest modern player, no doubt.