US Open champ Roger Federer could be greatest player ever
US Open champ Roger Federer could be greatest player ever. He’s got lots of strengths and no major weaknesses.
Advertise here with Carbon Ads
This site is made possible by member support. ❤️
Big thanks to Arcustech for hosting the site and offering amazing tech support.
When you buy through links on kottke.org, I may earn an affiliate commission. Thanks for supporting the site!
kottke.org. home of fine hypertext products since 1998.
Reader comments
RobertSep 14, 2004 at 11:46AM
I think he's good. But such a title ought to go to someone who has dominated for far longer than he has.
MattSep 14, 2004 at 11:53AM
I was about to post that exact thing, Robert. He's just starting to "bear fruit" so to speak. No doubt he is an exceptional player. In my personal opinion, it's going to require years of Sampras-like total (mental, physical) domination of the courts to have the title "greatest ever".
Logically speaking, the author allows for this but it seems like a bit of "fanboyism". Polished player, yes. Greatest ever, only time will tell.
MattSep 14, 2004 at 12:14PM
I think the author's suggesting that Federer could be the greatest player ever if he maintains this form over the next 5 to 10 years, rather than saying he could be the greatest player now. I think there's two ways to read that headline.
RobertSep 14, 2004 at 12:23PM
His sub-header is a better clue to where he's at.
SunnySep 14, 2004 at 8:32PM
What's even sad is that the only person who gave him a run for his money entire tournament was 34 year old Andre Agassi. What does that say abt Andre?
DinuSep 15, 2004 at 1:22AM
Seconding the post of Matt.... err, the second Matt... so I'm seconding the second Matt I suppose.
This doesn't seem like "fanboyism" as the first matt said. In fact, I'd say the author does a pretty thorough job of evaluating Federer's game at this stage and evaluating those who are labelled the giants of the game. I mean, his evaluations of Lendl, Sampras, and Agassi (greats who I watched through most of their carrers) certainly ring true to me.
Fanboyism denotes a certain irrational fanaticism to me, which seems rather unfounded in this case. From all the talk I've heard from experts, and from watching his game numerous times, he does seem like an unprecedented talent. Seeing him just dominate his peers reminds me of when Tiger burst onto the scene a few year's back, or when I used to watch Gretzky kate across the ice as if everyone else was in slow-motion.
He just seems to be operating on a higher level (both mentally and physically) than anyone else out there.
This thread is closed to new comments. Thanks to everyone who responded.