Join Date: Dec 2005
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Rep Power: 57
Total Points: 8,788,827,492,566,188.00
Pretty much this.
Originally Posted by hayZ
Why would the Australian Open matter? He is already regarded as the best in his sport by most of his peers, present and past. Many players are playing longer nowadays due to advances in sports science, clever scheduling (take note Nadal) and racket technology. Though the modern game negates longetivity due to the long rallies.
The greatest sportsman ever is such a subjective term, close to impossible to say. Unless someone comes along and has a McEnroe (84), Federer (2006), Djokovic (2011) year after year for a long ass time. Federer had some great years, though Nadal impeded that to a certain degree on Clay during Federers prime (2004-7).
Nadal is already breaking down, it will be interesting how he does at the French Open. Either way he has an built in excuse (a justified one at that) if he losses or better doesn't make it to the finals. But he may slowly creep up on Federer's total of slams if he keeps racking up wins at the French, and wins a U.S., Wimbledon, Australian here and there.