Is Federer the greatest ever?

Well, there has already been a lot of discussions about this topic among tennis enthusiasts ever since Roger Federer burst onto the tennis scene in 2003 with his emphatic Wimbledon win. There has been a lot of talk about his capabilities well before, but there was a feeling that he crumbled in crucial stages on the big stage and might become another of those promising youngsters who never fulfilled their true potential.
But hold on, that was not what was about to happen in the years to follow. We the spectators watched in awe in the coming years how FedEx ruled the tennis world with his genius on the court. At a time when power tennis is at its peak, Federer has shown how to 'overpower' his bigger and stronger opponents with a classical mix of deft touches and precision play, some of which led us to wonder whether we were watching tennis or some other sport.
But the problem with this "greatest ever" question has basically been two-fold -- the supremacy that one shows on the court as well as the quality of opponents that he plays against. As far as the supremacy part is concerned, there is no denying the fact that Federer's dominance has been something which was unprecedented by a long long way. No other player before him has shown the kind of dominance that he has shown, especially in the grand slams. A few statistics to prove it --

• A total of 15 grand slams - the most ever in the history of the game.
• 23 consecutive grand slam semi final appearances - a testament to the unbelievable consistency of the man.
• Winner of all the four grand slams (career grand slam) - only the third player in the open era to do so (after Rod Laver and Andre Agassi).
  

But there are certain other points which we need to consider before we jump to any conclusion. Unlike Agassi, Federer has failed to achieve the career golden slam (which includes the Olympic gold medal) till now. While comparing players from different generations, we are also comparing Federer with greats like Rod Laver who himself has won the four majors in one calendar year, a feat still unachieved by Federer. And to think that Rod has done this, not once but twice (1962 and 1969).
The quality of opponents is also a key element when we consider the 'greatness' of any player. I will not go into details comparing FedEx with many greats of the past, but just to reiterate the oft made comparisons with Pete Sampras, we would do well to bear in mind that --

• Sampras won seven Wimbledon titles playing against grasscourt heroes like Goran Ivanisevic, Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Tim Henman as also against Andre Agassi, Jim Courier who have very strong credentials. Federer's opponent list is not all that impressive in comparison.
• Sampras' inability to win the French Open has been the biggest point for his critics, but he had to contend with seasoned claycourters like Sergi Bruguera, Thomas Muster and Jim Courier in his time. The biggest claycourter of Federer's era, Rafael Nadal has defeated Federer in each and every occasion that the two have met in the French Open.

To talk about the famous rivalries, Sampras has the following head-to-head records --

• 20-14 against Andre Agassi.
• 16-4 against Jim Courier.
• 12-6 against Goran Ivanisevic.
• 12-7 against Boris Becker.
• 8-6 against Stefan Edberg.
• 6-1 against Tim Henman.

Some of Federer's head-to-head records are --

• 7-13 against Rafael Nadal.
• 5-6 against Andy Murray.

Sampras' rivalry with many players (the list is longer than that of Federer's) is because of the fact that many great players were playing at that time which is not the case about Federer's time. That certainly cannot be held against Federer as he is not responsible for the the quality of opposition that he faces, but the fact that he holds unfavourable head-to-head records against two of his greatest rivals (losing almost double the matches that he has won against Nadal) is definitely a shocker for many. Unfortunately, Federer did not play enough matches against Sampras himself (they faced only once at 2001 Wimbledon which Federer won in 5 sets) to make any viable comparisons.
To conclude, I would like to say that the practice of comparing players across generations itself seems to be a faulty practice. There are many factors which if taken into consideration makes such comparisons practically impossible. I feel that we would do well to enjoy the game rather than making futile comparisons in the mind. Federer is great and so are Sampras, Agassi and many other players. They can remain great without having to diminish the 'greatness' of others.