Is Roger Federer the Best in Tennis History?

(Photo by Clive Brunskill/Getty Images)

That same year he reached the quarter-finals at Wimbledon and was ranked 14th in the world.  In 2003, he would win the Wimbledon singles championship, his first win of a major.

The early part of his career was the end of the Sampras-Agassi years.  Agassi won the last major of his career at the Australian Open in 2003 and Sampras' last major was at the 2002 U.S. Open.

Gustavo Kuerten had won the French Open in 2000 and 2001 and Marat Safin won his first major at the U.S. Open in 2000.  Safin would win one more major – the 2005 Australian Open.

Australian's Lleyton Hewitt had won the 2001 U.S. Open and Wimbledon in the following year.

There are the Roddicks, Dokovics and a couple of others that have one major to their credit but it's safe to say that after Nadal, the competition, relative to other eras, is questionable.

When people ask me about Federer they want to know how I can doubt that he is the greatest.  I concede that 15 majors is awesome, but I tell them about the hey-day of tennis – the 10-year span between 1976-85.

If one looks at those years they will see that there were about seven reasons why Federer would have likely had real trouble winning so many majors if his career spanned this time frame.

The seven reasons with their lifetime total for majors are as follows: Guillermo Vilas (4), Boris Becker (6), John McEnroe (7), Mats Wilander (7), Ivan Lendl (8), Jimmy Connors (8) and Bjorn Borg (11).

One has to question if Federer could have won so many majors if he  played the same time these greats were in the game. 

Borg had the five year run at Wimbledon (1976-80) and the five year run at the French Open (1977-81).  McEnroe won three straight U.S. Opens (1979-81), and Lendl won three straight (1985-87).

At any other time during this era, there were always 10 or 12  players on the men's tour that had to be considered real factors in any tournament they entered.

Connors won four U.S. Opens and won at least one major on grass, hard-court and clay.

Borg won 11 majors but couldn't win the U. S. Open.  Did he have trouble with the surface or did he have trouble with the competition?

Toward the end of this period Wilander and fellow Swede Edberg started winning majors.

There were other good players;  Johan Kriek won back to back Australian Opens in 1981 and 1982 and Roscoe Tanner and Vitas Grulaitas were tough outs.

Could Federer have won 15 majors against these guys?  Could he have won five straight Wimbledon singles titles?  It's a guess.

Roger Federer is a tennis phenom.  He's unbelievable in his play and the way he carries himself.  Unless Nadal comes back strong from his leg injury, Federer is going to amass an almost unreachable record of majors won.

With this said, one has to always wonder if Roger Federer could have dominated during the years of the hey-day of tennis, the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?