2017 Wimbledon Final: Federer v Cilic

[Moxie]

Name me one reason why Federer isn't the greatest athlete in history... I'll wait.

Look, even I'm impressed, but I still think you have to keep it to tennis.

 

[Moxie]

The problem with talking a big game re: Nadal at Wimbledon is... it is based on nothing that's happened in the past 6 years. So I really don't understand what it is founded on.

I don't think Carol and I have the same take, but I don't mind being optimistic. Rafa has had a great year, and he did have a better Wimbledon than any of his recent. I don't mind sticking with the one that brought me to the party. But I was always sanguine about his options.

 

[El Dude]

Maybe AntiPusher disappeared to the Island of Misfit Toys, along with Kieran.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Obsi]

Name me one reason why Federer isn't the greatest athlete in history... I'll wait.

Federer hasn't had impact on the world like Muhammad Ali.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Federer hasn't had impact on the world like Muhammad Ali.

No athlete had an impact remotely close to Ali. If that's the criteria, then Ali will always be the greatest. But in terms of mastering your own sport, I would say Federer is better at his sport than Ali was at his, and accomplished more. It's a difficult comparison due to the different natures of boxing and tennis (not to mention Ali being stripped of his title), but I don't think anyone has been as good at their sport as Federer is at his. Jordan and Messi come to mind but I would still give the edge to Federer.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Because Michael Jordan is.

Like I said, Jordan and Messi are the only ones who have a case other than Roger if we're strictly talking about how good each was at his respective sport, but I think it's very easy to just say Jordan due to the mystique he had (and still does) and the fact that no athlete in history has been raised to god-like status the way he does. I'm not saying it's unwarranted, as Jordan is probably my favorite athlete of all time, but sometimes we romanticize him a little too much.

 

[Federberg]

No athlete had an impact remotely close to Ali. If that's the criteria, then Ali will always be the greatest. But in terms of mastering your own sport, I would say Federer is better at his sport than Ali was at his, and accomplished more. It's a difficult comparison due to the different natures of boxing and tennis (not to mention Ali being stripped of his title), but I don't think anyone has been as good at their sport as Federer is at his. Jordan and Messi come to mind but I would still give the edge to Federer.

I have to agree with this. I remember watching a Floyd Mayweather interview where he was asked who his top boxers were. He refused to put Ali at the top. When he was challenged on this, he said something to the effect of "well are we talking about boxing, or impact on humanity?" If we are talking sports, and just sports then there is a case for Federer. I would mention an athlete like Usain Bolt in the same light. I'm trying to steer away from those who played in team sports..

 

[atttomole]

In my opinion, its between Tiger Woods and Roger Federer. For me its hard to separate the two.

 

[Federberg]

In my opinion, its between Tiger Woods and Roger Federer. For me its hard to separate the two.

Yes I forgot about Tiger. Can't believe I did. He has to be in the list. So I have Federer, Woods, Bolt

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Yes I forgot about Tiger. Can't believe I did. He has to be in the list. So I have Federer, Woods, Bolt

1. Tiger has not even achieved the record for most majors in his own sport. He is behind Jack by four full majors. There is no way Tiger should be in the list. Further, he is going down hill since 2008 or so and does not even seem like one day he will be able to achieve the most important record.

2. Most agree that you cannot compare, or at least it is very difficult to compare, persons from team sports with persons from individual sports.
I would like to go one more step further here. Something like running (Bolt) or swimming (Phelps) while individual events, are difficult to consider as sports. To me in order for something to be called a sport there has to be an active opponent to you. If you can perform your act without any interference from an opponent, it is not so much of a sport. Actually, in view of this I would even say Golf is not a sport.

 

[Federberg]

1. Tiger has not even achieved the record for most majors in his own sport. He is behind Jack by four full majors. There is no way Tiger should be in the list. Further, he is going down hill since 2008 or so and does not even seem like one day he will be able to achieve the most important record.

2. Most agree that you cannot compare, or at least it is very difficult to compare, persons from team sports with persons from individual sports.
I would like to go one more step further here. Something like running (Bolt) or swimming (Phelps) while individual events, are difficult to consider as sports. To me in order for something to be called a sport there has to be an active opponent to you. If you can perform your act without any interference from an opponent, it is not so much of a sport. Actually, in view of this I would even say Golf is not a sport.

It's all opinions. I've never seen dominance in any sport like I saw with Tiger. Personally I've never been quite as caught up with the whole "it's just about the majors" thing. As for the rest... I used to be a sprinter, and let me tell you... sprinting is not just about running. There's a huge mental component. There's technique in the phases. There's a lot to it. So for me I'll stick with my picks

 

[GameSetAndMath]

It's all opinions. I've never seen dominance in any sport like I saw with Tiger. Personally I've never been quite as caught up with the whole "it's just about the majors" thing. As for the rest... I used to be a sprinter, and let me tell you... sprinting is not just about running. There's a huge mental component. There's technique in the phases. There's a lot to it. So for me I'll stick with my picks

No, the difference between "sports" and "games" is not a matter of opinion. Also, the difference between "team games" and "individual games" is also not a matter of opinion.

I am not denying that there is a mental component or even a huge mental component. But, there is no active adversary. Hence, all track and field events are very different. I guess they call it "games" to denote situation with active adversaries and "sports" for events that simply involve an individual's skill and performance in isolation. We should restrict our attention to only "games" and in that only "individual games" to make any comparison meaningful. Golf is not a game, in the first place (there are objections to Golf that say you don't even sweat while playing golf etc, I am not even talking about that kind of objections. I am talking about the absence of direct and active adversary).

 

[Federberg]

No, the difference between "sports" and "games" is not a matter of opinion. Also, the difference between "team games" and "individual games" is also not a matter of opinion.

I am not denying that there is a mental component or even a huge mental component. But, there is no active adversary. Hence, all track and field events are very different. I guess they call it "games" to denote situation with active adversaries and "sports" for events that simply involve an individual's skill and performance in isolation. We should restrict our attention to only "games" and in that only "individual games" to make any comparison meaningful. Golf is not a game, in the first place (there are objections to Golf that say you don't even sweat while playing golf etc, I am not even talking about that kind of objections. I am talking about the absence of direct and active adversary).

That's your choice of course. But as far as I recall this is about great athletes. By any measure Usain Bolt is an athlete. Now whether you want to change the terms is your call. As for you view that a guy like Justin Gatlin kneeling at the start isn't an adversary, I would respectfully disagree. Every sport has a different component of skill versus athleticism. Some are more weighted towards skill than athleticism, others are the other way. It's funny, I stopped myself from adding Gary Kasparov to my list, because I didn't want to get into a debate about whether chess is a sport or not. We all have different opinions I guess... I do agree with the focus on individual competition. That's something I guess

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Chess would be a game, but an exclusively mental game (of course, some amount of forearm strength is required to move the pieces
)

Basically, we can classify along three orthogonal dimensions.

1. Games vs. Sports (based on whether there is an active adversary who interferes with your actions) (e.g. tennis vs. sprinting)
2. Physical vs. Mental (e.g. tennis vs. chess)
3. Individual vs. Team (e.g. tennis vs. basket ball).

In order to make comparisons meaningful, I think we should restrict to "Individual Physical Games".

p.s. Sure, I agree that athleticism is involved in both sports and games.

 

[Federberg]

Chess would be a game, but an exclusively mental game (of course, some amount of forearm strength is required to move the pieces
)

Basically, we can classify along three orthogonal dimensions.

1. Games vs. Sports (based on whether there is an active adversary who interferes with your actions) (e.g. tennis vs. sprinting)
2. Physical vs. Mental (e.g. tennis vs. chess)
3. Individual vs. Team (e.g. tennis vs. basket ball).

In order to make comparisons meaningful, I think we should restrict to "Individual Physical Games".

p.s. Sure, I agree that athleticism is involved in both sports and games.

These are your definitions, you're welcome to run with them. There are no absolutes in this. I can respect your preferences even though I don't agree with them. I can appreciate the logic of your combat versus non-combat argument. But they are all athletes

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Anyway, I cannot think of anyone who excelled in their game better than Federer when restricted to "Individual Physical Games". I am not willing to extend the comparison beyond that range as it does not make sense to me.

 

[Federberg]

As a Brit I'm tempted to add Phil 'the power!' Taylor

 

[DarthFed]

I'm surprised that Woods is even being included in the conversation still. I think Fed and Woods stopped being a good debate after 2009 and now there is no real comparison. I get that Tiger was extremely dominant and had many legendary performances but there is something to be said about longevity and clearly he didn't have much of it, at least not enough to even come close to equaling the most important record in his sport. I know there are more than majors in golf but we are talking 14 vs. 18, like Pete vs Fed before this past Wimbledon...Can we really say Tiger is the greatest golfer ever?

I also agree that it is tough to compare individual athletes to team athletes. I do still think MJ is the greatest athlete I've ever seen. He does get romanticized like BS mentioned but he was simply incredible and watching him you knew he wouldn't allow his team to lose when it mattered most. I'd say Fed has closed the gap by quite a bit this year at least. There is a strong argument for him as the greatest individual sport athlete in history.

 

[mrzz]

14 vs. 18

Of all people, Darth...

 

[Ricardo]

I'm surprised that Woods is even being included in the conversation still. I think Fed and Woods stopped being a good debate after 2009 and now there is no real comparison. I get that Tiger was extremely dominant and had many legendary performances but there is something to be said about longevity and clearly he didn't have much of it, at least not enough to even come close to equaling the most important record in his sport. I know there are more than majors in golf but we are talking 14 vs. 18, like Pete vs Fed before this past Wimbledon...Can we really say Tiger is the greatest golfer ever?

I also agree that it is tough to compare individual athletes to team athletes. I do still think MJ is the greatest athlete I've ever seen. He does get romanticized like BS mentioned but he was simply incredible and watching him you knew he wouldn't allow his team to lose when it mattered most. I'd say Fed has closed the gap by quite a bit this year at least. There is a strong argument for him as the greatest individual sport athlete in history.

if you live outside US, maybe you would have a different perspective about MJ.....