"I've looked up to M. Jordan my whole life. He has done something nobody ever has"

[rmt]

In a technical sense Djokovic is the most complete ever, in a technical sense he is perfect. Perhaps revolutionized is not the word, because you're correct his style is as conventional as it gets.

The second point is what I have a problem with, the truth is , you're chances of winning drastically go down if you model yourself after Federer vs after Djokovic.

I was having this discussion with someone and they alerted me to the fact that Fed actually has revolutionized the game somewhat by synthesizing the millenium forehand and the classical forehand...so in that sense I was worng.

But I have a problem when people insinuate that natural talent like Fed's or Phelps essentially correlates to revolutionizing the game, what should be timeless are the perfect technicians, not the perfect athletes.That's how the game gets better.

It is not that Nole has revolutionized the game - it's because the homogenization of the surfaces is favorable to that type of game. This homogenization is evidenced by the fact that in the past 8 years, some one has won 3 of the 4 Grand Slams in a calendar year 5 times when only 2 people had accomplished that feat in the previous 34 years.

They have made the grass courts so that the bounce is higher and slower and they use balls that fluff up so that the serve and volley game is virtually suicide against the racquets and strings that they have now. Still, Nole's game is not as suited to grass or indoor carpet as it is to the hard courts of US Open or Australian Open. Nole's type of game is now the NORM (baseline hitting off both sides, little to no volleying and big serving). Fed's "classic" game is now the dinosaur - but in no way could one say that Nole's game is more "complete" than Fed's who can hit any shot in the book and whose transition game is unparalleled today.

What has actually taken Nole to a different level is the discovery of his gluten allergy. Since he has eliminated gluten from his diet, he doesn't have breathing problems anymore and his physical fitness (and his ability to outlast opponents as evidenced by his 6 hour victory over Nadal in the AO Finals) is the difference. But that's just better knowledge of nutrition - 20 years ago? - say what? - what's gluten?

But as far as technique is concerned, Nole is not much different than Murray (who has mental issues but more natural touch/feel for the game) or Del Potro (sidelined by injuries, harder hitting). Fed's the one with the more complete game which is neutralized by the homogeneous (slowing down of the) surfaces. No way would Nole win his Wimbledon if the grass were the grass that Sampras won 7 Wimbledons on.

[gengiskhan]

So what exactly did phelps change about the sport of swimming?




Btw, I motion to have this racist banned for good. No need to call Bolt a n i gg er.

& I am still here because I've never called him that. read my post again. so dont be having LOOSE MOTIONS over it.

BTW

You can undermine Phelps all you want despite his 18 golds just cuz he aint black.

Imagine if Phelps was black & we would've seen 10 threads each day how a black man changed the sport of swimming forever.

Bolt aint even good enough to lick Phelps shoes. He is a one trick pony.

Bolt has barely equaled carl lewis by winning 100m in 2 olympics. Lewis did that as well.

Phelps did has done it twice in 3 straight olympics. Athens-Beijing-London.

Thats a record.

[gengiskhan]

Greatest Athlete of All Time?

MJ leads by 40% right now.

[Ne 1]

Jordan - the greatest athlete ever?

This one is a no-brainer. If he's not the greatest basketball player ever (as I have proven), then he sure as heck isn't the greatest athlete ever. ESPN claimed he was the greatest athlete of the twentieth century -- excuse me while I laugh -- but that just isn't the truth.

ESPN was as prone to hype and endorsements as most Jordan-supporters. After all, who supported Jordan's #1-ranked sports biography? Jordan's clothing company. Wow. Now, that's unbiased. I wonder how much money Nike pays them each year in advertising. ESPN's credibility has often been questioned, especially in college football, where they have been accused of slanting the public's view of strong teams or Heisman Trophy winners, in favor of players and games that their sister company, ABC, televises.

I've had folks write and claim these people are experts. Experts? Dick Schapp pointed out that around 1950, a vote was taken for the greatest athlete of the first 50 years. Jim Thorpe was voted #1. However, in 1999, Thorpe was voted behind Babe Ruth (Ruth - #2 and Thorpe - #6). How many of these "experts" in 1999 saw either Thorpe or Ruth play? How can they be "experts", when the writers 50 years ago saw them both play? Answer: the 1999 writers follow hype, myth, and "legend."

Why would Jordan be considered the greatest athlete? Let's look at some criteria:

Athleticism? Hardly! Jordan's not even possessing the most athleticism out of basketball players. He didn't compete in track (unlike Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, who were champion track athletes, for instance). Carl Lewis, Jim Thorpe, Babe Didrickson-Zaharus, and Bo Jackson were all more athletic than Jordan.

Winning? Sorry. Put Rocky Marciano, Yogi Berra, and Bill Russell ahead of Jordan.

Dominated the most areas of his sport? Sorry. Try guys like Barry Bonds, Joe DiMaggio, Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, and Walter Payton ahead of Jordan.

Broke the most records? Wilt Chamberlain and Wayne Gretsky are far, far ahead of Jordan.

Impact on sport? Jackie Robinson. 'Nuff said.

What category puts Jordan at the top? Endorsement money. But in that case, Arnold Palmer, not Muhammad Ali, was #2. Furthermore, this proves ESPN list is hype-driven and would also prove Jordan isn't the greatest athlete, but rather that greatest advertising pitchman. Jordan didn't change the game of basketball. He didn't dominate the championships (6 in 8 years is chump change compared to Russell). I have challenged Jordan fans to give me a criteria for basing it. His combination of individual accomplishment, records, and championships are behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. So why is he #1? Because he is a pop-culture icon, not the greatest athlete. Just because ESPN says he's the best doesn't mean it, because nobody has yet to define why he's the best.

How about a comparison between Jordan and Babe Didrickson-Zaharus.


Track: Jordan has nothing to show, because Jordan's speed wasn't enough and his jumping ability was the product of Nike. Nike wants you to think different, but hype and commercials cannot stand up to the unbiased eye of a clock or a measuring tape, which is why he couldn't compete in the Olympic arena in these areas. I proved that his dunk contest championship in 1988 was a joke, and simply the product of hype, much like his athleticism is, in general.
Babe entered 8 out of 10 events in the National AAU track meet. Of those 8, she won 5 of them outright and tied for first in a 6th event. She won 2 gold medals in the Olympics, and lost the 3rd on a technicality. Because she was a pro golfer afterward, she was not allowed to compete in any more Olympic games, or who knows how many more she would have won?

Advantage: Babe


Baseball: Jordan was a miserable failure in MINOR LEAGUE baseball. He flirted with the Mendoza line (that means he barely hit .200). Sports Illustrated wrote an article about his inability to play baseball and the cover said "Bag it, Michael." Jordan got into such a snit, that he never talked to the magazine again. The analysis from baseball scouts on Jordan was that he was a rag-armed, weak-hitter trying to play a position that generally requires both. Jordan was a decent high school pitcher, but there's a difference between the men and the boys. What about Babe?
Babe PITCHED in several MAJOR LEAGUE exhibition games. Babe pitched against the big boys. Jordan sucked against the little boys.

Advantage: Babe.


Golf: Jordan likes to brag about his golfing prowess, but we see that he's simply a weekend hacker. He has as much chance at getting his [PGA] tour card as you and I do. Yeah, he golfs with Tiger Woods (and loses), but hey -- if I play soccer and get my @ss kicked by Pele, does that mean I'm a great soccer player? Jordan talks a big talk about joining the tour...and well, if his competitive drive were as great as advertised (emphasis on ADVERTISED), then he'd already be on the tour. What about Babe?
Babe won 82 amateur and PROFESSIONAL tournaments, including majors. She came back after having been treated for cancer and WON another major. This dwarfs Jordan's little "flu game" in the 1997 NBA Finals (in which he never had the flu, but said he was "under the weather." That is, unless you believe that Jordan is such a modern miracle that he can completely conquer influenza in 2 days.)

Advantage: Do I need to say?


Basketball: OK, the Jordan fans are going to say that he's one of the all-time greats (though I've proven he's not the greatest). And he certainly would have an advantage here. But consider this: Babe was never able to prove herself on the professional ground, because the WNBA, nor the NBA, nor the NBL (National Basketball League), nor the BAA (Basketball Association of America - the latter 2 were predecessors to the NBA) existed when she played. We do have their college careers as a comparative measuring stick: Both played 3 years, and Jordan was a 2 time All-American, and Babe was a 3 time All-American. Perhaps she could have proven that she was the greatest woman basketball player ever if she had the stage to display it on.

Advantage: Jordan


Other sports: What does Jordan do? Nothing. What did Babe do? Babe won championships in billiards, cycling, shooting, speed skating, squash, swimming, and tennis.

Advantage: Babe.

Who is the greatest North American Athlete of the 20th century?

Advantage: Babe.

Whether or not you think she's #1, you have to admit that she's ahead of Jordan, yet ESPN only put her at #10. Probably because she didn't have her own brand of sneakers.

[HardwoodLegend]

& I am still here because I've never called him that. read my post again. so dont be having LOOSE MOTIONS over it.

BTW

You can undermine Phelps all you want despite his 18 golds just cuz he aint black.

Imagine if Phelps was black & we would've seen 10 threads each day how a black man changed the sport of swimming forever.

Bolt aint even good enough to lick Phelps shoes. He is a one trick pony.

Bolt has barely equaled carl lewis by winning 100m in 2 olympics. Lewis did that as well.

Phelps did has done it twice in 3 straight olympics. Athens-Beijing-London.

Thats a record.

Swimming is a narrower niche sport with a smaller talent pool.

Track & Field has far more athletes gunning for those top times. Running is a part of every sport, and practically every football player at a speed position has run track in their lives.

Swimming has a longer shelf-life of dominance because contenders typically arrive around at the age of 15 and don't have to deal with the pounding of the joints and extreme exertion of muscles that you find in sprinting.

If Bolt competes in Rio and is a factor for a medal, it is faaaarrrr and away more impressive than Phelps' longevity. I already think what he's done is more impressive and dominant, but that's up for argument. Rio 2016 would leave no doubt.

[TMacMagic]

Who cares about swimming?

[gengiskhan]

Swimming is a narrower niche sport with a smaller talent pool.

Track & Field has far more athletes gunning for those top times. Running is a part of every sport, and practically every football player at a speed position has run track in their lives.

Swimming has a longer shelf-life of dominance because contenders typically arrive around at the age of 15 and don't have to deal with the pounding of the joints and extreme exertion of muscles that you find in sprinting.

If Bolt competes in Rio and is a factor for a medal, it is faaaarrrr and away more impressive than Phelps' longevity. I already think what he's done is more impressive and dominant, but that's up for argument. Rio 2016 would leave no doubt.

The bolded statements are absolute joke.

Bolt is a one trick pony. Cannot run hurdles so lacks versitility. He just runs straight line. Thats about it.

He also has huge advantage @ 6'5". He needed 41 steps to get to 100 m but Yuhan Blake needed 44 steps to get to 100 m @ 5'11".

Blake at 26 age will own Bolts a$$ at age 30 in Rio 2016. Mark my words. So keep dreaming of Bolt equaling phelps with 3 consequitive olympics gold in same individual event. He aint equaling Phelps forget beating his record.

Swimming is the toughest sport to own gold in. running comes much more natural. If you are 6'5" with extra long legs. its that much easier because of the longer steps & fewer steps to get to finish line.

Swimming is about extreme practice. timing of the dive & most importantly not loosing any ground on the turn. Its the mother of track & field.

Humans are not naturally aquatic creatures. Swimming is literally against the human physique in every sense.

Track & Field is part of the human evolution so much easier to own & win medals in.

Phelps >>>>>>> Bolt any given day.

[HardwoodLegend]

Hurdles are an obstruction introduced into the path that requires refined specialization. It's not the same as a swimmer simply changing up their stroke. There's a reason why there's a marked division between sprinters and hurdlers with very, very rare crossovers. It's more rare to see someone like Bolt include hurdles in their running schedule than it is to see a swimmer get in a medley relay at the same distance of their main stroke. You obviously know NOTHING about the physical demands of track.

And, did you just bring up Bolt's size as a way to downplay his dominance? LOL, ridiculous. I remember in Beijing they showed a measurement of chart showing how Phelps had an unnaturally long torso compared to most swimmers which put him at an advantage.

Part of Athletics is about using genetic supremacy to one's benefit.

[hawke812]

Jesus, some people can be wrong or misguided you know

[DuMa]

you can talk about jordan, gretzky, phelps, pele, ali, federer. but one other guyi would put in that list: Kelly Slater. dude has been dominating Surfing for close to 20 years

[TheMan]

cool story, bro, would read again

Jordan - the greatest athlete ever?

This one is a no-brainer. If he's not the greatest basketball player ever (as I have proven), then he sure as heck isn't the greatest athlete ever. ESPN claimed he was the greatest athlete of the twentieth century -- excuse me while I laugh -- but that just isn't the truth.

ESPN was as prone to hype and endorsements as most Jordan-supporters. After all, who supported Jordan's #1-ranked sports biography? Jordan's clothing company. Wow. Now, that's unbiased. I wonder how much money Nike pays them each year in advertising. ESPN's credibility has often been questioned, especially in college football, where they have been accused of slanting the public's view of strong teams or Heisman Trophy winners, in favor of players and games that their sister company, ABC, televises.

I've had folks write and claim these people are experts. Experts? Dick Schapp pointed out that around 1950, a vote was taken for the greatest athlete of the first 50 years. Jim Thorpe was voted #1. However, in 1999, Thorpe was voted behind Babe Ruth (Ruth - #2 and Thorpe - #6). How many of these "experts" in 1999 saw either Thorpe or Ruth play? How can they be "experts", when the writers 50 years ago saw them both play? Answer: the 1999 writers follow hype, myth, and "legend."

Why would Jordan be considered the greatest athlete? Let's look at some criteria:

Athleticism? Hardly! Jordan's not even possessing the most athleticism out of basketball players. He didn't compete in track (unlike Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, who were champion track athletes, for instance). Carl Lewis, Jim Thorpe, Babe Didrickson-Zaharus, and Bo Jackson were all more athletic than Jordan.

Winning? Sorry. Put Rocky Marciano, Yogi Berra, and Bill Russell ahead of Jordan.

Dominated the most areas of his sport? Sorry. Try guys like Barry Bonds, Joe DiMaggio, Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, and Walter Payton ahead of Jordan.

Broke the most records? Wilt Chamberlain and Wayne Gretsky are far, far ahead of Jordan.

Impact on sport? Jackie Robinson. 'Nuff said.

What category puts Jordan at the top? Endorsement money. But in that case, Arnold Palmer, not Muhammad Ali, was #2. Furthermore, this proves ESPN list is hype-driven and would also prove Jordan isn't the greatest athlete, but rather that greatest advertising pitchman. Jordan didn't change the game of basketball. He didn't dominate the championships (6 in 8 years is chump change compared to Russell). I have challenged Jordan fans to give me a criteria for basing it. His combination of individual accomplishment, records, and championships are behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. So why is he #1? Because he is a pop-culture icon, not the greatest athlete. Just because ESPN says he's the best doesn't mean it, because nobody has yet to define why he's the best.

How about a comparison between Jordan and Babe Didrickson-Zaharus.


Track: Jordan has nothing to show, because Jordan's speed wasn't enough and his jumping ability was the product of Nike. Nike wants you to think different, but hype and commercials cannot stand up to the unbiased eye of a clock or a measuring tape, which is why he couldn't compete in the Olympic arena in these areas. I proved that his dunk contest championship in 1988 was a joke, and simply the product of hype, much like his athleticism is, in general.
Babe entered 8 out of 10 events in the National AAU track meet. Of those 8, she won 5 of them outright and tied for first in a 6th event. She won 2 gold medals in the Olympics, and lost the 3rd on a technicality. Because she was a pro golfer afterward, she was not allowed to compete in any more Olympic games, or who knows how many more she would have won?

Advantage: Babe


Baseball: Jordan was a miserable failure in MINOR LEAGUE baseball. He flirted with the Mendoza line (that means he barely hit .200). Sports Illustrated wrote an article about his inability to play baseball and the cover said "Bag it, Michael." Jordan got into such a snit, that he never talked to the magazine again. The analysis from baseball scouts on Jordan was that he was a rag-armed, weak-hitter trying to play a position that generally requires both. Jordan was a decent high school pitcher, but there's a difference between the men and the boys. What about Babe?
Babe PITCHED in several MAJOR LEAGUE exhibition games. Babe pitched against the big boys. Jordan sucked against the little boys.

Advantage: Babe.


Golf: Jordan likes to brag about his golfing prowess, but we see that he's simply a weekend hacker. He has as much chance at getting his [PGA] tour card as you and I do. Yeah, he golfs with Tiger Woods (and loses), but hey -- if I play soccer and get my @ss kicked by Pele, does that mean I'm a great soccer player? Jordan talks a big talk about joining the tour...and well, if his competitive drive were as great as advertised (emphasis on ADVERTISED), then he'd already be on the tour. What about Babe?
Babe won 82 amateur and PROFESSIONAL tournaments, including majors. She came back after having been treated for cancer and WON another major. This dwarfs Jordan's little "flu game" in the 1997 NBA Finals (in which he never had the flu, but said he was "under the weather." That is, unless you believe that Jordan is such a modern miracle that he can completely conquer influenza in 2 days.)

Advantage: Do I need to say?


Basketball: OK, the Jordan fans are going to say that he's one of the all-time greats (though I've proven he's not the greatest). And he certainly would have an advantage here. But consider this: Babe was never able to prove herself on the professional ground, because the WNBA, nor the NBA, nor the NBL (National Basketball League), nor the BAA (Basketball Association of America - the latter 2 were predecessors to the NBA) existed when she played. We do have their college careers as a comparative measuring stick: Both played 3 years, and Jordan was a 2 time All-American, and Babe was a 3 time All-American. Perhaps she could have proven that she was the greatest woman basketball player ever if she had the stage to display it on.

Advantage: Jordan


Other sports: What does Jordan do? Nothing. What did Babe do? Babe won championships in billiards, cycling, shooting, speed skating, squash, swimming, and tennis.

Advantage: Babe.

Who is the greatest North American Athlete of the 20th century?

Advantage: Babe.

Whether or not you think she's #1, you have to admit that she's ahead of Jordan, yet ESPN only put her at #10. Probably because she didn't have her own brand of sneakers.

[ThatCoolKid]

It is not that Nole has revolutionized the game - it's because the homogenization of the surfaces is favorable to that type of game. This homogenization is evidenced by the fact that in the past 8 years, some one has won 3 of the 4 Grand Slams in a calendar year 5 times when only 2 people had accomplished that feat in the previous 34 years.

They have made the grass courts so that the bounce is higher and slower and they use balls that fluff up so that the serve and volley game is virtually suicide against the racquets and strings that they have now. Still, Nole's game is not as suited to grass or indoor carpet as it is to the hard courts of US Open or Australian Open. Nole's type of game is now the NORM (baseline hitting off both sides, little to no volleying and big serving). Fed's "classic" game is now the dinosaur - but in no way could one say that Nole's game is more "complete" than Fed's who can hit any shot in the book and whose transition game is unparalleled today.

What has actually taken Nole to a different level is the discovery of his gluten allergy. Since he has eliminated gluten from his diet, he doesn't have breathing problems anymore and his physical fitness (and his ability to outlast opponents as evidenced by his 6 hour victory over Nadal in the AO Finals) is the difference. But that's just better knowledge of nutrition - 20 years ago? - say what? - what's gluten?

But as far as technique is concerned, Nole is not much different than Murray (who has mental issues but more natural touch/feel for the game) or Del Potro (sidelined by injuries, harder hitting). Fed's the one with the more complete game which is neutralized by the homogeneous (slowing down of the) surfaces. No way would Nole win his Wimbledon if the grass were the grass that Sampras won 7 Wimbledons on.

First off, Fed does not have a truly "classic" style. He changed his game along with the courts, something that has greatly contributed to his dominance in recent years, moving from a serve and volley type player like Samphras to a baseliner like Agassi. True, he comes to net more that a Nadal or Djokovic, but wins a majority of his points from the baseline like most players today do.

Second off, Fed does not have a more complete game than Djokovic, excluding the serve, which is one of Fed's only advantages on Djoker. As I detailed earlier, less and less players today utilize the one-handed backhand as Fed does, particularly because it leaves the user vulnerable to heavy topspin shots to the backhand side. Because of improved racquet technology, western and semiwestern grips, which encourage and facilitate the use of heavy topspin, players with one-handers often find themselves having to slice back or return weakly and defensively these high, spin-heavy shots at their backhand, allowing their opponent to dictate and take control of a point. Fed is remarkably talented, and has a more flat, powerful forehand than other players, so he is able to overcome this weakness by playing defensively whenever the opponent starts targeting his backhand with topspin until he is comfortable enough to step around the ball to utilize his forehand, which may be the most signature shot in tennis today and wins him a lot of points. He also likes to camp out on his backhand side, forcing the opponent to either give him time to step into his backhand by not moving him, or attacking his forehand, which plays into what Fed wants most of the time. Djoker, on the other hand, plays with the conventional semiwestern forehand and corresponding two-handed backhand, leaving no such openings for his opponent to exploit. Djoker can handle any sort of shot comfortably, given adequate time, and does not have to rely on slicing and defensive play to get him through intervals in a point unless he chooses to. With Fed, if his opponent challenges his backhand, he has no such choice. Djoker has a much more complete game than Fed, emulating a Nadal type player, and relies on no shot as much as Fed relies on his forehand and serve. This doesn't make him a better player necessarily, he does not have the offensive capacity Fed does, but it does make him a more complete, versatile one.

To claim that the homogenization of surfaces has benefited Djoker alone would be false, it's benefited any player who has opted to work on his baseline, power game, Fed included. Fed is not at all the same player who took down Samphras at his own game; he is not a dinosaur, although he has retained some of the qualities that Samphras had in his hybrid forehand. Djoker wins because he is a complete player with no flaws who is incredibly fast, strong, and flexible, while Fed wins because he has a monster forehand and serve and is crafty enough to protect or avoid altogether his weaknesses. If the surfaces hadn't changed, Djoker may have transformed the same way Fed has and learned to play flat; I wouldn't be so quick to disparage or negate his success because of the evolution of the sport.

[ThatCoolKid]

The bolded statements are absolute joke.

Bolt is a one trick pony. Cannot run hurdles so lacks versitility. He just runs straight line. Thats about it.

He also has huge advantage @ 6'5". He needed 41 steps to get to 100 m but Yuhan Blake needed 44 steps to get to 100 m @ 5'11".

Blake at 26 age will own Bolts a$$ at age 30 in Rio 2016. Mark my words. So keep dreaming of Bolt equaling phelps with 3 consequitive olympics gold in same individual event. He aint equaling Phelps forget beating his record.

Swimming is the toughest sport to own gold in. running comes much more natural. If you are 6'5" with extra long legs. its that much easier because of the longer steps & fewer steps to get to finish line.

Swimming is about extreme practice. timing of the dive & most importantly not loosing any ground on the turn. Its the mother of track & field.

Humans are not naturally aquatic creatures. Swimming is literally against the human physique in every sense.

Track & Field is part of the human evolution so much easier to own & win medals in.

Phelps >>>>>>> Bolt any given day.

If you're trying to make an argument for Phelps being superior in his sport than Bolt is in his, you're not doing a very good job. Some of the crap you just spouted is just laughable.

[ThatCoolKid]

An actual Phelps trumps Bolt argument would be like this.

Phelps is more versatile. He not only swims in multiple stroke disciplines (which you can't really hold against Bolt because no parallel exists in his sports), but he succeeds in them at multiple distances. Swimmers will know how rare it is for someone to be incredible at a 100 m freestyle or 100 m butterfly and also be amazing at a 400 IM. Bolt runs the 100 m and the 200 m, which is very impressive for his sport, but pales in comparison to Phelps's feats. Track is a higher impact sport than swimming by a large margin, which gives Bolt some slack, but when you compare the sheer volume and frequency that Phelp's swims very different events at a ridiculously high level with Bolt, who gave up on the 400 m because it was too painful for him, it's very hard to give Bolt more credit than Phelps.

Phelps is more consistent. Making the Olympics at age 15 in swimming is ridiculous, especially for males. Phelps accomplishing this in the modern age of swimming is unprecedented, and, as of now, he is the only one to accomplish it. The only male today who can even come close to what Phelps did 12 years ago is Ryan Murphy, an amazingly talented swimmer who has been touted as a prodigy from a young age and been number one in the country for the 200 backstroke since before he reached a double digit birthday. Despite all of this and being 16 instead of 15, he failed to even qualify for the Olympic team, let alone make the finals.

Phelps then went on to break the world record in the 200 m butterfly at age 15 at World Championships, the youngest male to ever break a world record. He then goes on to develop into the world's most versatile swimmer, competing in IM events and succeeding in breaking the 400 IM world record the very next year, and the 200 IM the year after. As an 18 year old he was winning the most medals at World Championships. His performance at the 2004 Olympics games was incredible, he was the fastest in the world at the 100 and 200 m butterfly, 200 and 400 m IM, and close to fastest in the 200 m freestyle. His dominance only improved from there, I could go on, but you all know the rest, he blew everyone away at World Championships for the next 3 years and went on to have his historic olympics at the 2008 Olympic games.

What he did next I find even more impressive. Despite his infamous marijuana indulgence and minimal amount of practice for nearly 4 years Phelps still dominated the 2009 World Championships while intentionally handicapping himself by not wearing a polyurethane suit in protest of recent technological advancements. 2011 was more disappointing for him, Ryan Lochte surpassed him and was incredible, but Phelps was still at the top right below him in his incredibly diverse program of events despite basically chilling out for three years (he practiced significantly less than any of the other world class swimmers and took six month breaks whenever he felt like it). Then he struts right back up the reclaim his mantle at the 2012 games, which I'm sure you all know.

Just take a look at the world records he set. The 100 m and 200 m butterfly and 400 IM records are not going down for a very, very long time, absolutely nobody has even come close to them. His 200 IM got taken down by Lochte, who is the second best swimmer in history, and his 200 free got taken down by a polyurethane suit user who since the ban has enjoyed very little success. Absolutely nobody in the world currently has any shot at besting these times; I could see them lasting for decades. Can you say the same about Bolt?

Another way you can do look at it is that what Michael Phelps has accomplished in swimming has never been accomplished before, and the chances anyone will ever usurp him are slim to none. He is the undisputed, literally undisputed, GOAT of his sport. Bolt is a remarkable sprinter, but he does not surpass Phelps's utter dominance of swimming.

[rmt]

First off, Fed does not have a truly "classic" style. He changed his game along with the courts, something that has greatly contributed to his dominance in recent years, moving from a serve and volley type player like Samphras to a baseliner like Agassi. True, he comes to net more that a Nadal or Djokovic, but wins a majority of his points from the baseline like most players today do.

Second off, Fed does not have a more complete game than Djokovic, excluding the serve, which is one of Fed's only advantages on Djoker. As I detailed earlier, less and less players today utilize the one-handed backhand as Fed does, particularly because it leaves the user vulnerable to heavy topspin shots to the backhand side. Because of improved racquet technology, western and semiwestern grips, which encourage and facilitate the use of heavy topspin, players with one-handers often find themselves having to slice back or return weakly and defensively these high, spin-heavy shots at their backhand, allowing their opponent to dictate and take control of a point. Fed is remarkably talented, and has a more flat, powerful forehand than other players, so he is able to overcome this weakness by playing defensively whenever the opponent starts targeting his backhand with topspin until he is comfortable enough to step around the ball to utilize his forehand, which may be the most signature shot in tennis today and wins him a lot of points. He also likes to camp out on his backhand side, forcing the opponent to either give him time to step into his backhand by not moving him, or attacking his forehand, which plays into what Fed wants most of the time. Djoker, on the other hand, plays with the conventional semiwestern forehand and corresponding two-handed backhand, leaving no such openings for his opponent to exploit. Djoker can handle any sort of shot comfortably, given adequate time, and does not have to rely on slicing and defensive play to get him through intervals in a point unless he chooses to. With Fed, if his opponent challenges his backhand, he has no such choice. Djoker has a much more complete game than Fed, emulating a Nadal type player, and relies on no shot as much as Fed relies on his forehand and serve. This doesn't make him a better player necessarily, he does not have the offensive capacity Fed does, but it does make him a more complete, versatile one.

To claim that the homogenization of surfaces has benefited Djoker alone would be false, it's benefited any player who has opted to work on his baseline, power game, Fed included. Fed is not at all the same player who took down Samphras at his own game; he is not a dinosaur, although he has retained some of the qualities that Samphras had in his hybrid forehand. Djoker wins because he is a complete player with no flaws who is incredibly fast, strong, and flexible, while Fed wins because he has a monster forehand and serve and is crafty enough to protect or avoid altogether his weaknesses. If the surfaces hadn't changed, Djoker may have transformed the same way Fed has and learned to play flat; I wouldn't be so quick to disparage or negate his success because of the evolution of the sport.

We obviously see the sport of tennis very differently.

In the first bolded statement - to exclude the serve, which is probably the most important shot in tennis - the only shot in which you have complete control over, is a massive under-rating of the importance of the shot. And to say that the serve is one of the only shots that Fed has over Nole is just flat out wrong, IMO.

To me it's the opposite, Fed has every shot over Nole except the backhand, flexibility, and reach (because he's taller). Fed (in his prime) has one of the greatest forehands ever. His variety is unsurpassed - he can hit every spin, slice and dice one to death in addition to his power game. He has much better touch and natural feel for the game than Nole does. His net and transition games are superior to Nole's. I fail to see how any one can claim that Nole has a more VERSATILE game than Fed.

I never claimed that the homogenization of the surfaces ONLY benefitted Nole.. I said that it benefits the type of game he and a lot of the top players have (big baseline hitting off both sides). IMO, the slowing down of the courts has been detrimental to Federer. His type of game is ideal for low-bouncing, fast courts as evidenced by his better results on grass and fast, indoor court (like the year-end championships - WTF). Fed has won WTF 6 times, Nole only once and Nadal - never.

We even see the way they hit differently. I would say that Nole's groundstrokes are mostly flat whereas Fed's have a lot more spin and variety and he usually only flattens out the forehand when he's going for a winner.

In tennis, GOAT discussions IMO should be prefaced by ON WHAT SURFACE? Obviously, on clay, the answer is Nadal (7 Grand Slams.) or Borg (6). On grass, it would be Laver (9), Sampras (7) or Federer (7). On hard courts, it would be Federer (9). The reason why Federer holds the record GS and wins on all surfaces is his VERSATILITY - 9 HC, 7 grass, 1 clay compared to the other GOAT candidates: Laver - 9 grass, 2 clay or Sampras (7 grass, 7 HC) or Borg (6 clay, 5 grass).

Anyway, if you're interested in tennis discussion (as this is a basketball forum), why don't you join the Men's Tennis Forum (http://www.menstennisforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2). Lots of interesting, knowledgeable tennis fans over there. My username there is sco.