to those who say, but it's a team sport

PSACollector

to those who say, but it's a team sport ...

when comparing greatness between player a and player b ...

is it easier in golf, tennis, track & field, race car to say who's greater ...

or do you throw out stuff like, diff era, diff equipment, diff training, diff this, diff that ...

lanemyer85

the only individual sport I follow is men's tennis, and I tire of the Federer vs. Laver for "best ever" discourse. A) you can't compare eras. equipment and playing surface evolution, and most importantly C) Laver turned pro 1963, and in the pre-open era days, only amateurs were allowed to compete in Grand Slam competition. Therefore, Laver lost his Grand Slam eligibility during his prime years from 1963-1968. So when I hear the 'well Federer has 16 majors and Laver only 11, it's hard not to say - idiots. I love watching Federer, and Laver is long before my time, but if one were comparing the two, or any other tennis great, you need to qualify it as something to the affect of 'best player of the open era, or best of the pre-open era'. It would make more sense to use something like a player's career winning percentage. That way you're not trying to bridge different eras...you're rating them against a player's given competition. In this case, both Federer and Laver have career winning percentages of around 80%.

TomGshotput

Yes

A good example of how the easier path is often more boring