Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serena Gaining On Federer In Debate
OMG, reading some of the responses to the genesis of this thread makes it quit apparent of the lack of proper reading comprehension among so many of posters here. It is quite pitiful that so many of you interpreted the SI article as a simple normal comparison of an Orange (Roger Federer) to an Apple (Serena Williams) as if the Orange and Apple are the same and are comparable.
Rather, the writer of the SI piece says that both Roger Federer and Serena Williams, (who by the way, are each still active players), are each in a separate race to achieve the honor of the best-ever (GOAT) in “their respective League.”(ATP/WTA). Furthermore, the author implies that Roger Federer is further along in his race than Serena is in hers, but that with her RG triumph Serena is gaining on Federer in her race to where he is at in his. The comparison made in the article is not one of comparing a male player with a female player, but rather an integral comparison of two separate races of male and female for the male GOAT and female GOAT respectively. He said each of them are the “best of their generation” and let there be men’s best of his generation and a women’s best of her generation and see how it looks five years from now.
It is simplified like this:
Roger Federer the orange is in a race of oranges contending to be considered (and in some quarters he is already the clear cut best-ever) the GOAT among the best oranges of the history of the ATP, if he is not there already. Whereas, Serena Williams is in a race of apples contending to be considered the GOAT among the best apples of the history of the WTA; in his opinion she is not there yet, but “the needle for best ever has kept moving”.
Then, the author proceeded in giving a comparison of what Roger brings to his race and what Serena brings to her race with four distinct categories:- “the numbers, the competition, technique, and the intangibles”. The author gave “the numbers” category outright to the Federer race. He gave “the competition” category a toss-up rating, because “[While Federer confronts the frightening proposition of easing toward retirement against Nadal, Djokovic and maybe a half-dozen big hitters capable of taking him down at any time, Serena has no rivals, no worthy challengers. If she won the next four majors without losing a set, no one would be the slightest bit surprised]” although, “[For Williams, the toughest challenges came early -- starting with the formidable Martina Hingis, outclassed by the 17-year-old Serena in the 1999 U.S. Open final. Serena had to deal with Jennifer Capriati, Lindsay Davenport, Kim Clijsters, Hingis, Justine Henin,[Amelie Mauresmo], Arantxa Sanchez Vicario and her own sister Venus, each of whom held the No. 1 ranking and did so fiercely, as opposed to the flighty Dinara Safina, Jelena Jankovic Ana Ivanovic and Caroline Wozniacki in contemporary times]”. He gave basically a tie to each race with “the technique” category. And, he out rightly gave Serena’s race the “the intangibles” category.
The Author concluded with a “Conclusion” – “Not a clear call”, but if pressed he will go with Federer [race to the GOAT], due to 16 majors in 27 tries as the essential piece of information.
The SI article is not a comparison of apples with oranges. It a comparison of the race among oranges with oranges and the race among apples with apples for the GOAT honors in each respective league.
Last edited by laj; Jun 13th, 2013 at 12:33 AM.