re: Kornheiser: Nadal has removed Federer from the discussion of G.O.A.T

quote:

---

So because he lost once in a slam on clay to Kuerten , he is not better? By that logic, I'll assume you'll agree that Ferrer is a better hard court player than Nadal (See 2007 US Open and 2011 Australian Open).

You can argue that Kuerten is a better clay court player because he won 3 French Opens vs. Federer's 1 (I would still disagree). But pointing to one matchup is just silly.

---

I don't understand why you would believe that to be silly.

Federer was in his prime in 2004. Kuerten was three years removed from his prime (Kuerten won his three FO's in 1997, 2000, and 2001) and two months away from retiring from the game because of a bum hip.

Kuerten beat him 6-4, 6-4, 6-4 in the third round.

That's a routine beating. Again, Fed was #1 in the world.

To even question whether the Kuerten of his prime was a better clay court player than Federer is silly. How do you arrive at that conclusion? Did you enlist the services of a team of remedial fourth graders to help you out with that one?