Email
Print
Email
Print

Boris Becker: Only Federer could hang with my generation

Decrease fontDecrease font
Enlarge fontEnlarge font

For all the talk of the current “Golden Era” of tennis, Boris Becker says there’s only one Golden Boy who could have competed alongside his generation of greats: Roger Federer.

“I don’t think [Rafael] Nadal or [Novak] Djokovic would have been so successful in the era of serve and volley, but Federer could have played,” Becker said at the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit in New Delhi over the weekend.

He added that Federer’s variety puts him ahead of Nadal and Djokovic.

“The reason why Federer is still successful at the age of 31 is because he has got a good technique,” Becker said. “He can play from the baseline and when he has to, he can also come to the net more often than other players.”

As for whether Federer is the best player of all time, Boris was more inclined to hedge.

“It is the ultimate question, but unfortunately it has no answer,” Becker said. “Roger Federer has won more tournaments than anybody, but it remains unknown if he would have beaten a McEnroe, a Borg, a Laver or me.”

  • Published On Nov 19, 2012
  • 15 comments
    davidintel
    davidintel

    Federer vs Becker-  

    Federer wins 6-0 6-0 6-0

    Justdoit
    Justdoit

    Hey Boris - you gotta be Serious!!! Are you kiddin me dude....Enjoy your retired life and stop making foolish comments.

    AndrewM1
    AndrewM1

    You can't compare across eras.  The style of tennis that predominates today is largely a product of the advances in materials and designs that went into the equipment.  By the same token, training techniques are different as well.

    Also, Becker talks like he's was a dominant player in his era.  While he has several grand slams to his name, he wasn't the premiere player of his era, so I'm not sure how he names himself along side of McEnroe, Borg and Laver.

    notme
    notme

    And Boris thinks people believe his drivel??????

     

    craig1
    craig1

    Becker clearly must have been on something to make that comment - pretty absurd from someone with the Tennis experience he had.

    badgernation74
    badgernation74

    Lendl and Wilander were baseliners and they won more Slams than Becker or Edberg. Talent finds a way with the tools in front of them. Nadal and Djokovic compete better than anyone from that era, and better than Federer in this one.

    Maxshade71
    Maxshade71

    and vice versa. I dont see any of those serve and volley players winning on these super slow courts.

    MichaelChacon
    MichaelChacon

    Boris: "Und now GET OOF MEIN LAWN!!"

    Boris: "Und now Herr Empty Chair Nadal, I chust PASSED You! JAAA!! Now help me to mein scooter."

     

    Poor Boris, he has reached the "We were better in my epoch" stage. And obviously I retained nothing from a year of German. That I took in Germany. From a Polish political refugee. Poor Boris.

    abigchocoholic
    abigchocoholic

     @davidintel 

    Funny. 

     

    Nadal v. Becker:  6-0 6-0 6-0. Nadal never breaks a sweat. 

     

    All Becker could do is watch the ball sail to either side of him at Nadal's will.  At his peak, Becker would be lucky to be in the top 100 today. 

     

    I just watched Serena Williams and Stousser play harder tennis than Mcenroe and Borg ever did.  And they both had better physical bodies than Mcrenro or Borg ever did. 

     

    It's a whole new world now.   Way more money in the game bringing bigger stronger faster players to the court from all over the world. 

    KM00
    KM00

     @AndrewM1 Just to add... balls became a lot softer relative to the ones used in the 90s and courts a lot slower as well... But it is true... Because of these changes, it's hard to compare tennis eras. Had the general conditions (rackets, strings, balls, courts, sports science) not changed, you wouldn't also know if djoko or rafa would play the same type of game they are accustomed to today.

    AndrewM1
    AndrewM1

    By the way, for those claiming that Nadal or Djokovic are better than the players back then, the same (can't really compare across eras) is true looking back, as well.

    RafalPruszyn-ski
    RafalPruszyn-ski

     @badgernation74

     And yet, at 32 years of age, Federer is competing with these guys as an equl, and even at times as a better player. Nadal and Djoker are in their primes, Federer is 4 or 5 years past his prime, yet Federe is matching them title for title, grand slam for grand slam. A 24/25 year old Federer wouldnt lose a match to these two jokers.

    AndrewM1
    AndrewM1

     @KM00 Agreed.  That was very much my point.  Because of the enormous sweet spots and materials, the pure serve and volley game is dead because of the much greater power of each and every baseline shot from every player.  If they were using the older materials or, god-forbid, the tiny old wooden or aluminum rackets, those players could very well have decided to pursue a non-baseline style of play.

    badgernation74
    badgernation74

     @RafalPruszyn-ski  @badgernation74

    But a 19 year old Nadal did beat a 24/25 year old Federer in big time matches. Federer is a technical genius who moves with precision and wastes no energy on the court. But when he finds himself in a fifth set, the results aren't good. He refuses to change tactics because he doesn't think he should have to. That's been the overriding factor in his losses to Nadal and Djokovic. They fight harder and are willing to come out of their comfort zones when trailing. And before he won Wimbledon, Nadal and Djokovic had won NINE consecutive slams between them. Hardly slam for slam. I understand we all have our favorites, but it ridiculous to call Nadal and Djokovic jokers. Nadal is a legend, Djokovic is on his way. To deny that does nothing to honor Federer; in fact their wins against each other count more because they are all so great.