But is he the best ever? Well, he has lost 18 of 28 matches to rival Rafael Nadal. That gives us pause before calling him the best of all time.

But if he keeps winning Grand Slams, it might be hard to argue against him. For now, let's just say he's among the best to ever step on the court.


Resume outweighs Laver's

Bob Foltman

Chicago Tribune

As much as I love Pete Sampras, the lack of not only a French Open title but even an appearance in a French final, rules him out of "Greatest of All Time" discussion and leaves the choice between Rod Laver and Roger Federer.

Would Laver dominate today with the use of the current technology and advances available to players? How would Federer have fared with a wood racket and more cumbersome travel?

It's hard to believe the demands on players were greater in Laver's day than they are for Federer. The fact he reached two incredible milestones while being on the wrong side of 30, as well as the impeccable way he handles himself on and off the court, tip the scales in his favor.

If his back holds up, 20 Grand Slam titles doesn't appear out of the question.