Don’t anoint Roger Federer as the 'best-ever' just yet

Odes have been written about his forehand. His slice backhand can bring opponents to their knees and his serve is so imposing it’s called "Federer’s Express."

Combine his shot-making artistry with the graceful way he covers a court and an even-tempered disposition, and Roger Federer is the kind of tennis player you might create for a video game avatar.

Except, of course, Federer is for real. And after winning his first French Open and sixth Wimbledon title this year, he arrives Monday at Flushing Meadows, N.Y., for the U.S. Open having regained the throne as king of men’s tennis.

No longer is Federer being compared to the game’s greats; the consensus now is that he is the best ever.

Heady stuff to be sure, and given his résumé, it’s a difficult claim to refute. Wimbledon was Federer’s 15th Grand Slam title, enabling him to pass Pete Sampras for the men’s record. His victory at Roland Garros also gave him the elusive clay court Grand Slam (Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors never won there in singles) that many of the "best-ever" anointers were reluctant to bestow on Sampras in the 1990s.

Federer has won 61 singles tournaments in his career and, at one point, was ranked No. 1 for 237 consecutive weeks — or more than four years. His most mind-boggling achievement, however, might be his current streak of reaching the semifinals in 21 consecutive Grand Slam events.

The question, though, is whether this is solely a tribute to his greatness, or a result of the fact that the men’s game has become a one-trick pony, with pretty much every one of the top players standing at or behind the baseline hitting hard, harder and harder still.

Look, we’re not disputing that Federer has dominated his generation and is already on the short list when discussing all-time greats.

But the best ever? We say it’s still too early to realign the Mount Rushmore of tennis.

First, comparing athletes from different eras is great for sports-talk radio and press box banter, but pretty much a waste of time from a practical point of view, even when there is some overlap in careers such as in the case of Federer and Sampras. There are just too many variables that can skew the statistics, from advances in technology and training regimens to the quality of the competition.

Nonetheless, the fans and media — at least on this side of the Atlantic — can’t help themselves. We have to assign Federer a place in history before his career is history. Federer had no sooner finished posing for photos with Sampras, Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg after winning Wimbledon than NBC commentator John McEnroe was asking those Hall of Famers whether they agreed with him that the Swiss Mister has no peer in tennis annals.

We can assume that at 28, Federer’s legacy is still growing. He will probably win a few more Grand Slam titles, perhaps getting to 20. He is the No. 1 seed for the U.S. Open, which he has already won an unprecedented five consecutive times.