Recency bias is bad.

Think like starting watching tennis during Novak’s peak in 2015-2016. You missed Roger and Rafa’s peak.

Or even like I did when I started in 2011. Roger already had 16 slams and Rafa 10 majors. So missed over half of both their slams, yet saw 14 of Novak’s

So I didn’t get to see about 70% of Roger’s career including his absolute prime week to week.

And while I saw Rafa’s resurgence a few times (13, 17, 19), I didn’t really see his prime on a weekly basis of 07-10.

So further proof it’s hard to argue against Novak when you never

got to truly experience the others fully.

If I got to watch Roger in his day and Rafa in his, then got to compare it to Novak, I would have a better compass and understanding of each’s greatness.

But a few key points I have learned from the 9 years of this

1. Rafa’s a beast. He always comes back stronger, does greater things on clay, and doesn’t have a stopping point. He is never to be counted out anywhere. Ever

2. Roger is the barometer and has set the standard in his 20’s and 30’s. Others could pass him but he was the original

3. Novak pushed the bar even higher. I think he’s gonna end GOAT although I like him the least of the 3.

4. What Rafa has done in his teens is under appreciated.

5. What Roger has done in his 35-39 years are unprecedented and yet to be seen matched

6. Novak had a late prime