In the first of our Greatest Of All Time quarter-finals, top seed Roger Federer takes on ninth-seeded Boris Becker in an intriguing clash.
Under our GOAT rules each match is three sets, one on each surface. Here's the rundown on the two contenders.
Grand Slam titles: 16
Australian Open winner (2004, 2006, 2007, 2010)
French Open winner (2009)
Wimbledon winner (2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009)
US Open winner (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008)
Grand Slam titles: Six
Australian Open winner (1991, 1996)
French Open semi-finalist (1987, 1989, 1991)
Wimbledon winner (1985, 1986, 1989)
US Open winner (1989)
Simon Reed's verdict
I would give Federer the edge on all surfaces. Boris would sevre and volley at Wimbledon for sure. It would have been great on all three surfaces. Boris wasn't as good on clay only reaching the semi-finals of the French Open.
Do we believe that Federer is the second best clay court player of his generation? I think we do based on his record. If we say Nadal is the best clay court player on his generation, which I think is fairly safe to say. Maybe Thomas Muster as the second best but Federer's clay court record is extraordinary so I think you'd have to say he is the second best of his time.
And he is definitely a better clay court player than Becker.
So I would give Federer the edge in each of the sets.
I think they would be very tight matches, I think Boris would give him a heck of a run for his money but I think Federer would be too good all round. Just the one service break would decide things at the most.
On the hard courts, Boris was a super shot maker on both wings but particularly on the backhand, he had a huge backhand. He also had an amazing will and was a good volleyer.
And he was an exciting, charismatic player, and an extraordinary fighter so he would test Federer all round.
But I think Roger would have too much class. We're talking Roger at his best, the Roger of three years ago. He's just too good.
6-4 (clay) 7-6 (grass) 7-6 (hard)