I think too much is made of Roger and Rafa in relation to each other. I mean, I get it - they're clearly the best players of their respective generations and arguably the two greatest players ever. Sampras and Agassi are spoken of in the same breath, as are Edberg-Becker, McEnroe-Borg, Laver-Rosewall, etc. But if you look at their accomplishments autonomously from each other, they're both amazing and don't need further justification.
Unlike some of those pairings, it is easy to forget that Roger and Rafa are actually of a different generation. They are more similar to Connors-Borg, or Lendl-Wilander, than they are Edberg-Becker or Sampras-Agassi or Djokovic-Murray. Now like Borg and Wilander, Rafa reached a very high level at a young age, so all are paired more with their elders. But Rafa really is part of the generation with Novak and Murray, and most of Roger's peers have already retired or are on their way out. I mean think about the fact that Roger and Marat Safin are much closer in age than Roger and Rafa.
Now I'm guessing that Rafa really wants to catch Roger and Roger really wants to stay ahead. But unless Rafa blows by him and finishes with 20+ Slams, or Rafa stalls at 14, then we're going to have debates for years to come as to who was the greater player, with valid arguments on both sides. For better or worse.
