PDA

View Full Version : Clay Court GOAT


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

timnz
05-18-2009, 02:48 AM
Hello,

What are people's thoughts on a Clay Court Greatest Player of all time list (as of now)?

My list is:

1/ Borg - 6 French Opens + Monte Carlo, Italian Open wins

2/ Nadal - 4 French Opens + lots of clay court Masters Championships

3/ Rosewall - 6 Major Wins at Roland Garros - (French Amateur 1953, French Open in 1968 + 4 French Pro wins at Roland Garros on Clay)

4/ Guga - 3 French Opens + Other tournaments

5/ Vilas - 1 French Open + Most Clay Court wins ever

6/ Muster - 1 French Open + many other important Tournaments

What are people's thoughts on this list.

hoodjem
05-18-2009, 03:22 AM
1. Nadal
2. Borg
3. Rosewall
4. Wilding
5. Cochet
6. Lendl
7. Wilander
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Bruguera
16. Pietrangeli
17. Courier
18. Muster
19. Federer
20. Kodes
21. von Cramm
22. Emerson
23. Nastase
24. Trabert
25. Orantes
26. Panatta
27. Agassi
28. Connors
39. Nusslein
30. Tilden
31. Gimeno
32. Frank Parker
33. Roche
34. Sven Davidson
35. Jack Crawford
36. Fred Perry
37. J.E. Patty
38. Decugis
39. Segura


(Latest version, as of 10-23-12.)

jean pierre
05-18-2009, 03:27 AM
Hello,

What are people's thoughts on a Clay Court Greatest Player of all time list (as of now)?

My list is:

1/ Borg - 6 French Opens + Monte Carlo, Italian Open wins

2/ Nadal - 4 French Opens + lots of clay court Masters Championships

3/ Rosewall - 6 Major Wins at Roland Garros - (French Amateur 1953, French Open in 1968 + 4 French Pro wins at Roland Garros on Clay)

4/ Guga - 3 French Opens + Other tournaments

5/ Vilas - 1 French Open + Most Clay Court wins ever

6/ Muster - 1 French Open + many other important Tournaments

What are people's thoughts on this list.


Vilas : 1 French + 1 UOpen on clay

timnz
05-18-2009, 03:42 AM
Thoughtful list. Makes a lot of sense.

The part I can't comprehend is how Rosewall was so good on clay. Good enough to beat Laver. His game was a patient, placement, no power lots of S&V game.

He, like Borg, was quick! This is the common theme of the great Clay Court players, they are great runners around the court. Its hard to beat a guy who can run down everything.

Cenc
05-18-2009, 04:10 AM
i would put nadal in front of borg
i agree with the other part

pc1
05-18-2009, 04:29 AM
Thoughtful list. Makes a lot of sense.

The part I can't comprehend is how Rosewall was so good on clay. Good enough to beat Laver. His game was a patient, placement, no power lots of S&V game.

Rosewall actually could hit the ball very powerfully when needed and he hit the ball very early which gave him opponent less reaction time. Rosewall was super consistent, had great mobility with great passing shots, a great volley, excellent touch, a great lob and overhead. Hard for anyone to beat that combination. His backhand slice often dug low into the ground which made it very hard to drive back.

Rosewall was a very hard hitter of the ball in his prime but we tend to think of his later years. Even if you check out the highlights of his 1972 WCT match against Laver, you can see how hard he could hit and how he was often able to move Laver all over the court on the indoor surface.

CyBorg
05-18-2009, 10:04 AM
I'd include Cochet.

thalivest
05-18-2009, 11:58 AM
Muster was a great clay courter but he would never be that high. He only won 1 French Open even in a very competitive clay court field, but one without a dominant clay courter like Borg or Nadal. His only great years on clay in general were 1990, 1995, and 1996. He wasnt even really one of the best any other year.

My list would probably be:

1. Borg- atleast right now still is IMO
2. Nadal- will be #1 in future perhaps
3. Rosewall- amazing to wonder how many French Opens he would have won had tennis been Open era back then
4. Cochet
5. LaCoste
6. Kuerten
7. Vilas
8. Lendl

timnz
05-18-2009, 01:45 PM
You are absolutely right about having Lendl on the list. Also I'd like to add Wilander

So

Borg
Nadal - agree he possibly will be future #1 but this is a snapshot in time
Rosewall
Guga
Lendl
Wilander
Vilas
Muster - put him on the list just because he was such a prolific clay court winner + also 1995 & 1996 his record on clay was Nadal like.

If you add Cochet & Lacoste, then you would also need to add Tony Wilding who was the dominant clay courter in Europe from 1910 to 1914 (2 World Clay Court World championships + 4 or 5 Monte Carlos' and lots of other clay court championships).

pc1
05-18-2009, 02:00 PM
Of course Lendl and Wilander should be added but if people add Cochet, I would venture to say that Hans Nusslein would be perhaps be even greater than Cochet on clay. Cochet never won a set from Nusslein and Nusslein according to some sources defeated Vines a good majority of the time on clay.

Here are some quotes about Nusslein from McCauley's book. Tilden decribes Nusslein as "a machine with a brain" and ranked Nusslein very high. Budge said "Nusslein is the finest player I ever saw." Bottom line is that clay was Nusslein's best surface.

I understand the best book on Nusslein is written by Robert Geist but it's in German.

By the way one minor other UNKNOWN player may be in consideration for being a top clay court player, just a little player named Rod Laver. Laver defeated Rosewall in a number of clay tournaments and while Rosewall was superior on clay, Laver did almost always give him a battle on the surface.

I would throw in Nastase too.

Wouldn't it be interesting to see a peak Nastase on red clay with his speed and touch against Nadal's heavy topspin and power?

CyBorg
05-18-2009, 02:07 PM
You're right about Nusslein, but to be fair he was 9 years older than Cochet.

Also, we shouldn't ignore Von Cramm and even though they're best remembered for excelling on grass Laver and Budge both put together great results on clay. Probably not much worse than Lendl.

Does anyone have Segura's clay court results? I'm struggling to find good information about this.

pc1
05-18-2009, 02:16 PM
You're right about Nusslein, but to be fair he was 9 years older than Cochet.

Also, we shouldn't ignore Von Cramm and even though they're best remembered for excelling on grass Laver and Budge both put together great results on clay. Probably not much worse than Lendl.

Does anyone have Segura's clay court results? I'm struggling to find good information about this.

Von Cramm is an excellent choice and we should not forget about Fred Perry also.

timnz
05-18-2009, 02:42 PM
Thanks for your input guys, it makes for a really interesting discussion. What is interesting to reflect is how much easier and less controversial it is to put this list together than the general GOAT list. I guess it is because there are more obvious standouts on Clay ie Borg, Nadal and Rosewall.

There was some discussion above about Cochet, Lacoste, Wilding (In my opinion having one of the best clay court records ever), Nusslein, Von Cramm & Perry - great claycourt players all of them - but would any of you put them above any of the names of this list?

Borg
Nadal
Rosewall
Guga
Lendl
Wilander
Vilas
Muster

Q&M son
10-09-2009, 03:03 PM
I'd include Cochet.

And Wilding.

ubermeyer
10-09-2009, 03:41 PM
Federer is 10th

he does well except for nadal

urban
10-09-2009, 04:44 PM
I would add von Cramm, Drobny, Trabert, Pietrangeli and Santana and Gimeno to the group. I personally rate, as quite all Germans do, von Cramm over Nuesslein. In the few matches between the two, von Cramm came mostly on top. The Santana-Pietrangeli matches are described by Rex Bellamy as concerts between two pianists of the highest class, say Horowitz and Rubinstein. I have seen very few clay results of Segura, his game must be suited to clay. Hoad and Laver did very well on clay, they were the only two players in history, who won the French, Italian and German triple in the same year. Laver may have been not so consistent as Rosewall on clay, but it could very well be, that he had the upper hand in their actual clay head to head, due to some European results in 1963/64. In the open era, they were 4-4 (Bournemouth, RG 1968 (both Rosewall), Amsterdam, RG 1969, Louisville 1970 (all Laver), Washington 1971 (Ro), Houston 1972 (La), Houston 1976, Ro) with the last match played at Houston (and won by Rosewall) in 1976.

hoodjem
10-10-2009, 06:12 PM
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno

timnz
10-10-2009, 07:33 PM
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno

No love for Muster?

I am in pretty much agreement over your top ten. I'd put Muster around 11th on your list, and I'd put Kuerten above Lacoste. I realise that this is all subjective opinion though.

Chopin
10-10-2009, 08:31 PM
I'd place Guga ahead of Rosewall for sure.

Fed is also definitely top 10.

Chopin
10-10-2009, 08:37 PM
Don't the TW Historians want to annoint Max Decugis as the GOAT of clay?

ubermeyer
10-10-2009, 09:34 PM
1. Borg
2. Nadal

timnz
10-10-2009, 10:49 PM
Don't the TW Historians want to annoint Max Decugis as the GOAT of clay?

Nope. His 8 wins were in French Club member only entries in the French Championship (which was what the tournament was like until 1924). Hence no international competition in terms of those titles.

I don't know if he entered the World Hard Court Championship (Which started in 1912) but I know he didn't win that tournament (which was open to International Competitors).

But you are just teasing aren't you? :)

Got to hand it to Decugis for longevity though. He first made the French Championship final in 1902 and last made the final in 1923 - 21 years later.

Idzznew
10-10-2009, 11:06 PM
This is what I have of Decugis at the moment (www.tennisarchives.com), still adding results all the time of course!

Alex


Maxime Omer (Max) Decugis

Name: Maxime Omer (Max)
Family name: Decugis
Nationality: France
Gender:
Had: 95 years
Date of birth: September 24, 1882
Place of birth: Paris, France
Date of death: September 6, 1978
Place of death: Biot, France
Professional:



Stats
Matches in database: 100
Victories in database: 70
Tournaments won in database: 2

Results

1910 Monte Carlo
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Routledge, H.B. (6-3 6-1)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Good, F. (6-0 6-1)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Kleinschroth, Robert (6-4 6-1)
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Kleinschroth, Heinrich (6-2 6-4)
Final Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Ritchie, Major Josiah George (6-3 6-0 6-0)

1911 Wimbledon
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Larsen, Erik Øckenholt (7-9 6-3 6-3 6-0)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Bentley, A.L. (6-2 6-3 6-1)
Round 4 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Gore, Arthur William Charles (Wentworth) (2-6 6-4 6-4 8-6)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Heath, Rodney W. (10-8 6-4 7-5)
Semifinals Dixon , Charles Percy d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 5-7 6-2 6-3)

1911 Monte Carlo
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Wagner, Basil (6-1 6-4)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Bostwick, A.C. (6-0 6-0)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Ritchie, Major Josiah George (6-0 6-1)
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Rahe , Friedrich Wilhelm (6-3 7-5)
Final Wilding, Anthony Frederick (Tony) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (5-7 1-6 6-3 6-0 6-1)
1912 Wimbledon
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Thomas, George A. (6-2 6-0 6-3)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Ross, A.J. (6-0 6-1 7-5)
Round 4 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Doust, Stanley Norwood (6-4 6-3 7-5)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Roper-Barrett, Herbert (6-3 7-5 4-6 6-4)
Semifinals Gobert , André Maurice Henri d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-3 6-3 1-6 4-6 6-4)

1912 Monte Carlo
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Hick, Mark D. (6-3 6-2 )
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Zambaux, ? (6-0 6-2)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Allen, E.R. (Roy) (6-2 6-2)
Semifinals Wilding, Anthony Frederick (Tony) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (9-11 7-5 6-1)

1912 World hardcourt championships
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Aranyi, I. (6-2 6-1 6-0)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Tapscott, Eric (6-3 6-1 6-0)
Quarterfinals Froitzheim, Otto d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-3 6-4 4-6 6-4)

1913 Wimbledon
Round 1 White, M.R.L. d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (w.o.)

1913 Monte Carlo
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. von Boxberg, ? (6-1 6-0)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Rahe , Friedrich Wilhelm (7-5 4-6 6-4)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Murray, C.W. (7-5 6-0)
Semifinals Wilding, Anthony Frederick (Tony) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (3-6 6-0 6-3)

1913 World hardcourt championships
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Lemaire de Warzeé, Willie (6-2 6-3 6-4)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Gault, Georges (6-4 6-0 6-2)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. von Wessely, Curt (2-6 7-9 6-4 6-4 6-1)
Semifinals Wilding, Anthony Frederick (Tony) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-0 6-3 3-6 4-6 6-3)

1914 Wimbledon
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Thol, S.F. (6-2 6-2 6-1)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Aitken, Harold I.P. (6-2 6-1 6-3)
Round 3 Davson, Perival May d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-4 4-6 6-1 6-3)

1914 Monte Carlo
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Zels, O.H. (w.o.)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Lyle, C.E. Leonard (6-2 5-7 6-2)
Quarterfinals Kleinschroth, Robert d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-4 6-4)

1914 Cannes championships
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. de Coubasch, V. (6-2 6-2)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Du Pasquier, P. (6-1 6-1)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Boelling, F. (6-3 7-5)
Semifinals Brookes, Norman Everard d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 6-3)

1914 Riviera championships
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Simond, George Miéville (6-4 6-1)
Quarterfinals Lowe, Francis Gordon d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (w.o.)

1914 Nice
Round 1 Lowe, Francis Gordon d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (9-7 6-0)

1914 South of France championships
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Lippmann, S. (6-1 6-0)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Nickerson, Hoffman (6-1 6-3)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. von Lepel, Baron (6-1 6-3)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Sturtz, H. (6-2 6-0)
Semifinals Lowe, Francis Gordon d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 6-2)

1914 Cannes Carlton 2nd meeting
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Starkovitch, A. (6-3 6-3)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Biddle, Craig (6-4 6-4)
Semifinals Wilding, Anthony Frederick (Tony) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-4 6-2)

1914 Cannes Métropole
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Dunlop, Alfred Wallace (2-6 6-3 6-1)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Hope, Charles (6-0 6-0)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Cozon, G. (6-3 6-1)
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Lowe, Francis Gordon (6-1 7-5)
Final Brookes, Norman Everard d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (4-6 6-1 6-2 6-1)

1914 World hardcourt championships
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Aranyi, I. (6-2 6-1 6-0)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. De Borman, Paul (6-1 6-0 6-2)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Von Kehrling, Bela (6-3 5-7 6-3 6-2)
Semifinals Wilding, Anthony Frederick (Tony) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-1 6-2 6-1)

1919 Wimbledon
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Thol, S.F. (6-4 6-0 6-4)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Crawford, F.R.L. (Leighton) (6-2 4-6 5-7 10-8 6-1)
Round 3 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Grace, C.S. (6-0 6-1 6-3)
Round 4 Kingscote, Algernon Robert Fitzhardinge (Algie) d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 4-6 4-6 8-6 8-6)

1919 Monte Carlo
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Henley, W.G. (w.o.)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Brown, J.Stacey (6-1 6-1)
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Manset, G. (6-2 6-0)
Final Mishu, Nicolae d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 6-0)

1919 Cannes Carlton
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Mishu, Nicolae (6-3 6-2)
Final Watters, Douglas S. d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (w.o.)

1919 Cannes championships
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Brown Jr., J.S. (6-1 6-0)
Final Mishu, Nicolae d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-8 6-4 4-6 6-3 6-0)

1919 Riviera championships
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Relacom, L. (6-0 6-0)
Final Mishu, Nicolae d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-3 6-2 10-12 2-6 7-5)

1919 South of France championships
Semifinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Albarran, Pierre (3-6 6-3 6-3)
Final Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Mishu, Nicolae (6-3 6-2 6-1)

1920 Wimbledon
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Davson, A.W. (6-0 6-1 6-3)
Round 2 Drew, Alexander S. d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-4 9-7 6-8 6-2)

1920 World hardcourt championships
Round 1 Hirsch, Pierre d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (7-5 7-5 6-4)

1920 Barcelona
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Alonso de Areyzaga, Manuel (4-6 6-0 6-1)
Quarterfinals Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Quirante, ? (6-0 6-1)
Semifinals Dupont, Marcel d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 6-3)

1923 World hardcourt championships
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Mishu, Nicolae (w.o.)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Barbas, R. (6-4 7-5 3-6 6-2)
Round 3 Washer, Jean d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-1 6-1 6-2)

1925 Roland Garros
Round 1 Olivares, ? d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (w.o.)

1925 US Lawn tennis championships
Round 1 Chapin Jr., Alfred H. d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (w.o.)

1926 Wimbledon
Round 1 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Crawford, F.R.L. (Leighton) (2-6 6-4 8-6 1-6 7-5)
Round 2 Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) d. Greville, T. George (6-3 7-5 4-6 6-4)
Round 3 Kingsley, Charles d. Decugis, Maxime Omer (Max) (6-2 6-2 9-7)

timnz
10-10-2009, 11:29 PM
This is great. What is interesting is that in many matches he pushed Wilding hard (Wilding was the best clay courter from circa 1910 to 1914).

hoodjem
10-11-2009, 07:03 AM
No love for Muster?

I am in pretty much agreement over your top ten. I'd put Muster around 11th on your list, and I'd put Kuerten above Lacoste. I realise that this is all subjective opinion though.

Muster who? Just kidding.
Muster won only a single FO and seven other clay court titles, including Rome (three times) and Monte Carlo (three times), and 40 total clay court titles.
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno
14. Vilas
15. Federer
16. Muster
17. Courier
18. Bruguera

hoodjem
10-11-2009, 07:25 AM
I'd put Kuerten above Lacoste.
Lacoste has three French titles in singles (plus two runner-up), two in doubles (plus one runner-up), a bronze medal in doubles (on clay), and six Davis Cup (world championship) titles against Tilden and Johnston (not all on clay).

Kuerten has three French titles in singles, and 14 other clay court titles (including two at Monte Carlo, one at Rome, and one at Hamburg).

Tough call.



Vilas has one FO title (plus three runners-up), one USO title on clay in 1977, and 41 other clay court titles (including one each at Monte Carlo, Rome, and Hamburg).

Federer has one FO title (plus three runners-up), and 9 total clay court titles (including 4 at Hamburg, two runners-up at Rome, and three runners-up at Monte Carlo).

DarthFederer
10-12-2009, 05:01 PM
Nadal is the best

Federer should be at least be in the top 15

hoodjem
10-12-2009, 05:38 PM
Federer should be at least be in the top 15OK, make a case. We'll listen.

timnz
10-12-2009, 08:27 PM
Nadal is the best

Federer should be at least be in the top 15


If you don't ask me why do you rate Nadal above Borg? Looking at Achievements Borg is still a bit ahead of Nadal on Clay I would have thought.

Borgforever
10-13-2009, 01:00 AM
Clay court GOAT IMO:

I give a slight edge to Bear against all others -- although that is very debatable -- but here's my red clay top tier GOATs:

Björn Borg, Ken Rosewall, Rafael Nadal, H. L. Doherty, René Lacoste, Tony Wilding, Henri Cochet.

hoodjem
10-13-2009, 03:26 AM
^^^Cochet and Lacoste (I rate Cochet a bit higher), yes absolutely!

I know too little about Wilding and H.L., although you are helping that a lot.

borg number one
10-24-2009, 06:04 PM
See the best Clay Courter of all time on video:

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/25046593/ (Bud Collins on Borg/Nadal on Clay)

Borg-Gerulitas ('80 FO Final)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGvgXpuSKaE

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Borg+Vilas&search_ type=&aq=f (Borg Vilas '75 FO Final)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSDaYzKOxU8
(Borg Vilas '78 FO Final)


Borg-Lendl ('81 FO Final)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW4z0FnUz4o
Borg-Orantes (1974 Final)

Borg-Pecci ('79 FO Final)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGMGnjiBgMY

JoelDali
10-24-2009, 06:32 PM
[QUOTE=borg number one;4052892]
Borg-Lendl ('81 FO Final)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW4z0FnUz4o
QUOTE]

One of the greatest matches on clay of all time.

wyutani
10-24-2009, 06:43 PM
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno
14. Vilas
15. Federer
16. Courier
17. Muster

hoodjem
10-30-2009, 07:36 AM
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno
14. Vilas
15. Federer
16. Courier
17. Muster
Looks quite good to me. I can accept that Fed was better on clay than Muster or Courier.

David_86
10-30-2009, 09:34 AM
Borg was so far ahead of his rivals on clay from 77-81 and this really was the clay court era. So many tournaments played on clay and players whose strongest surface was clay. All those big North American tournaments played on green clay throughout the summer, the 2 big Spanish touraments in autumn. Nowadays they have only kept the spring clay court season and added a relatively small European summer season.

Sam F
10-31-2009, 12:21 AM
To me, there are a few ways to discuss this:

1- Who has the best record overall
2- Who was most dominant at a given time
3- Who would win if they all played today

What's interesting to me is how the French often seems to have someone who the field and world believe and accept will win. Often he does. I thought a lot of players gave up before the match against Courier in '91. It was almost a cakewalk for him. Lendl had a year or two like that (except Wilander never threw int he towel early). Kuerten's 3rd FO definitely seemed like this. Nadal 1-4 FO were this way. Kinda odd how this mentality sinks in there.

If we talking about the most dominant year, Muster in '95 cannot be discounted. Also, remember he lost a lot of time with that terrible injury when he was pinned b/t two car bumpers. I really don't care how quickly they say he came back, even though any competitive tennis after only 6 months is astonishing, he took him much longer to get back to full strength and confidence.

Regardless, I'm surprised Courier and Bruguera aren't mentioned as yet. Each won back to back FO. If you go by career record, that's better in a lot of ways than Muster.

borg number one
11-03-2009, 05:37 AM
See this interesting "Bleacher Report" article about the greatest clay court player of all time:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/161108-is-rafael-nadal-the-best-player-on-clayever

See this excerpt about Borg vs. Nadal:

"Borg is essentially a gold standard measuring tool for any modern player's success. He was a constant professional that made his game work on any surface. But it's no secret he loved the clay.

He carried an 86 percent winning mark for his career, 245-39, and won 30 titles. His four consecutive French Open titles were only recently matched by Nadal. His six career crowns at Roland Garros are still an ATP record, for now.

Still not as prolific of a winning percentage as Rafael, but Rafael has not finished with his career yet.

The right-hander from Sodertalje was one of the first to use a two-handed backhand on tour, much like the Raging Bull uses today. Apart from the differences in handedness, their similarities are eerie.

* Both are athletic baseliners with great backhands.
* Both use a considerable amount of topspin as a primary weapon.
* Both commit a very slim number of errors.
* Both can outlast anybody on tour in a five-set match.
* Both are cool, collected, and soft-spoken both on and off the court.
* Both have a very underrated, yet extraordinarily effective serve.

And so far, they have both adapted their game to the grasses of Wimbledon. Well, Borg did anyway. It is still to be seen if Nadal can have the kind of success that Borg did.

Borg beat some terrific players for the French title: Manuel Orantes, Vilas, Ilie Nastase, and Lendl. Nadal has mainly abused Federer at Roland Garros. He also beat Mariano Puerta in 2005, who had never advanced past the second round of any Slam previous to that.

Verdict: Toss-up."

Michael Bluth
11-06-2009, 02:09 PM
Just playing devil's advocate, but Muster was more dominant at his peak in 95 than Courier or Bruguera at their peaks. Courier's 92 French Open was pretty dominant too though.

Ripper014
11-06-2009, 02:27 PM
1. 2006 Nadal
2. 1977 Vilas
3. 1978 Borg

hoodjem
11-07-2009, 04:20 PM
1. 2006 Nadal
2. 1977 Vilas
3. 1978 Borg
I vote . . .
1. 1978 Borg-2008 Nadal (tie)
3. 1977 Vilas
4. 2006 Nadal

2006 Nadal lost three sets in the whole FO tournament. 1977 Vilas lost one set for the tournament. 2008 Nadal or 1978 Borg lost zero sets in the whole tournament. (1978 Borg beat Barazzutti 0-1-0 in the semis. Ouch!)

2008 Nadal positively crushed (1-3-0) Fed in the FO final. Ouch!

Most one-sided match between two high quality players I've seen in a long time.

Ripper014
11-07-2009, 06:01 PM
I vote . . .
1. 1978 Borg-2008 Nadal (tie)
3. 1977 Vilas
4. 2006 Nadal

2006 Nadal lost three sets in the whole FO tournament. 1977 Vilas lost one set for the tournament. 2008 Nadal or 1978 Borg lost zero sets in the whole tournament. (1978 Borg beat Barazzutti 0-1-0 in the semis. Ouch!)

2008 Nadal positively crushed (1-3-0) Fed in the FO final. Ouch!

Most one-sided match between two high quality players I've seen in a long time.



You seem to be basing this all on the French Open... Vilas in the summer of '77 had a run of 53 match winning streak on clay. Which was broken by Nastase using a spaghetti strung racket, Vilas retired objecting the use of the string job which was banned later in the year. This record winning streak was finally broken by Nadal in '06.

Borg was great but Vilas was pretty much unbeatable on clay in '77, as was Nadal in '06.

TheFifthSet
11-07-2009, 06:37 PM
In terms of form I think Nadal was better in '07-'08 than '06 on lay.

hoodjem
11-08-2009, 07:37 AM
Borg was great but Vilas was pretty much unbeatable on clay in '77, as was Nadal in '06.
I believe that Borg beat Vilas three times in 1977, two on clay (at Nice and Monte Carlo).

Ripper014
11-08-2009, 08:19 AM
I believe that Borg beat Vilas three times in 1977, two on clay (at Nice and Monte Carlo).

I have no knowledge of that... but Vilas won 16 tournaments that year (13 of which were on clay) including the French Open, the US Open (on clay at that time) and finished as runner-up at the Australian. It is worth noting that in none of his finals did he meet Borg... but then it is not Vilas's fault Borg didn't get to the finals.

This can all be debatable... but I am assuming that this thread is to solicate who each of us believes are the "Clay Court GOATs" and these are my choices.

hoodjem
11-08-2009, 08:36 AM
Yep. Vilas did a great record (particularly on clay) in 1977. No doubt about that. Borg skipped the French Open in 1977 because he was under contract with WTT.

Mustard
11-12-2009, 12:20 PM
Statiscally, Nadal and Borg are the best players on clay, but I think Thomas Muster at his peak, which wasn't long in terms of longevity, was the best clay court player.

As Muster is my all-time favourite player, I'm somewhat biased, but during his peak on clay, if he wasn't beating down his opponents, he'd dig so deep that he'd win matches on willpower. He saved a lot of match points in clay court matches during his peak, and he turned these matches around in his favour so often.

boredone3456
11-12-2009, 01:27 PM
Yep. Vilas did a great record (particularly on clay) in 1977. No doubt about that. Borg skipped the French Open in 1977 because he was under contract with WTT.

Its sad, given their stats against each other on clay that year, they had some good matches, that their was no match to be had at the french between them. However, even though Borg had some wins over Vilas that year, Vilas was the superior clay courter of the two overall I think, had Borg been able to play and win the french, you could probably then make the argument otherwise, but seeing as we can only speculate on that Vilas was superior that year.

In terms of the thread topic, Borg though is in my opinion the clay court GOAT. I know some are overly critical of using just Roland Garros as a judge or simply picking someone who won it a couple of times, but not doing so would be like annointing someone the GOAT on grass who played at and never won Wimbledon, the biggest Grass Court prize. My List right now

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Lendl
5. Wilander
6. Vilas

Vilas is sixth because of the fact that he fell in FO finals to people higher than him on the list several times. Other important clay court tournaments give him his ranking though, his clay court win streak was amazing, but on clays biggest stage he had a tough time beating his biggest clay rivals consistantly.

Clay lover
11-18-2009, 03:59 AM
I read through the whole thread and haven't seen a single mention of Sergi Bruguera, who had won two RG titles (and one of the few to DEFEND his title). I am not saying that he should be on the list, but I figured I could raise him up and see what you guys think of his status in the history of clay court tennis

flying24
11-18-2009, 05:52 AM
I read through the whole thread and haven't seen a single mention of Sergi Bruguera, who had won two RG titles (and one of the few to DEFEND his title). I am not saying that he should be on the list, but I figured I could raise him up and see what you guys think of his status in the history of clay court tennis

He is a great clay courter, but he isnt one of the greatest ever on clay. Lots of guys in history have 2 or more French Open titles, 3 or more finals, and 4 or more semis, so that doesnt set him apart. He was never really the dominant clay courter. He wasnt even the favorite to win the French either year he won. The only Masters he won during his prime on clay was 1993 Monte Carlo when Courier who killed him in Rome and was considered the top clay courter in the World at the time (until that years French where Sergei upset Courier) was absent. His other big clay court Masters was Monte Carlo in 1991. He has limited achievements as far as Masters victories and success, and overall tour success on clay compared to other French Open winners, especialy multiple.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 06:10 AM
Sergi was a great player, and considerably underrated. He was very streaky as a player though, which is why he hated playing Thomas Muster, someone who would concentrate on virtually every point. I absolutely loved their matches together when Muster would nearly always find a way to win, even when he was once a set and 2 breaks down (1995 Stuttgart Outdoor). Sergi's best moment was winning his first French Open in 1993 against Jim Courier, a result few expected.

jean pierre
11-18-2009, 06:17 AM
I believe that Borg beat Vilas three times in 1977, two on clay (at Nice and Monte Carlo).

It's true, but it was before the French, and Vilas didn't play good at this time (I think he lost against Franulovic in the first round in Rome). It's during and after the French he was incredible and won 53 matches consecutively on clay.

kishnabe
11-18-2009, 08:40 AM
i would put nadal in front of borg
i agree with the other part

Borg is obviously better in terms of achievement plus there was the factor of what if Borg had no reited at 25. He might have had 8-10 french open titles. Nadal won 4 so far with many master series titles but there is the case right now he might not win as many as people would have believed in 2008.

David_86
11-18-2009, 08:44 AM
When you look at Vilas' FO record, you can either see him as an underachiever or overrated. For someone who is supposed to be the 2nd best clay player of his generation...

1975 - Lost to Borg
1976 - Lost to Solomon
1977 - Won
1978 - Lost to Borg
1979 - Lost to Pecci
1980 - Lost to Solomon
1981 - Lost to Noah
1982 - Lost to Wilander

He never came close to Borg.

borg number one
11-18-2009, 09:03 AM
Mustard, Muster was definitely tough there for a while, especially on Clay. Being a lefty was also an advantage he had. He was strong and could seemingly go forever on clay.

What exactly happened to him and the failed drug test? I'm asking, because I don't recall the exact details, but wasn't it a "blood doping" situation? Was there some possible innocent explanation at all, or is the consensus now that he gained a significant competitive advantage unfairly? Perhaps there were lots of players at that time doing the same thing in hindsight, given what we know now in sports such as Baseball and even Tennis. Thanks in advance.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 09:04 AM
I have no knowledge of that... but Vilas won 16 tournaments that year (13 of which were on clay) including the French Open, the US Open (on clay at that time) and finished as runner-up at the Australian. It is worth noting that in none of his finals did he meet Borg... but then it is not Vilas's fault Borg didn't get to the finals.

This can all be debatable... but I am assuming that this thread is to solicate who each of us believes are the "Clay Court GOATs" and these are my choices.

Borg didn't get to the finals, because Vilas was playing mickey mouse events.

Borg was undefeated on red clay in 1977 and owned Vilas in the two events they played together on the surface.

As for Vilas's French Open performance - it is most definitely not better than Borg's flawless play at the 1980 French Open. Also worth noting is that the draws were missing some great players, including Borg.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 09:05 AM
It's true, but it was before the French, and Vilas didn't play good at this time (I think he lost against Franulovic in the first round in Rome). It's during and after the French he was incredible and won 53 matches consecutively on clay.

Playing mickey mouse events.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 09:07 AM
Its sad, given their stats against each other on clay that year, they had some good matches, that their was no match to be had at the french between them. However, even though Borg had some wins over Vilas that year, Vilas was the superior clay courter of the two overall I think, had Borg been able to play and win the french, you could probably then make the argument otherwise, but seeing as we can only speculate on that Vilas was superior that year.

Absurd. Borg's red clay record was a spotless 22-0 that year. Vilas was definitely the second best player that year on clay and took advantage of Borg's absence from RG due to WTT commitments.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 09:46 AM
What exactly happened to him and the failed drug test? I'm asking, because I don't recall the exact details, but wasn't it a "blood doping" situation? Was there some possible innocent explanation at all, or is the consensus now that he gained a significant competitive advantage unfairly? Perhaps there were lots of players at that time doing the same thing in hindsight, given what we know now in sports such as Baseball and even Tennis. Thanks in advance.

Who are you talking about here? Muster never failed a drugs test. Boris Becker insinuated that Thomas was taking drugs after the 1995 Monte Carlo final because he couldn't believe Muster's fitness in coming back to beat Becker from 2 sets down after spending the previous night on a drip at the hospital because of a lack of sugar in Thomas' bloodstream during the semi final against Andrea Gaudenzi. But when you run 10 miles a day like Thomas did, playing tennis matches is easy by comparison. When Thomas heard about Boris' accusations, he requested an immediate drug test, and it came back negative.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 09:50 AM
Absurd. Borg's red clay record was a spotless 22-0 that year. Vilas was definitely the second best player that year on clay and took advantage of Borg's absence from RG due to WTT commitments.

Hypotheticals count for nothing I'm afraid, only results, and Vilas' 1977 results were clearly better than Borg's.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 10:00 AM
Hypotheticals count for nothing I'm afraid, only results, and Vilas' 1977 results were clearly better than Borg's.

There is nothing hypothetical about Borg's better results than those of Vilas in 1977. I am not sure where you see better results by Vilas.

A hypothetical could be a "would be/could be" argument. For example, if Borg missed several months of playing time and I argued that he would have beaten Vilas had he been healthy and therefore was better, then I would be presenting a fallacious argument.

There is no such hypothetical here. Borg did play and did play better.

The fallacy here is on the side of those who argue for Vilas. Actually there are two fallacies:

a) the fallacious value allotted for Vilas's mickey mouse tourney results - such as his wholly irrelevant clay court streak, obtained by playing mostly weak opponents

b) the fallacious value allotted to the French open, which had many important players missing, including Borg

The French Open was not consistently attended in the 1970s. It was not in and of itself an automatic indicator of clay court superiority. The same thing happened in the early 1970s, when Jan Kodes won two titles at Roland Garros, while the far superior Laver and Rosewall were off playing WTT. However, Laver and Rosewall had other red clay results that supported their superiority over Kodes.

So, there.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 10:04 AM
There is nothing hypothetical about Borg's better results than those of Vilas in 1977. I am not sure where you see better results by Vilas.

A 53 match clay-court winning streak, which lasted until Nadal beat it in 2006. This streak also included 2 clay-court grand slam victories at the French Open and the US Open. It's plain to see who had the best results in 1977.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 10:06 AM
A 53 match clay-court winning streak, which lasted until Nadal beat it in 2006. This streak also included 2 clay-court grand slam victories at the French Open and the US Open. It's plain to see who had the best results in 1977.

See above.

I believe that Vilas had, by default, better green clay results than Borg in 1977 due to Borg's absence in the summer when most of the har-tru events were played.

However Borg clearly had better red clay results, meaning that there is evidence that he was better on red clay than Vilas.

Overall, Borg was far superior than Vilas due to his excellence on grass and carpet. Surfaces that Vilas avoided - when he didn't, he performed far worse on them than Borg.

pc1
11-18-2009, 11:57 AM
See above.

I believe that Vilas had, by default, better green clay results than Borg in 1977 due to Borg's absence in the summer when most of the har-tru events were played.

However Borg clearly had better red clay results, meaning that there is evidence that he was better on red clay than Vilas.

Overall, Borg was far superior than Vilas due to his excellence on grass and carpet. Surfaces that Vilas avoided - when he didn't, he performed far worse on them than Borg.

To put it in perspective, when Vilas and Borg finally met in the 1978 French Open Borg won 6-1 6-1 6-3. Vilas actually played very well. In that tournament Borg won 127 games and lost only 32 for an astonishing and superhuman games won percentage of 79.87 percentage which I think may be the best of any era but clearly the best of the Open Era.

Borg may very well have had the most dominant year of the Open Era in 1978 with a Games Won Percentage for the year of 66.18%.

In 1977 Borg won three matches and lost none to Vilas. Borg was clearly a better clay court player than Vilas in 1977 and would have been heavily favored had they met in the French Open.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 12:14 PM
In 1977 Borg won three matches and lost none to Vilas. Borg was clearly a better clay court player than Vilas in 1977 and would have been heavily favored had they met in the French Open.

You can't blame Vilas for showing up at the 1977 French Open and winning the tournament in Borg's absence. You've got to blame Borg for not playing in the French Open. You've got to give Vilas the benefit of the doubt, not Borg.

Tournament results should be the only thing that matters as far as rankings are concerned, not head-to-heads. It doesn't matter if Vilas won a load of what would be considered 250 tournaments today, he still won 2 grand slams that year and dominated on clay throughout the second half of the season. Honestly, Borg fans, stick to 1978-1981 when your guy won loads, 1977 was clearly Vilas' year.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 12:19 PM
You can't blame Vilas for showing up at the 1977 French Open and winning the tournament in Borg's absence. You've got to blame Borg for not playing in the French Open. You've got to give Vilas the benefit of the doubt, not Borg.

Tournaments results should be the only thing that matters as far as rankings are concerned, not head-to-heads. It doesn't matter if Vilas won a load of what would be considered 250 tournaments today, he still won 2 grand slams and dominated on clay throughout the second half of the season. Honestly, Borg fans, stick to 1978-1981 when your guy won loads, 1977 was clearly Vilas' year.

I don't think Vilas should be blamed either. But if a question is posed: "who was the better player on red clay that year?" the answer requires analyzing all the variables.

If the question is "what are some of the most dominant performances at the French open" then Vilas's result should not come with a grain of salt either. Here we go strictly on the results.

However a question like "what are some of the most impressive performances at the French open", then things get a bit more ambiguous and perhaps here we can take into account that players like Borg or Orantes did not attend the event.

A more useful and interesting question to me would be "what was the most dominant player on (insert surface) at a particular point in time?". This question unburdens us from referring to a grand slam event as the sole variable for consideration. We do this now because of the standardization of the tour. But can we get away with the same knowing what we know about the 70s? I don't think so.

We can ask very different questions and get very different answers.

pc1
11-18-2009, 12:59 PM
I don't think Vilas should be blamed either. But if a question is posed: "who was the better player on red clay that year?" the answer requires analyzing all the variables.

If the question is "what are some of the most dominant performances at the French open" then Vilas's result should not come with a grain of salt either. Here we go strictly on the results.

However a question like "what are some of the most impressive performances at the French open", then things get a bit more ambiguous and perhaps here we can take into account that players like Borg or Orantes did not attend the event.

A more useful and interesting question to me would be "what was the most dominant player on (insert surface) at a particular point in time?". This question unburdens us from referring to a grand slam event as the sole variable for consideration. We do this now because of the standardization of the tour. But can we get away with the same knowing what we know about the 70s? I don't think so.

We can ask very different questions and get very different answers.

There's no doubt Vilas was a great clay court player and he was excellent in 1977 but in keeping with this thread which is asking who is the clay court goat, "If you had your life on the line and you had to pick one player to win between Borg and Vilas and they played at Roland Garros in 1977 in the French Open Final, who would you bet on?" You have to pick Borg unless you have a death wish.

Did Vilas have a great clay season in 1977? My answer is yes. Was he the best clay court player in 1977? My answer is no. Clearly Borg was.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 01:20 PM
There's no doubt Vilas was a great clay court player and he was excellent in 1977 but in keeping with this thread which is asking who is the clay court goat, "If you had your life on the line and you had to pick one player to win between Borg and Vilas and they played at Roland Garros in 1977 in the French Open Final, who would you bet on?" You have to pick Borg unless you have a death wish.

Whoever you'd bet your life on in a hypothetical 1977 French Open final between Vilas and Borg, you can't base who had the better year on that, you have to go by what actually happened in terms of tournament results throughout the year.

Did Vilas have a great clay season in 1977? My answer is yes. Was he the best clay court player in 1977? My answer is no. Clearly Borg was.

Not in terms of results. Vilas won 2 clay court grand slams and had an awesome run on clay in the second half of the year. Whether Borg could have beaten Vilas at the French Open if he had showed up or if he could have beaten Vilas at the US Open if he hadn't have gotten injured is all hypothetical speculation.

pc1
11-18-2009, 02:40 PM
Whoever you'd bet your life on in a hypothetical 1977 French Open final between Vilas and Borg, you can't base who had the better year on that, you have to go by what actually happened in terms of tournament results throughout the year.



Not in terms of results. Vilas won 2 clay court grand slams and had an awesome run on clay in the second half of the year. Whether Borg could have beaten Vilas at the French Open if he had showed up or if he could have beaten Vilas at the US Open if he hadn't have gotten injured is all hypothetical speculation.

Again I'm not writing about results in this case. You disagreeing about results and that's fine but I'm writing that in my opinion Borg was the superior clay court player to Vilas in 1977. In tournament results for the year Borg won 13 of 20 tournaments plus Wimbledon and he was unbeaten against Vilas with a 3-0 record.

Mustard
11-18-2009, 02:54 PM
I thought Borg won 11 titles in 1977?

1. Memphis
2. Nice
3. WCT Monte Carlo
4. Denver
5. Wimbledon
6. Boca Raton
7. Madrid
8. Barcelona
9. Basel
10. Cologne
11. Wembley

While Vilas won 16:

1. Springfield
2. Buenos Aires (Apr)
3. Virginia Beach
4. French Open
5. Kitzbuhel
6. Washington DC
7. Louisville
8. South Orange
9. Columbus
10. US Open
11. Paris Outdoor
12. Tehran
13. Bogota
14. Santiago
15. Buenos Aires (Nov)
16. WCT Johannesburg

And wasn't it 2-0 to Borg in the head-to-head from 1977?

Bjorn Borg def. Guillermo Vilas (6-4, 1-6, 6-2, 6-0) in the final of Nice
Bjorn Borg def. Guillermo Vilas (6-2, 6-3) in the semi final of WCT Monte Carlo.

hoodjem
11-18-2009, 05:56 PM
And wasn't it 2-0 to Borg in the head-to-head from 1977?

Bjorn Borg def. Guillermo Vilas (6-4, 1-6, 6-2, 6-0) in the final of Nice
Bjorn Borg def. Guillermo Vilas (6-2, 6-3) in the semi final of WCT Monte Carlo.
It was not on clay, but Borg did also beat Vilas at the Masters in NYC on carpet: 6-3, 6-3.

CyBorg
11-18-2009, 07:14 PM
I have Borg winning Hilton Head in 1977 as well, which makes for 12 titles. Not sure what the 13th is, but this is not the first time I've heard of 13.

pc1
11-19-2009, 06:49 AM
I have Borg winning Hilton Head in 1977 as well, which makes for 12 titles. Not sure what the 13th is, but this is not the first time I've heard of 13.

That was from memory and I could be wrong but I got that from the Collins book.

krosero
11-19-2009, 06:51 AM
I thought Borg won 11 titles in 1977?

1. Memphis
2. Nice
3. WCT Monte Carlo
4. Denver
5. Wimbledon
6. Boca Raton
7. Madrid
8. Barcelona
9. Basel
10. Cologne
11. WembleyJust note, Boca Raton was Borg's first victory of the year, in January (the ATP told me it will be updated when their historical database gets updated).

Borg's got 13 titles in Bud Collins' book, though Bud doesn't say what the extra 2 titles are. Vilas has 16 titles at the ATP and ITF sites, though Bud gives him 17 with Rye, NY which he says was not officially recognized by the ATP.

pc1
11-19-2009, 06:54 AM
Just note, Boca Raton was Borg's first victory of the year, in January (the ATP told me it will be updated when their historical database gets updated).

Borg's got 13 titles in Bud Collins' book, though Bud doesn't say what the extra 2 titles are. Vilas has 16 titles at the ATP and ITF sites, though Bud gives him 17 with Rye, NY which he says was not officially recognized by the ATP.

Thanks Krosero for confirming the amount of the titles that I recalled reading in the Collins book.

jean pierre
11-19-2009, 07:12 AM
Whoever you'd bet your life on in a hypothetical 1977 French Open final between Vilas and Borg, you can't base who had the better year on that, you have to go by what actually happened in terms of tournament results throughout the year.



Not in terms of results. Vilas won 2 clay court grand slams and had an awesome run on clay in the second half of the year. Whether Borg could have beaten Vilas at the French Open if he had showed up or if he could have beaten Vilas at the US Open if he hadn't have gotten injured is all hypothetical speculation.

You're totally right !!

David_86
11-19-2009, 08:04 AM
Maybe Borg fans should just give up trying to convince Vilas fans that their man had better results in 1977. At least they can go home and watch Borg humiliate Vilas in some very prestigious clay-court tournaments.

OnceWas
11-19-2009, 09:55 AM
Your top 3 are the top 3. Maybe not in that order. But, maybe so.

Ripper014
11-19-2009, 11:10 AM
See above.

I believe that Vilas had, by default, better green clay results than Borg in 1977 due to Borg's absence in the summer when most of the har-tru events were played.

However Borg clearly had better red clay results, meaning that there is evidence that he was better on red clay than Vilas.

Overall, Borg was far superior than Vilas due to his excellence on grass and carpet. Surfaces that Vilas avoided - when he didn't, he performed far worse on them than Borg.



Lets stay on point... the title of the thread is "Clay Court Goat", not red clay not green clay not Wimbledon results. Just simply who is the Clay Court Goat...

I believe Vilas in 77' is only second to Nadal in 06'?

I also don't think you can base head-to-head meetings over results over a field. If that is the case... then Panatta is a much better player than Borg... I believe he has a 2-0 record over Borg at the French Open.

All threads here are to solicit opinions... you have provided yours... Mustard his... and I mine. At the end of the day I doubt any of us are going to change our decisions so why don't we just move on.

pc1
11-19-2009, 11:46 AM
Lets stay on point... the title of the thread is "Clay Court Goat", not red clay not green clay not Wimbledon results. Just simply who is the Clay Court Goat...

I believe Vilas in 77' is only second to Nadal in 06'?

I also don't think you can base head-to-head meetings over results over a field. If that is the case... then Panatta is a much better player than Borg... I believe he has a 2-0 record over Borg at the French Open.

All threads here are to solicit opinions... you have provided yours... Mustard his... and I mine. At the end of the day I doubt any of us are going to change our decisions so why don't we just move on.

The thread is clay court GOAT, not best year on clay. Borg defeated Panatta most of the time on clay and yes he did defeat Panatta at the French. Panatta never defeated Borg again after Borg made an leap in his tennis level in 1977.

Why don't you check out Borg's clay court record in 1978? He wasn't just defeating people, he was destroying them. Even Panatta, who Borg defeated in five sets at the Italian wasn't really close to Borg if the match was fairly judged. The line calls were so bias in favor of Panatta, the crowd threw objects at Borg and yet Borg still prevailed in five sets. That is possibly the greatest year on clay ever.

Like I wrote before Borg lost only 32 games in seven matches at the French in 1978. That's domination.

Yet you can't base the clay court GOAT on that year alone despite the fact Borg was invincible that year. The thread is the greatest clay court GOAT and I think that means career.

Overall in his career Borg has super credentials to be the clay court GOAT.

Mustard
11-19-2009, 12:21 PM
Rafael Nadal is 139-4 on clay since the start of 2005 Monte Carlo. That's domination over a 4 year period.

I still maintain that the Muster of 1995 is the best. He would find a way to win virtually any clay-court match in this period, no matter how much he was down. He lost a handful, but won the vast majority brilliantly with an insane schedule. 1995 Muster = Clay GOAT.

CyBorg
11-19-2009, 03:56 PM
Lets stay on point... the title of the thread is "Clay Court Goat", not red clay not green clay not Wimbledon results. Just simply who is the Clay Court Goat...

I believe Vilas in 77' is only second to Nadal in 06'?

I also don't think you can base head-to-head meetings over results over a field. If that is the case... then Panatta is a much better player than Borg... I believe he has a 2-0 record over Borg at the French Open.

All threads here are to solicit opinions... you have provided yours... Mustard his... and I mine. At the end of the day I doubt any of us are going to change our decisions so why don't we just move on.

- my post was in response to another post, not simply in response to the thread

- h2h meetings was never the only point, which is why Panatta is an inappropriate example .. Borg did not only own Vilas, but the clay court events he played altogether

- the point of discussions is not to present opinions, but to engage in debates - meaning making convincing, logical arguments.

CyBorg
11-19-2009, 03:59 PM
The thread is clay court GOAT, not best year on clay. Borg defeated Panatta most of the time on clay and yes he did defeat Panatta at the French. Panatta never defeated Borg again after Borg made an leap in his tennis level in 1977.

Why don't you check out Borg's clay court record in 1978? He wasn't just defeating people, he was destroying them. Even Panatta, who Borg defeated in five sets at the Italian wasn't really close to Borg if the match was fairly judged. The line calls were so bias in favor of Panatta, the crowd threw objects at Borg and yet Borg still prevailed in five sets. That is possibly the greatest year on clay ever.

Like I wrote before Borg lost only 32 games in seven matches at the French in 1978. That's domination.

Yet you can't base the clay court GOAT on that year alone despite the fact Borg was invincible that year. The thread is the greatest clay court GOAT and I think that means career.

Overall in his career Borg has super credentials to be the clay court GOAT.

Borg was destroying people on clay even in 1977. Vilas supporters mainly argue for his results by valuing the quantity of his results over Borg's quality.

Yes, Vilas did win a lot of events on clay that year, but he also played a crapload of events on the surface. Largely because he shunned events on other surfaces - something that Borg never did. Vilas should not be rewarded for this.

Muster is a similar case. He won something in the neighbourhood of 11-12 events on clay in 1995. But he carefully avoided events on other surfaces and piled up a lot of insignificant titles (though I do give Muster credit for at least being the best player on clay in his best year, something not true for Vilas).

People who argue for Vilas and Muster simply use poor logic.

Regardless, you are correct that the thread was not originally about the best year on clay, but the best overall on clay. But I think the thread digressed because there is no argument. Borg is the clearcut best ever on clay at least until or if Nadal returns to greatness next spring. The "best year" argument is a desperate attempt by certain fans of other players to turn the topic in their favour.

Chopin
11-19-2009, 04:13 PM
There is no such thing as a GOAT.

I mean, Federer would probably beat Borg on clay the vast majority of times, but he's not in the same category as Borg in terms of accomplishments on clay.

There are too many factors to consider in debates like this. Eras are not created equal (despite what the TW Historians will tell you--oh oops, they'll tell you that Laver's era was superior), but it's truly impossible to compare eras. It's all a matter of personal opinion--stats are worthless in many instances.

In my opinion, winning one Wimbledon today is a much greater accomplishment than Renshaw's streak at Wimbledon, but others may disagree.

Why even debate all this GOAT bs?

Let's just stop comparing players over vast periods of time. If you want to talk about Borg, talk about him within the context of the players he competed against. If you want to talk about Nadal, talk about him in the same context.

CyBorg
11-19-2009, 04:28 PM
There are too many factors to consider in debates like this. Eras are not created equal (despite what the TW Historians will tell you--oh oops, they'll tell you that Laver's era was superior), but it's truly impossible to compare eras.

Have not grown tired of the noise of crickets yet?

borg number one
11-19-2009, 04:45 PM
Chopin, I must disagree. I don't think Federer would probably beat Borg more often than not on clay. Borg would attack his backhand mercilessly and by about the 3rd set, Federer would be sucking wind, hoping for cooler temperatures at RG. We've seen that play out a few times versus Nadal already.

pc1
11-20-2009, 03:38 AM
Borg was destroying people on clay even in 1977. Vilas supporters mainly argue for his results by valuing the quantity of his results over Borg's quality.

Yes, Vilas did win a lot of events on clay that year, but he also played a crapload of events on the surface. Largely because he shunned events on other surfaces - something that Borg never did. Vilas should not be rewarded for this.

Muster is a similar case. He won something in the neighbourhood of 11-12 events on clay in 1995. But he carefully avoided events on other surfaces and piled up a lot of insignificant titles (though I do give Muster credit for at least being the best player on clay in his best year, something not true for Vilas).

People who argue for Vilas and Muster simply use poor logic.

Regardless, you are correct that the thread was not originally about the best year on clay, but the best overall on clay. But I think the thread digressed because there is no argument. Borg is the clearcut best ever on clay at least until or if Nadal returns to greatness next spring. The "best year" argument is a desperate attempt by certain fans of other players to turn the topic in their favour.

When you look at 1978, you realize Borg also had perhaps the best year on clay also and he very well may have had the best career on clay.

jrepac
11-20-2009, 08:01 AM
Chopin, I must disagree. I don't think Federer would probably beat Borg more often than not on clay. Borg would attack his backhand mercilessly and by about the 3rd set, Federer would be sucking wind, hoping for cooler temperatures at RG. We've seen that play out a few times versus Nadal already.

I would wholeheartedly agree w/you...

borg number one
11-20-2009, 06:38 PM
Very good Jrepac. When Borg was playing on Clay, though he always had that "Ice Borg" face going, you got the sense that he didn't think anyone should beat him on the surface, especially on red clay. It was possible, if perhaps he was somewhat off for some reason, and playing on a fast rublico surface (green clay at the US Open), but beating him at the French would not be easy to accomplish.

Imagine a series of ten 5 set matches versus him on red clay, say over 20 days. That would NOT be fun for anyone. Nadal,Lendl, and Muster have been the only players I've seen that could sustain such a high level of play for say 4-5 hours on that surface. It requires superhuman stamina, court coverage, and grit. I'll include Vilas in that short list as well, with the others.

David_86
11-21-2009, 12:41 AM
There's a nice quote from Hans Gildemeister, a very talented clay-court player in his day, after he was beaten in straight sets by Borg at the French Open.

"I've never played so well, but I've never felt so tired and I've never had to run so much, and I've played Vilas over 5 sets."

hoodjem
11-21-2009, 07:13 AM
There's a nice quote from Hans Gildemeister, a very talented clay-court player in his day, after he was beaten in straight sets by Borg at the French Open.

"I've never played so well, but I've never felt so tired and I've never had to run so much, and I've played Vilas over 5 sets."

This was after the quarterfinals of the 1979 FO: 6-4, 6-1, 7-5, for Borg . . . of course.

the little dasher
11-22-2009, 07:41 PM
How many French opens has Borg won?

How many has Vilas one?

There's your answer. (As if you reallt doubted it).

And Muster a great on clay?

Get off the grass.

Chopin
11-22-2009, 08:20 PM
Have not grown tired of the noise of crickets yet?

How could one grow tired of the sound of crickets? They're sublime.

Mustard
11-23-2009, 05:24 AM
the little dasher;4131769]How many French opens has Borg won?

How many has Vilas one?

As much of a fan I am of Vilas, of course I know Borg was better than him on clay. Vilas played very well in the 1978 French Open final and was completely outplayed. What I'm saying is that Vilas was the best player for the year 1977.

And Muster a great on clay?

Get off the grass.

Thomas won 40 clay court titles in his career and went 111-5 on clay in a two year period (1995-1996). People have definitely forgotten how good Thomas was in these years.

borg number one
11-23-2009, 05:31 AM
Mustard, I agree with you T. Muster was great on clay, during his peak. I was amazed at his tenacity and consistency. That hard left handed forehand was very difficult to contend with. I remember reading that just like Borg/Vilas/Nadal, he would train like crazy (no coincidence that the great clay courters are like that). He also showed great resiliency when he came back after that serious car accident. That showed a lot of heart, no doubt and we should all admire him for that toughness.

the little dasher
11-23-2009, 02:32 PM
As much of a fan I am of Vilas, of course I know Borg was better than him on clay. Vilas played very well in the 1978 French Open final and was completely outplayed. What I'm saying is that Vilas was the best player for the year 1977.



Thomas won 40 clay court titles in his career and went 111-5 on clay in a two year period (1995-1996). People have definitely forgotten how good Thomas was in these years.

Fair enough. I'd be happy enough with the 1st point though I see that Borg and Vilas played once on clay in '77 with Borg the winner. Skinny evidence I agree but I'd still favour Borg over Vilas even in 77 in a direct match up. Vilas' overall record was probably superior in that year so its take your pick I guess.

I didn't know that about Muster though. Always thought him over rated but those stats are impressive. Thanks for the heads up on him.

Mustard
11-23-2009, 04:00 PM
Here is the full list of Thomas Muster's clay-court matches in those two years.

Thomas Muster clay-court results in 1995
1995 Mexico City
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Nicolas Pereira (6-2, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Leonardo Lavalle (6-4, 6-1)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Oscar Martinez (7-6, 6-1)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (7-6, 1-6, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Fernando Meligeni (7-6, 7-5)

1995 Estoril
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Oscar Martinez (6-4, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Franco Davin (7-5, 6-1)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Javier Sanchez (4-6, 7-6, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Emilio Sanchez (6-2, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-4, 6-2)

1995 Barcelona
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Jordi Burillo (4-6, 7-6, 6-2)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Andrei Cherkasov (6-3, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Javier Sanchez (7-6, 6-4)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Costa (6-3, 3-6, 7-5)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-3, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Magnus Larsson (6-2, 6-1, 6-4)

1995 Monte Carlo Masters
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Guy Forget (6-2, 6-2)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Bernd Karbacher (6-2, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Alberto Berasategui (7-6, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. David Wheaton (6-4, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Andrea Gaudenzi (6-3, 7-6)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Boris Becker (4-6, 5-7, 6-1, 7-6, 6-0)

1995 Rome Masters
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Paul Haarhuis (6-4, 6-4)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Jan Siemerink (3-6, 6-4, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-2, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Michael Chang (6-3, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Wayne Ferreira (3-6, 6-1, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Sergi Bruguera (3-6, 7-6, 6-2, 6-3)

1995 French Open
Round of 128: Thomas Muster def. Gerard Solves (3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1)
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Cedric Pioline (6-1, 6-3, 6-3)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Costa (6-3, 7-5, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Andrei Medvedev (6-3, 6-3, 6-0)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-2, 3-6, 6-7, 7-5, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-4, 6-0, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Michael Chang (7-5, 6-2, 6-4)

1995 St. Poelten
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Filip Dewulf (4-6, 7-6, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Alex Lopez Moron (6-2, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Rodolphe Gilbert (6-2, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Stefano Pescosolido (6-0, 3-6, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-3, 3-6, 6-1)

1995 Gstaad
Round of 32: Alex Corretja def. Thomas Muster (7-5, 6-1)

1995 Stuttgart Outdoor
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Rios (6-2, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bernd Karbacher (6-4, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Tomas Carbonell (6-2, 6-0)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Sergi Bruguera (6-7, 7-6, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Jan Apell (6-2, 6-2)

1995 Amsterdam
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Martin Sinner (6-2, 6-3)
Round of 16: Marcelo Filippini def. Thomas Muster (Walkover)

1995 Kitzbuhel
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Steve Campbell (6-3, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Frederik Fetterlein (6-3, 6-3)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Sandor Noszaly (7-6, 6-3)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Gilbert Schaller (6-3, 6-7, 6-3)
Final: Albert Costa def. Thomas Muster (4-6, 6-4, 7-6, 2-6, 6-4)

1995 San Marino
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Filippini (6-4, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Felix Mantilla (6-3, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Adrian Voinea (7-6, 2-6, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Stefano Pescosolido (6-4, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Andrea Gaudenzi (6-2, 6-0)

1995 Umag
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Roberto Carretero (6-2, 3-0 ret.)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Alejo Mancisidor (6-3, 6-1)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Jordi Arrese (6-1, 6-3)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (7-5, 5-7, 7-6)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Costa (3-6, 7-6, 6-4)

1995 Bucharest
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Tomas Carbonell (6-4, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Cedric Pioline (7-5, 6-3)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Arnaud Boetsch (6-4, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Sandor Noszaly (6-2, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Gilbert Schaller (6-4, 6-3)

Clay-court win-loss record for 1995: 65-2

Thomas Muster clay-court results in 1996
1996 Mexico City
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Juan Albert Viloca-Puig (6-4, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Luis Lobo (7-6, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Alejandro Hernandez (6-4, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (6-3, 2-6, 6-1)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Jiri Novak (7-6, 6-2)

1996 Estoril
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. David Rikl (6-1, 7-5)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Moya (6-4, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (6-4, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Alex Corretja (6-7, 6-4, 6-0)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Andrea Gaudenzi (7-6, 6-4)

1996 Barcelona
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Alex Corretja (6-1, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-4, 7-5)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Roig (6-1, 6-1)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Moya (4-6, 6-2, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Rios (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-1)

1996 Monte Carlo Masters
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Tomas Carbonell (7-5, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Moya (6-2, 7-6)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Sjeng Schalken (5-7, 6-1, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Cedric Pioline (6-3, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-3, 5-7, 4-6, 6-3, 6-2)

1996 Munich
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Stefano Pescosolido (6-1, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Hendrik Dreekmann (4-6, 6-2, 7-5)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Mark Philippoussis (6-3, 0-6, 6-2)
Semi Final: Carlos Moya def. Thomas Muster (6-3, 6-3)

1996 Rome Masters
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Herbert Wiltschnig (6-3, 6-0)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Petr Korda (6-2, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Todd Martin (1-6, 6-4, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Rios (6-3, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-3, 3-6, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Richard Krajicek (6-2, 6-4, 3-6, 6-3)

1996 St. Poelten
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Nasser-Ghanim Al-Khulaifi (6-0, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Marc-Kevin Goellner (6-7, 6-4, 7-6)
Quarter Final: Andrea Gaudenzi def. Thomas Muster (Walkover)

1996 French Open
Round of 128: Thomas Muster def. Frederik Fetterlein (6-4, 6-2, 6-4)
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Gerard Solves (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Adrian Voinea (6-2, 5-2 ret.)
Round of 16: Michael Stich def. Thomas Muster (4-6, 6-4, 6-1, 7-6)

1996 Stuttgart Outdoor
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Marcos Aurelio Gorriz (7-6, 7-6)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Galo Blanco (6-3, 6-0)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (6-2, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Alberto Berasategui (6-3, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-2, 6-2, 6-4)

1996 Kitzbuhel
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Emilio Sanchez (6-3, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Mariano Zabaleta (6-1, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Emilio Benfele Alvarez def. Thomas Muster (6-1, 7-5)

1996 Bogota
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Franco Squillari (6-4, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bryan Shelton (6-4, 6-4)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Ramon Delgado (2-6, 6-1, 7-5)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Lucas Arnold Ker (6-1, 6-7, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Nicolas Lapentti (6-7, 6-2, 6-3)

Clay-court win-loss record for 1996: 46-3
Clay-court win-loss record for 1995-1996 combined: 111-5

CyBorg
11-23-2009, 04:05 PM
Fair enough. I'd be happy enough with the 1st point though I see that Borg and Vilas played once on clay in '77 with Borg the winner. Skinny evidence I agree but I'd still favour Borg over Vilas even in 77 in a direct match up. Vilas' overall record was probably superior in that year so its take your pick I guess.

I didn't know that about Muster though. Always thought him over rated but those stats are impressive. Thanks for the heads up on him.

Twice. They played twice on clay. Three times overall.

CyBorg
11-23-2009, 04:07 PM
Mustard, I agree with you T. Muster was great on clay, during his peak. I was amazed at his tenacity and consistency. That hard left handed forehand was very difficult to contend with. I remember reading that just like Borg/Vilas/Nadal, he would train like crazy (no coincidence that the great clay courters are like that). He also showed great resiliency when he came back after that serious car accident. That showed a lot of heart, no doubt and we should all admire him for that toughness.

Great player and one of my favorites. I also think that his two-year peak in 95-96 is underrated and by virtue of its Borg/Nadal-like dominance it puts him ahead of guys like Bruguera and Courier for me on clay.

hoodjem
11-23-2009, 04:32 PM
Clay-court win-loss record for 1996: 46-3
Clay-court win-loss record for 1995-1996 combined: 111-5

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno
14. Vilas
15. Muster
16. Federer
17. Courier
18. Bruguera
19. Decugis

Azzurri
11-23-2009, 04:36 PM
Rafael Nadal is 139-4 on clay since the start of 2005 Monte Carlo. That's domination over a 4 year period.

I still maintain that the Muster of 1995 is the best. He would find a way to win virtually any clay-court match in this period, no matter how much he was down. He lost a handful, but won the vast majority brilliantly with an insane schedule. 1995 Muster = Clay GOAT.

would love to see nadal/muster...love it.

Carsomyr
11-23-2009, 05:07 PM
Muster is a similar case. He won something in the neighbourhood of 11-12 events on clay in 1995. But he carefully avoided events on other surfaces and piled up a lot of insignificant titles (though I do give Muster credit for at least being the best player on clay in his best year, something not true for Vilas).

Exactly. Muster was winning clay events well into September, after the US Open had taken place. Nadal's four clay court titles in 2008 came during the normal clay season, four of his five came in the same period in 2007, and his four titles in 2006 came in the same period as well.

And it's not like he didn't lose on clay in 1995; he still suffered defeats against Costa and Corretja. High quality clay court opponents, to be sure, but so were Nadal's losses from 2006-2008: didn't lose a match on clay in 2006, lost to four time French Open finalist and reigning holder of the Coupe des Mousquetaires, Roger Federer, in Hamburg in 2007, and lost to former FO champion, JC Ferrero, in Rome in 2008.

the little dasher
11-23-2009, 05:31 PM
Thanks for those stats on Muster Mustard. You must be a big fan.

That sort of record over such a long stretch certainly does stack up as an exceptional performance in the game's history.

Tomaz Bellucci
11-30-2009, 12:16 AM
Here is the full list of Thomas Muster's clay-court matches in those two years.

Thomas Muster clay-court results in 1995
1995 Mexico City
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Nicolas Pereira (6-2, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Leonardo Lavalle (6-4, 6-1)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Oscar Martinez (7-6, 6-1)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (7-6, 1-6, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Fernando Meligeni (7-6, 7-5)

1995 Estoril
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Oscar Martinez (6-4, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Franco Davin (7-5, 6-1)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Javier Sanchez (4-6, 7-6, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Emilio Sanchez (6-2, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-4, 6-2)

1995 Barcelona
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Jordi Burillo (4-6, 7-6, 6-2)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Andrei Cherkasov (6-3, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Javier Sanchez (7-6, 6-4)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Costa (6-3, 3-6, 7-5)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-3, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Magnus Larsson (6-2, 6-1, 6-4)

1995 Monte Carlo Masters
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Guy Forget (6-2, 6-2)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Bernd Karbacher (6-2, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Alberto Berasategui (7-6, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. David Wheaton (6-4, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Andrea Gaudenzi (6-3, 7-6)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Boris Becker (4-6, 5-7, 6-1, 7-6, 6-0)

1995 Rome Masters
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Paul Haarhuis (6-4, 6-4)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Jan Siemerink (3-6, 6-4, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-2, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Michael Chang (6-3, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Wayne Ferreira (3-6, 6-1, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Sergi Bruguera (3-6, 7-6, 6-2, 6-3)

1995 French Open
Round of 128: Thomas Muster def. Gerard Solves (3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1)
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Cedric Pioline (6-1, 6-3, 6-3)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Costa (6-3, 7-5, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Andrei Medvedev (6-3, 6-3, 6-0)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-2, 3-6, 6-7, 7-5, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-4, 6-0, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Michael Chang (7-5, 6-2, 6-4)

1995 St. Poelten
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Filip Dewulf (4-6, 7-6, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Alex Lopez Moron (6-2, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Rodolphe Gilbert (6-2, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Stefano Pescosolido (6-0, 3-6, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-3, 3-6, 6-1)

1995 Gstaad
Round of 32: Alex Corretja def. Thomas Muster (7-5, 6-1)

1995 Stuttgart Outdoor
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Rios (6-2, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bernd Karbacher (6-4, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Tomas Carbonell (6-2, 6-0)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Sergi Bruguera (6-7, 7-6, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Jan Apell (6-2, 6-2)

1995 Amsterdam
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Martin Sinner (6-2, 6-3)
Round of 16: Marcelo Filippini def. Thomas Muster (Walkover)

1995 Kitzbuhel
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Steve Campbell (6-3, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Frederik Fetterlein (6-3, 6-3)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Sandor Noszaly (7-6, 6-3)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Gilbert Schaller (6-3, 6-7, 6-3)
Final: Albert Costa def. Thomas Muster (4-6, 6-4, 7-6, 2-6, 6-4)

1995 San Marino
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Filippini (6-4, 6-2)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Felix Mantilla (6-3, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Adrian Voinea (7-6, 2-6, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Stefano Pescosolido (6-4, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Andrea Gaudenzi (6-2, 6-0)

1995 Umag
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Roberto Carretero (6-2, 3-0 ret.)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Alejo Mancisidor (6-3, 6-1)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Jordi Arrese (6-1, 6-3)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (7-5, 5-7, 7-6)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Costa (3-6, 7-6, 6-4)

1995 Bucharest
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Tomas Carbonell (6-4, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Cedric Pioline (7-5, 6-3)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Arnaud Boetsch (6-4, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Sandor Noszaly (6-2, 6-2)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Gilbert Schaller (6-3, 6-4)

Clay-court win-loss record for 1995: 65-2

Thomas Muster clay-court results in 1996
1996 Mexico City
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Juan Albert Viloca (6-4, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Luis Lobo (7-6, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Alejandro Hernandez (6-4, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (6-3, 2-6, 6-1)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Jiri Novak (7-6, 6-2)

1996 Estoril
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. David Rikl (6-1, 7-5)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Moya (6-4, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (6-4, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Alex Corretja (6-7, 6-4, 6-0)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Andrea Gaudenzi (7-6, 6-4)

1996 Barcelona
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Alex Corretja (6-1, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-4, 7-5)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Roig (6-1, 6-1)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Moya (4-6, 6-2, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Rios (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-1)

1996 Monte Carlo Masters
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Tomas Carbonell (7-5, 6-4)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Carlos Moya (6-2, 7-6)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Sjeng Schalken (5-7, 6-1, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Cedric Pioline (6-3, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-3, 5-7, 4-6, 6-3, 6-2)

1996 Munich
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Stefano Pescosolido (6-1, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Hendrik Dreekmann (4-6, 6-2, 7-5)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Mark Philippoussis (6-3, 0-6, 6-2)
Semi Final: Carlos Moya def. Thomas Muster (6-3, 6-3)

1996 Rome Masters
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Herbert Wiltschnig (6-3, 6-0)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Petr Korda (6-2, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Todd Martin (1-6, 6-4, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Marcelo Rios (6-3, 6-2)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Albert Costa (6-3, 3-6, 6-4)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Richard Krajicek (6-2, 6-4, 3-6, 6-3)

1996 St. Poelten
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Nasser-Ghanim Al-Khulaifi (6-0, 6-1)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Marc-Kevin Goellner (6-7, 6-4, 7-6)
Quarter Final: Andrea Gaudenzi def. Thomas Muster (Walkover)

1996 French Open
Round of 128: Thomas Muster def. Frederik Fetterlein (6-4, 6-2, 6-4)
Round of 64: Thomas Muster def. Gerard Solves (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Adrian Voinea (6-2, 5-2 ret.)
Round of 16: Michael Stich def. Thomas Muster (4-6, 6-4, 6-1, 7-6)

1996 Stuttgart Outdoor
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Marcos Aurelio Gorriz (7-6, 7-6)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Galo Blanco (6-3, 6-0)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Francisco Clavet (6-2, 6-4)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Alberto Berasategui (6-3, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-2, 6-2, 6-4)

1996 Kitzbuhel
Round of 64: BYE
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Emilio Sanchez (6-3, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Mariano Zabaleta (6-1, 6-2)
Quarter Final: Emilio Benfele Alvarez def. Thomas Muster (6-1, 7-5)

1996 Bogota
Round of 32: Thomas Muster def. Franco Squillari (6-4, 6-3)
Round of 16: Thomas Muster def. Bryan Shelton (6-4, 6-4)
Quarter Final: Thomas Muster def. Ramon Delgado (2-6, 6-1, 7-5)
Semi Final: Thomas Muster def. Lucas Arnold Ker (6-1, 6-7, 6-3)
Final: Thomas Muster def. Nicolas Lapentti (6-7, 6-2, 6-3)

Clay-court win-loss record for 1996: 46-3
Clay-court win-loss record for 1995-1996 combined: 111-5

Great and amazing stats :shock:

boris becker 1
12-01-2009, 04:59 PM
1. Borg
2. Guga
3. Nadal
4. Vilas
5.Bruguera
6. Rosewall
7. Muster
8. Agassi
9. lendl
10 Courier


anyone that didnt put Bruguera on their list is a disgrace

lambielspins
12-01-2009, 06:22 PM
1. Borg
2. Guga
3. Nadal
4. Vilas
5.Bruguera
6. Rosewall
7. Muster
8. Agassi
9. lendl
10 Courier


anyone that didnt put Bruguera on their list is a disgrace

Putting Bruguera above Rosewall, Muster (even with an extra French), and Lendl is a much bigger disgrace than not having him in the top 10.

big bang
12-02-2009, 12:01 AM
1. Borg
2. Guga
3. Nadal
4. Vilas
5.Bruguera
6. Rosewall
7. Muster
8. Agassi
9. lendl
10 Courier


anyone that didnt put Bruguera on their list is a disgrace

LOL Guga before Nadal RLMAO!!!
Agassi before Lendl and Courier good one, you sure are the joker of the day:)

boris becker 1
12-06-2009, 08:12 PM
bruguera would get in nadals head if they played. rafa wouldnt be able to wear him down. sergi would drop shot rafa to death and make it a war.


the year bruguera beat courier in the final I have not seen anyone play as good on clay as that match.

namelessone
12-06-2009, 08:54 PM
bruguera would get in nadals head if they played. rafa wouldnt be able to wear him down. sergi would drop shot rafa to death and make it a war.


the year bruguera beat courier in the final I have not seen anyone play as good on clay as that match.

Check out Nadal's 2008 RG run or for that matter Borg's runs. That's the best CC tennis you will ever see.

Datacipher
12-07-2009, 01:02 AM
Sergi was a great player, and considerably underrated. He was very streaky as a player though, which is why he hated playing Thomas Muster, someone who would concentrate on virtually every point. I absolutely loved their matches together when Muster would nearly always find a way to win, even when he was once a set and 2 breaks down (1995 Stuttgart Outdoor). Sergi's best moment was winning his first French Open in 1993 against Jim Courier, a result few expected.

Bruguera was really lazy. That was his real problem. Were it not for that, not only would he have more FO's, he would have been a real threat at the other slams as well. He had as much spin as Nadal does today. He had good hands. He had great court coverage. He actually was quite a bit more talented than Muster, too bad he didn't have 1/4 of Muster's work ethic. Nobody was able to get him to work, not his coaches, not John Mcenroe, not his father. A shame.

hoodjem
12-07-2009, 04:05 AM
Results--not coulda, shoulda, wanna.

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Santana
13. Gimeno
14. Vilas
15. Bruguera
16. Federer
17. Muster
18. Courier

JoshDragon
12-07-2009, 12:06 PM
1. Borg
2. Guga
3. Nadal
4. Vilas
5.Bruguera
6. Rosewall
7. Muster
8. Agassi
9. lendl
10 Courier


anyone that didnt put Bruguera on their list is a disgrace

Please explain how a 3 time RG champion is better than a 4 time RG champion.

hoodjem
12-07-2009, 12:18 PM
Please explain how a 3 time RG champion is better than a 4 time RG champion.
You go JD. Good point!

hoodjem
12-22-2009, 04:58 AM
When you look at Vilas' FO record, you can either see him as an underachiever or overrated. For someone who is supposed to be the 2nd best clay player of his generation...

1975 - Lost to Borg
1976 - Lost to Solomon
1977 - Won
1978 - Lost to Borg
1979 - Lost to Pecci
1980 - Lost to Solomon
1981 - Lost to Noah
1982 - Lost to Wilander

He never came close to Borg.
When was the 53-match winning streak of Vilas's on clay? 1977?

pc1
12-22-2009, 05:22 AM
When was the 46 match winning streak of Vilas's on clay? 1977?

Didn't play Borg at all during that streak. Borg was 3-0 against Vilas that year.
And yes the streak was in 1977. Some have the streak at 50 if you count another tournament.

I know this may sound silly to some of you but while I don't think Jimmy Connors is the clay court GOAT I do think he was a great clay court player. He won the US Open on har tru and won many top clay court tournaments. I think Connors is a top clay court player. I think he very well could be in the top 15 of all time. Put it this way, I think he's far better than Michael Chang and yet Chang has one French Open and Connors doesn't.

hoodjem
12-22-2009, 05:44 AM
Clay-court GOATs

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Lacoste
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Vilas
13. Santana
14. Bruguera
15. Pietrangeli
16. Federer
17. Muster
18. Courier
19. von Cramm
20. Emerson
21. Trabert
22. Agassi
23. Connors
24. Gimeno
25. Frank Parker
26. Roche
27. Nastase
28. Sven Davidson
29. Jack Crawford
30. Fred Perry

hoodjem
12-22-2009, 05:47 AM
I know that may sound silly but while I don't think Jimmy Connors is the clay court GOAT I do think he was a great clay court player. He won the US Open on har tru and won many top clay court tournaments. I think Connors is a top clay court player. I think he very well could be in the top 15 of all time. Put it this way, I think he's far better than Michael Chang and yet Chang has one French Open and Connors doesn't.
Connors was ferocious on any surface, and he won the US Open on har-tru in 1976 over Borg, and was runner-up on green-clay at the USO twice (1975, 1977).

Mustard
12-22-2009, 03:19 PM
When was the 53-match winning streak of Vilas's on clay? 1977?

May-October 1977 and it was controversially ended by Ilie Nastase and the spaghetti-strung racquet he was using in the match (1977 Aix-en-Provence final). Vilas retired in the best of 5 sets match in protest after Nastase won the first two sets 6-1, 7-5. After that match, Vilas won another 21 clay-court matches in a row before 1977 ended. Ignoring that Nastase match, Vilas won 74 clay-court matches in a row and 74 matches in a row overall (not all of them on clay).

Didn't play Borg at all during that streak. Borg was 3-0 against Vilas that year.

2-0, seeing as the 3rd was in January 1978 in the semi finals of the Masters. Still, the fact is that during the clay-streak, Vilas could only beat who was in front of him and he did that. I believe that Vilas could possibly have beaten Borg at that time because he was playing so well and his confidence was sky high, so I don't know why people just assume that Borg would have hammered him had they met on clay in the second half of 1977. Is it the 1978 French Open final that convinces them? But Vilas wasn't as good then as he had been 6-9 months previously. Even though I think Vilas played a great match in the 1978 French Open final inspite of the scoreline being one-sided in Borg's favour, the Borg in that tournament was Borg at his absolute best, close to perfection.

pc1
12-22-2009, 07:15 PM
I would add von Cramm, Drobny, Trabert, Pietrangeli and Santana and Gimeno to the group. I personally rate, as quite all Germans do, von Cramm over Nuesslein. In the few matches between the two, von Cramm came mostly on top. The Santana-Pietrangeli matches are described by Rex Bellamy as concerts between two pianists of the highest class, say Horowitz and Rubinstein. I have seen very few clay results of Segura, his game must be suited to clay. Hoad and Laver did very well on clay, they were the only two players in history, who won the French, Italian and German triple in the same year. Laver may have been not so consistent as Rosewall on clay, but it could very well be, that he had the upper hand in their actual clay head to head, due to some European results in 1963/64. In the open era, they were 4-4 (Bournemouth, RG 1968 (both Rosewall), Amsterdam, RG 1969, Louisville 1970 (all Laver), Washington 1971 (Ro), Houston 1972 (La), Houston 1976, Ro) with the last match played at Houston (and won by Rosewall) in 1976.

Urban,

I am now of the understanding that von Cramm and Nusslein only played once and that von Cramm won but in virtually all the practice matches Nusslein won. I've been generally of the opinion over the years that Nusslein is clearly up there with the Vines, Budge, and Perry trio (which I suppose would make it a quartet) as far as tennis strength is concerned. From what I have read of his style, he seems to be a 1930's version of Agassi, hitting the ball on the rise and never missing. Well at least the older version of Agassi. I'm sure Nusslein enjoyed tennis more than Agassi. lol.

pc1
12-22-2009, 07:25 PM
2-0, seeing as the 3rd was in January 1978 in the semi finals of the Masters. Still, the fact is that during the clay-streak, Vilas could only beat who was in front of him and he did that. I believe that Vilas could possibly have beaten Borg at that time because he was playing so well and his confidence was sky high, so I don't know why people just assume that Borg would have hammered him had they met on clay in the second half of 1977. Is it the 1978 French Open final that convinces them? But Vilas wasn't as good then as he had been 6-9 months previously. Even though I think Vilas played a great match in the 1978 French Open final inspite of the scoreline being one-sided in Borg's favour, the Borg in that tournament was Borg at his absolute best, close to perfection.

I suppose technically you're correct but the Masters is considered, strangely enough to be a part of the 1977 season so it's really 3-0.

It's kind of like American Football. The 2010 Super Bowl will be considered a part of the 2009 National Football League season.

hoodjem
02-04-2010, 04:25 PM
Mais oui--
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra

pc1
02-04-2010, 05:19 PM
Mais oui--
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Borotra


It's appropriate you brought this thread back considering the Borg/Rosewall clay court thread.

My fantasy clay match ups of recent years. Kuerten at his best against Nadal at his best.

Nastase against Federer. Super speed, super touch by Nastase against Federer.

borg number one
02-04-2010, 05:24 PM
That's very interesting on Kuerten pc1, who took out Federer at the FO in 2004.

See this on him and Luxilon strings:


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1899876,00.html

http://img.timeinc.net/time/europe/magazine/2009/0601/tennis_0601.jpg

hoodjem
02-04-2010, 05:32 PM
It's appropriate you brought this thread back considering the Borg/Rosewall clay court thread.

My fantasy clay match ups of recent years. Kuerten at his best against Nadal at his best.

Nastase against Federer. Super speed, super touch by Nastase against Federer.

Nastase could probably out-psych Fed.

pc1
02-04-2010, 05:37 PM
Nastase could probably out-psych Fed.

In my mind I see Nastase winning most of the time on clay, especially with wood. Come to think of it, with wood it would be a fascinating match up on any surface.

hoodjem
02-04-2010, 05:43 PM
Nastase was a magician, but a crazy magician.

He and Tiriac were like Rasputin and the Wild Man of Borneo.

borg number one
02-04-2010, 06:06 PM
Do you guys know Tiriac is Romania's first BILLIONAIRE? The guy is the richest man in tennis! He started the first private bank there and started numerous banks/businesses in the country, post-Communism. He was "crazy like a fox":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_%C5%A2iriac

http://estadium.ya.com/daviscup/images/finalphotos/Sin%20t%EDtulo-Tiriac&Nastase1972.jpg

pc1
02-04-2010, 07:15 PM
Do you guys know Tiriac is Romania's first BILLIONAIRE? The guy is the richest man in tennis! He started the first private bank there and started numerous banks/businesses in the country, post-Communism. He was "crazy like a fox":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_%C5%A2iriac

http://estadium.ya.com/daviscup/images/finalphotos/Sin%20t%EDtulo-Tiriac&Nastase1972.jpg

So Romania's first billionaire is a man who used to eat glass on a bet. lol.

hoodjem
02-16-2010, 04:19 PM
Do you guys know Tiriac is Romania's first BILLIONAIRE? The guy is the richest man in tennis! He started the first private bank there and started numerous banks/businesses in the country, post-Communism. He was "crazy like a fox":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_%C5%A2iriac

http://estadium.ya.com/daviscup/images/finalphotos/Sin%20t%EDtulo-Tiriac&Nastase1972.jpg
Holy cow--Tiriac is a billionaire?

Incroyable!



Ahhh; this explains a lot: "In 1983, he [Tiriac] became a tennis manager; above all, he managed Boris Becker from 1984 to 1993."

borg number one
02-16-2010, 08:59 PM
Holy cow--Tiriac is a billionaire?

Incroyable!



Ahhh; this explains a lot: "In 1983, he [Tiriac] became a tennis manager; above all, he managed Boris Becker from 1984 to 1993."


Yes Hoodjem, lol. I almost fell out of my chair when I read that. He was "crazy like a Fox" wasn't he? Vilas and Becker, not bad as a player, coach, and manager, but he was known to be pretty strange. I'll take L. Bergelin instead!

hoodjem
02-17-2010, 06:28 PM
Yes Hoodjem, lol. I almost fell out of my chair when I read that. He was "crazy like a Fox" wasn't he? Vilas and Becker, not bad as a player, coach, and manager, but he was known to be pretty strange.
If you had Tiriac and Nastase and Becker and Vilas play a doubles match, I think someone would be killed.

Three crazies and one poet--what a combination.

hoodjem
04-05-2010, 05:22 AM
Here's the greatest claycourter thread.

Where's Kuerten? Where's Federer?

pc1
04-05-2010, 05:25 AM
Here's the greatest claycourter thread.

Where's Kuerten? Where's Federer?

Not that it means much but I always got the impression Kuerten was one of the happiest men ever to play tennis. He seemed to really get joy out of just playing and hitting the ball.

borg number one
04-05-2010, 05:28 AM
I think you're list has it just about right Hoodjem. Kuerten is top 10. Federer is probably in the #10-#15 range or #15-#20 all time on your list. Some may disagree, but top 15-20 all time on a surface is really not bad. There have been so many greats over the years.

pc1
04-05-2010, 05:34 AM
I think you're list has it just about right Hoodjem. Kuerten is top 10. Federer is probably in the #10-#15 range or #15-#20 all time on your list. Some may disagree, but top 15-20 all time on a surface is really not bad. There have been so many greats over the years.

Of course. Tennis has been around a long time and there have been a lot of great players. If a player ranked in the top 15-20 on every surface for all time, that player probably would be in the top ten ever overall, maybe top five. The ranking of 10-15 is obviously even better.

hoodjem
04-05-2010, 06:20 AM
Mais oui.
Claycourt GOATs--

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Lacoste
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Borotra
11. Wilding
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Bruguera
16. Pietrangeli
17. Federer
18. Muster
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Emerson
22. Trabert
23. Agassi
24. Connors
25. Gimeno
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

dmt
04-05-2010, 06:30 AM
Mais oui.
Claycourt GOATs--

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Lacoste
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Vilas
13. Santana
14. Bruguera
15. Pietrangeli
16. Federer
17. Muster
18. Courier
19. von Cramm
20. Emerson
21. Trabert
22. Agassi
23. Connors
24. Gimeno
25. Frank Parker
26. Roche
27. Nastase
28. Sven Davidsonthis is a pretty good list. I must admit i am not an expert on players before the open era, but i still think Guga is too low. Maybe i am biased since i am a huge fan of his clay court game, but i do think he should be higher.

hoodjem
04-06-2010, 02:23 PM
This is a pretty good list. I must admit I am not an expert on players before the open era, but i still think Guga is too low. Maybe I am biased since I am a huge fan of his clay court game, but I do think he should be higher.True. Guga is very, very good on clay. But the players ahead of him are damn good.

After all, what is the name of the FO trophy? (Numbers 1-10 are pretty ethereal company.)

timnz
04-06-2010, 02:43 PM
Where does Anthony Wilding fit on this list? As far as I can see he was mostly unbeaten for about 5 years on clay (1910 to 1914 seasons) and probably tallied the most clay court titles of anyone in history.

kimbahpnam
04-06-2010, 03:13 PM
If Nadal is 2 and Fed lost 3 FO FINALS to him, wouldn't that give Fed more credibility on clay? Not to mention beating him in Madrid?

TMF
04-06-2010, 03:56 PM
If Nadal is 2 and Fed lost 3 FO FINALS to him, wouldn't that give Fed more credibility on clay? Not to mention beating him in Madrid?

Here's a poll from another that has Federer as the #7 greatest CC of all time.

1. Björn Borg
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Mats Wilander
4. Gustavo Kuerten
5. Ivan Lendl
6. Guillermo Vilas
7. Roger Federer
8. Andre Agassi
9. Sergi Bruguera
10. Rod Laver
11. Thomas Muster
12. Ilie Nastase
13. Juan Carlos Ferrero
14. Jim Courier
15. Pete Sampras
16. Boris Becker
17. Guillermo Coria
18. Jan Kodes
19. Gaston Gaudio
20. Albert Costa
21. Andres Gimeno

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/2657.htm

CyBorg
04-06-2010, 04:59 PM
That's an open era list.

CyBorg
04-06-2010, 05:04 PM
2-0, seeing as the 3rd was in January 1978 in the semi finals of the Masters. Still, the fact is that during the clay-streak, Vilas could only beat who was in front of him and he did that. I believe that Vilas could possibly have beaten Borg at that time because he was playing so well and his confidence was sky high, so I don't know why people just assume that Borg would have hammered him had they met on clay in the second half of 1977. Is it the 1978 French Open final that convinces them? But Vilas wasn't as good then as he had been 6-9 months previously. Even though I think Vilas played a great match in the 1978 French Open final inspite of the scoreline being one-sided in Borg's favour, the Borg in that tournament was Borg at his absolute best, close to perfection.

Never mind. I think I've misread this post.

Mustard
04-06-2010, 05:17 PM
Never mind. I think I've misread this post.

I better clarify my points in that post.

1. Vilas could have beaten Borg in the second half of 1977 had they played because his confidence was so high

2. Why do people consider that Borg would have definitely won if they had played in the second half of 1977? Is it the 1978 French Open final that convinces them?

3. Vilas played a great match in the 1978 French Open final, but the scoreline was one-sided in Borg's favour

4. Borg was at his absolute best during the 1978 French Open.

thalivest
04-06-2010, 05:39 PM
Mais oui.
Claycourt GOATs--

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Lacoste
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Borotra
11. Drobny
12. Vilas
13. Santana
14. Bruguera
15. Pietrangeli
16. Federer
17. Muster
18. Courier
19. von Cramm
20. Emerson
21. Trabert
22. Agassi
23. Connors
24. Gimeno
25. Frank Parker
26. Roche
27. Nastase
28. Sven Davidson

You rate Laver too low IMO. He did quite well vs Rosewall on clay. I can see Kuerten ranking over Laver since he would have won 5 or 6 Frenchs had his hip not gone out. However do you really think Wilander or even Lendl would win over a series of matches vs Laver with both in their primes on clay?
Also if one is giving Kuerten benefit of doubt on his career (the only way he could rank over Laver on clay IMO) then he too should rank higher in that case.

fed_rulz
04-06-2010, 08:29 PM
Here's a poll from another that has Federer as the #7 greatest CC of all time.

1. Björn Borg
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Mats Wilander
4. Gustavo Kuerten
5. Ivan Lendl
6. Guillermo Vilas
7. Roger Federer
8. Andre Agassi
9. Sergi Bruguera
10. Rod Laver
11. Thomas Muster
12. Ilie Nastase
13. Juan Carlos Ferrero
14. Jim Courier
15. Pete Sampras
16. Boris Becker
17. Guillermo Coria
18. Jan Kodes
19. Gaston Gaudio
20. Albert Costa
21. Andres Gimeno

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/2657.htm

As much as I love to see Fed at #7, this list is a joke if it rates Sampras and Becker at #15 & #16 respectively. They belong somewhere around 41-50. How on earth are they ranked ahead of someone who actually won a FO (Gaudio) or someone who reached the finals (Coria)? Lists like these demonstrate the favorable bias towards the players of the past generation, while short-changing the current generation in the process.

anointedone
04-06-2010, 08:52 PM
Here's a poll from another that has Federer as the #7 greatest CC of all time.

1. Björn Borg
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Mats Wilander
4. Gustavo Kuerten
5. Ivan Lendl
6. Guillermo Vilas
7. Roger Federer
8. Andre Agassi
9. Sergi Bruguera
10. Rod Laver
11. Thomas Muster
12. Ilie Nastase
13. Juan Carlos Ferrero
14. Jim Courier
15. Pete Sampras
16. Boris Becker
17. Guillermo Coria
18. Jan Kodes
19. Gaston Gaudio
20. Albert Costa
21. Andres Gimeno

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/2657.htm


You are seriously using rankopedia as your source!?!!?!?!

And those rankings are pure thrash. Courier just barely in front of Sampras and Becker. Coria over Kodes and Gimeno. Laver below Agassi and Bruguera. Complete nonsense.

You are desperate to find ways to pimp your hero Federer and it is getting sad.

TMF
04-06-2010, 09:05 PM
You are seriously using rankopedia as your source!?!!?!?!

And those rankings are pure thrash. Courier just barely in front of Sampras and Becker. Coria over Kodes and Gimeno. Laver below Agassi and Bruguera. Complete nonsense.

You are desperate to find ways to pimp your hero Federer and it is getting sad.

No I'm not serious. Of course there's are names on there that I wouldn't included. I just want to get back at some folks undermined Roger, not just his clay level but everything else about his game/ability. I wouldn't list this on other forum, just this one. Now you know why.

CyBorg
04-06-2010, 09:15 PM
I better clarify my points in that post.

1. Vilas could have beaten Borg in the second half of 1977 had they played because his confidence was so high

2. Why do people consider that Borg would have definitely won if they had played in the second half of 1977? Is it the 1978 French Open final that convinces them?

3. Vilas played a great match in the 1978 French Open final, but the scoreline was one-sided in Borg's favour

4. Borg was at his absolute best during the 1978 French Open.

I don't think Vilas was capable of beating a healthy Borg on any surface. However Borg wasn't healthy (at the US Open) and that's part of the game, so it doesn't matter.

World Beater
04-06-2010, 10:39 PM
No I'm not serious. Of course there's are names on there that I wouldn't included. I just want to get back at some folks undermined Roger, not just his clay level but everything else about his game/ability. I wouldn't list this on other forum, just this one. Now you know why.

you do understand that you are not exactly gaining any credibility for yourself or federer when the whole list is just so inane. Federer at #7 is one thing but some of those others there are ridiculous.

In an effort to prop up roger, you end up looking like a ******* because the list itself is made with regards to little logic.

Federer at #7 becomes questionable by default because the whole list is just bizarre.

Nathaniel_Near
04-06-2010, 10:46 PM
The last page of this thread has been the source for some major lol for me, I must say.

timnz
04-07-2010, 12:41 AM
I like

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra

After all Wilding won more clay court titles than anybody including 2 World Hard Court Championships on Clay (equivalent to Roland Garros), so he should be in the top ten. As good as Kuerten was on Clay he can't rate higher than Lendl or Wilander because, though he won Roland Garros like them, they also got two other finals there (Guga zero) and won many more clay court titles than he did.

anointedone
04-07-2010, 02:45 AM
I got a good laugh out of this rankopedia. Witness their all time greatest mens players ever rankings:

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/3.htm

-Andre Agassi at #4 all time ahead of Rod Laver. :lol:

-Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg above Ken Rosewall, Bill Tilden, and Pancho Gonzales

-Andy slamless Murray above Guillermo Vilas, Ilie Nastase, and Mats Wilander

-Andy Roddick also above Mats Wilander,


The womens are even better though:

http://www.rankopedia.com/44/Ranking-Best-tennis-player-ever-(female)/Step1/5.htm

-Martina Hingis the #6 women player all time ahead of Margaret Court (in addition to higher than Henin, Serena, Venus, and a bunch of double digit slam winners)

-Kim Clijsters ahead of both Suzanne Lenglen and Helen Wills Moody

-Maria Sharapova ahead of Helen Wills Moody (Sabatini was also ahead of Wills Moody before I voted)

-Sabatini, Davenport, Mauresmo, and Capriati all ahead of Maureen Connolly

-Ana Ivanovic over Maria Bueno

-Anna Kournikova ahead of Maria Bueno, Virginia Wade, and Jana Novotna

pc1
04-07-2010, 03:20 AM
I got a good laugh out of this rankopedia. Witness their all time greatest mens players ever rankings:

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/3.htm

-Andre Agassi at #4 all time ahead of Rod Laver. :lol:

-Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg above Ken Rosewall, Bill Tilden, and Pancho Gonzales

-Andy slamless Murray above Guillermo Vilas, Ilie Nastase, and Mats Wilander

-Andy Roddick also above Mats Wilander,


The womens are even better though:

http://www.rankopedia.com/44/Ranking-Best-tennis-player-ever-(female)/Step1/5.htm

-Martina Hingis the #6 women player all time ahead of Margaret Court (in addition to higher than Henin, Serena, Venus, and a bunch of double digit slam winners)

-Kim Clijsters ahead of both Suzanne Lenglen and Helen Wills Moody

-Maria Sharapova ahead of Helen Wills Moody (Sabatini was also ahead of Wills Moody before I voted)

-Sabatini, Davenport, Mauresmo, and Capriati all ahead of Maureen Connolly

-Ana Ivanovic over Maria Bueno

-Anna Kournikova ahead of Maria Bueno, Virginia Wade, and Jana Novotna

It just shows how a lot of these so called opinion polls are just popularity polls in actuality. How else would Anna Kournikova be on the list?

hoodjem
04-07-2010, 07:11 AM
You rate Laver too low IMO. He did quite well vs Rosewall on clay. I can see Kuerten ranking over Laver since he would have won 5 or 6 Frenchs had his hip not gone out. However do you really think Wilander or even Lendl would win over a series of matches vs Laver with both in their primes on clay?
Also if one is giving Kuerten benefit of doubt on his career (the only way he could rank over Laver on clay IMO) then he too should rank higher in that case.Sorry. I do tend to rate Laver conservatively in order to compensate for a personal bias. I thus hope to result in a balanced and objective rating.

Also I try to avoid "coulda and woulda ifs," particularly regarding injuries. (The Pro ban is another story.)

hoodjem
04-07-2010, 07:14 AM
Here's a poll from another that has Federer as the #7 greatest CC of all time.

1. Björn Borg
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Mats Wilander
4. Gustavo Kuerten
5. Ivan Lendl
6. Guillermo Vilas
7. Roger Federer
8. Andre Agassi
9. Sergi Bruguera
10. Rod Laver
11. Thomas Muster
12. Ilie Nastase
13. Juan Carlos Ferrero
14. Jim Courier
15. Pete Sampras
16. Boris Becker
17. Guillermo Coria
18. Jan Kodes
19. Gaston Gaudio
20. Albert Costa
21. Andres Gimeno

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/2657.htmThis does appear to be an Open-Era ONLY list. (I could not open the link to ascertain the correctness here.)

I do think that any list of great clay-courters to leave off Cochet, Lacoste, and Borotra is oddly configured.

amorco
04-07-2010, 07:30 AM
Claycourt GOATs--

1. Nadal
2. Borg
3. Kuerten
4. Muster
5. Vilas
6. Wilander
7. Laver
8. Federer
9. Lendl
10. Rosewall
11. Santana
12. Bruguera
13. Courier
14. Agassi
15. Coria
16. Connors
17. Nastase
18. Emerson
19. Clerc
20. Trabert

Nadal_Power
04-07-2010, 08:51 AM
Wow.. Federer in front of great Ivan Lendl :confused:

miniRafa386
04-07-2010, 08:57 AM
yea nadal is def #1, i think even with only 4 RG he still beats borg with the most consecutive matches

hoodjem
04-07-2010, 10:19 AM
Wow.. Federer in front of great Ivan Lendl :confused:Well, of course. Lendl was a weekend, country club player.

timnz
04-07-2010, 01:32 PM
Why is Wilding not on anybodys lists? I mean he won more Claycourt titles than anyone in history. He was pretty much unbeatable on the surface for 5 seasons in a row. And its not just because people are leaving the old timers off their lists - I see people have the Cochet, Lacoste etc.

hoodjem
04-07-2010, 02:31 PM
I'm willing. Can you tell us more about Wilding?

(To me he's mostly just a name.)

timnz
04-07-2010, 03:15 PM
Before the World Hardcourt Championship came into being in 1912 the top European Clay court tournament was Nice. Wilding won that 3 times. He also won the other prestiguous Clay court tournament Monte Carlo 5 times (a record he shares with Nadal). The French Open didn't exist (in terms of being open to all players anyway) but the international world hardcourt championship (Actually played on clay) was the true forerunner of the French Open (not the 'French Club members only' french championships). Wilding won that twice. Accoding to Wildings davis cup team mate Norman Brookes (who was such a good player himself he pushed a peak Bill Tilden to the limit in matches when he Brookes was in his '40's), Wildings best surface was clay, even though he had won Wimbledon on grass 4 times. From the 1911 season to the 1914 season he hardly lost a match on the surface (open to input here, I'm actually wondering if he was in fact unbeaten on clay during that period). He won 18 titles on clay alone in his last 2 seasons (!913 & 1914). Basically in the 1910's before the first world war he was the Nadal of that period. I'm sure he would have gone on but unfortunately he was killed in World war 1 in 1915.

hoodjem
04-07-2010, 06:13 PM
The French Open didn't exist (in terms of being open to all players anyway) but the international world hardcourt championship (Actually played on clay) was the true forerunner of the French Open (not the 'French Club members only' french championships). Wilding won that twice.
Is there any way to estimate how many equivalents to the FO (international field, deep draw on clay) he won?

Should we say two? Or more?

fedifed
04-07-2010, 06:16 PM
Nadal is definetly the clay court goat

hoodjem
04-07-2010, 06:17 PM
But Borg is definitely the clay-court GOAT (to date).

pc1
04-07-2010, 06:50 PM
But Borg is definitely the clay-court GOAT (to date).

Most dominant performance ever in a major, 1978 French Open win by Borg, 127 games won, 32 games lost. Twenty one sets out of twenty one sets won. Defeated Vilas in the final with a loss of only five games.

timnz
04-07-2010, 06:57 PM
Is there any way to estimate how many equivalents to the FO (international field, deep draw on clay) he won?

Should we say two? Or more?

Between the two World Hardcourt Championship wins, Championship of Europe in 1905 (Clay ?), Nice wins, Monte Carlo & other wins - I'd say 5 to 7 equivalents.

Have a look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Wilding

He won a lot of clay court tournaments outside of those mentioned as well. A lot of the tournaments were best of 5 sets.

Be good to get one of the great historians on this bulletin board to confirm though.

The-Champ
04-08-2010, 02:30 AM
Wow.. Federer in front of great Ivan Lendl :confused:


Haven't you heard?

- If Federer didn't choke against Nadal he would've been the greatest on clay.

- If Federer used more drop shots against Nadal, he would have been the clay GOAT.

- If Nadal didn't direct all his shots to Federer's bh, Fed would've have been the greatest on clay.

- If Roger, didn't have mono those 4 years he lost to Nadal at the French, he could've been the greatest on clay.

- If Nadal didn't fistpump after every point, federer would've been the greatest on clay.

- If Federer's serve didn't collapse everytime he faced Nadal, he could've been the greatest on clay because Fed's serve is on par with Pete's.



These are the reasons why Federer should be ahead of Lendl on the clay greats-list.

dmt
04-08-2010, 03:46 AM
Haven't you heard?

- If Federer didn't choke against Nadal he would've been the greatest on clay.

- If Federer used more drop shots against Nadal, he would have been the clay GOAT.

- If Nadal didn't direct all his shots to Federer's bh, Fed would've have been the greatest on clay.

- If Roger, didn't have mono those 4 years he lost to Nadal at the French, he could've been the greatest on clay.

- If Nadal didn't fistpump after every point, federer would've been the greatest on clay.

- If Federer's serve didn't collapse everytime he faced Nadal, he could've been the greatest on clay because Fed's serve is on par with Pete's.



These are the reasons why Federer should be ahead of Lendl on the clay greats-list.

lol :) great post

swordtennis
04-08-2010, 08:30 AM
You know Borg #1 I have been doing some serious soul searching and I actually am putting Borg as the clay court GOAT. Now I think Nadal is #2 but this cronic injury "xcuse" thing is making me drop Nadal down.
Borg and his camp conducted themselves with consistency, nobility and aplomb.
Just thought U might like to hear that.
He was definately the "Ice Man".
The greatest clay court player that ever lived. Also in the top with the other GOATs. Laver, Pete and Fed.

borg number one
04-08-2010, 12:37 PM
You know Borg #1 I have been doing some serious soul searching and I actually am putting Borg as the clay court GOAT. Now I think Nadal is #2 but this cronic injury "xcuse" thing is making me drop Nadal down.
Borg and his camp conducted themselves with consistency, nobility and aplomb.
Just thought U might like to hear that.
He was definately the "Ice Man".
The greatest clay court player that ever lived. Also in the top with the other GOATs. Laver, Pete and Fed.

I love it and agree with you. Yet, I have major respect for Nadal and I think he's got a shot at catching Borg. If he does that, depending on how he does that, at that point I may concede that he is in fact #1 on clay. Yet, in my book, Borg is still the Clay King and among the Greats of all time, which are Borg, Federer, Laver, and Sampras in my opinion. That's great to hear. It sounds like you may have some newfound respect for Bjorn Borg. I tell you, he deserves his place in the Game. He toiled for many years and had such a bright, but abbreviated career. He was a class act in Tennis too. Per Harry Hopman, he was a "complete credit to the Game". It's hard to get top Borg in many respects. Very unique. Like the quote from Nastase, he does not seem like he's from the same planet in some ways. Thanks.

CyBorg
04-08-2010, 12:55 PM
Nadal has a few chinks to his resume now, compared to Borg. It's hard to ignore:

- the awful fourth round loss at RG during what should be his peak/prime

- the four dominant years on red clay, compared to Borg's five (in a row)

If Nadal dominates again this year then he's push the latter total to five. But that still won't change the fact that he'll have that 2009 disappointment sitting in between.

We can look back at Borg's career and say that at his peak he was untouchable. He has that mystique. Nadal lost some of mystique last year.

newmark401
04-08-2010, 01:05 PM
Before the World Hardcourt Championship came into being in 1912 the top European Clay court tournament was Nice. Wilding won that 3 times. He also won the other prestiguous Clay court tournament Monte Carlo 5 times (a record he shares with Nadal). The French Open didn't exist (in terms of being open to all players anyway) but the international world hardcourt championship (Actually played on clay) was the true forerunner of the French Open (not the 'French Club members only' french championships). Wilding won that twice. Accoding to Wildings davis cup team mate Norman Brookes (who was such a good player himself he pushed a peak Bill Tilden to the limit in matches when he Brookes was in his '40's), Wildings best surface was clay, even though he had won Wimbledon on grass 4 times. From the 1911 season to the 1914 season he hardly lost a match on the surface (open to input here, I'm actually wondering if he was in fact unbeaten on clay during that period). He won 18 titles on clay alone in his last 2 seasons (!913 & 1914). Basically in the 1910's before the first world war he was the Nadal of that period. I'm sure he would have gone on but unfortunately he was killed in World war 1 in 1915.

Actually, Reggie Doherty holds the record for the most Monte Carlo titles - six (1897-99 and 1902-04). I'd certainly include not only Tony Wildiing, but also both of the Doherty brothers in a discussion on the GOAT on clay.

I counted 68 tournament wins on clay for Wilding from the 112 overall tournament titles listed for him in the wikipedia entry.

anointedone
04-08-2010, 01:37 PM
Nadal has a few chinks to his resume now, compared to Borg. It's hard to ignore:

- the awful fourth round loss at RG during what should be his peak/prime

- the four dominant years on red clay, compared to Borg's five (in a row)

If Nadal dominates again this year then he's push the latter total to five. But that still won't change the fact that he'll have that 2009 disappointment sitting in between.

We can look back at Borg's career and say that at his peak he was untouchable. He has that mystique. Nadal lost some of mystique last year.

Given that Nadal would miss the next couple months and Wimbledon as the defending Champion with an injury soon after his French Open defeat I dont think the French Open loss to Soderling will mean of anything in the evaluation of his career if he rebounds strongly.

newmark401
04-08-2010, 02:13 PM
Here's a chronological list of Tony Wilding's tournament wins on clay (the list is not meant to be definitive):

1905

1. Poseldorf Cup, Hamburg, Germany
2. Championships of Europe, Bad Homburg, Germany
3. Le Touquet, France

1906

1. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
2. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France
3. Championships of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (the Spanish Championships were closed to overseas players at this point, so Wilding can’t have won it, as stated in wikipedia)
4. Wiesbaden, Germany (Wilding won both the Wiesbaden Cup and the Championships of Wiesbaden at this tournament)
5. Championships of Austria, Prague, Bohemia
6. Championships of Bohemia, Prague, Bohemia (Wilding appears to have won this tournament in addition to the Championships of Austria, although the tournaments might have been played concurrently)
7. Carlsbad, Austria
8. Franzensbad, Bohemia
9. Marienbad, Austria (Wilding won both the Auersperg Prize [the “Cup”] and the Championships of Marienbad events at this tournament)
10. Bad Homburg, Germany
11. Baden-Baden, Germany

1907

1. South of France Championships, Nice, France
2. Wiesbaden, Germany (again, Wilding won both the Wiesbaden Cup and the Championships of Wiesbaden at this tournament)
3. Championships of Austria, Prague, Bohemia
4. Championships of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
5. Championships of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
6. Marienbad, Austria (again, Wilding won both the Auersperg Prize [the “Cup”] and the Championships of Marienbad events at this tournament)
7. Franzensbad, Bohemia
8. Carlsbad, Austria
9. Swiss Championships, Lucerne, Switzerland
10. Baden-Baden, Germany
[The chronology is probably slightly incorrect for tournaments 6-8 above]

1908

1. Championships of the Italian Riviera, San Remo, Italy
2. Monte Carlo, Monaco
3. South of France Championships, Nice, France
4. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France
5. Metropole Hotel, Cannes, France
6. Wiesbaden, Germany (for the third year in a row Wilding Wilding won both the Wiesbaden Cup and the Championships of Wiesbaden at this tournament)
7. Lille, France
8. Bordeaux, France
9. Dieppe, France
10. Baden-Baden, Germany

1909 – Wilding did not play in Europe in this year, nor, probably, on clay

1910

1. South African Championships, Johannesburg, South Africa
2. Championships of the Italian Riviera, San Remo, Italy
3. Leopold Club, Brussels, Belgium
4. Lille, France
5. Brussels, Belgium
6. Ostend, Belgium
7. The Hague, Holland
8. Évian-les-Bains, France
9. Sapicourt, France

1911

1. Championships of the Italian Riviera, San Remo, Italy
2. Monte Carlo, Monaco
3. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
4. South of France Championships, Nice, France
5. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France

1912

1. Monte Carlo, Monaco
2. Deauville, France

1913

1. Monte Carlo, Monaco
2. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
3. World Hard Court Championships, Paris, France
4. Deauville, France
5. Le Touquet, France
6. Montreux Autumn Meeting, Montreux, Switzerland
7. Montreux Palace Autumn Meeting, Montreux, Switzerland

1914

1. Carlton Club (1st Meeting), Cannes, France
2. Bordighera, Italy
3. Beaulieu, France
4. Cote d’Azur Championships, Cannes, France
5. Monte Carlo, Monaco
6. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
7. South of France Championships, Nice, France
8. Nice Country Club Tournament, Nice, France
9. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France
10. Carlton Club (2nd Meeting), Cannes, France
11. World Hard Court Championships, Paris, France

Wilding also won the “Forme-Becharat Cup” in Menton in 1911, 1913 and 1914, but this event was probably played concurrently with the Riviera Championships.

This gives Wilding a total of 68 clay court tournament wins (known so far). The 1914 World Hard Court Championships was Wilding’s last ever win in a singles tournament.

hoodjem
04-08-2010, 04:45 PM
Haven't you heard?

- If Federer didn't choke against Nadal he would've been the greatest on clay.

- If Federer used more drop shots against Nadal, he would have been the clay GOAT.

- If Nadal didn't direct all his shots to Federer's bh, Fed would've have been the greatest on clay.

- If Roger, didn't have mono those 4 years he lost to Nadal at the French, he could've been the greatest on clay.

- If Nadal didn't fistpump after every point, federer would've been the greatest on clay.

- If Federer's serve didn't collapse everytime he faced Nadal, he could've been the greatest on clay because Fed's serve is on par with Pete's.



These are the reasons why Federer should be ahead of Lendl on the clay greats-list.Ooooh. Dripping with sarcasm.

Watch out: TMF might be watching.

CyBorg
04-08-2010, 04:46 PM
Given that Nadal would miss the next couple months and Wimbledon as the defending Champion with an injury soon after his French Open defeat I dont think the French Open loss to Soderling will mean of anything in the evaluation of his career if he rebounds strongly.

It will, because he did play and he did lose. However rebounding strongly will certainly make a difference.

dmt
04-08-2010, 06:43 PM
Borg also lost twice to Panatta at the french open

anointedone
04-08-2010, 06:55 PM
Borg also lost twice to Panatta at the french open

True but this didnt break the 5 year run of complete dominance on clay of Borg that CyBorg was referring to (1977-1981 I am pretty sure).

swordtennis
04-09-2010, 07:39 AM
I love it and agree with you. Yet, I have major respect for Nadal and I think he's got a shot at catching Borg. If he does that, depending on how he does that, at that point I may concede that he is in fact #1 on clay. Yet, in my book, Borg is still the Clay King and among the Greats of all time, which are Borg, Federer, Laver, and Sampras in my opinion. That's great to hear. It sounds like you may have some newfound respect for Bjorn Borg. I tell you, he deserves his place in the Game. He toiled for many years and had such a bright, but abbreviated career. He was a class act in Tennis too. Per Harry Hopman, he was a "complete credit to the Game". It's hard to get top Borg in many respects. Very unique. Like the quote from Nastase, he does not seem like he's from the same planet in some ways. Thanks.

You are welcome, Man.
Well I have been watching more of his matches and how he and his CAMP conducted themselves and realized he was greater than I thought originally. Nadal gets knocked down mainly due to his camps bizzare behavior.
I think the thing that threw me off was that I did not realize how efficient his movement was. He hit with big topspin too. After closer analysis of his strokes his strokes are not as bad as I thought as well. Somewhat ecclectic. Not as pretty as Lavers but not as funky as Connors or Macenroes.

timnz
04-09-2010, 04:22 PM
Here's a chronological list of Tony Wilding's tournament wins on clay (the list is not meant to be definitive):

1905

1. Poseldorf Cup, Hamburg, Germany
2. Championships of Europe, Bad Homburg, Germany
3. Le Touquet, France

1906

1. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
2. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France
3. Championships of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (the Spanish Championships were closed to overseas players at this point, so Wilding can’t have won it, as stated in wikipedia)
4. Wiesbaden, Germany (Wilding won both the Wiesbaden Cup and the Championships of Wiesbaden at this tournament)
5. Championships of Austria, Prague, Bohemia
6. Championships of Bohemia, Prague, Bohemia (Wilding appears to have won this tournament in addition to the Championships of Austria, although the tournaments might have been played concurrently)
7. Carlsbad, Austria
8. Franzensbad, Bohemia
9. Marienbad, Austria (Wilding won both the Auersperg Prize [the “Cup”] and the Championships of Marienbad events at this tournament)
10. Bad Homburg, Germany
11. Baden-Baden, Germany

1907

1. South of France Championships, Nice, France
2. Wiesbaden, Germany (again, Wilding won both the Wiesbaden Cup and the Championships of Wiesbaden at this tournament)
3. Championships of Austria, Prague, Bohemia
4. Championships of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
5. Championships of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
6. Marienbad, Austria (again, Wilding won both the Auersperg Prize [the “Cup”] and the Championships of Marienbad events at this tournament)
7. Franzensbad, Bohemia
8. Carlsbad, Austria
9. Swiss Championships, Lucerne, Switzerland
10. Baden-Baden, Germany
[The chronology is probably slightly incorrect for tournaments 6-8 above]

1908

1. Championships of the Italian Riviera, San Remo, Italy
2. Monte Carlo, Monaco
3. South of France Championships, Nice, France
4. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France
5. Metropole Hotel, Cannes, France
6. Wiesbaden, Germany (for the third year in a row Wilding Wilding won both the Wiesbaden Cup and the Championships of Wiesbaden at this tournament)
7. Lille, France
8. Bordeaux, France
9. Dieppe, France
10. Baden-Baden, Germany

1909 – Wilding did not play in Europe in this year, nor, probably, on clay

1910

1. South African Championships, Johannesburg, South Africa
2. Championships of the Italian Riviera, San Remo, Italy
3. Leopold Club, Brussels, Belgium
4. Lille, France
5. Brussels, Belgium
6. Ostend, Belgium
7. The Hague, Holland
8. Évian-les-Bains, France
9. Sapicourt, France

1911

1. Championships of the Italian Riviera, San Remo, Italy
2. Monte Carlo, Monaco
3. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
4. South of France Championships, Nice, France
5. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France

1912

1. Monte Carlo, Monaco
2. Deauville, France

1913

1. Monte Carlo, Monaco
2. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
3. World Hard Court Championships, Paris, France
4. Deauville, France
5. Le Touquet, France
6. Montreux Autumn Meeting, Montreux, Switzerland
7. Montreux Palace Autumn Meeting, Montreux, Switzerland

1914

1. Carlton Club (1st Meeting), Cannes, France
2. Bordighera, Italy
3. Beaulieu, France
4. Cote d’Azur Championships, Cannes, France
5. Monte Carlo, Monaco
6. Riviera Championships, Menton, France
7. South of France Championships, Nice, France
8. Nice Country Club Tournament, Nice, France
9. Championships of Cannes, Cannes, France
10. Carlton Club (2nd Meeting), Cannes, France
11. World Hard Court Championships, Paris, France

Wilding also won the “Forme-Becharat Cup” in Menton in 1911, 1913 and 1914, but this event was probably played concurrently with the Riviera Championships.

This gives Wilding a total of 68 clay court tournament wins (known so far). The 1914 World Hard Court Championships was Wilding’s last ever win in a singles tournament.

Well, this is incredibly impressive (& thanks very much for the work getting this detail) Does that give Wilding a place in the list of the best clay courters?

Since the Grand Slams weren't settled on until the late 20's or early 30's - (from 1912 to 1923 there were three recognised world championships - Grass (Wimbledon), Clay (World Hardcourt championship) and Indoor (Word covered court championship) what do you think are the equivalent clay majors for Wilding? I'm thinking pre-1912 - he won Nice combined with Monte Carlo 5 times and also won the Championships of Europe on Clay in 1905. Combined with the 2 World Hard court championships - that is equivalent to 8 clay majors. (you could throw in a couple of Riviera Championships as well). Plus I am thinking that he has the record for most clay court tournament tournament victories in history (more than L. Doherty?) he should at least get a mention on the best clay courters list.

newmark401
04-10-2010, 03:52 AM
“Well, this is incredibly impressive (& thanks very much for the work getting this detail) Does that give Wilding a place in the list of the best clay courters?

"Since the Grand Slams weren't settled on until the late 20's or early 30's - (from 1912 to 1923 there were three recognised world championships - Grass (Wimbledon), Clay (World Hardcourt championship) and Indoor (Word covered court championship) what do you think are the equivalent clay majors for Wilding? I'm thinking pre-1912 - he won Nice combined with Monte Carlo 5 times and also won the Championships of Europe on Clay in 1905. Combined with the 2 World Hard court championships - that is equivalent to 8 clay majors. (you could throw in a couple of Riviera Championships as well). Plus I am thinking that he has the record for most clay court tournament tournament victories in history (more than L. Doherty?) he should at least get a mention on the best clay courters list.”


I copied those tournaments from the list of Tony Wilding’s singles tournament victories included in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Wilding

I’m sure that virtually all of those 62 tournaments were played on clay. I’m not sure that, for example, Wilding won two tournaments in Montreux in 1913, but it is more difficult to check up on some results than others. Regardless of this, he was still a great player, on any surface. But especially on clay, where he won about sixty per cent of this singles titles. I don't know who has won the most clay court titles in history.

You could certainly argue that the World Hard Court Championships were the precursor to the modern French Championshps/French Open. Monte Carlo also tended to attract the top players most years (the men competed for the Monte Carlo Cup). As far as I can see, Wilding played Monte Carlo five times and won it five times (1908, 1911-14). The Riviera tournaments in general had quite small draws, especially in the early years, but a lot of the top players did compete in them. That’s why they are worth remembering. You can find many of the early draws, not just from the Riviera tournaments, here: www.tennisarchives.com Don't forget German tournaments like Bad Homburg, Wiesbaden and Baden-Baden, which also had some excellent top-class draws (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=320958).

Anyway, if you like Wilding, keep an eye out for a results thread I’m going to create in the next few days. It will have virtually all of the final results from all of the tournaments where Wilding won the singles title, plus the dates (some of them approximate) and the surface of the court. The total of 112 overall singles titles for him is accurate.

timnz
04-10-2010, 03:01 PM
“Well, this is incredibly impressive (& thanks very much for the work getting this detail) Does that give Wilding a place in the list of the best clay courters?

"Since the Grand Slams weren't settled on until the late 20's or early 30's - (from 1912 to 1923 there were three recognised world championships - Grass (Wimbledon), Clay (World Hardcourt championship) and Indoor (Word covered court championship) what do you think are the equivalent clay majors for Wilding? I'm thinking pre-1912 - he won Nice combined with Monte Carlo 5 times and also won the Championships of Europe on Clay in 1905. Combined with the 2 World Hard court championships - that is equivalent to 8 clay majors. (you could throw in a couple of Riviera Championships as well). Plus I am thinking that he has the record for most clay court tournament tournament victories in history (more than L. Doherty?) he should at least get a mention on the best clay courters list.”


I copied those tournaments from the list of Tony Wilding’s singles tournament victories included in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Wilding

I’m sure that virtually all of those 62 tournaments were played on clay. I’m not sure that, for example, Wilding won two tournaments in Montreux in 1913, but it is more difficult to check up on some results than others. Regardless of this, he was still a great player, on any surface. But especially on clay, where he won about sixty per cent of this singles titles. I don't know who has won the most clay court titles in history.

You could certainly argue that the World Hard Court Championships were the precursor to the modern French Championshps/French Open. Monte Carlo also tended to attract the top players most years (the men competed for the Monte Carlo Cup). As far as I can see, Wilding played Monte Carlo five times and won it five times (1908, 1911-14). The Riviera tournaments in general had quite small draws, especially in the early years, but a lot of the top players did compete in them. That’s why they are worth remembering. You can find many of the early draws, not just from the Riviera tournaments, here: www.tennisarchives.com Don't forget German tournaments like Bad Homburg, Wiesbaden and Baden-Baden, which also had some excellent top-class draws (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=320958).

Anyway, if you like Wilding, keep an eye out for a results thread I’m going to create in the next few days. It will have virtually all of the final results from all of the tournaments where Wilding won the singles title, plus the dates (some of them approximate) and the surface of the court. The total of 112 overall singles titles for him is accurate.

Thanks - I'll look forward to your list.

Would you agree then that Wilding deserves a place in the list of the top clay courters of history?

newmark401
04-11-2010, 05:17 AM
"Would you agree then that Wilding deserves a place in the list of the top clay courters of history?"

Yes, definitely.

hoodjem
04-11-2010, 03:05 PM
I am leaning toward putting him on the list.

The hard part is calculating how many FO (or clay slam) equivalents he might have.

timnz
04-11-2010, 04:31 PM
I am leaning toward putting him on the list.

The hard part is calculating how many FO (or clay slam) equivalents he might have.

I guess a player can only play the tournaments that are available to him.
From 1905 to 1912 Wilding played and won the major clay court championships available eg the Championships of Europe in 1905, Nice multiple times, Monte Carlo many times, the various important German tournaments. I think, as I have said it probably comes out about 6 to 8 major combined with 2 World Hard Court championships on Clay (from after 1912) won in 1913 and 1914.

Do we rate a players strength solely on their 'major equivalents'. I agree they are the most important titles but some weight should be given to number of titles too and it would appear that Wilding has the most clay court titles of anyone in history.

But, I agree it is hard to work out equivalents.

Its a shame Tennis is not like golf where it was understood that the Majors have changed over time, and it was clear what they were at any one stage.
The majors for tennis were only clear from 1912 to 1924 (Covered court championships, Wimbledon, World hard court championships), and then they changed from the mid-20's/early 30's onwards (to our present 'Grand Slam' events). Its hard to pick what the majors were from 1877 to 1911 inclusive.

hoodjem
04-11-2010, 04:39 PM
^^^Wow! Sounds like he'd be right up there with Borg and Nadal.

timnz
04-11-2010, 05:07 PM
^^^Wow! Sounds like he'd be right up there with Borg and Nadal.

Sorry, I'm probably getting a tad carried away :)

He probably lists around the 5 to 10 level I think.

newmark401
04-12-2010, 06:42 AM
"I am leaning toward putting him on the list.

"The hard part is calculating how many FO (or clay slam) equivalents he might have."

I don't think people thought in those terms back in Wilding's day, when the tennis set-up was very different from what it is nowadays. It might be better to divide tennis history into different eras, with the first one extending from around the early 1880s up until the First World War. This would probably be fairer to the early players.

hoodjem
04-12-2010, 09:54 AM
Do we rate a players strength solely on their 'major equivalents'. I agree they are the most important titles but some weight should be given to number of titles too and it would appear that Wilding has the most clay court titles of anyone in history.No, you are correct. Yet it's a good place to start, and maybe the easiest method by which to compare over many decades and different eras, and thus to rank.

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Bruguera
16. Pietrangeli
17. Federer
18. Muster
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Emerson
22. Trabert
23. Agassi
24. Connors
25. Gimeno
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

jean pierre
04-12-2010, 11:14 AM
Here's a poll from another that has Federer as the #7 greatest CC of all time.

1. Björn Borg
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Mats Wilander
4. Gustavo Kuerten
5. Ivan Lendl
6. Guillermo Vilas
7. Roger Federer
8. Andre Agassi
9. Sergi Bruguera
10. Rod Laver
11. Thomas Muster
12. Ilie Nastase
13. Juan Carlos Ferrero
14. Jim Courier
15. Pete Sampras
16. Boris Becker
17. Guillermo Coria
18. Jan Kodes
19. Gaston Gaudio
20. Albert Costa
21. Andres Gimeno

http://www.rankopedia.com/ZoneID=3/15602/Step1/2657.htm


For me, Vilas is better than Kuerten. Vilas won just one French because of Borg, but he won USOPen on clay too. Kuerten won 3 times the French, but beating Corretja and Norman.

Gizo
04-12-2010, 11:54 AM
For me, Vilas is better than Kuerten. Vilas won just one French because of Borg, but he won USOPen on clay too. Kuerten won 3 times the French, but beating Corretja and Norman.

In 1977 Vilas beat Gottfried in the final, who only won 3 singles titles on clay, all of them on American green clay as well. 1977 was the only time that Gottfried progressed beyond the last 16 at the French in 13 attempts. In 12 appearances in Rome, Gottfried reach 1 semi-final and 0 finals.
Corretja is regarded by many people as the best, or at worst one of the best, players to have never won the French over the past 20 years. From 1998-2002 he reached 2 finals, 1 semi-final and 2 more quarter-finals at the French, and he won the title at Rome in 1997. Corretja >>> Gottfried.

It's less clear cut with Norman, but he had won the title at Rome in 2000, beating Kuerten in the final, so he was no slouch on clay either.

Guga also beat Ferrero twice en-route to his French titles in 00 and 01. Ferrero was already a dangerous clay court opponent in 00. In 01 he had won titles at Estoril, Barcelona and Rome (beating Kuerten in a 5 set final) and finished as the runner-up at Hamburg. Many people tipped him to dethrone Kuerten that year, but Guga thrashed him in their semi-final. Not to mention that Guga beat the 96 champion Kafelnikov in both his quarter-finals in 00 and 01 as well.

And of course Guga's title run in 97 is regarded as one of the most impressive grand slam campaigns in the open era, with him beating Muster, Medvedev, Kafelnikov and Bruguera along the way.

Vilas can count himself extremely lucky that Borg was absent at the French in 77, given how badly he was owned by him on clay. Even in 77 Borg won both their clay court matches at Nice and Monte-Carlo pretty easily. The only times he beat Borg on clay were in the 73 Buenos Aires final when a 17 year old Borg was leading and then had to retire after colliding with the umpire's chair, and in the world team cup in 80 which Borg treated as an exho. And of course, Vilas was slaughtered by Borg in the 75 and 78 French finals, winning 0 sets and a combined total of just 14 games. He did beat some strong clay court opponents en-route to his title in 77, Franulovic (who was fading by then though), Fibak and Ramirez, but still Guga's title runs in 97 and 01 are both more impressive in my opinion. It's a lot more debable with Guga's 00 run.

big bang
04-12-2010, 12:49 PM
Borg got one major flaw to his resume.. if he was the greatest claycourter why didnt he win USO when it was played on clay:confused:

Texastennis
04-12-2010, 12:53 PM
I think you all have Federer too high but generally a very interesting and (very welcome!) civil discussion.

newmark401
04-12-2010, 02:54 PM
I'd also include the Dohertys in the discussion. A list of some of their clay court singles victories can be found here:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=322284

timnz
04-12-2010, 04:11 PM
Borg got one major flaw to his resume.. if he was the greatest claycourter why didnt he win USO when it was played on clay:confused:

Borg didn't hit his peak until sometime in 1977. I am not sure how he went at the US Open in that year (did he compete - not sure that he did). 1975 and 1976 were before his peak (I know he won the French in 1974/1975). He didn't like American clay court as much as European - the surface didn't suit him as well, plus Jimmy Connors was a great player on American clay. His head to head on clay with Borg from 1974 to 1976 was 3-0 I believe.

Did Borg play the US Open in 1977 (the last one on clay)?

timnz
04-12-2010, 04:16 PM
I'd also include the Dohertys in the discussion. A list of some of their clay court singles victories can be found here:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=322284


They certainly won the top clay court titles of their time (and personally I think that Laurie was the best pre-world war one player, even though I am a fan of Wilding), but the number of their clay court titles, with full respect to their abilities, wasn't up there with someone like Wilding ie 13 to 16 Clay court titles each compared to over 60 for Wilding.

CyBorg
04-12-2010, 04:21 PM
Borg didn't hit his peak until sometime in 1977. I am not sure how he went at the US Open in that year (did he compete - not sure that he did). 1975 and 1976 were before his peak (I know he won the French in 1974/1975). He didn't like American clay court as much as European - the surface didn't suit him as well, plus Jimmy Connors was a great player on American clay. His head to head on clay with Borg from 1974 to 1976 was 3-0 I believe.

Did Borg play the US Open in 1977 (the last one on clay)?

He did. Borg was injured, having missed all the summer events leading up to the US Open, and had to retire in the fourth round match against Dick Stockton (even at one set apiece at the time).

Of course, the US Open was then on har-tru - not red clay, which is what we refer to as 'clay' today. No event on the men's tour is on har-tru anymore. Houston was, I think, the last one.

I think it makes more sense to separate red clay and har-tru and treat them as different surfaces.

big bang
04-12-2010, 04:29 PM
Borg didn't hit his peak until sometime in 1977. I am not sure how he went at the US Open in that year (did he compete - not sure that he did). 1975 and 1976 were before his peak (I know he won the French in 1974/1975). He didn't like American clay court as much as European - the surface didn't suit him as well, plus Jimmy Connors was a great player on American clay. His head to head on clay with Borg from 1974 to 1976 was 3-0 I believe.

Did Borg play the US Open in 1977 (the last one on clay)?

but still its the closest thing to red clay.. if he could win on other surfaces why not har-tru?? I mean USO still counted as a claycourt tournament back then and some of the other claycourt specialists didnt seem to have trouble playing there. I still think its a flaw in Borgs resume!

timnz
04-12-2010, 04:42 PM
but still its the closest thing to red clay.. if he could win on other surfaces why not har-tru?? I mean USO still counted as a claycourt tournament back then and some of the other claycourt specialists didnt seem to have trouble playing there. I still think its a flaw in Borgs resume!

He would have love to have won it. Again, though in 1975 & 1976 Borg was 19 and 20 years old respectively - not at his peak yet. A pity he was injured in 1977 - I don't see anyone beating him if he was healthy that year.

newmark401
04-12-2010, 04:59 PM
"Quote:
Originally Posted by newmark401
I'd also include the Dohertys in the discussion. A list of some of their clay court singles victories can be found here:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=322284


They certainly won the top clay court titles of their time (and personally I think that Laurie was the best pre-world war one player, even though I am a fan of Wilding), but the number of their clay court titles, with full respect to their abilities, wasn't up there with someone like Wilding ie 13 to 16 Clay court titles each compared to over 60 for Wilding."

That list of the Dohertys' clay court singles titles isn't complete, but it's all I have for them. I don't think their numbers really matter, it's their utter dominance which is so impressive.

krosero
04-12-2010, 05:20 PM
but still its the closest thing to red clay.. if he could win on other surfaces why not har-tru?? I mean USO still counted as a claycourt tournament back then and some of the other claycourt specialists didnt seem to have trouble playing there. I still think its a flaw in Borgs resume!Borg did eventually have great success on har-tru, not at the USO but at the Pepsi Grand Slam, which doesn't exist anymore but was a big tournament at the time. I don't think he was as strong on Har-Tru as he was on red clay, but the evidence is there that he was the best har-tru player of his generation. He just had to gradually overtake Jimmy Connors.

In '75 at the USO he was still far from his peak and not favored to win the USO. And he lost to Connors (who owned him them, physically and psychologically) in straights.

In '76 he went into the USO as the Wimbledon champion, and some people expected him to win, others picked Connors. And Connors beat him in a very close match (Connors had 2-point margin in total points won; Borg had points to go up two sets to one).

In January '77 he beat Connors in a close match at Pepsi. In September he was top-seeded at the Open and the favorite to win, but defaulted early with an injury.

In January '78 he beat Connors in another three-setter at Pepsi, 6-1 in the final set, a little more comfortably than the previous year.

In early '79 he dominated Connors at Pepsi, 6-2, 6-3. And he won Pepsi again in 1980, his last time playing that tournament.

So basically Borg didn't solve Connors until January '77, and until then Connors prevented him from winning the USO. Afterwards he solved Connors (eventually even dominating him), but there was only one USO left on Har-Tru and he was injured for it.

So a combination of youth and injuries (and a tough early matchup with Jimmy Connors) shut Borg out at the three USO's played on clay.

CyBorg
04-12-2010, 05:24 PM
Borg also won three consecutive events at the US Pro (Boston) on har-tru from 1974 to 1976 (correct me if I'm wrong). Hilton Head was an exo on har-tru as well. Borg won that in 1976 and 1977 and then it was scrapped.

Har-tru played faster than red clay and was much more friendly to players like Connors and other guys who simply did not do well on red. It's "clay", but "clay" is just a label. The material isn't the same.

timnz
04-12-2010, 05:51 PM
"Quote:
Originally Posted by newmark401
I'd also include the Dohertys in the discussion. A list of some of their clay court singles victories can be found here:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=322284


They certainly won the top clay court titles of their time (and personally I think that Laurie was the best pre-world war one player, even though I am a fan of Wilding), but the number of their clay court titles, with full respect to their abilities, wasn't up there with someone like Wilding ie 13 to 16 Clay court titles each compared to over 60 for Wilding."

That list of the Dohertys' clay court singles titles isn't complete, but it's all I have for them. I don't think their numbers really matter, it's their utter dominance which is so impressive.

They were impressive indeed. Wilding himself I think was hugely respectful of Laurie's abilities.

krosero
04-12-2010, 05:56 PM
Borg also won three consecutive events at the US Pro (Boston) on har-tru from 1974 to 1976 (correct me if I'm wrong). Hilton Head was an exo on har-tru as well. Borg won that in 1976 and 1977 and then it was scrapped.

Har-tru played faster than red clay and was much more friendly to players like Connors and other guys who simply did not do well on red. It's "clay", but "clay" is just a label. The material isn't the same.Yes, Boston went to har-tru in '74 and Borg won it three straight times (though he didn't have to face Connors). Plus he has those two Hilton Head titles on har-tru.

This thing about har-tru not being clay is tricky, because har-tru might be faster, but it's still a slow surface, comparable to clay in that sense. On the other hand as you say the material is not the same, and it made some difference in the matchups. I think it made a difference in the Borg-Connors matches, though not necessarily because Borg was really hindered on har-tru. Red clay, especially at its slowest, was obviously Borg's strongest suit, but he could play well on all slow surfaces. I think it made more of a difference to Connors. He could play great on har-tru but was, at best, questionable on red clay. Or at least an unproven force on red clay.

I don't know but did Jimmy have any real experience on red clay, I mean in his formative years? He lost in the opening rounds at the French in '72 and '73 when he was already a top player; and after he started playing at the French again in '79 he never got past the semis. It's just a contrast with what he did at the USO on har-tru (making all three finals, and winning one of them).

CyBorg
04-12-2010, 06:06 PM
Connors could drive through the ball on har-tru, take it early, force it to the corners, overpower the opponent. But on red everything stayed up and grinding out long rallies was more to Borg's strengths.

As for comparing clay across eras, we can only really use red clay results if we want to be fair. Nadal has not played a single atp match on har-tru, so we don't know how he'd do. So ultimately it's red clay results of one versus red clay results of another. IMO.

krosero
04-12-2010, 06:32 PM
Connors could drive through the ball on har-tru, take it early, force it to the corners, overpower the opponent. But on red everything stayed up and grinding out long rallies was more to Borg's strengths.

As for comparing clay across eras, we can only really use red clay results if we want to be fair. Nadal has not played a single atp match on har-tru, so we don't know how he'd do. So ultimately it's red clay results of one versus red clay results of another. IMO.In the matches I've seen, Connors does seem to be getting a lot of pace from his opponents on har-tru, and of course that's something he liked.

As for the comparison with Nadal, I agree about restricting it to red clay, though if I had to speculate I think Nadal would adapt to har-tru just as well as Borg did. Neither one of them grew up on har-tru but both excel for obvious reasons on slow dirt.

Now Federer, I wonder, he didn't grow up on har-tru, but if har-tru gave Connors an advantage I think it may have given a similar advantage to Federer. Now that would have been really interesting, to see the Fed-Nadal rivalry on clay split up between red clay and some har-tru matches.

Gizo
04-12-2010, 11:35 PM
I think with Borg's defeats to Connors on har-tru at the US Open in 75 and 76, the fact that they were playing the US was probably more important than the surface. As we all know Connors was considerably more formidable in the US, regardless of the surface, than he was in the Europe (he still had an excellent record outside the US of course). And Connors only beat Borg once in Europe.

Har-tru courts are pretty much exclusively used it North America (though you can find a few in London). These are hypothetical scenarios, but put the pre-prime Borg of 75-76 against Connors on har-tru on Europe, and he would stand a much better chance of winning than he did in the US. Likewise even if the US Open had used European style red clay for a bit, I think Connors still would have found a way to win the title on it. Stich is another player like Connors who was outstanding in his home country regardless of the surface, as highlighted by his excellent record in German tournaments on clay, carpet and grass.

timnz
04-12-2010, 11:51 PM
I think with Borg's defeats to Connors on har-tru at the US Open in 75 and 76, the fact that they were playing the US was probably more important than the surface. As we all know Connors was considerably more formidable in the US, regardless of the surface, than he was in the Europe (he still had an excellent record outside the US of course). And Connors only beat Borg once in Europe.

Har-tru courts are pretty much exclusively used it North America (though you can find a few in London). These are hypothetical scenarios, but put the pre-prime Borg of 75-76 against Connors on har-tru on Europe, and he would stand a much better chance of winning than he did in the US. Likewise even if the US Open had used European style red clay for a bit, I think Connors still would have found a way to win the title on it. Stich is another player like Connors who was outstanding in his home country regardless of the surface, as highlighted by his excellent record in German tournaments on clay, carpet and grass.

Connors beat Borg a couple of times on clay in South America in minor tournaments though in 1977 and 1978. One of them was in Buenos Aires in 1978 straight after the US Open - he beat Borg 5–7 6–3 6–3. He also Beat Borg on clay in 1974 in Indianapolis. Having said that from 1977 onwards Borg was definitely dominant over Connors.

xFullCourtTenniSx
04-13-2010, 01:25 AM
Number 1 is absolutely Nadal. He is by far the best clay court player the game has ever seen. He is an absolute beast on the red dirt and has an unbelievable defensive game. Borg was good, but Nadal is simply unbeatable in terms of defense and that is probably the most important thing on clay. The second most important thing is the ability to rally and construct points, and Nadal also has that going for him.

Number 2 is Borg. Do I even need to really argue his case?

Federer I believe could've been known as one of the clay court greats had it not been for Nadal. Federer did very well on clay before Nadal came and took all the trophies on the dirt. I mean, Federer coul've had 5 straight titles at Roland Garros if Nadal were never born. But such an argument is, of course, unfair. But Federer has made it to 4 straight French Open finals; and before that made it to the semifinals, where he lost to Nadal. Federer has also beaten Nadal on clay, which is a massive achievement for anyone who pulls off such a feat. Not only that, he BAGELED Nadal on clay. How many times do you see Nadal bageled? How many times will you ever see him bageled on his own turf?

And there's also Coria. He was a good clay court player as well. But I'm not too familiar with the older generation players, so I can't really make a case for or against any of these players. All I know is that Borg was essentially the old school Nadal and Nadal is the buffed up, modern-day Borg.

dmt
04-13-2010, 01:57 AM
Federer isnt the third best on the red dirt, no way. Top 10? yes, but not top 3. Gustavo Kuerten was better on clay.

big bang
04-13-2010, 04:23 AM
Number 1 is absolutely Nadal. He is by far the best clay court player the game has ever seen. He is an absolute beast on the red dirt and has an unbelievable defensive game. Borg was good, but Nadal is simply unbeatable in terms of defense and that is probably the most important thing on clay. The second most important thing is the ability to rally and construct points, and Nadal also has that going for him.

Number 2 is Borg. Do I even need to really argue his case?

Federer I believe could've been known as one of the clay court greats had it not been for Nadal. Federer did very well on clay before Nadal came and took all the trophies on the dirt. I mean, Federer coul've had 5 straight titles at Roland Garros if Nadal were never born. But such an argument is, of course, unfair. But Federer has made it to 4 straight French Open finals; and before that made it to the semifinals, where he lost to Nadal. Federer has also beaten Nadal on clay, which is a massive achievement for anyone who pulls off such a feat. Not only that, he BAGELED Nadal on clay. How many times do you see Nadal bageled? How many times will you ever see him bageled on his own turf?

And there's also Coria. He was a good clay court player as well. But I'm not too familiar with the older generation players, so I can't really make a case for or against any of these players. All I know is that Borg was essentially the old school Nadal and Nadal is the buffed up, modern-day Borg.

I have Nadal ahead of Borg as well! sure Borg got more FO at this point, but Nadal dominated all claycourt events the last 5 years (09 was not as great I know) Nadal is still very young, even with his physical problems he could easily focus on clay only and win pretty much all there is, but his ambitions is bigger than just being the greatest claycourter!

borg number one
04-13-2010, 07:47 AM
That's a good discussion above on Har-Tru courts (rublico) vs. red clay and also on Borg/Connors on clay. Connors preferred the "faster" clay and also playing in the United States. Furthermore, he did get Borg when Borg was 19-20, as opposed to 20+. Having said that, Connors was a great rublico player, so he should get credit for being one of the best rublico players at the time, along with Borg and Vilas.

Orantes took the US Open in 1975, and Connors beat a 20 year old Borg in the 1976 final. In 1975, Connors beat Borg in the SF. In 1977, Borg retired in the 4th round vs. Dick Stockton with a shoulder injury. (I don't think he ever lost a match to Stockton). In 1978, they switched to hard courts and Borg lost to Connors in the final, but Borg did have a bad blister on his thumb (thumb unjury) and he could hardly grip his racquet after pain shots.

I'll add that even M. Orantes was pretty tough on rublico (green clay). Borg beat Orantes in the FO final in 1974 on red clay, but Orantes beat Connors on rublico at the US Open final in 1975. Players such as Orantes, Vilas, and Clerc were some very dangerous clay courters back then that could give serve and volleyers fits on clay. Wood racquets on clay vs. modern racquets on clay have changed the dynamics some, plus they have supposedly made clay at the Fo faster than it was during the 70's. So, with wood racquets, slower red clay, and no Luxilon strings, blasting a great clay courter in the 70's off the court was a very tall order.

hoodjem
04-13-2010, 09:21 AM
This thing about har-tru not being clay is tricky, because har-tru might be faster, but it's still a slow surface, comparable to clay in that sense. On the other hand as you say the material is not the same, and it made some difference in the matchups. I think it made a difference in the Borg-Connors matches, though not necessarily because Borg was really hindered on har-tru. Red clay, especially at its slowest, was obviously Borg's strongest suit, but he could play well on all slow surfaces.I played a lot on har-tru as a youngster (it is popular in the southern US) and on hard courts.

The ball tends to skid a lot, particularly off of power shots. I don't know if this is also true of red clay (having played on red clay only twice, and I can't remember the conditions--I was too young).

pc1
04-13-2010, 10:30 AM
In the matches I've seen, Connors does seem to be getting a lot of pace from his opponents on har-tru, and of course that's something he liked.

As for the comparison with Nadal, I agree about restricting it to red clay, though if I had to speculate I think Nadal would adapt to har-tru just as well as Borg did. Neither one of them grew up on har-tru but both excel for obvious reasons on slow dirt.

Now Federer, I wonder, he didn't grow up on har-tru, but if har-tru gave Connors an advantage I think it may have given a similar advantage to Federer. Now that would have been really interesting, to see the Fed-Nadal rivalry on clay split up between red clay and some har-tru matches.
I saw Connors play Borg in the US Open semi in 1975. Borg wasn't nearly the player he would be and it was clear that Borg had problems on har-tru with the Connors power and also the fact his shots didn't bounce as high as many other players and tended to skid. Connors was able to win almost any big point in that match by hitting Borg's short balls and approaching the net. Borg was able to adjust to that obviously in later years.

borg number one
04-13-2010, 10:58 AM
Rubico courts play quite a bit faster. I've played junior tournaments on both surfaces. Sometimes on a rubico court, it can seem a bit slippery and one has more difficulty coming to a complete stop and changing directions. You tend to "slide around" on rubico a bit more than red clay and it's definitely faster, with the balls bouncing lower. One notices the finer particles contained on a red clay court, versus the "pebbles" on a rubico court. A really nice rubico court is a lot of fun to play on, especially in the heat of a Houston summer! Yet, Red Clay feels a lot better to me. When you slide, the clay tends to sort of "keep you up better", so one can really run around pretty fast with good traction, given that you'll have to slide properly as you're moving laterally and forwards/backwards on the court.

See this excerpt on wikipedia describing rubico courts:

Green clay

Green clay, Har-Tru or "American" clay, is similar to red clay, the differences being that it is slightly harder and faster. Green clay is packed to make the subsurface. It is then covered with a topping. These clay courts are found primarily in the Eastern and Southern parts of the United States, but are also located in all 50 states. In parts of the gulf coast region of the Southeast, green clay courts are often referred to as "rubico." There are two major WTA tournaments played on green Har-Tru clay courts; the Family Circle Cup in Charleston, SC and the MPS Group Championships in Ponte Vedra Beach, FL, a new event in 2009.

timnz
04-13-2010, 11:12 AM
I disagree with some recent posts. I would place Borg ahead of Nadal because 6 French Opens beats 4 French Opens. Now Nadal has the potential to be number 1 (and probably will take that position) but that is just potential, he has to get there - until then Borg is number 1 on clay. You can't rate people on what they could be, you can only rate people on what they have achieved to date.

krosero
04-13-2010, 11:17 AM
Connors beat Borg a couple of times on clay in South America in minor tournaments though in 1977 and 1978. One of them was in Buenos Aires in 1978 straight after the US Open - he beat Borg 5–7 6–3 6–3. He also Beat Borg on clay in 1974 in Indianapolis. Having said that from 1977 onwards Borg was definitely dominant over Connors.I think in a thread last year somebody questioned whether the Buenos Aires exo really was on clay. It was something about whether the exo was held at the venue normally used for Davis Cup (definitely red clay) or on some other court.

Nadal_Power
04-13-2010, 11:51 AM
I disagree with some recent posts. I would place Borg ahead of Nadal because 6 French Opens beats 4 French Opens. Now Nadal has the potential to be number 1 (and probably will take that position) but that is just potential, he has to get there - until then Borg is number 1 on clay. You can't rate people on what they could be, you can only rate people on what they have achieved to date.

There's not just French Open!!! Rafa set some numbers on this surface that will probably never be equal

Besides that,Rafa is playing very few clay tournaments over the season.. all in all,after this year's French Open (with Nadal's result from Monte Carlo,Barca,Rome and Paris) we will probably have some better picture about this two greatest clay players of all time

TMF
04-13-2010, 12:55 PM
There's not just French Open!!! Rafa set some numbers on this surface that will probably never be equal

Besides that,Rafa is playing very few clay tournaments over the season.. all in all,after this year's French Open (with Nadal's result from Monte Carlo,Barca,Rome and Paris) we will probably have some better picture about this two greatest clay players of all time

This is one area I agree that Nadal outclassed Borg on other clay tournaments. He’s been consistently defending his titles every year. Rarely loses and set a very high standard after setting a record of winning 81 consecutive matches.

The-Champ
04-13-2010, 03:44 PM
This is one area I agree that Nadal outclassed Borg on other clay tournaments. He’s been consistently defending his titles every year. Rarely loses and set a very high standard after setting a record of winning 81 consecutive matches.

WOW!! One of Rafa's greatest bashers of all time Mr. TMF is defending him. I wonder why?


Borg is clearly the Clay GOAT, and that's coming from a Nadal fan!!

CyBorg
04-13-2010, 04:47 PM
There's not just French Open!!! Rafa set some numbers on this surface that will probably never be equal

There have been numerous threads comparing Borg's numbers and Nadal's numbers and in no way are Nadal's percentages better than Borg's. It all comes down to Nadal's longevity.

In terms of pure dominance, Borg's play at the 1978 French Open is superior to anything Nadal's done.

borg number one
04-13-2010, 05:10 PM
I loved watching Borg on clay and I love watching Nadal on clay these days. It's pretty clear that they rank at the top among the Game's clay courters, with Rosewall somewhat in the conversation as well, per many.

Here are some stats on Borg's clay career below. See the 30 clay titles he racked up between 1974-1981 below and his clay titles by year. His 30 clay titles were among 64 total titles. 23 of those 64 titles were indoors and he had 5 hard court titles. Among his 30 clay titles, he amassed 6 FO titles and also other prestigious clay titles including two Italian Opens and three Monte Carlo titles. 30 clay titles over 7 years means an average rate of 4.3 clay titles each year. Nadal now has 25 clay titles, out of 36 total, amassed over 6 years from 2004-2009. That's also a rate of a little over 4 clay titles per year for Nadal (vs. 4.3 for Borg for 7 years from 1974-1981). So, their "rates" of clay titles are similar. Nadal is now 181-16 so far on clay, while Borg was 245-39 during his career on clay.

Here are the number of clay titles Borg won by year:

1974-4
1975-3
1976-2
1977-5
1978-4
1979-5
1980-4
1981-3

Here are his clay court titles:

French Open 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981
Geneva, Switzerland 1981
Stuggart, Germany 1981
Monte Carlo 1977, 1979, 1980
Nice, France 1977, 1980
Pepsi Grand Slam 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980
Palermo, Italy 1979
Bastad, Sweden 1974, 1978, 1979
Boston, Massachusetts 1974, 1975, 1976
Italian Open 1974, 1978
Barcelona, Spain 1975, 1977
Madrid, Spain 1977
Dusseldorf, Germany 1976

TMF
04-13-2010, 05:22 PM
WOW!! One of Rafa's greatest bashers of all time Mr. TMF is defending him. I wonder why?


Borg is clearly the Clay GOAT, and that's coming from a Nadal fan!!

Oh please...that’s just show you how much you know me. I’ve been given rafa’s credits lots of times before for all he’s done.

The world is not evolve around only on this board, in case you didn’t know.

CyBorg
04-13-2010, 05:49 PM
Here are the number of clay titles Borg won by year:

1974-4
1975-3
1976-2
1977-5
1978-4
1979-5
1980-4
1981-3

Here are his clay court titles:

French Open 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981
Geneva, Switzerland 1981
Stuggart, Germany 1981
Monte Carlo 1977, 1979, 1980
Nice, France 1977, 1980
Pepsi Grand Slam 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980
Palermo, Italy 1979
Bastad, Sweden 1974, 1978, 1979
Boston, Massachusetts 1974, 1975, 1976
Italian Open 1974, 1978
Barcelona, Spain 1975, 1977
Madrid, Spain 1977
Dusseldorf, Germany 1976

Percentages tell a better story. Borg in the span of the five years between 1977 and 1981 had a winning percentage of roughly 97 on red clay. Rafa's numbers, at last calculation, were comparable for 2005-2009, but took a bit of a hit due to Madrid/RG last year.

Still, that gives you an idea of how unbeatable these guys are on their best surface. It's also interesting to look at the losses. Borg's losses were largely superficial. A retirement in Hamburg in '79 while up 4-1. A loss to Vilas in small tourney in 1980. The only head scratcher was a defeat to Pecci in Monte Carlo in 1981. Nadal had odd losses to Ferrero in Rome and, of course, Soderling at RG.

TMF
04-13-2010, 05:51 PM
I loved watching Borg on clay and I love watching Nadal on clay these days. It's pretty clear that they rank at the top among the Game's clay courters, with Rosewall somewhat in the conversation as well, per many.

Here are some stats on Borg's clay career below. See the 30 clay titles he racked up between 1974-1981 below and his clay titles by year. His 30 clay titles were among 64 total titles. 23 of those 64 titles were indoors and he had 5 hard court titles. Among his 30 clay titles, he amassed 6 FO titles and also other prestigious clay titles including two Italian Opens and three Monte Carlo titles. 30 clay titles over 7 years means an average rate of 4.3 clay titles each year. Nadal now has 25 clay titles, out of 36 total, amassed over 6 years from 2004-2009. That's also a rate of a little over 4 clay titles per year for Nadal (vs. 4.3 for Borg for 7 years from 1974-1981). So, their "rates" of clay titles are similar. Nadal is now 181-16 so far on clay, while Borg was 245-39 during his career on clay.

Here are the number of clay titles Borg won by year:

1974-4
1975-3
1976-2
1977-5
1978-4
1979-5
1980-4
1981-3

Here are his clay court titles:

French Open 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981
Geneva, Switzerland 1981
Stuggart, Germany 1981
Monte Carlo 1977, 1979, 1980
Nice, France 1977, 1980
Pepsi Grand Slam 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980
Palermo, Italy 1979
Bastad, Sweden 1974, 1978, 1979
Boston, Massachusetts 1974, 1975, 1976
Italian Open 1974, 1978
Barcelona, Spain 1975, 1977
Madrid, Spain 1977
Dusseldorf, Germany 1976

Thanks for the interesting numbers.

Here's what Rafa has in his resume so far:

2002
Alicante
Vigo
Barcelona
Gran Canaria

2004
Sopot

2005
Costa Do Sauipe
Acapulco
MC
Barcelona
Rome
RG
Bastad
Stuttgart

2006
MC
Barcelona
Rome
RG

2007
MC
Barcelona
Rome
RG
Stuttgart

2008
MC
Barcelona
Hamburg
RG

2009
MC
Barcelona
Rome


29 total titles for Rafa. He’s one title behind the great Borg but will eventually pass him.

Dating back from 2005 MC to 2007 Hamburg(right before the FO), Nadal was on a tear by winning 13 consecutive tournaments he enter, or winning 81 matches in a row.

Mustard
04-13-2010, 05:53 PM
Nadal had a win-loss record of 136-2 on clay from the start of 2005 Monte Carlo up until beating Djokovic at 2009 Madrid. That's a 98.55% winning percentage.

As of now, Nadal has gone 141-4 on clay since the start of 2005 Monte Carlo. That's a winning percentage of 97.24%.

CyBorg
04-13-2010, 05:54 PM
Thanks for the interesting numbers.

Here's what Rafa has in his resume so far:

2002
Alicante
Vigo
Barcelona
Gran Canaria

29 total titles for Rafa. He’s one title behind the great Borg but will eventually pass him.

These aren't atp tour titles.

TMF
04-13-2010, 06:00 PM
These aren't atp tour titles.

Didn't rafa earned atp points for those? Atleast I know Barcelona is been around for years.

TMF
04-13-2010, 06:02 PM
Nadal had a win-loss record of 136-2 on clay from the start of 2005 Monte Carlo up until beating Djokovic at 2009 Madrid. That's a 98.55% winning percentage.

As of now, Nadal has gone 141-4 on clay since the start of 2005 Monte Carlo. That's a winning percentage of 97.24%.

Yes, quite amazing. Unfortunately Rafa ain't going to retire and there's no way he can sustain this consistency and thus his number can only go down.

DudewithBabolat
04-13-2010, 06:27 PM
Rafa's known to have a number of injuries. Once he's in tip-top shape again, he'll be unstoppable, again. I mean come on, it's Rafa AKA 'The King of CLay'

CyBorg
04-13-2010, 07:04 PM
Didn't rafa earned atp points for those? Atleast I know Barcelona is been around for years.

Are you serious?

Nadal_Power
04-18-2010, 10:55 AM
After taking Monte Carlo for the record 6th consecutive time :

202 ATP clay matches for Rafa with blistering 186-16 score

42 tournaments played with 26 titles from 28 finals


Looking good for clay court GOAT player :-D

The-Champ
04-18-2010, 04:28 PM
After taking Monte Carlo for the record 6th consecutive time :

202 ATP clay matches for Rafa with blistering 186-16 score

42 tournaments played with 26 titles from 28 finals


Looking good for clay court GOAT player :-D


It's still Borg!!

If Rafa wins the FO this year...then we can start speculating. Hope he does.

timnz
04-19-2010, 12:52 AM
After taking Monte Carlo for the record 6th consecutive time :

202 ATP clay matches for Rafa with blistering 186-16 score

42 tournaments played with 26 titles from 28 finals


Looking good for clay court GOAT player :-D

I wonder if Rafa will get the ultimate record and break the tie of 6 titles he shares with Laurie Doherty.

Carsomyr
04-19-2010, 01:05 AM
Didn't rafa earned atp points for those? Atleast I know Barcelona is been around for years.

Those are Futures titles. Didn't you think it strange that Nadal collected 4 titles in 2002 and didn't win a single tournament until 2004?

Mustard
04-19-2010, 06:18 AM
I posted some Nadal clay-court stats in another thread:

In his ATP Tour career: 186-16 (92.08 winning percentage)
Since the start of 2005: 160-6 (96.39 winning percentage)
Since the 11th April 2005: 146-4 (97.33 winning percentage)
In Monte Carlo: 34-1 (97.14 winning percentage)

hoodjem
04-24-2010, 05:05 PM
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Bruguera
16. Pietrangeli
17. Federer
18. Muster
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Emerson
22. Trabert
23. Agassi
24. Connors
25. Gimeno
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

Drobny at no. 12--a great clay-courter.

Mustard
04-25-2010, 09:53 AM
Why is Muster in 18th? He won 40 clay-court titles in his career, including 18 in 1995-1996 alone.

timnz
04-25-2010, 12:39 PM
Why is Muster in 18th? He won 40 clay-court titles in his career, including 18 in 1995-1996 alone.

Muster was a great Clay Court player. But being 18th on that list I would imagine is a product of the greatness of numbers 1 to 17. Not a lot of players I would disagree with (though there are some I don't know too much about).

davey25
04-25-2010, 12:42 PM
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Bruguera
16. Pietrangeli
17. Federer
18. Muster
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Emerson
22. Trabert
23. Agassi
24. Connors
25. Gimeno
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

Drobny at no. 12 --great clay-courter.

I think Muster and Courier at their best are clearly better than Bruguera. JMO though. I agree with Bruguera, Federer, Muster, and Courier all being in the same little area.

hoodjem
04-26-2010, 07:51 AM
Muster was a great Clay Court player. But being 18th on that list I would imagine is a product of the greatness of numbers 1 to 17. Not a lot of players I would disagree with (though there are some I don't know too much about).

Exactly. When one is talking about the GOAT of anything in the entire history of the game, just being on the list is a great achievement. Cracking the top-ten is realizing god-like status.

But the list is adjustable as more opinions add weight to certain arguments or rankings.

pc1
04-26-2010, 07:59 AM
Exactly. When one is talking about the GOAT of anything in the entire history of the game, just being on the list is a great achievement. Cracking the top-ten is realizing god-like status.

But the list is adjustable as more opinions add weight to certain arguments or rankings.

Agreed so that's why I don't understand why some are offended if their favorite isn't number one on the GOAT list in anything but let's say number five instead. To be number five is still terrific.

Incidentally Hoodjem, I noticed Emerson is ahead of Gimeno on this list. Gimeno was a renown clay court player and defeated Rosewall numerous times on clay. Clay may have been one of his stronger surfaces and I think overall Gimeno was a superior player to Emmo especially considering Gimeno played Laver, Gonzalez and Rosewall regularly on the old Pro Tour which was far superior to the amateur tour Emerson played on.

hoodjem
04-26-2010, 08:15 AM
Clay-court GOATS--
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Muster
16. Pietrangeli
17. Bruguera
18. Federer
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Gimeno
22. Emerson
23. Trabert
24. Agassi
25. Connors
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

Nadal_Power
05-03-2010, 02:14 AM
Rafa on clay after Rome :

Matches : 191 - 16
Tournaments : 43
Finals : 29
Titles : 27

Looks good for me :grin:

hoodjem
05-03-2010, 05:31 AM
I wish someone would do a side-by-side comparison of relatable statistics for Borg versus Nadal.?

Maybe Nadal is better after 2010 MC and Rome.

Murray_Fan
05-03-2010, 05:49 AM
It would be very funny if murray was on there :)

borg number one
05-03-2010, 05:58 AM
I wish someone would do a side-by-side comparison of relatable statistics for Borg versus Nadal.?

Maybe Nadal is better after 2010 MC and Rome.

Hoodjem, basically, Nadal and Borg are neck and neck in terms of accomplishment. We have Borg with 2 more FO titles, but that was by the time he was past 25 years of age. He did skip the '77 FO Open though due to a player's strike. Meanwhile, as to other tourneys, it's an apples to oranges comparison in that the clay schedule is quite different now with more the advent of the Masters series/tourneys. So you have a different mix now, with perhaps more "official" clay tournaments to be contested. Nadal has won more tourneys thus far in terms of his "win rate", but Borg still has two more RG titles. Other than that, overall, both have been extremely dominating during their respective eras. By, 26 or so, Nadal may very well catch Borg at the FO, we'll see. Yet, as of now, it's really pretty close in my book if you look at overall accomplishment. Yet, I disagree with the argument that Nadal has beaten Federer on clay, so he is automaticaly greater than Borg on clay. Federer is a borderline great clay courter, but it's not as if Federer is the second best clay court player in history. If Nadal wins 2 more FO titles, and also starts winning more Wimbledons, then, he'll start entering Borg territory as an all time great player and not just an all time great clay courter.

robow7
05-03-2010, 07:29 AM
Hoodjem, I think I would have to move Vilas up on your roster considering he had the record 53 straight winning matches on clay until Nadal came along and broke it. How far up, not sure since not familar with a couple above him.