Is Nadal better than Sampras now?

Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by tennisaddict, Sep 9, 2013.

  1. tennisaddict

    tennisaddict G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Messages:
    15,213
    13 majors vs 14

    8 lower valued FO vs 7 at prestigious Wimbledon

    Lesser weeks at number 1 than Sampras

    0 WTF

    thing in his favor are the career slam and the masters.

    Olympic tennis doesnt really matter and so ignoring .

    Does Nadal need to get 1 more ?
     
    #1
  2. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    Has been for a while.
     
    #2
  3. Bulldog93

    Bulldog93 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Messages:
    23
    If Nadal keeps this up, he will be better than Federer. The more titles he keeps racking up away from The French, the closer the gap gets.
     
    #3
  4. BrooklynNY

    BrooklynNY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,627
    Yeah, he basically is the GOAT now, duh.

    He is better than Fed who is better than Sampras, this is just basic logic, right? :D
     
    #4
  5. Yeah I agree.

    IMO Federer and Nadal clearly sit at the top of the heap as the two best players to play the game.

    P.S. to the OP, the FO is not valued less these days. I don't think any of the majors are. Things have majorly equalized from a few decades back, for several reasons.
     
    #5
  6. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,588
    Best since Sampras for sure. They are of the same mold.. Ridiculous mental toughness that raise their game in the face of main rivals.

    Its easier to compare Fedal because they are of the same era. When comparing them to past eras things get a little more murky
     
    #6
  7. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,124
    Location:
    New York
    To me Nadal has already surpassed Sampras because: he's won all 4 slams, he's won more than twice as many masters. A big difference.
     
    #7
  8. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Who valued FO lower? because sampras didnt win a single FO?

    I dont think there is even a contest. RPNadal won on all surfaces, Sampras didnt.
     
    #8
  9. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Better than Sampras and then some.
     
    #9
  10. Ajosin

    Ajosin Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    137
    Nadal is better than Sampras. Sampras could not do much damage on clay and that is a HUGE negative for him. Imagine being ranked #20 in the world and being HAPPY about the #1 player being in your quarter :). That does NOT happen with Nadal or even Djoker/Fed.
     
    #10
  11. granddog29

    granddog29 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages:
    834
    Hard to say. Sampras is the best grass, fast hard court, and carpet player of the Open Era. Nadal is the best player of anyone in history on any surface on clay and is an all time great on all surfaces that exist today- clay, grass, hard courts. I would probably say Nadal since he is only going to keep adding to his achivements. Sampras is way underrated on this forum though.
     
    #11
  12. Netspirit

    Netspirit Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,245
    Location:
    Snoqualmie, WA
    I don't think Sampras, who won 14 Slams, 5 WTFs and ended 6 years ranked #1, is now the third of all time.

    But it is getting very close for sure.
     
    #12
  13. Cesc Fabregas

    Cesc Fabregas Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    8,318
    No Sampras still ahead.
     
    #13
  14. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,293
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    They're a tie in my book.
     
    #14
  15. mistik

    mistik Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,892
    Sampras not even manage to play even one damn RG final is a big mines.
     
    #15
  16. Mick

    Mick Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,363
    Before CBS stopped airing, McEnroe said in his opinion, Nadal is now better than Sampras even though Sampras has 1 more GS. McEnroe said Nadal could win on any surface.
     
    #16
  17. tennisaddict

    tennisaddict G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Messages:
    15,213
    This is a very good point, you are saying that in one of 4 majors, you will be happy if you drew the Number 1.

    While 0 Wtf is really bad, the same goes for Sampras with not even 1 FO final. Best is semis.

    Since Rafa has chances for 1 more major, i think with the next one he will be ahead.

    For now, it would be the same.
     
    #17
  18. Tenez101

    Tenez101 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,638
    Nadal >= Federer > Sampras.
     
    #18
  19. Mike Sams

    Mike Sams Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,270
    The problem is that Sampras sucked on clay. So if he and Nadal were rivals, they would only be playing grass and hardcourts. So the numbers in the H2H would not likely be lopsided in Nadal's favour.
     
    #19
  20. clayman2000

    clayman2000 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,849
    I would say yes:

    1 less slam, but he has won at every tournament, and he also has 2 slam wins on each surface.

    They both won 3 slams in a row once, but the difference is that Nadal has also made 5 straight slam finals, something Sampras never did.

    As for the difference in year end no 1's (which will probably be 3 years by the end of 2013) I would reply that Sampras never had guys playing as well as Nadal had to compete with.

    Nadal played at a very high level in 2007 and 2011, but the issue was that the guys he came across in those years were embarking on 2 of the best years ever. It would be like punishing Cristiano Ronaldo for not winning more Ballon D'or's simply because he plays during the era of perhaps the best ever
     
    #20
  21. corners

    corners Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    5,441
    You forgot his record against Federer, which is a huge plus on his resume. Sampras never faced a player as good as Federer.

    But even still, Sampras has one extra slam, and much, much more time at #1. History clearly favors Pistol Pete at this point. But Nadal is closing fast. However, he's 27 now, and unless he's on really good drugs he will soon decline. And physical decline and his style of play will not mix, one would think. He doesn't have much time, and if he has another knee episode or two a lot of that time will be lost.

    But all that aside, who cares really, congratulations to Rafa Nadal! An amazing career so far!
     
    #21
  22. vegasgt3

    vegasgt3 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    330
    Tied at worst. He's a more complete player.
     
    #22
  23. coloskier

    coloskier Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,579
    If he gets 2 more GS's, and a WTF, then yes.
     
    #23
  24. Anti-Fedal

    Anti-Fedal Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,101
    So I guess Agassi must be better than Sampras according to your logic
     
    #24
  25. Crose

    Crose Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,093
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    That was the main point of the argument, not all of it. There are other things to it.
    For example Agassi has 8 slams. Nadal is only 1 off with 13.
     
    #25
  26. clayman2000

    clayman2000 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,849
    If Sampras never faced as good a player as Federer than how can you count time at no 1 against Rafa?? Its not as if Rafa has never been ranked 1 or was there for just a few weeks.

    For example, Nadal in 2007 and 2011 was an extremely solid, and just ran into players on ridiculous seasons.
     
    #26
  27. StrongerThanAll

    StrongerThanAll Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    347
    He might pass Sampras soon but hasn't yet. Sampras sure was more fun to watch though.
     
    #27
  28. Crose

    Crose Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,093
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Sampras wouldn't sniff 100 weeks at #1 playing with the likes of Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic.
     
    #28
  29. heninfan99

    heninfan99 Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,898
    I actually think Sampras would beat Nadal but Nadals' achievements within his era will be greater.
    I'm comfortable with Nadal being regarded as the GOAT.
    I just think if Gasquet was 17 or 17 on serve & volley points Sampras might even trounce Nadal.
     
    #29
  30. vive le beau jeu !

    vive le beau jeu ! G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,570
    Location:
    Ometepe, Pink Granite, Queyras, Kerguelen (...)
    no.

    10 godfakers
     
    #30
  31. chippy17

    chippy17 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    Messages:
    405
    Federer and Nadal are yin and yang, 2 sides of the same coin, I always find it bizarre (ie there must be some sort of higher power) that along comes Federer who is looking like he will be utterly unstoppable and then this kid arrives on the scene who has the perfect game to beat the unbeatable...life is strange
     
    #31
  32. PhrygianDominant

    PhrygianDominant Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    2,021
    I find it poetic that Federer, probably the greatest player to ever live has a rival that he cannot conquer.
     
    #32
  33. 1477aces

    1477aces Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,597
    Nadal's bad on blue clay. And on slow clay he lost to Federer. And has only 2 green clay slams compared to Federer's 7.
     
    #33
  34. Ajosin

    Ajosin Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    137
    Sampras did play Fed and lost at Wimby. That was the end of Sampras' run of championships.

    Also, years at N1 is overrated. Sampras could end N1 with 1 slam and a couple majors (like 2013 Djoker), but that Never happens now. There are so many points sucked up by the elite that you need a multiple Slam year to end N1 in the rankings (the hazards of an era where 3 goats have overlapped).
     
    #34
  35. Blinkism

    Blinkism Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    8,598
    IMO, Nadal needs to match Sampras's 14 GS's to better him, but then needs to win just 1 more to enter the "Is Nadal better than Federer now?" conversation. Sampras is the benchmark.
     
    #35
  36. pmerk34

    pmerk34 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,212
    Location:
    L. Island, NY
    Wimbledon is the most prestigious tournament. Almost all the players say that and it has long been so in the public as well.

    The FO during Pete's era was dominated by dirtballers who did little to nothing elsewhere. IF you want to elevate it because Nadal wins it all the time then do so. Pete won when it mattered most and most of you raking Nadal above him are probably too young to remember 1990-1998 Sampras
     
    #36
  37. swizzy

    swizzy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    675
    Sampras was awesome.. nadal was better than him and will be better than the other great of the sport if he is not already.
     
    #37
  38. Ajosin

    Ajosin Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    137
    It's Pete's fault that dirtballers dominated RG. It speaks volumes that he could never master playing on clay due to a lack of tennis talent.

    By contrast Fed dominated clay, except when he faced Nadal that is. Sampras struggled against average players on clay b/c of his lack of skill.

    Sampras' abismal clay play is a huge gap in his résumé as an all time great.

    I'd say you can't be a great if you play like an average joe on any of the surfaces the tour is built on (clay, HC, grass).
     
    #38
  39. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,602
    176 weeks at no 1 behind, 5 WTF's behind, those are pretty big holes.
     
    #39
  40. NEW_BORN

    NEW_BORN Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Where's the poll so that i can vote YES :)
     
    #40
  41. Ajosin

    Ajosin Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    137
    Agree with the 5 WTF's, but disagree with the weeks at N1.

    That is an overrated stat for Sampras b/c he did not have to do much to stay at N1 compared to today's players.

    In today's era, you need to have 2 slams (or 1 slam + 2 finals appearances) and multiple masters to be #1:

    1993-1998: Sampras finishes #1, mediocre years in 1996 and 1998 only winning one slam. .
    1999: Aggasi, one of the greats ends as #1 with two slams.
    2000-2003: Relatively easy to end as #1 with one slam. String of year end #1s with one slam for the year: Kuerten one slam in 2000, Hewitt one slam in 2001 and one more slam in 2002, Andy roddick one slam in 2003.
    2004-2012 Extremely difficult to end at #1. Multiple slams / slam finals required. The golden age of tennis thanks to Nadal/Fed/Djoker. Average # of slams for year-end #1 jumps to an unseen 2.3 slams/year.
     
    #41
  42. pmerk34

    pmerk34 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,212
    Location:
    L. Island, NY
    Pete's record on clay is cared about one place, this board. For the rest of the world it;s a non issue except it would have been nice for him to have won a FO. That't about it. Lack of Skill? Clay is about grinding all day. It's the least skill demanding. Just look at the list of French Open winners from 1990-2002 compared to Wimbledon and the US Open.
     
    #42
  43. Sampras still ahead

    Weeks at number 1 plus 5 YEC

    He also won the biggest tennis tournament in the world 7 times compared to Rafa's 2

    Also you cannot criticize Pete for not having a career slam as the surfaces were different back then unlike today.
     
    #43
  44. Smasher08

    Smasher08 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,117
    Location:
    The 6
    Sampras has 5 titles at his second strongest major. Nads has 2. And less than half the weeks at #1.

    No argument to either when you view them as surface specialists.
     
    #44
  45. clayman2000

    clayman2000 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,849
    Sure I can.

    Clay hasnt changed much, but the success of guys like Del Po and Soderling at the FO shows that a big game can work in Paris if exercised properly.

    Sampras just couldnt get the hang of it.

    As for the "biggest tennis tournament in the world" thats like saying the Masters in golf is more valuable than the Open or the US open. Yeah its a bigger name but to the players its all the same
     
    #45
  46. diggler

    diggler Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,178
    Location:
    Sydney
    Sampras was year end number 1 for 6 straight years. This counts for nothing?
     
    #46
  47. firepanda

    firepanda Professional

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,423
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Yes. The fact Nadal has the career slam outweighs Sampras' extra slam.
     
    #47
  48. firepanda

    firepanda Professional

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,423
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Yes, it doesn't. Number 1 is irrelevant in the greatness discussion. For one thing, few people end up remembering it. Also, rankings are another way of approximating greatness. There's no point in accounting it in a separate greatness measure. Either figure out who's best by total points accumulated or something, or don't bother with it at all.
     
    #48
  49. steenkash

    steenkash Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Messages:
    250
    Nadal will eventually be recognized as the greatest, He has dominated in what might be the golden era of tennis, he's 27 and already 13 grand slams up, I truly think he can win 4-5 more to surpass Rodger.
     
    #49
  50. steenkash

    steenkash Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Messages:
    250
    I agree, by the number 1 argument that would mean for example Juan Carlos Ferrero is a better player than Andy Murray, the later who has a better record in tournaments without reaching world number 1 .
     
    #50

Share This Page