It is amazing how casually people dismiss Sampras' dismal French record. As mentioned, in 12 years, he gets to ONE semi-final and then gets dusted. Other years, he meekly went down in the first and second or third rounds. The fact is that Sampras never even had a chance to win this Slam. He wasn't even one of the top 20 players on that surface many years he entered and the results showed it. Yet, Borg, who never won the US OPEN, GOT to the finals 4 times and barely lost twice--barely!! Lendl never won Wimbledon, but GOT to the finals twice, 2 games from beating Becker in '86. McEnroe never won the French, but he GOT to the final, two games away from beating Lendl in '84. Becker got to the quarterfinals or semis of the French on 5 occasions. Agassi got to 3 French finals, winning one. He got to 2 Wimbledon finals and about 4 semis. TWO TOTALLY different surfaces. He got to 5 US open finals, 4 Austalian finals--not to mention a ton of quarters and semis in these events. Sampras' horrendous performance in the second most valued major is a HUGE GAP in his resume. Yet, people gloss it over and call him the greatest far and away. That's such bullcrap. Borg didn't even play Australia. If he did, he could have the record. Borg won 5 Wimbledons and 6 French Opens and was a four time finalist at the US OPEN. His record is EVERY bit as impressive as Sampras--if not more. Bottom line: How can you call a guy the indisputable best when he could but manage one semifinal (where his butt was kicked and he practically passed out) in 12 years. Sampras wanted the French in the worst way and wasn't even CLOSE to winning it. Greatest grass courter ever?--YES. After that, there are 3 or 4 guys who are right there or better than him.