mattennis about the homogenization. I don't think it matters.
Sampras is the same as Federer if you take clay away. Without clay they both have 19 slam finals. So Sampras was as dominant as Federer. And Nadal can't dominate Hard Courts also. I think Sampras just wasn't good enough on clay that's it.
You could argue because skipping the clay season he was fresher for the end season. I mean Roddick was also not good on clay. I mean Federer is an exception to the rule. I just think he is that great. Once in while stars align and every 50 years a player that talented comes. Probably statistical extreme but it is possible.
A bet against a champion is a bad bet!