Clay Court GOAT

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by Ripper014

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]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

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]

In terms of form I think Nadal was better in '07-'08 than '06 on lay.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by Ripper014

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]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Clay lover

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]

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]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

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]

Originally Posted by Cenc

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Ripper014

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]

Originally Posted by jean pierre

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]

Originally Posted by boredone3456

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]

Originally Posted by borg number one

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]

Originally Posted by CyBorg

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.