Clay Court GOAT

[Gizo]

I said this a few weeks ago, but Lendl's clay court credentials are incredibly underrated. Over the years I've seen people ranking the likes of Kuerten, Federer, Vilas and Muster above him on clay, which is absolutely absurd. None of those 4 players compare to him on the surface.

It's close between Lendl and Wilander on clay, but I would go with Lendl as his overall clay court CV is slightly better, and in my opinion his peak standard of play on surface was better than Wilander's. Wilander himself has admitted that as well.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by Gizo

I said this a few weeks ago, but Lendl's clay court credentials are incredibly underrated. Over the years I've seen people ranking the likes of Kuerten, Federer, Vilas and Muster above him on clay, which is absolutely absurd. None of those 4 players compare to him on the surface.

It's close between Lendl and Wilander on clay, but I would go with Lendl as his overall clay court CV is slightly better, and in my opinion his peak standard of play on surface was better than Wilander's. Wilander himself has admitted that as well.

I agree with you totally. Lendl in fact has an argument for being the player of the Open Era. I'm not writing he is definitely but he's in the running. The guy won 146 tournaments in his career and 8 majors in 19 finals.

As far as his clay court credentials are concerned, Lendl won more clay court tournaments than Kuerten won total tournaments in his career according to the ATP website. And of course he won three French Opens.

Lendl just in general is vastly underrated. He was incredible at his best.

[Gizo]

Yes and given Lendl's proficiency on carpet, hard courts and even grass, it wasn't as if he was padding out his record on clay by entering every small clay court tournament under the sun when he had bigger fish to fry on other surfaces.

He was also a multiple champion at each of the 4 most prestigious clay court titles away from RG; Rome, Monte-Carlo, Hamburg and Barcelona. Plus he had winning clay court h2hs against Wilander (6-4) and Vilas (7-5), and beat Muster and Bruguera on clay in 1992.

From 1984-1987 his record at RG was W, F, W, W which shows how dominant he was there.

[hoodjem]

Latest edition:

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
25. Trabert
26. Orantes
27. Panatta
28. Agassi
29. Connors
30. Nusslein
31. Tilden
32. Gimeno
33. Frank Parker
34. Roche
35. Sven Davidson
36. Jack Crawford
37. Fred Perry
38. J.E. Patty
39. Decugis
40. Segura

[hoodjem]

I did note that the Bleacher report issued a list of clay-court GOATs recently:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...tennis-history

Here is that list distilled for the men:
1. Nadal
2. Borg
3. Cochet
4. Lacoste
5. Wilander
6. Lendl
7. Kuerten

It mostly corresponds to our list, but with a two serious oversights, specifically Rosewall and Wilding. As is well-known on here, Wilding was, I believe, entirely undefeated on clay for a number of years.

I submit that Rosewall was an excellent clay-courter, with many clay-court wins to his name.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by Gizo

I said this a few weeks ago, but Lendl's clay court credentials are incredibly underrated. Over the years I've seen people ranking the likes of Kuerten, Federer, Vilas and Muster above him on clay, which is absolutely absurd. None of those 4 players compare to him on the surface.

It's close between Lendl and Wilander on clay, but I would go with Lendl as his overall clay court CV is slightly better, and in my opinion his peak standard of play on surface was better than Wilander's. Wilander himself has admitted that as well.

I put Kuerten above Lendl on clay.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

Latest edition:

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
25. Trabert
26. Orantes
27. Panatta
28. Agassi
29. Connors
30. Nusslein
31. Tilden
32. Gimeno
33. Frank Parker
34. Roche
35. Sven Davidson
36. Jack Crawford
37. Fred Perry
38. J.E. Patty
39. Decugis

While some positions can be moved above or bottom, the lsit is very good and takes into account all the best cc players ever.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Gizo

Yes and given Lendl's proficiency on carpet, hard courts and even grass, it wasn't as if he was padding out his record on clay by entering every small clay court tournament under the sun when he had bigger fish to fry on other surfaces.

He was also a multiple champion at each of the 4 most prestigious clay court titles away from RG; Rome, Monte-Carlo, Hamburg and Barcelona. Plus he had winning clay court h2hs against Wilander (6-4) and Vilas (7-5), and beat Muster and Bruguera on clay in 1992.

From 1984-1987 his record at RG was W, F, W, W which shows how dominant he was there.

In fact, back in 1980 when Lendl reached the top 4, other than winning the DC and making the Masters finals and WCT semis, all on carpet, almost 90% of Lendl´s best results were achieved on clay.Won Houston and Barcelona, reached semis at Rome and Hamburg.he also excelled on hard courts, particularly beating Borg twice, but his most consistent results were on clay.

In 2 years, however, he would be much more feared on carpet or hard courts, since he played less and less cc tournaments.

[forzamilan90]

I think Nadal, Borg, and Rosewall are the three best ever on clay in that order.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by forzamilan90

I think Nadal, Borg, and Rosewall are the three best ever on clay in that order.

Fine list.

[Nadal_Power]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

I put Kuerten above Lendl on clay.

Why is that?

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by Nadal_Power

Why is that?

Because I think he was a better clay court player.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Because I think he was a better clay court player.

Well played.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

Latest edition:

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
25. Trabert
26. Orantes
27. Panatta
28. Agassi
29. Connors
30. Nusslein
31. Tilden
32. Gimeno
33. Frank Parker
34. Roche
35. Sven Davidson
36. Jack Crawford
37. Fred Perry
38. J.E. Patty
39. Decugis

Found your list excellent but miss Segura!

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

Well played.

Kuerten is one of those special players whose career had so much more promise than his health permitted. IMO, he had what it took to be an all time great. He also had an amazingly positive attitude on the court that you rarely see in tennis.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Kuerten is one of those special players whose career had so much more promise than his health permitted. IMO, he had what it took to be an all time great. He also had an amazingly positive attitude on the court that you rarely see in tennis.

On clay, at his best I believe Kuerten was superior to Lendl but on record I think Lendl was better. It's close. Kuerten is one of the few players I believe would have a good chance to beat Nadal at his best on red clay.

The guy had a very underrated serve also and he could play well on faster surfaces.

[Nadal_Power]

Originally Posted by pc1

On clay, at his best I believe Kuerten was superior to Lendl but on record I think Lendl was better. It's close. Kuerten is one of the few players I believe would have a good chance to beat Nadal at his best on red clay.

The guy had a very underrated serve also and he could play well on faster surfaces.

He was a joke on Carpet and Grass, and his Indoor record is nothing special with just above 50% of wins

[pc1]

Originally Posted by Nadal_Power

He was a joke on Carpet and Grass, and his Indoor record is nothing special with just above 50% of wins

He was getting better imho and he did win some hard court and indoor tournaments.

I think his greatest clutch matches was when I believe he defeated both Sampras and Agassi in consecutive rounds to win the Masters Cup.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/P...rten.aspx?t=mr

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by pc1

On clay, at his best I believe Kuerten was superior to Lendl but on record I think Lendl was better. It's close. Kuerten is one of the few players I believe would have a good chance to beat Nadal at his best on red clay.

The guy had a very underrated serve also and he could play well on faster surfaces.

It is very close. But, IMO, Kuerten was an inherently more talented player and his game, both his stroke mechanics and his tactical approach to the game, was better suited to clay than Lendl's. I also think that a healthy Kuerten would be an even match for Nadal or Borg on clay.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by pc1

He was getting better imho and he did win some hard court and indoor tournaments.

I think his greatest clutch matches was when I believe he defeated both Sampras and Agassi in consecutive rounds to win the Masters Cup.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/P...rten.aspx?t=mr

True. He also beat a screaming, hot tempered, Federer at Indian Wells on hard court.