Will Nadal's accomplishments be better than Sampras when he is done ?

[tennisaddict]

Sampras has YEC, more weeks at No 1 , 3 more majors.

But Nadal has the career slam, which is the "hallmark" of a true tennis great.

Sampras was never a contender for clay, while Nadal was a genuine favorite in 2009-2010 on all 4 surfaces and he proved that as well. Rafa had genuine chances to win multiple majors on all 4 slams. Even Federer was not that close in this regard.

Masters wins lesser said the better.Both have superior H2H amongst their peers.

Pete ended with 7 wimbledons. I would guess Rafa will cross that at FO. I would give at least 1 or 2 more majors to Nadal by the time he calls it time.

Even if he does not get to 14 majors and falls 1 or 2 short, I think he is the more "accomplished" player in terms of all round success.

Any thoughts ?

[TenTan]

Yes, i think Nadal will be historically ranked as the better player, even should he retire tomorrow. hes achieved more than Sampras and the career golden slam is hard to compete against.

[90's Clay]

Nadal may win more slams (possible) but overall I dont know. Nadal has the advantage in the masters department, and the career grand slam (Which I dont know how much it accounts for anymore, its not like Agassi winning the career slam).

Sampras has wayyyy more time on top and all those YEC titles as well (something Nadal hasn't one yet).. I dont think Nadal was on top even for a year was he?

Nadal and Pete both have dominance over their main rivals.. Both mentally tough and maybe the greatest competitors ever. Type A personalities.. They're similar in that regard

I hope Nadal does break all the records and has a long time on top to end his career. I would rather see Nadal be the dominant hands down GOAT more then I would rather see anyone other then Sampras.

Nadal's my 2nd favorite player ever.

The only thing that really hurts Nadal is he just wasn't on top for very long at #1 and he is probably gonna have to win some more non clay slams IMO. Pete was on top for 6-7 years straight.


I hope Nadal does demolish every record set though. God bless him.. He deserves it. He proved a lot of people wrong. Hes a down to earth cat, hes respectful. He isn't a freakin silver spoon primadonna pansy who thinks hes too good for everyone else regardless of how great his career is.

[tennisaddict]

Nadal's accomplishments are all the more remarkable compared to Sampras because it came in the era of Federer and Djokovic, 2 of the all time greats.

Sampras did not have multi slam winners to contend with. Agassi was not much of a competition at the majors and there was no genuine contender at USO and Wimbledon.

Sampras does not even have a final at French. So his number of weeks at number 1 over Nadal does not really carry that much weightage as opposed to Nadal who had made multiple finals in all 4 majors.

[Clarky21]

No.

10Peteisbetter

[beast of mallorca]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Nadal may win more slams (possible) but overall I can't see how. Nadal has the advantage in the masters department, but the career grand slam (Which I dont know how much it accounts for anymore, its not like Agassi winning the career slam).

Sampras has wayyyy more time on top and all those YEC titles as well (something Nadal hasn't one yet).. I dont think Nadal was on top even for a year was he?

Nadal and Pete both have dominance over their main rivals.. Both mentally tough and maybe the greatest competitors ever. Type A personalities.. They're similar in that regard

I hope Nadal does break all the records and has a long time on top to end his career. I would rather see Nadal be the dominant hands down GOAT more then I would rather see anyone other then Sampras.

Nadal's my 2nd favorite player ever.

The only thing that really hurts Nadal is he just wasn't on top for very long at #1


I hope Nadal does demolish every record set though. God bless him.. He deserves it. He proved a lot of people wrong.

Hope so too. I guess we'll wait and see.

[President]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Nadal may win more slams (possible) but overall I dont know. Nadal has the advantage in the masters department, and the career grand slam (Which I dont know how much it accounts for anymore, its not like Agassi winning the career slam).

Sampras has wayyyy more time on top and all those YEC titles as well (something Nadal hasn't one yet).. I dont think Nadal was on top even for a year was he?

Nadal and Pete both have dominance over their main rivals.. Both mentally tough and maybe the greatest competitors ever. Type A personalities.. They're similar in that regard

I hope Nadal does break all the records and has a long time on top to end his career. I would rather see Nadal be the dominant hands down GOAT more then I would rather see anyone other then Sampras.

Nadal's my 2nd favorite player ever.

The only thing that really hurts Nadal is he just wasn't on top for very long at #1 and he is probably gonna have to win some more non clay slams IMO. Pete was on top for 6-7 years straight.


I hope Nadal does demolish every record set though. God bless him.. He deserves it. He proved a lot of people wrong. Hes a down to earth cat, hes respectful. He isn't a freakin silver spoon primadonna pansy who thinks hes too good for everyone else regardless of how great his career is.

Federer deserves to be the GOAT more than either of them...for all he has done to promote the sport (that your boy Petros NEVER did) for his utter dominance of the field for 4 years, and his amazing playing style. Not to mention he owns most of the important records in this sport.

[OrangePower]

When comparing career accomplishments, the most weight should be given to (1) number of slams, and (2) weeks at #1. Other criteria like masters wins, YEC wins, etc come after.

Rafa is not going to come near Sampras in terms of weeks at #1.

So the only way he can even be in the discussion to be considered more accomplished than Pete is if he ends up with 15+ slams.

As to whether that is possible: I think it is possible, but not likely. Maybe a 20% chance.

[Biscuitmcgriddleson]

Originally Posted by tennisaddict

Sampras has YEC, more weeks at No 1 , 3 more majors.

But Nadal has the career slam, which is the "hallmark" of a true tennis great.

Sampras was never a contender for clay, while Nadal was a genuine favorite in 2009-2010 on all 4 surfaces and he proved that as well. Rafa had genuine chances to win multiple majors on all 4 slams. Even Federer was not that close in this regard.

Masters wins lesser said the better.Both have superior H2H amongst their peers.

Pete ended with 7 wimbledons. I would guess Rafa will cross that at FO. I would give at least 1 or 2 more majors to Nadal by the time he calls it time.

Even if he does not get to 14 majors and falls 1 or 2 short, I think he is the more "accomplished" player in terms of all round success.

Any thoughts ?

Federer wasn't close to winning multiple majors on each surface? You might want to check history for a second.

[Steve0904]

Really good question OP. I will say no mostly because of the first line you stated. I think Nadal finishes tied with Sampras in majors and he has the career slam which Sampras doesn't, but IMO weeks at #1 and YEC titles give the edge to Sampras even if they finish tied. Mostly because Sampras blows Nadal out of the water in these categories, and I'm not sure I see Nadal ever getting back to #1, and I doubt even more that he'll ever win a YEC if it stays on indoor hard which it looks like it will. Really this all comes down to how much you rate the career GS versus say weeks at #1 and YEC titles. Pete also has more YE #1's, but Nadal has more MS titles. I think Sampras's accomplishments will be seen as slightly better than Nadal's by the time Nadal is retired.

[tennisaddict]

Originally Posted by Biscuitmcgriddleson

Federer wasn't close to winning multiple majors on each surface? You might want to check history for a second.

Rafa was more close to winning a 2nd AO and a 2nd USO than Federer was to winning a 2nd FO. Ofcourse Fed has an advantage over Nadal that he has won several majors on 3 of the 4, whereas Nadal has just 1 each at AO and USO.

[Raz11]

Can't really compare between different eras. These days, tennis has become much more commercial so the tournament directors has done what ever they can to increase the chances of the top players winning. They have included 32 seeds, slowing down of surfaces and there is a possibility of draw rigging. This applies to Federer and Djokovic as well.

You need to dominate more than one surface to be considered an all time great, imo. If Nadal can win a couple more wimbledons than I would consider him an all time great along with Federer, Borg, Sampras and Laver.

[90's Clay]

Originally Posted by President

Federer deserves to be the GOAT more than either of them...for all he has done to promote the sport (that your boy Petros NEVER did) for his utter dominance of the field for 4 years, and his amazing playing style. Not to mention he owns most of the important records in this sport.

Nadal has been a great ambassador to the sport as well. What are u talking about? Utter dominance? He couldn't dominate Nadal.. He dominated everyone BUT Nadal.. And to a lesser extent Nole.

If there is anyone who deserves to be GOAT its Nadal and it isn't even close. He proved the world wrong.. Most thought he would never never do anything off of clay, he beats your boy at wimbledon.. Then they said he wouldn't anything on hard courts (Myself included), he goes out and wins BOTH hardcourt slams (beating Fed twice at the AO) and the olympics. He could have continued to get down on himself and let Nole continue to run over him? (Like Fed let Nadal).. Nope.. Nadal took Nole out 3 straight times last year.

Nadal has the upper hand on his main rivals for his career (Fed couldn't do it)

Nadal has also been the hardest working player BY FAR in the history of this game.. His training sessions are one of legends

Nadal has less talent then guys like Sampras and Fed and Laver Yet put himself into that same level of greatness due to his desire hard work and dedication

[tennisaddict]

This thread is not about Federer, it is more about who is a genuine No 2 of the modern era.

[Steve0904]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Nadal has been a great ambassador to the sport as well. What are u talking about? Utter dominance? He couldn't dominate Nadal.. He dominated everyone BUT Nadal.. And to a lesser extent Nole.

If there is anyone who deserves to be GOAT its Nadal and it isn't even close. He proved the world wrong.. Most thought he would never never do anything off of clay, he beats your boy at wimbledon.. Then they said he wouldn't anything on hard courts (Myself included), he goes out and wins BOTH hardcourt slams (beating Fed twice at the AO) and the olympics. He could have continued to get down on himself and let Nole continue to run over him? (Like Fed let Nadal).. Nope.. Nadal took Nole out 3 straight times last year.

Nadal has the upper hand on his main rivals for his career (Fed couldn't do it)

Nadal has also been the hardest working player BY FAR in the history of this game.. His training sessions are one of legends

Nadal has less talent then guys like Sampras and Fed and Laver Yet put himself into that same level of greatness due to his desire hard work and dedication

Federer is more accomplished, thus if anyone deserves to be the GOAT it is him. It's very simple actually. I don't care how hard Nadal worked. You can't say Federer or anyone else for that matter didn't have to work as hard. If you don't have the better list of accomplishments you won't be the GOAT.

[90's Clay]

Originally Posted by Steve0904

Federer is more accomplished, thus if anyone deserves to be the GOAT it is him. It's very simple actually. I don't care how hard Nadal worked. You can't say Federer or anyone else for that matter didn't have to work as hard. If you don't have the better list of accomplishments you won't be the GOAT.

Fed didn't have to work nearly as hard as Nadal did. Fed isn't notorious for those grueling training sessions like Nadal is. Nadal had to almost re-evaluate and revamp his game to become a major threat outside of clay. Fed just also had just more raw talent then Nadal (and the gift of better health, Nadal came into pro tennis with foot problems). Nadal had to do ALOT more to be an all time great then Pete or Roger did who had more talent and raw ability on more then just one surface at a younger age.

[beast of mallorca]

Originally Posted by Steve0904

Federer is more accomplished, thus if anyone deserves to be the GOAT it is him. It's very simple actually. I don't care how hard Nadal worked. You can't say Federer or anyone else for that matter didn't have to work as hard. If you don't have the better list of accomplishments you won't be the GOAT.

Wait til their careers are over then, before making your final judgement.

[TMF]

Sampras is one tier below Federer, so stop comparing the two.

As for Nadal, he's getting closer and closer to Sampras. Both players have strength and weaknesses. With Sampras it's the clay, too few MS. Nadal has no WTF.

[beast of mallorca]

Originally Posted by TMF

Sampras is one tier below Federer, so stop comparing the two.

As for Nadal, he's getting closer and closer to Sampras. Both players have strength and weaknesses. With Sampras it's the clay, too few MS. Nadal has no WTF.

Haha, I like your signature TMF.
I guess helloworld is a Sampras diehard......

[TMF]

Originally Posted by beast of mallorca

Wait til their careers are over then, before making your final judgement.

If he can break Roger's slam count, weeks at #1, WTF, and piled up countless of tennis records then he should be put ahead of Federer. As of now, Roger is widely considered as the greatest(same for Graf).