Clay Court GOAT - Page 13

timnz · 04-25-2010, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustard

Why is Muster in 18th? He won 40 clay-court titles in his career, including 18 in 1995-1996 alone.

Muster was a great Clay Court player. But being 18th on that list I would imagine is a product of the greatness of numbers 1 to 17. Not a lot of players I would disagree with (though there are some I don't know too much about).

davey25 · 04-25-2010, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem

1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Bruguera
16. Pietrangeli
17. Federer
18. Muster
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Emerson
22. Trabert
23. Agassi
24. Connors
25. Gimeno
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

Drobny at no. 12 --great clay-courter.

I think Muster and Courier at their best are clearly better than Bruguera. JMO though. I agree with Bruguera, Federer, Muster, and Courier all being in the same little area.

hoodjem · 04-26-2010, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timnz

Muster was a great Clay Court player. But being 18th on that list I would imagine is a product of the greatness of numbers 1 to 17. Not a lot of players I would disagree with (though there are some I don't know too much about).

Exactly. When one is talking about the GOAT of anything in the entire history of the game, just being on the list is a great achievement. Cracking the top-ten is realizing god-like status.

But the list is adjustable as more opinions add weight to certain arguments or rankings.

pc1 · 04-26-2010, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem

Exactly. When one is talking about the GOAT of anything in the entire history of the game, just being on the list is a great achievement. Cracking the top-ten is realizing god-like status.

But the list is adjustable as more opinions add weight to certain arguments or rankings.

Agreed so that's why I don't understand why some are offended if their favorite isn't number one on the GOAT list in anything but let's say number five instead. To be number five is still terrific.

Incidentally Hoodjem, I noticed Emerson is ahead of Gimeno on this list. Gimeno was a renown clay court player and defeated Rosewall numerous times on clay. Clay may have been one of his stronger surfaces and I think overall Gimeno was a superior player to Emmo especially considering Gimeno played Laver, Gonzalez and Rosewall regularly on the old Pro Tour which was far superior to the amateur tour Emerson played on.

hoodjem · 04-26-2010, 08:15 AM

Clay-court GOATS--
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Muster
16. Pietrangeli
17. Bruguera
18. Federer
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Gimeno
22. Emerson
23. Trabert
24. Agassi
25. Connors
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

Nadal_Power · 05-03-2010, 02:14 AM

Rafa on clay after Rome :

Matches : 191 - 16
Tournaments : 43
Finals : 29
Titles : 27

Looks good for me

hoodjem · 05-03-2010, 05:31 AM

I wish someone would do a side-by-side comparison of relatable statistics for Borg versus Nadal.?

Maybe Nadal is better after 2010 MC and Rome.

Murray_Fan · 05-03-2010, 05:49 AM

It would be very funny if murray was on there

borg number one · 05-03-2010, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem

I wish someone would do a side-by-side comparison of relatable statistics for Borg versus Nadal.?

Maybe Nadal is better after 2010 MC and Rome.

Hoodjem, basically, Nadal and Borg are neck and neck in terms of accomplishment. We have Borg with 2 more FO titles, but that was by the time he was past 25 years of age. He did skip the '77 FO Open though due to a player's strike. Meanwhile, as to other tourneys, it's an apples to oranges comparison in that the clay schedule is quite different now with more the advent of the Masters series/tourneys. So you have a different mix now, with perhaps more "official" clay tournaments to be contested. Nadal has won more tourneys thus far in terms of his "win rate", but Borg still has two more RG titles. Other than that, overall, both have been extremely dominating during their respective eras. By, 26 or so, Nadal may very well catch Borg at the FO, we'll see. Yet, as of now, it's really pretty close in my book if you look at overall accomplishment. Yet, I disagree with the argument that Nadal has beaten Federer on clay, so he is automaticaly greater than Borg on clay. Federer is a borderline great clay courter, but it's not as if Federer is the second best clay court player in history. If Nadal wins 2 more FO titles, and also starts winning more Wimbledons, then, he'll start entering Borg territory as an all time great player and not just an all time great clay courter.

robow7 · 05-03-2010, 07:29 AM

Hoodjem, I think I would have to move Vilas up on your roster considering he had the record 53 straight winning matches on clay until Nadal came along and broke it. How far up, not sure since not familar with a couple above him.

timnz · 05-03-2010, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by borg number one

Hoodjem, basically, Nadal and Borg are neck and neck in terms of accomplishment. We have Borg with 2 more FO titles, but that was by the time he was past 25 years of age. He did skip the '77 FO Open though due to a player's strike. Meanwhile, as to other tourneys, it's an apples to oranges comparison in that the clay schedule is quite different now with more the advent of the Masters series/tourneys. So you have a different mix now, with perhaps more "official" clay tournaments to be contested. Nadal has won more tourneys thus far in terms of his "win rate", but Borg still has two more RG titles. Other than that, overall, both have been extremely dominating during their respective eras. By, 26 or so, Nadal may very well catch Borg at the FO, we'll see. Yet, as of now, it's really pretty close in my book if you look at overall accomplishment. Yet, I disagree with the argument that Nadal has beaten Federer on clay, so he is automaticaly greater than Borg on clay. Federer is a borderline great clay courter, but it's not as if Federer is the second best clay court player in history. If Nadal wins 2 more FO titles, and also starts winning more Wimbledons, then, he'll start entering Borg territory as an all time great player and not just an all time great clay courter.

Borg won his 6th French Open, in 1981, having just had his 25th birthday a few days earlier. If Nadal wins his 5th this year he will have turned 24. Hence, Borg and Nadal are on the same schedule. In fact since Borg's birthday is the 6th of June and Nadal's the 3rd of June - Borg would have been 3 days younger than Nadal winning his 6th (if Nadal wins the next 2). This is assuming that the date in June, 2011 is the same day in June that the final was played in 1981 (shouldn't be much different).

CyBorg · 05-03-2010, 04:53 PM

My simple way of looking at Borg/Nadal on clay. I've posted about these two guys already in this thread. But just to address some of the things already posted, here's what I would look at - how to characterize the respective years of these players by placing them into categories.

dominant - very good - adequate, etc.

Borg:

1974 - very good
1975- very good
1976 - adequate
1977 - dominant
1978 - dominant
1979 - dominant
1980 - dominant
1981 - dominant

Nadal

2005 - dominant
2006 - dominant
2007 - dominant
2008 - dominant
2009 - very good
2010 - ?

So far I see Borg as having five dominant years on the surface and two very good years.

Nadal I have as having four dominant years and one very good year.

According to the numbers, a dominant year is any kind of year when the player is virtually invincible. In the case of these players what we normally get is a winning percentage of .95 or more. No glaring losses.

"Very good" is anything with some warts, but the player is still the best in the game on the surface - but not quite invincible. People can look up the numbers on their own, but the winning percentage drops closer to .9, give or take.

Counting majors is a waste of time.

Mustard · 05-04-2010, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by borg number one

Hoodjem, basically, Nadal and Borg are neck and neck in terms of accomplishment. We have Borg with 2 more FO titles, but that was by the time he was past 25 years of age. He did skip the '77 FO Open though due to a player's strike.

Players strike? I thought Borg played WTT that year thus making himself ineligible for the French Open?

borg number one · 05-05-2010, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustard

Players strike? I thought Borg played WTT that year thus making himself ineligible for the French Open?

Mustard, I don't know exactly how to characterize it, since I was young in 1977 and don't recall the exact "political" details of that conflict between players and the FO/Tour. It's my understanding that Tour officials were in a dispute with players that were playing World Team Tennis. I've read that Borg and others players who had a contract with the WTT were the players that ultimately missed playing the 1977 French Open.

Now, was this a "strike" action by those players vying for the rights of WTT vs. the Tour, or was he automatically ineligible to play? Was this a "choice" or were such players automatically ineligible? I'm not certain the exact details surrounding which side was more "responsible" for that dispute. There was so much fighting going on during that period, with Connors, Ashe, and Borg all pivotal male players while professional Tennis found its way, with players lobbying for certain rights/freedoms in terms of how events were conducted and rankings determined.

Datacipher · 05-05-2010, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by borg number one

Mustard, I don't know exactly how to characterize it, since I was young in 1977 and don't recall the exact "political" details of that conflict between players and the FO/Tour. It's my understanding that Tour officials were in a dispute with players that were playing World Team Tennis. I've read that Borg and others players who had a contract with the WTT were the players that ultimately missed playing the 1977 French Open. Now, was this a "strike" action by those players vying for the rights of WTT vs. the Tour, or was he automatically ineligible to play? Was this a "choice" or were such players automatically ineligible? I'm not certain the exact details of which side is more "responsible" for that dispute. There was so much fighting going on during that period, with Connors, Ashe, and Borg all pivotal male players while professional Tennis found its way, with players lobbying for certain rights/freedoms in terms of how events were conducted and rankings determined.

If I ever knew the details of 77, I have since forgotten. However, Connors was banned in 74 for signing a contract with WTT. I think that due to the lawsuit etc, by the time Borg skipped, he may have done so voluntarily.

newmark401 · 05-09-2010, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem

Clay-court GOATS--
1. Borg
2. Nadal
3. Rosewall
4. Cochet
5. Lendl
6. Wilander
7. Wilding
8. Lacoste
9. Kuerten
10. Laver
11. Borotra
12. Drobny
13. Vilas
14. Santana
15. Muster
16. Pietrangeli
17. Bruguera
18. Federer
19. Courier
20. von Cramm
21. Gimeno
22. Emerson
23. Trabert
24. Agassi
25. Connors
26. Frank Parker
27. Roche
28. Nastase
29. Sven Davidson

Nice to Tony Wilding ranking so high, although I'm not sure what the criteria are. I wonder where Reggie Doherty or Laurie Doherty should rank, or Bill Tilden?

Anyway, this thread has almost all of Tony Wilding's singles tournament wins, on all surfaces: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=4624626

hoodjem · 05-09-2010, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newmark401

Nice to Tony Wilding ranking so high, although I'm not sure what the criteria are. I wonder where Reggie Doherty or Laurie Doherty should rank, or Bill Tilden?

Anyway, this thread has almost all of Tony Wilding's singles tournament wins, on all surfaces: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=4624626

IMO Tilden did win a French Championship, but certain individuals took it away from him.

pc1 · 05-09-2010, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem

IMO Tilden did win a French Championship, but certain individuals took it away from him.

Well at least Tilden won the World Hardcourt which was the equivalent of the French in those days.

It's a shame Tilden was robbed.

Chopin · 05-09-2010, 09:22 PM

Nice statistics in here boys!

I have to say though, if I were to assign (subjunctive) "categories" to a player's performance over a given year, as our good friend "CyBorg" has done, I think I'd choose some better adjectives!

"Adequate"
"Very Good"
"Dominate"

Hmmm...(by the way, where is plain old "Good?" on that list, huh CyBorg?)

Chopin's Categories:

Sordid
Middling
Equable
Fertile
Exquisite
Regal
Divine

...

Obstreperous (I'm not sure where to put this one!)

Thanks for reading,
Chopin (The Maestro)

Chopin · 05-09-2010, 09:23 PM

^^Sometimes I amaze even myself

04-26-2010, 08:15 AM	#245
hoodjem G.O.A.T. Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bierlandt Posts: 10,020	Clay-court GOATS-- 1. Borg 2. Nadal 3. Rosewall 4. Cochet 5. Lendl 6. Wilander 7. Wilding 8. Lacoste 9. Kuerten 10. Laver 11. Borotra 12. Drobny 13. Vilas 14. Santana 15. Muster 16. Pietrangeli 17. Bruguera 18. Federer 19. Courier 20. von Cramm 21. Gimeno 22. Emerson 23. Trabert 24. Agassi 25. Connors 26. Frank Parker 27. Roche 28. Nastase 29. Sven Davidson __________________ The smart man thinks he knows a lot; the wise man is aware that he knows little. Last edited by hoodjem : 04-26-2010 at 08:21 AM.

05-03-2010, 05:31 AM	#247
hoodjem G.O.A.T. Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bierlandt Posts: 10,020	I wish someone would do a side-by-side comparison of relatable statistics for Borg versus Nadal.? Maybe Nadal is better after 2010 MC and Rome. __________________ The smart man thinks he knows a lot; the wise man is aware that he knows little.

05-03-2010, 05:49 AM	#248
Murray_Fan Rookie Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 160	It would be very funny if murray was on there __________________ 2x Head Youtek Radical MP (Babolat PRM Team/Tournament Hybrid, 57lbs, Mid) Head Tour Team Youtek 12 Racket Bag (Gold) & Matching BackPack (Gold)

05-03-2010, 04:53 PM	#252
CyBorg Legend Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 5,270	My simple way of looking at Borg/Nadal on clay. I've posted about these two guys already in this thread. But just to address some of the things already posted, here's what I would look at - how to characterize the respective years of these players by placing them into categories. dominant - very good - adequate, etc. Borg: 1974 - very good 1975- very good 1976 - adequate 1977 - dominant 1978 - dominant 1979 - dominant 1980 - dominant 1981 - dominant Nadal 2005 - dominant 2006 - dominant 2007 - dominant 2008 - dominant 2009 - very good 2010 - ? So far I see Borg as having five dominant years on the surface and two very good years. Nadal I have as having four dominant years and one very good year. According to the numbers, a dominant year is any kind of year when the player is virtually invincible. In the case of these players what we normally get is a winning percentage of .95 or more. No glaring losses. "Very good" is anything with some warts, but the player is still the best in the game on the surface - but not quite invincible. People can look up the numbers on their own, but the winning percentage drops closer to .9, give or take. Counting majors is a waste of time. Last edited by CyBorg : 05-03-2010 at 05:14 PM.

05-09-2010, 09:22 PM	#259
Chopin Hall Of Fame Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: St. John, USVI Posts: 3,715	Nice statistics in here boys! I have to say though, if I were to assign (subjunctive) "categories" to a player's performance over a given year, as our good friend "CyBorg" has done, I think I'd choose some better adjectives! "Adequate" "Very Good" "Dominate" Hmmm...(by the way, where is plain old "Good?" on that list, huh CyBorg?) Chopin's Categories: Sordid Middling Equable Fertile Exquisite Regal Divine ... Obstreperous (I'm not sure where to put this one!) Thanks for reading, Chopin (The Maestro) __________________ New Poll: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=463382