How has Nadal passed Sampras?
- Thread starter Standaa
- Start date
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
LOL, the Federer lovers in this thread either have no intelligence or are simply acting like typical fanboys do. But let's roll with their argument for discussion sake and see where it gets us. Their charge is that most of Nadal's slams have been at the FO so Sampras is somehow still greater.
So let's take away 12 of Nadal's FOs leaving him with 1 FO and 8 total slams. Now you'd have to also do that with Sampras at his most successful slam, so take away 6 of his Wimbledon titles, leaving him 1 Wimbledon and 8 total slams as well. Now they're tied in slam count but Sampras would still be lacking a career slam while Nadal would have slams on every surface, a major difference!
Who now would be greater? If the Federer lovers still insist it's Sampras, I want to ask ... what language are you folks speaking?
So let's take away 12 of Nadal's FOs leaving him with 1 FO and 8 total slams. Now you'd have to also do that with Sampras at his most successful slam, so take away 6 of his Wimbledon titles, leaving him 1 Wimbledon and 8 total slams as well. Now they're tied in slam count but Sampras would still be lacking a career slam while Nadal would have slams on every surface, a major difference!
Who now would be greater? If the Federer lovers still insist it's Sampras, I want to ask ... what language are you folks speaking?
LOL, the Federer lovers in this thread either have no intelligence or are simply acting like typical fanboys do. But let's roll with their argument for discussion sake and see where it gets us. Their charge is that most of Nadal's slams have been at the FO so Sampras is somehow still greater.
So let's take away 12 of Nadal's FOs leaving him with 1 FO and 8 total slams. Now you'd have to also do that with Sampras at his most successful slam, so take away 6 of his Wimbledon titles, leaving him 1 Wimbledon and 8 total slams as well. Now they're tied in slam count but Sampras would still be lacking a career slam while Nadal would have slams on every surface, a major difference!
Who now would be greater? If the Federer lovers still insist it's Sampras, I want to ask ... what language are you folks speaking?
Sure, those are all dumb arguments. But you can't deny that Sampras is better than Nadal at 3/4 slams.
Standaa
G.O.A.T.
who's 3
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal takes up two spots by himself, probably.
btw, congrats on five pages. A troll thread that makes it this far is definitely a success.
Breakpointerer
Legend
Zverev would like to put himself in there
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Nadal has obviously passed Pete.
But they arguably both make the Tennis Mt. Rushmore
Nadal, Pete/Borg, Djokovic, Laver
But they arguably both make the Tennis Mt. Rushmore
Nadal, Pete/Borg, Djokovic, Laver
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Machan, I can tell you're not just a Sampras fan but a lover of the game of tennis as well. Much respect to you
As for him being better, machi you must remember you're talking to a huge Sampras fan who followed his entire career so there's no bias against him. I've followed them both from the start of their careers and both played/play exquisite tennis. More accomplished at the other slams, yes but how do you reckon Sampras is better?
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
LOL, back at the turn of the century, Mclaren's Ron Dennis was asked when his team might return to winning ways at a time his cars were frequently blowing engines during races. He famously said ... "to finish first, first you must finish!"
Machan, I can tell you're not just a Sampras fan but a lover of the game of tennis as well. Much respect to you
As for him being better, machi you must remember you're talking to a huge Sampras fan who followed his entire career so there's no bias against him. I've followed them both from the start of their careers and both played/play exquisite tennis. More accomplished at the other slams, yes but how do you reckon Sampras is better?
Then you're just playing semantics. Because otherwise you cannot say Sampras is better than Gasquet, only more accomplished.
Yugram
Legend
Borg. The father of the modern game.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Yes very good point and I agree that we must allow ourselves some leeway to make such pronouncements. So I'll say this- having watched Sampras all his career, I have no doubt that the man in his prime was peerless on grass or least on fast grass. Would he beat Nadal on it? I'd have to say more often than not but that's assuming Nadal would continue to play his current game. On fast grass, he may have developed his game very differently but I'll still pick Sampras simply because I don't believe it's possible to play any better than he did, especially if you watched the final of Wimbledon '99
But as for the other surfaces, I'm not so sure. Nadal is a hardcourt great in his own right so I wouldn't be so quick to give it to Sampras.
Yes very good point and I agree that we must allow ourselves some leeway to make such pronouncements. So I'll say this- having watched Sampras all his career, I have no doubt that the man in his prime was peerless on grass or least on fast grass. Would he beat Nadal on it? I'd have to say more often than not but that's assuming Nadal would continue to play his current game. On fast grass, he may have developed his game very differently but I'll still pick Sampras simply because I don't believe it's possible to play any better than he did, especially if you watched the final of Wimbledon '99
But as for the other surfaces, I'm not so sure. Nadal is a hardcourt great in his own right so I wouldn't be so quick to give it to Sampras.
Regardless of the word play, Sampras is better/more accomplished than Nadal on 75% of the slams. You cannot deny this.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
That’s a poto.This guy over Petros??
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Machan ... I'm grateful to whoever on this forum coined the phrase 'agree to disagree' else you & I would be at this all night!
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Who’s Sampras? Sorry if I’m too young to ask that question.
Machan ... I'm grateful to whoever on this forum coined the phrase 'agree to disagree' else you & I would be at this all night!
You can't disagree to a fact
.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Simple ... he's the greatest grass court player of all time and is vying to be 4th on the GOAT list with Federer (@Yugram
)Simple ... he's the greatest grass court player of all time and is vying to be 4th on the GOAT list with Federer (@Yugram
You are evading the question like a politician. You cannot deny the FACT that Sampras has achieved more than Nadal at 3/4 slams.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Assume on planet Bozor there are three orchards with 3 different types of fruits. Assume that each fruit is equally scarce and equally valuable. John and Larry both retire as two of the best fruit pickers on planet Bozor, with both people having been fruit pickers for exactly 700 days.
John picked 7 apples, 6 cherries, 0 blueberries
Larry picked 3 apples, 5 cherries, and 25 blueberries.
Thus, John is a better fruit picker than Larry because he is better at picking apples and cherries? HINT: disparity matters
Last edited:
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Fedr has a Rolodex. Nadl has a Richard Mill.
Do u prefer Cassius or Pâté Philips?
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Just pate. Delicious.
I never said John or Larry are better overall. I simply said Sampras is more accomplished than Nadal at 3/4 slams. Draw your own conclusions.
Larry is the goat blueberry picker.
John is the superior apple and cherry picker .. and at a time when apples were what counted most.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Only at Wimbledon.
As for the other two, he's more successful, no doubt. But not better. Only 1 more title at each but never had an obstacle like Federer or Novak whereas Nadal did.
'Better' is subjective. He may not be better to you, but better for others.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Otha Omala!
Where did I evade the question? I clearly expressed my thoughts about this subject. What more is there to say? If there's any specific question, please let me know
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Andre here was a better opponent than anyone Nadal has beaten at the US Open in his many years of playing the event.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Otha Omala!
You are evading by not agreeing that Sampras is more accomplished at 3/4 slams.
Nailed it! You answered the question yourself
No, we already agreed above it's semantics. Better is effectively interchangeable with accomplishments because otherwise Gasquet > Sampras. You already agreed to that part.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Not overall, but in those specific matches (USO 2001 vs. USO 2010 and 2013) sure.Andre better than Djokovic? I doubt you'll find many takers for that one
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Machan, @Amritia gave me a great example. See, the way I see it is like comparing it to a triathlon. You can do worse than a competitor in 2 of the three disciplines, but still win overall if in the third discipline you had a heavy victory.
If you lost a triathlon, but then later complained that you had a moral victory because you did marginally better in 2 of the 3 races despite losing, you'd be laughed away. As laughable as those who go through each Slam and say Sampras is better at 3 of the 4. Weighted average and margin of superiority has to be taken into account.
D
Deleted member 775898
Guest
Yes he is, but Nadal is still overall much more accomplished than Sampras. Case closed.
FrontHeadlock
Hall of Fame
If it’s an interesting question who cares if it’s trolling or not? We can still have good discussion on the topic.
I never said anything about overall who is better/accomplished/etc. I said Pete is more accomplished at 3/4 slams and you refuse to acknowledge this. It's hilarious!
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Then you can't say that it can't be denied Pete is better at 3/4 slams...
You give Nadal Pete's AO draws and he'd have 5 titles there.
Give Pete Nadal's AO draws and I doubt he'd even have 1.
Give Nadal Pete's US Open draws he'd probably have 5-6 titles there.
Give Pete Nadal's US Open draws he still wins around 4-5 imo.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
A Federesque, a language of delusion grandeur!LOL, the Federer lovers in this thread either have no intelligence or are simply acting like typical fanboys do. But let's roll with their argument for discussion sake and see where it gets us. Their charge is that most of Nadal's slams have been at the FO so Sampras is somehow still greater.
So let's take away 12 of Nadal's FOs leaving him with 1 FO and 8 total slams. Now you'd have to also do that with Sampras at his most successful slam, so take away 6 of his Wimbledon titles, leaving him 1 Wimbledon and 8 total slams as well. Now they're tied in slam count but Sampras would still be lacking a career slam while Nadal would have slams on every surface, a major difference!
Who now would be greater? If the Federer lovers still insist it's Sampras, I want to ask ... what language are you folks speaking?
I was initially using 'better' as equivalent to accomplished, since better otherwise has no real meaning since it would be quite subjective.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Otha machan, you just flipped the entire script! I'm the one that started by saying I have no problem accepting that Pete is more accomplished at the other slams
E36BMWM3
Hall of Fame
Greater than Sampras greater than your boy Djokovic i bet you put salt as opposed to sugar in that lame azz tea... VAMOS!!!0 YECs (The gaping hole in his resume)
5 YE #1 (Somewhat inflated)
209 weeks at number one (Only 56 consecutive, lol)
And...
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Yes machi, I have some time now. While it's true that Djokovic in 2013 wasn't the same player he was in 2011, I don't know that we can use such arguments to devalue Nadal's victories over him. The Federer fans like to do that to downplay Nadal's victory over him at Wimbledon 2008 but though a Djokovic fan primarily, I'm not going to do that. I think Nadal thoroughly deserved those victories. In 2013, he pretty much swept the summer American hardcourt season if memory serves right.
