Sandwichman
Rookie
Who do you guys think is the best player under pressure of all time. I listed some of the GOATs, but if you think someone else is better, please specify.
Best clutch player ever?
- Thread starter Sandwichman
- Start date
Omega_7000
Legend
Have to go with Nadal on this one. He's won a LOT of big matches (esp. against Fed) by saving a ton of break points!
Sandwichman
Rookie
The only reason I say Fed is because of Wimby 09. OTher than that its Nadal all the way.
Joe Pike
Banned
That's easy, Steffi Graf.
Won FO 87 final after trailing 3-5 in the last set.
Won Wim 88 final after trailing 5-7 0-2.
Won USO 89 final after trailing 4-6 2-4.
Won Wim 91 final after trailing 4-5 and 5-6 in the last set (with opponent serving).
Won FO 93 final after trailing 3-4 in the last set (with opponent serving).
Won Wim 93 final after trailing 1-4 in the last set (with opponent serving).
Won FO 96 final after trailing 3-5 in the last set set.
Won FO 99 after trailing 4-6 4-5 (with opponent serving).
Satch
Hall of Fame
Federer under pressure is one of the worst player ever...
Almost every time when for example Djokovic took the 1st set from him in any GS, i knew it's the end for Fed, he can't play anymore. Nadal ruined him that way.
Sampras is fascinating, he can always get an ace serve when he really needs.
YES! Bear down
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Joe Montana.
I think it comes down to a thread I started a few months ago. If you had to pick one player to play a match for your life, who would you pick?
Jimmy Connors picked Pancho Gonzalez but a lot of people picked Jimmy Connors.
I think Federer was way down the list.
Here's the link to the thread.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=320376
I think it comes down to a thread I started a few months ago. If you had to pick one player to play a match for your life, who would you pick?
Jimmy Connors picked Pancho Gonzalez but a lot of people picked Jimmy Connors.
I think Federer was way down the list.
Here's the link to the thread.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=320376
Depends what you mean by 'clutch'. I always think of clutch as hitting a winner of some sort on a point where you really needed it or when it was very risky to go for a winner (the two usually come hand in hand). I'd say Nadal plays great points under pressure mostly because he doesn't make errors and hits shots that are just too difficult for his opponent to do anything with. So I'd call Nadal great under pressure, but his play doesn't evoke the connotations I associate with the word 'clutch'. I'd go Sampras or Prime Federer.
President of Serve/Volley
Semi-Pro
Pete Sampras....
There's a point at which someone becomes either a 'slow starter' or a 'mental-midget-mid-match' moreso than simply clutch!
If I had to have someone play for my life, he'd be one of the choices.
What's going on here?
Roger has so few votes!
How quickly we forget. How many times did this guy save set points in big matches? Just from the top of my head:
Aus2007 final against gonzalez; saved 2 set points
USO2007 final against djokovic; saved countless set points in 1st and 2nd set
W 2007 final; saved 4 bp in the fifth against nadal
W 2008 final; 4th set tb saved championship point; in the 5th rafa needed 8 or 9 bp before he converted
W 2009 final against roddick; down 2-6 in the 2nd tb
FO 2009; down 1-5 in the 3rd set against acasuso; down 2 sets to love against Haas and down bp for haas to serve out the match; down 2 sets to 1 against delpo
Roger has so few votes!
How quickly we forget. How many times did this guy save set points in big matches? Just from the top of my head:
Aus2007 final against gonzalez; saved 2 set points
USO2007 final against djokovic; saved countless set points in 1st and 2nd set
W 2007 final; saved 4 bp in the fifth against nadal
W 2008 final; 4th set tb saved championship point; in the 5th rafa needed 8 or 9 bp before he converted
W 2009 final against roddick; down 2-6 in the 2nd tb
FO 2009; down 1-5 in the 3rd set against acasuso; down 2 sets to love against Haas and down bp for haas to serve out the match; down 2 sets to 1 against delpo
flyinghippos101
Legend
Nadal is kind of a mental beast so... my vote goes to Rafy
IvanAndreevich
Legend
Ignorant statement. You don't win 16 GS titles by not being clutch.
Federer is definitely one of the most clutch players of all time.
he won 16 majors most of them against a POOR COMPETION,he dominated them,he wasnt in a diffcult position is most of them.i forgot the number of matches fed lost when he has match points.when you push fed to his limit.his chances of winning the match is pretty low.it can happen to all the players at time.fed only manage to win 2 majors finals when he tested one against rafa in 07 the other one against roddick 09.he lost many 5 setters in majors,at times he even had match points.safin 05 AO djokovic 10 US open,he lost to nadal in AO AND WIM both of them you bank on him to win on a surfaces that favaurs him.he isnt clutch player at all.he is famaus of losing tight matches not just in majors in masters level as well.
ashitaka2010
Semi-Pro
AO 2009 final: 3rd set tiebreak, double fault on set point.
abmk
Bionic Poster
that was one of his worst serving days ....
same happened in the 4th set breaker vs delpo where his DF was the only mini-break in that set
you could've given a much better example in rome 2006 where he blew 2 forehands on MPs
abmk
Bionic Poster
I'd disagree ... Lleyton was a phenomenal fighter at his prime, but IMO he wasn't the big point player that nadal/borg/sampras/federer were at their peaks. For one he didn't have potent weapons like them, secondly his second serve was never that reliable ..
regarding an example of him blowing a match through his own mistakes : vs agassi in the 2002 USO semi-final
sphinx780
Hall of Fame
Sampras was the first that came to mind and Nadal Borg and Fed all need to be up there too.
For some reason I just feel like Sampras won more matches from sheer gutting it out in his prime compared to a Fed who just seemed more talented than most of his challengers in his prime run. I don't have stats to back it up, there was something about the gutsy second serve that Sampras would go for and refusing to go for a safer serve in the big moments.
Just one more opinion to fan the flames of this discussion
For some reason I just feel like Sampras won more matches from sheer gutting it out in his prime compared to a Fed who just seemed more talented than most of his challengers in his prime run. I don't have stats to back it up, there was something about the gutsy second serve that Sampras would go for and refusing to go for a safer serve in the big moments.
Just one more opinion to fan the flames of this discussion
Nadal, Sampras and Federer in that order. Federer in his prime was a beast to deal with and would deliver when it mattered. He would save all the break points with his big forehands and also his serve. Sampras would get some of the best serves (first and second) at all crucial break points and save them all (and he would do that again and again).
Nadal is a defensive beast and will ensure to get more balls back and especially during the big finals, he does everything that he can to win. These three are the best in this department. You know they will deliver on the final day.
Nadal is a defensive beast and will ensure to get more balls back and especially during the big finals, he does everything that he can to win. These three are the best in this department. You know they will deliver on the final day.
Raiden
Hall of Fame
But that's precisely what we need. Everything else is empty **** gibberish.
So far the only extensive evidence presented is that of Graf.
So needless to say Steffi is the best clutch player in the history of tennis
.
Last edited:
Dilettante
Hall of Fame
Hewitt under pressure. I still remember his guts playing DC vs Spain, on clay, and IN Spain, with 17 years or so. He got balls.
And for getting key points at the right moment, Sampras hands down.
And for getting key points at the right moment, Sampras hands down.
sphinx780
Hall of Fame
To use stats effectively, we would have to define clutch otherwise the stats are really based on an opinion of what clutch is and becomes as arbitrary as each of us stating an opinion. Not that I'm for or against either, they both make for an entertaining conversation.
Is clutch simply winning more often than not?
Is clutch making great comebacks? If so, how does the fact that they got behind to begin with factor into this? Do we then need to define the difference between the winning player's level of play (i.e. did they play poorly to get behind or did their opponent play out of their mind to pull ahead)?
Is clutch having the mental acuity to not get behind in the first place?
Is clutch simply point in and point out focus?
Is clutch taking calculated risk above normal play in the most important parts of a match?
borg number one
Legend
Borg, Nadal, Sampras, and Federer are all great clutch players, but in my opinion, it's in different ways. I think Borg and Nadal are the greatest "clutch" players overall. Yet, I will say that because of the Sampras serve, he was great when you really needed a service point! I do think it's worth noting that there's a difference between 4 and 5 set wins. Sampras and Federer tend to be "clutch", but they really like to close out 3 set wins and not have matches go on longer. That's not true of either Borg or Nadal. They're both "clutch", but that's true in short (3 set) or longer matches (4-5 sets). Among these greats, the guys with the best stamina, Borg and Nadal, also have the best five set records around. They are both significantly better than either Sampras or Federer in terms of 5 set winning percentage.
Bhagi Katbamna
Legend
Sampras.
Hit a second serve ace down match point against Alex Corretja.
Hit a second serve ace down match point against Alex Corretja.
abmk
Bionic Poster
incorrect, he hit that second serve ace when they were even in the tie-break ...this was after:
( however many people seem to forget ) he made a stunning volley ( stretching ) to save MP in response to a pretty good crosscourt FH from corretja
Last edited:
Raiden
Hall of Fame
No.
Yes.
Somebody is always behind. If only for the fact that somebody is serving first and therefore somebody else is constantly trailing at one point or another.
It's that and more. It could be that you're a set or more behind (as many already pointed out) or that your opponent has matchpoint(s) or it could also very well be within a game: you're love-30 or love-40 down and you're serving. It's all of those (and sometimes all of those at the same time)
That's the theory.
Putting that in practice and (more importantly) doing it with a high degree of success is what separates the good from the bad and the ugly.
jt1224x0
Rookie
Andyroddickfan
Rookie
Jordan Eberle. The guy is the best clutch player i've ever seen play.
In older times: Perry, Gonzalez (you better beat him fast, or you don't beat him at all) and Newcombe, who was a 5th set and tiebreak specialist. Laver was tough in 5 setters, but never a good tiebreak player. Maybe the breaker came too late in his career. Borg was tough in a 5 setter. The one who really relished to play in the clutch was Becker. He liked that kind of situation. He lost some long matches on stamina, never on confidence.
ashitaka2010
Semi-Pro
okdude1992
Hall of Fame
sampras serve. so clutch!
nadal is super clutch as well. he has the never say die mentality
nadal is super clutch as well. he has the never say die mentality
Tennis_Monk
Hall of Fame
Best clutch player and "someone to play a match for one's life" are not the same thing for me.
Federer is generally a great front runner. I wouldnt mind having him play for my life (that is if i am not able to play myself).
However if my life depended on a single point, thats when i would ask Nadal to step in for me. Ofcourse if there is an option to serve, Sampras isnt a bad choice either.
LameTennisPlayer
Professional
MAHUT!........................ No explanation required.
Tennis_Monk
Hall of Fame
Really?..... 10aces
LameTennisPlayer
Professional
yes.....really................10unreturnablereturns
