Hall of Fame
Federer is in another stratosphere on clay compared to Sampras lol it's not even close
Yeah but after '05 there's really no one who comes even close to the 40% mark regularly apart from Rafa and Ferru (Nalby and Muzz did win 40.8% and 42.9% in '09 and '11 respectively while managing a pathetic 69.6% and 72.1% on serve). That says something, no?-rgw %’s were a little higher on every surface in the 90s than they are now, clay included. If we’re going to compare the efficacy of their return games, raw return games won won’t always be terribly revelatory.
A fair point but 18 matches ain't that unusual in the '90s when lots of top guys played just 1-2 CC events before RG. Plus 58.6% in '94 and even 55.4% in '92 and 54.1% in '97 are pretty damn good for someone who "sucked" on clay! (For comparison Fed won 56.4% on clay last year, when he was still able to reach the SF at RG after a 2-year hiatus.) '95 and '96 were indeed poor campaigns on paper (funny how that worked out for his latter FO campaign, eh?), but as I've pointed out he had issues in those years that remain fairly obscure: ankle sprain early in the CC season and low 1st-serve % throughout '95, death of his coach and low RGW% in '96.-Pete’s peak single year % of games won on clay is comparable to Fed’s, yes, but with smaller sample sizes one is likelier to find aberrant results that may not serve as accurate snapshots. Sampras played 18 matches on clay that year, and the years surrounding ‘93 are filled with comparatively pedestrian %s of games won. Federer, on the other hand, had a five year stretch where his % of games won on clay ranged between the high 50s and low 60s.
Yes but dishing out bagels and breadsticks to the likes of Leconte, Pete and A. Med is still mighty sensational! Also Bruguera would half-ass most of the year a la Wilander, Guga and Stan only to wake up for the biggie, which is why I say the usual by-the-numbers comparison between him and Muster is misleading cuz I'm pretty sure (peak) Sergi would still get the better of his nemesis at RG despite their H2H.-surely Nadal’s near-imperviousness to upsets and outperforming of gw %’s (76-2 over two years, 60+ clay win streak is impressive no matter how granular one gets in evaluating his opposition) is a point in his favour when considering Bruguera lost to Haarhuis twice on clay in ‘93, lost to Koevermans, got blitzed by Edberg in the Madrid final (albeit in quicker conditions than Serg was accustomed to on clay), two matches to a young Medvedev (one in BO5) and one to a young Berasategui. Brugueras performance at RG was indeed impressive, but his games won are largely buoyed by his first four matches which neither him nor Nadal would ever be in realistic danger of losing.
Nonsense. He only has one French Open (one where Nadal was not his opponent, so...), the greatest clay event, so there is no way Federer is within a country mile of being the 3rd best in this category.Federer is the 3rd best clay court player of all time behind only Nadal and Borg.
Stan beat peak Djokovic on clay and stopped him from capturing a CYGS . Stan is the 3rd best clay court player of all time behind only Nadal and Borg .Federer beat peak Djokovic on clay and stopped him from capturing a CYGS. Federer is the 3rd best clay court player of all time behind only Nadal and Borg.