Nadal had 27 Masters 1000 in 2014 and Sampras 14. Nadal had the Masters 1000 record. Such a giant difference of Masters 1000 with Sampras, plus the Olympics (which Agassi won but Sampras didn't) compensate Sampras' advantage in WTF. 1 OG + 27 Masters 1000 = 5 WTF + 14 Masters 1000.Hilarious.
Nadal didn't win 33 MS when he won his 14 slams.
Olympic is irrelevant because it wasn't important in Sampras time many players don't even play there.
14=14. While Nadal has the career slam, but Sampras is famous for his 7 wimbledon, the most prestigious tennis tournament. Sorry, but the tie-breaker still put Sampras ahead of Nadal base on my previous post.
Crucially, Nadal's Career Grand Slam is more relevant than Sampras' advantage in weeks as #1. Sampras had to compete against Agassi, who is much worse than Federer and Djokovic.
Imagine this hypothetical scenario:
Aliens want to invade Earth. Like in Space Jam, the future of humankind will be decided in a tennis match. The greatest alien tennis player will face the greatest human tennis player. Importantly, the match will be played in a Grand Slam court. We don't know if it will be played at Wimbledon, Roland Garros, the US Open or the Australian Open.
We only can choose between 24-year-old Sampras and 24-year-old Nadal. Who would you choose? Remember there is a 25% chance of the match being played on clay at Roland Garros.
Of course, the better player who would safe humankind would be Nadal. This "mental experiment" illustrates how relevant is the Career Grand Slam.