I think Sampras was great, but I think that if you put him in his prime against prime Nadal, Sampras would have it very difficult on HC, and obviously he would't even win a set on clay. On HC I don't think he could win a match, maybe 10-15% of the total matches played there. On grass it would be 50%+ for Pete, but it's difficult to say because they played on different kind of grass. But besides the results, I don't think Nadal is more talented than Pete, I just think that Pete would have a terrible match-up problem against Nadal, even worse than Federer has. Nadal would destroy Pete's backhand everytime. On the other hand, if I compare Agassi instead of Pete, I don't think he would lose so much to Nadal, they would be even I think. Just to point out that it's all about matchups in these cases. what do you think?