Azzurri
Legend
how is it possible you are not banned. you argue with almost everyone. you are clueless about tennis and that is a fact.
Is Sampras the GOAT (yes/no)?
- Thread starter Bud
- Start date
how is it possible you are not banned. you argue with almost everyone. you are clueless about tennis and that is a fact.
JoshDragon
Hall of Fame
I think Laver, Federer, and Sampras all have a legitimate case for the GOAT. Nadal, will be there soon if he continues to win majors. Especially if he wins the US Open this year.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Why would he need the USO? Both Fed and Sampras are constantly referred to as potential GOATs and they have won only 3 slams out of 4. What's up with the double standard? He needs to win a few more slams that's all, I mean the USO would be great of course and I hope he WILL get it but he will be up there at the top regardless.
JoshDragon
Hall of Fame
If Nadal does win the US Open and maybe 5 or 6 more majors, especially if he won a calendar year grand slam, then he would have a better case as the GOAT.
At this point Federer and Sampras, have twice as many majors as Nadal. Nadal, has won on all 3 different surfaces but he still needs something huge, like the US Open to put him up there with Federer, Laver, and Sampras.
Tennis_Monk
Hall of Fame
I find it little amusing that someone with 22 posts is saying "atlast".
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
For Nadal to have a good case for the goat Nadal obviously just needs to keep adding to the slam count to approach Feds tally.(The US open will be a bonus) IF he can do that he will overcome Fed as the best of the era with his dominating 5-2 slam final record v Fed.
Fed lags behind other goat other goat candidates like Sampras even if he gets more slams than Sampras because he was dominated by someone from his own era. Fed needs to address the 2-5 slam final deficit v Nadal.
Fed lags behind other goat other goat candidates like Sampras even if he gets more slams than Sampras because he was dominated by someone from his own era. Fed needs to address the 2-5 slam final deficit v Nadal.
35ft6
Legend
By default, for now, I'll say yes. At his best, he would have smoked every guy before him. But he never won the French and was in general has a mediocre record on clay (yeah, I know he won a masters on clay, so did a lot of other dudes....). If Fed ties Pete's record, he becomes new GOAT for his superior performance on clay.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
I think most importantly Fed needs to reverse the 2-5 slam final deficit v Nadal to overcome Sampras. You can't be dominated by someone in your own era and be goat. It's illogical.
navratilovafan
Banned
No Sampras is not the GOAT. Federer certainly is not either though.
35ft6
Legend
Point taken, but how is Sampras' GOAT status being determined? By number of Slams? Like does the last US Open not count because he was getting beat by a lot of people that year? In a way, Fed is a victim of his own success in that regard. Sampras could and often did lose to a lot of different people, but Fed is more consistent, getting deep into more tournaments and more frequently, to get the chance to meet Nadal, usually the number 2 seed, in the finals. I see what you're saying, but in a way Fed is being faulted for winning more against more people than Sampras did in his time.
Anyway, for a few years, Fed dominated in a way nobody else did, too bad he is playing in the time of the greatest clay courter of all time, or else he would have 3 French Opens now. No GOAT is considered GOAT for dominating everybody from the very beginning to the very end. Their best years are considered and their record at the big tournaments. This goes for tennis to football to boxing.
Last edited:
clayman2000
Hall of Fame
This is coming from a Roddick and Nadal fan so im pretty sure i am unbiased:
Federer is Open era Goat followed by Sampras and Borg
Laver is all time GOAT followed by Pancho and Rosewall then Federer
Why i feel Federer > Sampras:
Stats:
Federer: Sampras:
GS wins: 13 14
GS finals: 18 18
Wks no 1: 237 286
Consec wks: 237 102
complete year 1: 3 2
Masters wins: 14 11
Year w~ 10 titles: 3 1
Year w~ 90% win %: 4 0
Clay titles: 7 3
Grass titles: 10 10
Hard titles: 38 37
Carpet titles: 2 14 (flawed cause Fed plays only 2 a year, now only 1)
Master Cup: 4 / 7 5 / 11
Career win %: 81% 77%
Now by the stats, it is clearly tied. Then in GOAT judging it goes to dominance. Like i said, Sampras has never lost less than 10 matches in his career, roger did it 4 times. Federer has made the finals of all four GS titles twice, Sampras has never made 3 major finals in a year ( Fed did this 4 time). Roger also has the longest winning streak on both grass and hard. But even that does not make Fed the GOAT.
I know this has been said so much, but how can the GOAT have won 1 big clay title, and never made a final at the clay major. Now I know Federer never won it (thank God), but 1 match should not make or break a players GOATness.
Federer is Open era Goat followed by Sampras and Borg
Laver is all time GOAT followed by Pancho and Rosewall then Federer
Why i feel Federer > Sampras:
Stats:
Federer: Sampras:
GS wins: 13 14
GS finals: 18 18
Wks no 1: 237 286
Consec wks: 237 102
complete year 1: 3 2
Masters wins: 14 11
Year w~ 10 titles: 3 1
Year w~ 90% win %: 4 0
Clay titles: 7 3
Grass titles: 10 10
Hard titles: 38 37
Carpet titles: 2 14 (flawed cause Fed plays only 2 a year, now only 1)
Master Cup: 4 / 7 5 / 11
Career win %: 81% 77%
Now by the stats, it is clearly tied. Then in GOAT judging it goes to dominance. Like i said, Sampras has never lost less than 10 matches in his career, roger did it 4 times. Federer has made the finals of all four GS titles twice, Sampras has never made 3 major finals in a year ( Fed did this 4 time). Roger also has the longest winning streak on both grass and hard. But even that does not make Fed the GOAT.
I know this has been said so much, but how can the GOAT have won 1 big clay title, and never made a final at the clay major. Now I know Federer never won it (thank God), but 1 match should not make or break a players GOATness.
egn
Hall of Fame
Wait a second..Fed who is 10-8 vs. Nalbandian and while Fed was no.1 was 7-3 vs. Nalbandian. Nalbandian who could not catch up to Fed after winning the first 5 in a row against Fed in his first prime year. However once Fed got rolling destroyed Nalbandian when he was playing even his own best tennis from 2004-2008..Kind of funny how Nadal has a losing record against Nalby also...no wait those happenend in 2007 so of course they don't count as Nadal is argubley not "in his prime" however Fed 2003 was obviously "so into his prime that those should be held to the stone." Nalbandian handled Nadal with ease in fall 2007 beating him 6-1, 6-2 and 6-4, 6-0..By the way 2003 Nalbandian was not even his best year as that was 2005 or 2006...Fed has had two players that have caused him trouble..Nadal and Murray.
What makes this era so strong? Who actually can beat Nadal..wasn't Feds era so weak because he destroyed everyone and lost once in a blue moon...well isn't that what Nadal is doing. You throw this amazing double standard around...Nadal's era is not weak and I don't think Feds is either they are just strong enough to dominate the rest of the tour. What happens if Murray and DJoker never win another slam (or for Murray's case a slam)..is this era now weak..I would not consider it any weaker or stronger. At this given moment in time they put the pressure on..they would go down as the men who got screwed by Fed and Nadal not the men who were talentless and weak. Calling the past era weak is not only an attempt to take a cheap stab at Fed but an insult to a whole field of players.
Hell besides then hold that same standard to Nadal he won those French Opens in that weak era.
navratilovafan
Banned
From the 2003 year end Masters onwards Nalbandian's only 3 wins in many matches were indoors, Nalbandian's best surface by far and a non-slam surface. 1 of those 3 was when Federer was badly injured and hobbling around the court and Federer was still 2 points from winning. Federer is overall 10-3 vs Nalbandian at that point. Unless Nalbandian's prime mysteriously ended after the 2003 U.S Open that is. Talking out of his ass is a Nadal_Freak specialty.
egn
Hall of Fame
Its even more funny that Nadal has a losing record against the one player he mentioned lol.
navratilovafan
Banned
Yes so true. Was also very lucky to win their only match he did win and not be 0-3. Was embarassed in both losses winning only 4 games. I like Nadal, in fact I like him more than Federer, but Nadal_Freak's twisted double standards to make everything favorable to Nadal, everything unfavorable to Federer or other players he doesnt like, and never acknowledge anything that isnt, are comedic.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
knowing that slams are the most significant events by far, Fat Nalby should start thinking about making one of the slam surfaces his best surface and making 5 setters his best match length.:shock:
Fat Dave has about 0 relevance in this thread since he hasn't done anything in slams.
Fat Dave has about 0 relevance in this thread since he hasn't done anything in slams.
navratilovafan
Banned
I agree with that. Nalbandian better hurry too, he is running out of time as after the surgery and the return he will already be 28. I agree he has no place in this thread.
Tennis_Monk
Hall of Fame
Sampras probably had chances of being called a GOAT until Federer came in. Now May be federer becomes a GOAT candidate may be he doesnt.. He effectively knocked out Sampras by virtue of his Claycourt Play. How could one be called a greatest player of all time when he isnt even a factor in one Major tournament and a 2-3 month season every year.
Inferior record for fed against Nadal, Sampras fans put this to good use but isnt at the same level as being top#2 clay court player.
Inferior record for fed against Nadal, Sampras fans put this to good use but isnt at the same level as being top#2 clay court player.
navratilovafan
Banned
Federer basically knocked Sampras off by virtue of his clay court play? Federer NEVER won the French. Just an absurd statement. I agree Sampras is not the GOAT but it isnt based on Federer's clay court play.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
If it was about coming 2nd then Lendl would be the Goat.
Winning things is what determines greatness.
Winning the Davis cup a few times for example like all the past greats have done will help Fed become greater than coming 2nd all the time on clay.
Winning things is what determines greatness.
Winning the Davis cup a few times for example like all the past greats have done will help Fed become greater than coming 2nd all the time on clay.
navratilovafan
Banned
Since Federer flakes out on Davis Cup you can forget about that. He hasnt won the French Open, Olympics in singles, Davis Cup, and he doesnt hold the record for most slams or at any of the 4 slam venues. Yet he is somehow the GOAT according to some? Pretty ridiculous.
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
since the smart-as*es want to always bring the davis cup why don't we take a look at each's davis cup profiles and investigate the ridiculous claims of many here regarding federer's davis cup play.
sampras: http://www.daviscup.com/teams/player.asp?player=10001217
wins=19, losses=9.
federer: http://www.daviscup.com/teams/player.asp?player=10019424
wins=35, losses=11
WOW am i surprised!! federer played almost twice more davis cup matches than pete and has a better winning record in his matches, yet it's federer who gets chastised and has the reputation of skipping davis cup matches. LOL
sampras: http://www.daviscup.com/teams/player.asp?player=10001217
wins=19, losses=9.
federer: http://www.daviscup.com/teams/player.asp?player=10019424
wins=35, losses=11
WOW am i surprised!! federer played almost twice more davis cup matches than pete and has a better winning record in his matches, yet it's federer who gets chastised and has the reputation of skipping davis cup matches. LOL
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
That's good but Fed he didn't win the davis cup. Lendl won a lot of Wimbledon matches too 48-14, more than a lot of guys who won Wimbledon, but he didn't win. Its about winning the final, not just winning preliminaries. :shock:
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
sure, but at least you do know that davis cup requires TEAM effort, right? whenever federer plays he always had to save the country from being eliminated from the world group, while sampras has only to build up on what his country already did. in 1995 sampras has to only play 2 matches each in qf's and semis and the us are sure to win. federer wins his 2 singles rubbers and still switzerland loses. you can't expect more than those from federer when he still has his career to think about.
sampras did not even play in 93, 96, 98 and 01, while federer is still to miss a year not playing davis cup. questioning federer's davis cup integrity is ridiculously stupid, imo.
thalivest
Banned
Federer had a great shot to win in 2003 but he CHOKED a big lead away vs Hewitt in the semis which would have put Switzerland into the final and Australia went on to win. Lack of team depth cant explain that, and he should have been able to finish off Hewitt who he would beat the next 200 times they played but didnt. He wimped out of World Group ties for a long time after that. Then this year with Wawrinka beating Blake the Swiss probably would have advanced with Federer playing but he wimped out with some little bad sore which didnt kept him out of any other tournaments. Federer can take alot of blame for never winning Davis Cup.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
In the biggest chance Fed had he blew it for Switzerland by losing to Hewitt in the semis.:shock:
Fed and Wawrinka would have had a great chance in the last 5 years if Fed played more than the first round matches. Other greats have had to win the Davis cup along side their slams and thus they set the standard for future greats to follow. Fed fails in Davis cup.
Fed and Wawrinka would have had a great chance in the last 5 years if Fed played more than the first round matches. Other greats have had to win the Davis cup along side their slams and thus they set the standard for future greats to follow. Fed fails in Davis cup.
vtmike
Banned
Thats a very good post! But unfortunately the haters will still find a way to discredit & insult him...
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
federer is still an up and coming player in 2003, and who knows if they would've won had federer won that match. they still have to play the deciding rubber and i don't think they can get away with it, especially against the aussies in australia.
to carry the switzerland to the final federer basically has to play 1st round, qf, sf and final and win all 3 of his matches, and that is a MONUMENTAL task, something that not even sampras is capable. especially that he has a career to think of. name me a former great who won the davis cup and played from 1st round to final and playing 2 or 3 rubbers each. and with a joke team, to add.
Last edited:
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
again, name me a former great who has a good year in slams and singlehandedly carried his team from 1st round to davis cup championship. sampras did not do that in 1995 (skipped the 1st round), hence i cannot say "he" won the davis cup in 95. to win something, you need to play from start to finish.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
wawrinka and fed only came together in 2008, though. and good examples on mcenroe and becker, btw. what mcenroe did in 1982 was impressive, but his singles career that year wasn't, though. so as becker in 1989. the thing is, had federer prioritized the davis cup like these guys did during his best years 04-07, he might've snatched one for switzerland. but i don't think his singles career would get to where he is now.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Exactly that's what makes the greats greater. They were able to achieve some slams and some Davis cups.
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
it's definitely not sampras, though. though he did singlehandedly win the final, he did not carry the team to the final. plus considering that he skipped many years of davis cup play, i would call his davis cup record pretty pathetic for an all-time great.
380pistol
Banned
You do realize 15 of Federer's Davis Cup matches were either Qualifying or play-off matches???
Stop with the excuses will you?? In 1995 Sampras played the QF, SF and F. Winning both singles in QF and SF and all 3 in F. Of the 9 ties the USA needed Pete won 7 (5 of them on clay). As for the 1st rd at most Fed would need to win 1 match (maybe 2) and it's in February between Aus Open and Indian Wells. No he hasn't done it, but he hasn't exactly shown up either. So what's the reason for him not even showing up??
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Yeh he did win it single handed, and on clay too, so he has won a bigger clay title than Fed has won in his career.
Sampras won 2 Davis cups and so has Nadal so you'll just have to get used to it. You can always email the Davis Cup people with you're suggestions if you want new rules about who becomes a Davis cup winner.
Fed said he wants to play until he's 35, so he has plenty of Davis cup years to look forwards to,to try to win a few.
Sampras won 2 Davis cups and so has Nadal so you'll just have to get used to it. You can always email the Davis Cup people with you're suggestions if you want new rules about who becomes a Davis cup winner.
Fed said he wants to play until he's 35, so he has plenty of Davis cup years to look forwards to,to try to win a few.
BorisBeckerFan
Professional
At 155 votes Pete is at nearly 40% in favor. That means the other 60 percent are likely Laver, Borg, Federer, Pancho etc supporters for GOAT. I wonder if any of them would gobble up 40% of the vote or would that other 60% be more evenly split between the rest? I have not voted for Pete mainly because I don't suscribe to the GOAT theory but I am not surprised that Pete is getting this much support. I'm not sure that any of the other candidates would take 40% out of the 60% that's left over.
ckthegreek
Rookie
The USO is not a prerequisite. If he wins the FO another 3-4 times and at SW19 2 more times he will get closer to Sampras than Federer. It's quality over quantity.
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
Yeh he did win it single handed, and on clay too, so he has won a bigger clay title than Fed has won in his career.
Sampras won 2 Davis cups and so has Nadal so you'll just have to get used to it. You can always email the Davis Cup people with you're suggestions if you want new rules about who becomes a Davis cup winner.
Fed said he wants to play until he's 35, so he has plenty of Davis cup years to look forwards to,to try to win a few.
the thing is, with a country like the usa one would expect a GOAT candidate like sampras to contribute at least 5 davis cups to his country. i can't expect the same for switzerland, who has a player in the top 10, another at top 20 (recently) then the rest lingering at top 100 or worse.
sampras did not win the davis cup, usa did. nadal did not win davis cup, spain did. its as ridiculous as saying michael jordan won 6 nba championships lol
final point: federer has done anything he can for his country without sacrificing his career. he played more matches and won more, but with a pathetic team like that you can't expect more.
and a big LOL at sampras winning a bigger clay title than fed.
Last edited:
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
and that's what makes things harder for fed. he always need to save his country from world group elimination while sampras doesn't have to worry about that. of course anyone would hardly be motivated carrying a team like that. there were quite a lot of times where fed won both his singles rubbers and still switzerland loses. he has a legit reason in not showing up this year, as his back is still definitely troubling him. you can't always be patriotic like that. with their davis cup records compared, it's either sampras is more selfish for playing less matches, or that usa is strong enough for him not to be needed in a lot of matches. both of these things cant be said for fed and switzerland.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
But he failed at Davis cup unlike the past greats no matter how you spin it.
What you're failing to recognize is that the Davis cup is part of his career, so he sacrificed one part of his career for another part.
What you're failing to recognize is that the Davis cup is part of his career, so he sacrificed one part of his career for another part.
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
no he did not; his country failed him at davis cup.
and another thing, no one remembers a player for his davis cup contributions. you can't convince me that davis cup is very prestigious.
federer did enough. he brought switzerland a gold medal, something sampras hasn't done.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
No they didn't , Fed failed himself at the Davis Cup by losing the semi for them and by rarely turning up for the last 5 years.
The doubles achievements like his doubles Gold help Fed's care in the 'doubles goat' thread where Fed would rate very lowly. It's totally irrelevant to the singles goat discussion.
I don't have to convince you that the Davis cup is prestigious, the fact that all the greats find is prestigious makes it prestigious. Everyone that has a sense of history remembers the contribution of the greats to the Davis cups and their Davis cups victories greatly enhances their greatness.
Both Fed and Sampras have won 0 singles medals at the Olympics. The difference is Sampras only played in 1 Olympics during his career in 1992 so he didn't prioritize it, and it was before he was #1, while Fed did prioritize it and has been chasing a singles Olympic medal all of his career. Federer has won a big 0 Olympic medals IN SINGLES in 3 Olympics, despite prioritizing the Olympics IN SINGLES. London will make it 0 from 4 if he fails again. It will be the ultimate insult if he fails again in London ON GRASS. Before the 08 Olympics Fed said:
"In my position, as someone who has won a lot of grand slams(IN SINGLES), it's right up there," he said. "Winning would mean as much to me as an Wimbledon victory".
Fed needs to worry about overcoming Nadal in this era before Fed is even compared to Sampras or other goat candidates.
The doubles achievements like his doubles Gold help Fed's care in the 'doubles goat' thread where Fed would rate very lowly.
It's totally irrelevant to the singles goat discussion. I don't have to convince you that the Davis cup is prestigious, the fact that all the greats find is prestigious makes it prestigious. Everyone that has a sense of history remembers the contribution of the greats to the Davis cups and their Davis cups victories greatly enhances their greatness.
Both Fed and Sampras have won 0 singles medals at the Olympics. The difference is Sampras only played in 1 Olympics during his career in 1992 so he didn't prioritize it, and it was before he was #1, while Fed did prioritize it and has been chasing a singles Olympic medal all of his career. Federer has won a big 0 Olympic medals IN SINGLES in 3 Olympics, despite prioritizing the Olympics IN SINGLES. London will make it 0 from 4 if he fails again. It will be the ultimate insult if he fails again in London ON GRASS. Before the 08 Olympics Fed said:
"In my position, as someone who has won a lot of grand slams(IN SINGLES), it's right up there," he said. "Winning would mean as much to me as an Wimbledon victory".
Fed needs to worry about overcoming Nadal in this era before Fed is even compared to Sampras or other goat candidates.
Last edited by a moderator:
fed_the_savior
Banned
until some1 wins 15, yes
Chelsea_Kiwi
Hall of Fame
It's not these days, most players couldn't care less.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Wrong.
Everyone cares. Do some research.
Federer is the odd one out with 0 Davis cups. Nadal who may well be the best of this era, has 2 Davis cups already.
Everyone cares. Do some research.
Federer is the odd one out with 0 Davis cups. Nadal who may well be the best of this era, has 2 Davis cups already.
luckyboy1300
Hall of Fame
No they didn't , Fed failed himself at the Davis Cup by losing the semi for them and by rarely turning up for the last 5 years.
The doubles achievements like his doubles Gold help Fed's care in the 'doubles goat' thread where Fed would rate very lowly.
I don't have to convince you that the Davis cup is prestigious, the fact that all the greats find is prestigious makes it prestigious. Everyone that has a sense of history remembers the contribution of the greats to the Davis cups and their Davis cups victories greatly enhances their greatness.
Both Fed and Sampras have won 0 singles medals at the Olympics. The difference is Sampras only played in 1 Olympics during his career in 1992 so he didn't prioritize it, and it was before he was #1, while Fed did prioritize it and has been chasing a singles Olympic medal all of his career. Federer has won a big 0 Olympic medals IN SINGLES in 3 Olympics, despite prioritizing the Olympics IN SINGLES. London will make it 0 from 4 if he fails again. It will be the ultimate insult if he fails again in London ON GRASS. Before the 08 Olympics Fed said:
"In my position, as someone who has won a lot of grand slams(IN SINGLES), it's right up there," he said. "Winning would mean as much to me as an Wimbledon victory".
Fed needs to worry about overcoming Nadal in this era before Fed is even compared to Sampras or other goat candidates.
no that isn't a fact. that's just your opinion unless you provide an evidence.
whatever dude. you could invent your own criteria as to who's goat but davis cup and h2h are very ridiculous it already overridden the surface factor. i find it really ridiculous that someone is even in the contention of goat after being a joke on clay.
Chelsea_Kiwi
Hall of Fame
13 GS>6 GS. Whats the point in doing research when I know I am right. Do your own research.
Chelsea_Kiwi
Hall of Fame
Sums it up. You have to be talented on all surfaces.
