Nadal or Sampras--who will end his career as the best claycourter?

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Although this doesn't get mentioned nearly often enough, Nadal and Sampras are currently tied in one vital stat as far as clay achievements on the big stage are concerned: they're both undefeated in French Open finals. :eek:

However, should Nadal lose one RG final before the end of his career, Sampras will get this one and reign supreme. #fact

Go Pete! Go Nads! :p
 

Sudacafan

G.O.A.T.
Although this doesn't get mentioned nearly often enough, Nadal and Sampras are currently tied in one vital stat as far as clay achievements on the big stage are concerned: they're both undefeated in French Open finals. :eek:

However, should Nadal lose one RG final before the end of his career, Sampras will get this one and reign supreme. #fact

Go Pete! Go Nads! :p
Nadal, Sampras and me are undefeated in RG finals.
I am even better than Federer, who lost 4 of them.
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Pete won Rome in the 90s - basically the equivalent of about 10RGs in this CRAPOLA era.

Newsflash Fedfans, he ain't even in the conversation ROFLMAO.
Actually, there's a very good case to be made for Federer as clay GOAT, but let's not derail this thread by turning it into a Fed/Rafa war, please (I'll create another one just for you, should you want me to). ;)
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Pete won Rome in the 90s - basically the equivalent of about 10RGs in this CRAPOLA era.

Newsflash Fedfans, he ain't even in the conversation ROFLMAO.
Nadal was 8 years old at the time but taking into account that hes an early bloomer it's fair to say he was already in his prime. So technically Sampras beat him.
 

JackGates

Hall of Fame
Well, if we use Nadal fan weak era logic, then Pete at least beat multiple French Open champs, Rafa never did.

And even the most biased Fed fans don't put Fed even on the Kuerten level. I agree, sure Rafa is the goat, but if Fed and Djokovic were decent on clay, they would at least beat him once or twice in RG finals.

Heck, if Ferrer, Almagro and Verdasco can beat Rafa on clay and can't beat Fed on clay, this tells you that the clay field isn't as strong.

So, yeah, Rafa is the clay goat, but he is also in a very weak clay era.
 

JackGates

Hall of Fame
Could you please explain the joke? I didn't get it.
It's because some fans say that Federer with normal racket and Nadal not being the lefty would beat Nadal on clay and anybody else.

He bageled Rafa and Kuerten on clay and is undefeated vs Almagro, Verdasco and Ferrer on clay.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
This one is tough. I need to break it down statistically.

Sampras vs Nadal at RG:

Sampras:
24-13 overall
1-2 vs top 10
0 titles

Nadal
79-2
21-1 vs top 10
9 titles

This is too close to call.

However:

2005-2008, 2010-2014, 2017 were all the weakest eras ever.

2009 and 2015 were the only 2 strong years and Sampras went undefeated those years whereas Nadal lost. As a matter of fact, none of the Big 4 went undefeated during both of those years at the FO.

Sampras > Nadal + Federer + Djokovic + Murray combined!

But to be fair, the same logic could be used to show that 2012-2017 Rafa is better at Wimbledon than Pete.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
I thought about this a lot just now in the bathroom. The probing nozzle shooting hot jets of water into my bunghole offered perspective:

Nadal barely beats Pete. It’s true, Nadal had easy offals like weakerer and laughovic to run up his numbers but this only shows how much more competition Pete faced in not being able to win one.

******* is weak era ghost
Baldal is clay specialist weak era ghoul

Chokoprick is not anything right now so his legacy still needs some time to set down.
 

Prabhanjan

Professional
Sampras won Rome in 1994. Nadal didn't.
Pete defeated another undefeated FO finalist Becker. The bias against Pete is unbelievable on this forum.

Pete won Rome in the 90s - basically the equivalent of about 10RGs in this CRAPOLA era.
Hello sir! Pete conquered the might Russia on clay in Classia! Mind it!

Could you please explain the joke? I didn't get it.
Fed showed how to defeat the then undefeated Soderling in a FO final.

Silly thread. Sampras never reached a final
If Rafa can't match the silliness, how can be entitled for seriousness then ;)

Well, if we use Nadal fan weak era logic, then Pete at least beat multiple French Open champs, Rafa never did.
True like 24.000001 carat gold. Rafa should be stripped of the La Decima!

And even the most biased Fed fans don't put Fed even on the Kuerten level. I agree, sure Rafa is the goat, but if Fed and Djokovic were decent on clay, they would at least beat him once or twice in RG finals.
That's the Kuerten's mistake. If he had defeated Fed in five sets in 2004 meeting instead of straight sets beatdown, he would be now having 5 FO's and not 3 :p

So, yeah, Rafa is the clay goat, but he is also in a very weak clay era.
No, Pete is the true clay goat.

What kind of brain-dead stupidity am I reading, is there no proper tennis forum anywhere...
If its brain-dead, its not stupidity ;)
 
Top