Nadal vs Borg

[MuseFan]

Who is the greatest claycourter of all time?

The evidence:

The biggest clay events before Roland Garros:

Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome

Nadal - 14
Borg - 7

Roland Garros

Nadal - 4
Borg - 6

Career winning %

Nadal - 91%
Borg - 86%

Titles

Borg - 30
Nadal - 25

This is really tough. I'd have to say right now it's a tie. If Rafa can win one more French Open, I'd crown him CC GOAT.

 

[big bang]

Rafa is the greatest already, look at the competition hes up against!
soon the *******s will tell you otherwise, but Rafa must be the greatest claycourter ever, he beat Fed 3 finals in rough at FO..
if you consider Fed as GOAT you should consider Rafa as the greatest claycourter ever!!

 

[MuseFan]

Rafa is the greatest already, look at the competition hes up against!
soon the *******s will tell you otherwise, but Rafa must be the greatest claycourter ever, he beat Fed 3 finals in rough at FO..
if you consider Fed as GOAT you should consider Rafa as the greatest claycourter ever!!

No it has nothing to do with who you beat. It's all about the titles.

 

[Agassifan]

One or two more french opens and you can start claiming clay GOAT. Right now, he is Top 2 all time on clay.

 

[big bang]

No it has nothing to do with who you beat. It's all about the titles.

maybe in your world!
most people look at how strong the field was when you won and who you beat.. winning 3 FO titles against Fed, guess you cant do better!

 

[namelessone]

Rafa has freakish stats on clay 153-6 since 2005,4 RG won's,81 match winning streak on clay,usually wins 2 out of 3 clay masters a year but until he ties borg's number of RG's,he is nr.2 on clay.

 

[lawrence]

Rafa is the greatest already, look at the competition hes up against!
soon the *******s will tell you otherwise, but Rafa must be the greatest claycourter ever, he beat Fed 3 finals in rough at FO..
if you consider Fed as GOAT you should consider Rafa as the greatest claycourter ever!!

*******s would actually agree with you, think about it; if Fed lost all those FO's to the clay GOAT, then it just makes Federer look even better than losing them to a non clay GOAT, right?

 

[Blinkism]

Don't forget the winning streak Nadal had on clay- a record 81 matches!

He's only lost 2 claycourt finals and that was to the GOAT and 2009 French Open Champ!

Add to that the fact that Nadal doesn't have any active losing records to anyone on clay.

AND Nadal beat the reigning French Open Champion, Albert Costa, in Monte Carlo, Carlos Moya in Hamburg, and Magnus Norman in Umag all in the same year.. at the age of 17!!!

In 2003, I know! :lol:

He also owns the most titles at Monte Carlo, Rome, and Barcelona. All very important clay tournaments.

He's won the career clay triple- Monte Carlo, Rome, Hamburg/Madrid (and the first guy to make the finals of all 3 in a year- 2009)

He has the record for most consecutive matches won at the French Open

He's won Monte Carlo in doubles

He won the French Open on his first try, and then didn't lose until his 5th try.

 

[Blinkism]

*******s would actually agree with you, think about it; if Fed lost all those FO's to the clay GOAT, then it just makes Federer look even better than losing them to a non clay GOAT, right?

That was, most likely, the intent of the OP (who has been trolling Nadal fans, as of late)

 

[big bang]

*******s would actually agree with you, think about it; if Fed lost all those FO's to the clay GOAT, then it just makes Federer look even better than losing them to a non clay GOAT, right?

that was my point! I cant see why they dont agree!?

 

[Dgpsx7]

yea, I would say he is the best clay courter ever. In the next three years he will win a lot more clay court titles and seal it.

 

[malakas]

Rafa has freakish stats on clay 153-6 since 2005,4 RG won's,81 match winning streak on clay,usually wins 2 out of 3 clay masters a year but until he ties borg's number of RG's,he is nr.2 on clay.

Agreed.He needs more RG titles to say he's clay GOAT.
He will get there.

 

[Blinkism]

If Nadal wins 6 Monte Carlo titles in a row, that'd be ridiculous.

Nadal is the best player to ever play Masters Series tournaments on clay, that's for sure.

5 Monte Carlo titles
4 Rome titles
1 Hamburg title

1 Hamburg final
1 Madrid final

Borg won Monte Carlo 3 times, Rome twice, and never won Hamburg (he did win a clay tourney in Madrid, though, once).
Although, I'm not sure what the "Big 3" non-FO clay tourneys would be in Borg's day.

I know that Rome has always been the second best clay tournament in Men's Tennis.

 

[Blinkism]

To Borg's credit, though, he not only won the French Open 6 times, but he also made the final of the US Open when it was on clay. He also made the semi's of the USO on clay and the Quarters at the FO once

Overall, when you consider slam results on clay

Borg > Nadal

When you consider everything else

Nadal > Borg

So, Nadal needs to win more FO titles, basically.

 

[tudwell]

From 1977-1981, Borg went 115-4 on clay (according to ATP statistics), and one of those losses was a retirement while up 4-1 in the first set. :shock: The reason Borg has fewer Monte Carlos, Romes, etc. than Nadal is simply that he didn't play them as much. He was just as dominant as Nadal on clay. Won the French Open without dropping a set twice (both times losing fewer games than Nadal did in 2008 ).

And keep in mind Borg didn't play the French Open in 1977, which he almost definitely would have won (went 26-1 that year on clay, his only loss being a retirement in the fourth round of the U.S. Open). And his last victory at the French Open came just days after he turned 25! Think of what he could have accomplished had he not retired so early.

 

[joeri888]

So far, Borg is. Borg won 6, Rafa 4.

 

[namelessone]

From 1977-1981, Borg went 115-4 on clay (according to ATP statistics), and one of those losses was a retirement while up 4-1 in the first set. :shock: The reason Borg has fewer Monte Carlos, Romes, etc. than Nadal is simply that he didn't play them as much. He was just as dominant as Nadal on clay. Won the French Open without dropping a set twice (both times losing fewer games than Nadal did in 2008 ).

And keep in mind Borg didn't play the French Open in 1977, which he almost definitely would have won (went 26-1 that year on clay, his only loss being a retirement in the fourth round of the U.S. Open). And his last victory at the French Open came just days after he turned 25! Think of what he could have accomplished had he not retired so early.

Yeah but it works both ways,Rafa played more on clay than Borg and he has a larger consecutive win streak(38 wins more) and only 2 more losses.(one of those coming in Rome against JCF when Nadal played with blisters,he said that he couldn't put his foot down on the floor one week earlier,in Barca).
Also,I suspect Borg didn't play every clay tournament because he wanted to save himself for RG,unlike Rafa. Borg at RG was one of the most dominant forces in the history of tennis but I'll give him this,he sure knew how to plan ahead.

I don't know if Borg would have won it in 1977. As we have seen with Nadal in 09' anything is possible in tennis. Nadal also had just 1 defeat this clay season,in Madrid against Fed and had a 33 match clay winning streak until then. What happened? He got ousted in 4th round at RG.

 

[borg number one]

As far as "performance level", they are extremely close thus far. Yet, Borg is a bit more accomplished overall on this Surface because the French Open is the test on Red Clay. Winning a bunch of other clay court tourneys tends to "evaporate" if one flames out at the French.

So, I rate them as 1. Borg, 2. Nadal, as the two best clay courters of all time.

As far as other surfaces, Borg is also more accomplished, but I'll keep the focus on Clay. Yes, Nadal has beaten Federer several times at the French Open, but Borg took out Vilas in straight sets once in the RG final, and also wore out Ivan Lendl in 5 sets at the 1981 French Open Final. Both of those players were better than Roger Federer on Clay.

Fitness/Stamina is a HUGE attribute on red clay, and Federer would have been wore down by either Lendl or Vilas, as he has been against Nadal, and as he would have been against Borg. He often looked fatigued versus Nadal during French Open finals. Federer is not one of the "top five" clay-courters of all time. Grass, hard courts, and indoor courts are very different than red clay. It's like night and day as far as tennis goes.

 

[malakas]

Well Nadal can only play the one who is across the net.And so far on clay he's been defeating all the players that were across the net.

 

[TheMagicianOfPrecision]

maybe in your world!
most people look at how strong the field was when you won and who you beat.. winning 3 FO titles against Fed, guess you cant do better!

What Rafa has done on clay is simply amazing-i agree-beating the GOAT in 3 finals is a marvelous achievment.
Although dont forget that Bjorn Borg won the French 6! times, the only minus imo about Borg and the FO was that in his finals he beat Pecci, Gerulaitis, pre-prime Lendl and Vilas (his best win) who isnt exactly any clay-GOATS.

 

[The-Champ]

Borg is the best CC-player of all time...and I'm not saying this because I'm a Swede (I hate Söderling and Björkman).

But there is a great possibility that Rafa will surpass Björn's achievements in the coming years....Good luck with that!

 

[Toxicmilk]

I like Nadal a lot, but please..

No it has nothing to do with who you beat. It's all about the titles.

So according to your logic, if Donald Young were to amass more titles via challengers than Fed, he's a better player.

 

[big bang]

What Rafa has done on clay is simply amazing-i agree-beating the GOAT in 3 finals is a marvelous achievment.
Although dont forget that Bjorn Borg won the French 6! times, the only minus imo about Borg and the FO was that in his finals he beat Pecci, Gerulaitis, pre-prime Lendl and Vilas (his best win) who isnt exactly any clay-GOATS.

that was my point, not trying to take anything away from Borg, but I think what Rafa has achieved is more impressive considering the competition hes up against..

 

[Tsonga#1fan]

Until Rafa Nadal can boast impressive credentials such as "competed in 8 French over a 9 year span, winning 6 while loosing to only 1 player, he is still the pretender.

Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome

Nadal - 14
Borg - 7

Borg is still #1 for now. Borg didn't play as many of those events leading up to the French, he had enough good sense to give his body some much needed rest. His clay competition in that era was as good or better as what Nadal has faced in his. Vilas was awesome on clay. I would take either a prime Borg OR Vilas against Nadal on clay anytime and feel comfortable with the decision.

 

[mtincoronel76]

For me, in clay, Nadal but just. Overall, Borg. He was unstoppable in both clay -six Roland Garros in eight years- and grass -five consecutive Wimbledon-, and retires at 26-Age with 11 Grand Slams without ever playing the Australian Open during his prime, and 2 Masters (Nadal hasnt won any yet), winning in these major finals to notable hall of famers like Connors, Vilas, Nastase, Orantes, McEnroe, Lendl, and preventing Gerulaitis from being one of them (Borg bested him at RG and Masters finals). Not only Nadal, nobody in open era won what he at age 26. Astonishing.
anyway were similar styles - different era, different racquets, obviously ... - but the invincible's aura that Rafa has in clay, the Swedish (I repeat) had it both clay and grass.

 

[Night Slasher]

Nadal, thanks to his incredible consistency. Nothing beats his 11 titles at Roland Garros.

Peak to peak? It's a very tough call, Borg's 1978 RG run was the most dominant performance in a single grand slam in the Open era, so his top level was extremely high. I can't say that Rafa's peak was higher than Bjorn's, if we compare their best runs (1978, 1980 for Borg, 2008, 2010/2012 for Rafa).
I would say their peaks are equally impressive.

By the way, counting their Rome titles doesn't really make sense. Borg played in Rome three times and won twice, and never played again after the 1978 incident, while Rafa never missed a single Rome edition since 2005 (his breakthrough year).

 

[Sport]

Nadal, thanks to his incredible consistency. Nothing beats his 11 titles at Roland Garros.

Peak to peak? It's a very tough call, Borg's 1978 RG run was the most dominant performance in a single grand slam in the Open era, so his top level was extremely high. I can't say that Rafa's peak was higher than Bjorn's, if we compare their best runs (1978, 1980 for Borg, 2008, 2010/2012 for Rafa).
I would say their peaks are equally impressive.

By the way, counting their Rome titles doesn't really make sense. Borg played in Rome three times and won twice, and never played again after the 1978 incident, while Rafa never missed a single Rome edition since 2005 (his breakthrough year).

2017 Rafa would destroy any Borg or younger Nadal.

 

[Night Slasher]

2017 Rafa would destroy any Borg or younger Nadal.

In your dreams, definitely.

 

[Towny]

Borg is criminally underrated and was an absolute beast on clay (and off clay). But what Rafa has achieved is just simply a class above. His consistency and dominance are simply unparalleled. Peak for peak is very difficult to assess given the vast difference is racket technology. However, I would have to back Rafa here too

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Borg had better clay results than Federer, but he would be routined by Federer on clay in the current era. It would be more close if Federer was playing in the 70’s, though even then I would bet on Federer every time.

Considering Borg packed it all in after his ‘run’ came to an end, his run may have been much shorter or non existent in the current era.

I don’t wish to disparage Borg, he was undoubtedly a great, great champion, head and shoulders above his peers. However the greatest champions of all rebuild themselves after brutal losses and come back to be champions again.

 

[mtincoronel76]

Borg had better clay results than Federer, but he would be routined by Federer on clay in the current era. It would be more close if Federer was playing in the 70’s, though even then I would bet on Federer every time.

Considering Borg packed it all in after his ‘run’ came to an end, his run may have been much shorter or non existent in the current era.

I don’t wish to disparage Borg, he was undoubtedly a great, great champion, head and shoulders above his peers. However the greatest champions of all rebuild themselves after brutal losses and come back to be champions again.

Totally debatable. Borg is arguably 2th clay GOAT behind Rafa (not only for resuts, also for baseliner style, resistance, patience and mentality). But anyway ... what does Federer have to do here?
He had 11 claycourt titles in entire career... even Nole, Vilas, Lendl, Muster, Wilander and Guga are better qualified than Fed on this surface.

 

[redrover]

In peak playing level they are probably about tied, or Borg slightly ahead. Rafa is light years ahead in achievements and longevity now though, so it is has to be him by a long ways. Rafa on clay has to not only be the GOAT of clay, but the GOAT of any player on any surface ever, apart from maybe Margaret Court on grass.

 

[tennis_pro]

2017 Rafa would destroy any Borg or younger Nadal.

LMAO

 

[Rogerer]

2017 Rafa would destroy any Borg or younger Nadal.

Ubaldo scanagatta said nadal 2017 was better than 2008, but said borg is probably better than both nadal(s)

 

[MichaelNadal]

Don't forget the winning streak Nadal had on clay- a record 81 matches!

He's only lost 2 claycourt finals and that was to the GOAT and 2009 French Open Champ!

Add to that the fact that Nadal doesn't have any active losing records to anyone on clay.

AND Nadal beat the reigning French Open Champion, Albert Costa, in Monte Carlo, Carlos Moya in Hamburg, and Magnus Norman in Umag all in the same year.. at the age of 17!!!

In 2003, I know! :lol:

He also owns the most titles at Monte Carlo, Rome, and Barcelona. All very important clay tournaments.

He's won the career clay triple- Monte Carlo, Rome, Hamburg/Madrid (and the first guy to make the finals of all 3 in a year- 2009)

He has the record for most consecutive matches won at the French Open

He's won Monte Carlo in doubles

He won the French Open on his first try, and then didn't lose until his 5th try.

Agreed.He needs more RG titles to say he's clay GOAT.
He will get there.

Yeah but it works both ways,Rafa played more on clay than Borg and he has a larger consecutive win streak(38 wins more) and only 2 more losses.(one of those coming in Rome against JCF when Nadal played with blisters,he said that he couldn't put his foot down on the floor one week earlier,in Barca).
Also,I suspect Borg didn't play every clay tournament because he wanted to save himself for RG,unlike Rafa. Borg at RG was one of the most dominant forces in the history of tennis but I'll give him this,he sure knew how to plan ahead.

I don't know if Borg would have won it in 1977. As we have seen with Nadal in 09' anything is possible in tennis. Nadal also had just 1 defeat this clay season,in Madrid against Fed and had a 33 match clay winning streak until then. What happened? He got ousted in 4th round at RG.

What Rafa has done on clay is simply amazing-i agree-beating the GOAT in 3 finals is a marvelous achievment.
Although dont forget that Bjorn Borg won the French 6! times, the only minus imo about Borg and the FO was that in his finals he beat Pecci, Gerulaitis, pre-prime Lendl and Vilas (his best win) who isnt exactly any clay-GOATS.

Borg is the best CC-player of all time...and I'm not saying this because I'm a Swede (I hate Söderling and Björkman).

But there is a great possibility that Rafa will surpass Björn's achievements in the coming years....Good luck with that!

Damn, miss these guys

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

 

[Rogerer]

LMAO

Rafa 2017>2008
He lost less games against and a real stan is stronger than a scared fed. Ubaldo said rafa played his best tennis in 2017 because was more aggressive, had a better serve and backhand
"In the beginning, he was the greatest defender in the world. Now he attacks from the baseline, even from the backhand, he serves at 200 km per hour, and when he gets to the net he always takes point" .
Peak borg would beat both version of Rafa.

 

[yokied]

Amongst Nadal's weaponry is fear, surprise and a fanatical devotion to the topspin to the BH. He is a creature of poly. He's got tremendous talent but he is the most one-dimensional GOAT-tier player: one style, one surface, one shot-dependent. I hope he would be, but he's not necessarily a lock in pre-poly eras.

 

[itrium84]

Amongst Nadal's weaponry is fear, surprise and a fanatical devotion to the topspin to the BH. He is a creature of poly. He's got tremendous talent but he is the most one-dimensional GOAT-tier player: one style, one surface, one shot-dependent. I hope he would be, but he's not necessarily a lock in pre-poly eras.

If you take away all clay matches/win/titles from Rafa - he remains respectable ATG with 7 GS titles. It seems your perception is one-dimensional, not his game.

 

[MichaelNadal]

If you take away all clay matches/win/titles from Rafa - he remains respectable ATG with 7 GS titles. It seems your perception is one-dimensional, not his game.

There's no need to "take away clay" in the first place lol, they just do it bc what he's done on it is SO RIDICULOUS that they hate having to include it.

 

[Rogerer]

32 games lost>35 with a forfait and 41 games lost
Vilas>>scared fed on clay and wawrinka
Baby djoko and thiem>barazzuti
Borg 1978>rafa 2017>(at least equal) rafa 2008

 

[RaulRamirez]

Amongst Nadal's weaponry is fear, surprise and a fanatical devotion to the topspin to the BH. He is a creature of poly. He's got tremendous talent but he is the most one-dimensional GOAT-tier player: one style, one surface, one shot-dependent. I hope he would be, but he's not necessarily a lock in pre-poly eras.

Great point.
Unlike other true great players, Rafa should have played with 1970s technology, so that detractors on a tennis forum could readily see that he would've been great in any era, not just the one he played in.
He also should have won far less often on clay so that his resume would've been more balanced.

As for being one-dimensional, it's a shame that, apparently, he relied on that 140 mph serve, had no volley, no overhead, no touch, no ROS. This is why he was only able to make 15 GS finals outside of clay with a skewed imbalance of 5 AO, 5 WC and 5 USO.

 

[mental midget]

Amongst Nadal's weaponry is fear, surprise and a fanatical devotion to the topspin to the BH. He is a creature of poly. He's got tremendous talent but he is the most one-dimensional GOAT-tier player: one style, one surface, one shot-dependent. I hope he would be, but he's not necessarily a lock in pre-poly eras.

don't you think it's fair to say he adapted his game to the tools at his disposal though? imo he's every bit the athlete borg was, and had he come up in a different era i think his natural skills could have just as easily been applied to a more 'classic' game.

 

[Rogerer]

don't you think it's fair to say he adapted his game to the tools at his disposal though? imo he's every bit the athlete borg was, and had he come up in a different era i think his natural skills could have just as easily been applied to a more 'classic' game.

And? Could nadal adapt at the classic game?

 

[Adv. Edberg]

Borg actually, just because Nadal has had really weak competition during more than half his career.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Borg actually, just because Nadal has had really weak competition during more than half his career.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Borg actually, just because Nadal has had really weak competition during more than half his career.

Nadal did face Federer and Djokovic on clay. Much better than any competition Borg faced.

 

[mental midget]

don't you think it's fair to say he adapted his game to the tools at his disposal though? imo he's every bit the athlete borg was, and had he come up in a different era i think his natural skills could have just as easily been applied to a more 'classic' game.

my point was that in my opinion, of course. the guy is one of the best athletes to ever play the game–explosive, great hands, high tennis IQ. I see no reason a young nadal couldn't have been shaped into a suberb s&v player, or anything else really.

 

[GabeT]

lol, has anyone even watched Borg? Just watch the Borg Lendl FO final for comparison. Barely move, points that go over a minute and they don’t even sweat. Nadal would obliterate Borg

 

[Rogerer]

Nadal did face Federer and Djokovic on clay. Much better than any competition Borg faced.

Vilas>>