Nadal vs Kuerten

[Morrissey]

Finishing #1 or even reaching #1 is a gigantic achievement. Although I don't like Roddick, he did reach and finish as #1 before Federer. He accomplished a lot at a young age and most people don't even remember that he was #1.

Although it is entertaining, we can never compare two players from different era. Both Kuerten and Nadal were/are electrifying clay court players who beat Federer in his prime. I just thought it is interesting that they never played against each other in French.

I think Kuerten could have beaten 05, 06 Nadal, go toe to toe with 07 Nadal, but 08 Nadal looked unbeatable. Kuerten was a streaky player with some x factor. I think it was McEnroe who said when Kuerten is on, he can out hit anyone including Sampras and Agassi. That is a huge compliment and I really think Kuerten would have been the only one who can give Nadal some trouble.

After all, Kuerten did finish #1 and we all have to respect that even though it was year 2000 as some people noted. He was the best in the world that year and Nadal cannot yet say that. Why did Kuerten finish #1? Because he won non clay tournaments. No one can take that away from him.

Outside of that Masters Cup what non clay event did he win that year?

 

[veroniquem]

Outside of that Masters Cup what non clay event did he win that year?

Your new avatar is awesome! How did you get it that quick?

 

[Zaragoza]

Guga was the best clay player in his time, and Nadal is the best clay player now. Both are likable characters, although personally I like Guga more because of his sincere and non-pretentious (sometimes guffy, you just cannot not to like someone like that) spirit.

My point is that it is difficult to compare players from different era. Nadal may be awesome on clay right now, but there will definitely be someone better in the future.

It´s difficult to compare players from different eras but Nadal is definitely more dominant on clay than Kuerten ever was (4 vs 3 R.Garros and 8 vs 4 Masters Series on clay) and that´s only at 22 y.o.
Kuerten in 1997 had to play three 5-sets matches and two 4-sets matches to win R.Garros.
In 2000 he played two 5-set matches and had a hard time beating Magnus Norman in the final.
In 2001, the year when he won his 3rd R.Garros, he saved matchpoint against Russell in 4th round.
So he was never as dominant as Nadal is in R.Garros but Nadal already won more titles than him anyway as well as Masters Series on clay so there´s no doubt that Nadal is much better than Kuerten was on clay.

I think it´s out of question who is the better player on grass (2 Wimbledon finals and going on vs 1 QF appearance).

On hardcourts, Nadal overall has done better in the Slams than Kuerten.
Kuerten won 1 Masters Cup, 1 MS and made 2 MS finals.
Nadal has won 3 MS and made 3 MS finals at 22.
So even if Kuerten won the Masters Cup once I would consider Nadal the most consistent and better player on hardcourts (once again he´s 22 so most likely he will improve his hardcourt achievements).

So as good as Kuerten´s career was, Nadal´s career at 22 is already better and he is a greater player.