NonP
Legend
The unquestioning certitude of know-nothings never fails to crack me up. It's not hard to guess how many of these geniuses have even watched Borg's complete matches on clay, and that's assuming they have the sufficient know-how to analyze his game when he's dismissed as a glorified Ferrer by these very paper tigers.
Having said that....
I'd give a small edge to Rafa myself but yours strikes me as the best response by far. Very rare to see evenhanded posts like this, let alone here!
Having said that....
I'd give a small edge to Rafa myself but yours strikes me as the best response by far. Very rare to see evenhanded posts like this, let alone here!
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
For some reason Djokovic fans hate it when one mentions Thiem destroying him in RG 2017 or Chung beating him in straight sets in AO.Lol, in all my time on this forum I've never seen another poster get continually as rattled as you do whenever that 2015 RG match gets mentioned. It still burns that Djokovic finally got a win over your boy there irrespective of his form, no?
That RG 2015 match is totally irrelevant for the discussion about peak Nadal vs peak Borg. This is like saying peak Safin would have beaten peak Djokovic in AO based on their 2005 match.
Last edited:
WilPro
Semi-Pro
Borg had no clue about topspin. He couldn't last for more than 2 balls in a rally against Rafa. It would end 6-0 6-0 6-0 for Rafa.
120 years old Rafa would beat 27 years old Borg, any day.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Ae na pivo.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Too many votes for the Nadal. Disgusting.
Martin J
Hall of Fame
Moze, moze, samo da se sredi vreme
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Don't worry, I'm working with the mods to make comparing Borg with Ferrer a bannable offense.
flutzingitaway
Semi-Pro
Djokovic fans have gotten too big for their britches. They hated people calling Wawrinka a bad match up for Djokovic and cried endlessly about the 19-6 head to head. Not recognizing it makes Djokovic look far better to acknowledge Wawrinka is a bad match up.
One Djokovic fanatic launched into a verbal barrage at me for pointing out Nadal of 2005-2010 which Federer faced was better overall than 2011-2016 that Djokovic faced on clay. I even specifically pointed out though I definitely do not rank Federer above Djokovic on clay. This individual went into full assault mode, even deeming me a Nadal fanatic and later a Federer fanatic (contradicting himself, as you will be hard pressed to find anyone who is both of those) all for saying that. I had a thread deleted by mods about Nadal and Henin using PEDs, and both serving a silent ban yet on this persons planet I am a "Nadal fanatic".
I had wanted Djokovic to pass Federer's marks for a long while, but not sure if I still do. It is basically deciding which has the more annoying fans as I am not a huge fan of any of the Big 3, despite admiring them all massively. These days Federer's only ultra annoying fan is TMF, a massive change from the old days, while Djoker has a whole army of Selestial equivalents. It would be kind of nice now to see them get the humble pie of Djokovic getting none of the big marks, and them all split between Fedal.
125downthemiddle
Banned
Djokovic fans have gotten too big for their britches. They hated people calling Wawrinka a bad match up for Djokovic and cried endlessly about the 19-6 head to head. Not recognizing it makes Djokovic look far better to acknowledge Wawrinka is a bad match up.
One Djokovic fanatic launched into a verbal barrage at me for pointing out Nadal of 2005-2010 which Federer faced was better overall than 2011-2016 that Djokovic faced on clay. I even specifically pointed out though I definitely do not rank Federer above Djokovic on clay. This individual went into full assault mode, even deeming me a Nadal fanatic and later a Federer fanatic (contradicting himself, as you will be hard pressed to find anyone who is both of those) all for saying that. I had a thread deleted by mods about Nadal and Henin using PEDs, and both serving a silent ban yet on this persons planet I am a "Nadal fanatic".
I had wanted Djokovic to pass Federer's marks for a long while, but not sure if I still do. It is basically deciding which has the more annoying fans as I am not a huge fan of any of the Big 3, despite admiring them all massively. These days Federer's only ultra annoying fan is TMF, a massive change from the old days, while Djoker has a whole army of Selestial equivalents. It would be kind of nice now to see them get the humble pie of Djokovic getting none of the big marks, and them all split between Fedal.
What about me bro?
Martin J
Hall of Fame
flutzingitaway
Semi-Pro
You are still my sweetie!
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
He is mine!
flutzingitaway
Semi-Pro
You need to become a Djokovic fan like him now!
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
He needs to see the light and become a Rafa fan. Cmon
flutzingitaway
Semi-Pro
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
If that happened a divorce would be in my mindAs long as neither of you become a Fed fan.
D
Deleted member 769694
Guest
Nadal 8-2. Borg is much smarter and has much more variety in his game. On clay though, none of those things would bother rafa. Rafa handles low balls very well and not going to transition effectively against nadal on clay. I dont see borg having any weapons that are bigger than nadals.
On grass and hard its much different
On grass and hard its much different
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Watch the 2013 Final. Borg would do a little better than Ferrer I guess but the problem would be the same. Just wouldn’t have firepower to hurt Nadal.
I agree, and I already made the Ferrer comparison myself. That’s why I don’t think Borg could hurt Federer or Djokovic on clay either.
He was great in his time though, no question about this. But put Federer or Djokovic in his time (not both of them simultaneously) and they both would win 6 or more RG titles. And on the other hand put Borg in the Nadal clay era, and he wins nothing big. Both seems to be a given for me.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Bender
G.O.A.T.
Depends how you're comparing them:
Edit: I’d also add the observation that in any scenario where we “even the playing field”, we either make Borg better than he was, or make Nadal worse than he is. That comes to show that the field has gotten stronger absolutely since Borg’s time and so while I can’t say with any confidence how this particular matchup would’ve gone, Nadal’s outrageous record on clay despite the increased professionalism of the tour may be reason alone to give Nadal the edge here.
- Peak Borg as we knew him back then (equipment, conditioning, etc) vs Peak Nadal as we know him → Borg gets destroyed
- Peak Borg as we knew him back then vs Peak Nadal in Borg's era → Nadal has the edge in physicality (probably) but no way to know how he would've adjusted his game; so by default Borg wins
- Peak Borg in modern era vs Peak Nadal → Nadal might edge him given Nadal's leftyness + physicality but no way to know how Borg would've adjusted his game, so Nadal wins by default
- Both are pretty even in terms of best clay swing
- Both dominated their eras on the surface
- Nadal dominated clay despite playing a more professional tour
- Nadal had to play GOAT contenders on the surface, both of whom would've had ATG clay resumes but for Nadal's dominance
- Borg had a deeper field of specialists
Edit: I’d also add the observation that in any scenario where we “even the playing field”, we either make Borg better than he was, or make Nadal worse than he is. That comes to show that the field has gotten stronger absolutely since Borg’s time and so while I can’t say with any confidence how this particular matchup would’ve gone, Nadal’s outrageous record on clay despite the increased professionalism of the tour may be reason alone to give Nadal the edge here.
Last edited:
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Borg was a truly dominant player in his day but just watching a few minutes of on of his old clay matches with wooden rackets highlights the enormous gap between his era and ours.
The modern game much more reliant on weaponry. Very few pure baseline grinders can succeed at highest level.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Awesome post and I agree with almost everything, even if I am less charitable to Borg.
Bender
G.O.A.T.
Just curious but what leads you to be less charitable to Borg?
I’m assuming the main thing is the relatively less professional nature of the tour back then and the fact that Nadal’s record is still superior despite that.
It wouldn’t affect their matchup though.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
Borg will be another Federer of clay vs Nadal. Top class, but will come in second everytime.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Except Fed is an ATG whose best surface is HC/grass (yes, even taking losses to Nadal into account), not the case for Borg.
I have little doubt a 10+ slam winning talent who shares Nadal's surface preference would do much better than a guy who doesn't.
ForehandRF
Legend
There is no reason to think that Borg won't do better than Federer.
GoldenMasters
Semi-Pro
Borg would smash that ass-picking cheater.
D
Deleted member 769694
Guest
Who was the french open champ in 2009?
Its gotta hurt, could of have the 10+ streak, but maybe hurts more that Fed took his only FO that year.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Except Borg had offensive weapons (namely his serve and FH) as evidenced by his success on old-school slick grass and indoor carpet.
You still believe that a guy who wins five Wimbledons in a row is a grinder?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I like how many people are giving Nadal the benefit of the doubt and not Borg.
Would Nadal hit with his ridiculous spin with wooden racquets? I doubt it.
Would Nadal hit with his ridiculous spin with wooden racquets? I doubt it.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Well he wouldn't have had to hit with the same ridiculous spin, he'd just have to hit a heavier ball then the other dude using a wooden racquet.
Nadal's athleticism, footwork (quite underrated aspect of his), amazing shotmaking, that he's a lefty etc. would make him a clay phenom in any era, you can bank on that. It's his massive success off-clay and his incredibly longevity that I don't see him replicating in any era but this one, even though he's obviously too great of a player to be confined to just one surface no matter the conditions.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
But people assume Borg wouldn't adapt if he came up in the modern era
zagor
Bionic Poster
But people assume Borg wouldn't adapt if he came up in the modern era
Well year, recency bias. It's why big 3 are put on a pedestal above all other greats before them. Rarely people stop for a moment and wonder what an amazing coincidence is that 3 absolute best players of all time just happen to play in a same era (more or less).
Really, while I do give Nadal the edge on clay (and voted for him in the poll) what Borg in dominating two surfaces that were polar opposites at the time was nothing short of amazing, probably one of the most impressive feats in tennis history. I mean Borg serve and volleyed in his one Wimbledon title run more than Djokodal did in their entire careers.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I don't think Nadal would have 12 RG titles with a player like Borg to compete against.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Well no, obviously. However, it would really be an amazing occurrence for guys who are best CC players ever to coexist in the same era. We're talking about two guys who are historically the best talents for the surface. The closest it came to that actually I would argue is Fed and Novak on HC and even then, they're 6 years apart.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Yeah, them being 6 years apart allowed each of them to have 11 HC slams.
Sabrina
Hall of Fame
Give them the same condition, technology, equipment and training method?
I see a 5 setters with 51/49 in favor of Nadal. The winner probably is the one with more luck on his side.
Borg of course does not have the insane longevity of Nadal on clay but in term of peak level he is definitely up there.
I see a 5 setters with 51/49 in favor of Nadal. The winner probably is the one with more luck on his side.
Borg of course does not have the insane longevity of Nadal on clay but in term of peak level he is definitely up there.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Oops there is a reality smackdown.
zagor
Bionic Poster
I mean, Fed lost his first 10 matches on clay and got straight-setted by Guga on his last legs at the FO at the time he was pulverizing the field on HC and grass. Novak had plenty of slip-ups at the French and lost in relatively routine fashion the first time he played a non-Nadal opponent in a FO final.
That people put them so often on the level Borg with the "if not for Nadal" argument is absurd, not to mention short-sighted as you could start doing the same for so many players throughout history. I can get saying that Fedovic are as good or better than Guga or Lendl (though I disagree) but Borg? Yeah, ridiculous.
flutzingitaway
Semi-Pro
I think a reason this poll is so lopsided is not only recency bias but that Nadal has so many more RG titles (12, but will probably wind up with like 15) than Borg (6) skews perspective. Which I understand, but when you think about it had Borg played the 77 French and continued playing after 81 he probably would have wound up with around 10-12 RG titles. He probably would have won in 77. He probably wins both 82 and 83. After 83 the wins would not come as easily, people like Lendl would start challenging him and age would start to be a factor but he probably wins 1 or 2 at some point in the 84-89 period. He still would not win as many as Nadal will wind up with for sure, but closer than the total is now.
I do see people who say Nadal never played someone like Borg on clay which is completely true (those who put Fed or Djokovic on the same level as Borg on clay are delusional), but lets remind everyone here that likewise the same is true for Borg. Borg has never played anyone anywhere close to Nadal on clay. Baby Lendl a mere one time (81 RG final) is not close, and don't make me laugh by comparing Vilas to Nadal on clay.
I do see people who say Nadal never played someone like Borg on clay which is completely true (those who put Fed or Djokovic on the same level as Borg on clay are delusional), but lets remind everyone here that likewise the same is true for Borg. Borg has never played anyone anywhere close to Nadal on clay. Baby Lendl a mere one time (81 RG final) is not close, and don't make me laugh by comparing Vilas to Nadal on clay.
Last edited:
Hitman
Bionic Poster
It comes to not understanding the history of the sport, or sometimes allowing fanboying to blind rational thinking. Comparing Federer and Djokovic to Borg as cannon fodder to Nadal is borderline hilarious. One guy was designed to dominate clay, the other two were designed to dominate grass and hard respectively.
flutzingitaway
Semi-Pro
Wrong thread.
Similar threads
- Poll
