Prime Nadal vs Prime Sampras at the French Open - Only Sampras Serves - Who Wins?

Prime Nadal vs Prime Sampras at French Open (Only Sampras Serves)

  • Nadal

    Votes: 59 41.3%
  • Sampras

    Votes: 84 58.7%

  • Total voters
    143
#1
A theoretical matchup between Prime Nadal and Prime Sampras at Roland Garros, but Sampras serves every game.

As a Federer and Nadal fan, I think these two have gone a level beyond the Sampras league, but to be fair we could have seen that years ago when Federer played Sampras at Wimbledon and beat him, Federer was very weak then but still beat Sampras, then, Wimbledon champion.

So we can take most versions of Nadal on clay here, but 2008 was probably the best form because he is the only player in history who beat prime Federer at Wimbledon. Federer didn't lose a set till the final of Wimbledon 2008, and in the run up to the French Open final he only lost I think a couple of sets on the way to the final.

Yet in the final he beat Federer the greatest player of all time, in his prime, 6-1, 6-3 and 6-0.

So Sampras serving every game to Nadal, well considering Sampras never even made it to the final, and the baseline game was a lot weaker compared to now. And Nadal would target the Sampras backhand non stop, and it would be far far more exposed than Federer's so it would constantly land short for Nadal to win the point. Also considering the surface would nullify the Sampras serve.

And considering Nadal dismantled Federer in a love set, I think Nadal wins this 6-2 6-2 6-0.

But that might be generous because it's difficult to see how Sampras could take four games off Prime Nadal even on his serve on all games, Sampras would not win points from the baseline, and would get passed by Nadal at the net (who is probably greatest of all time in the passing shots)

......

To back up what I said this is a video Sport has linked.


Observations are as predicted. Because of the surface, the Sampras serve is nullfied somewhat, Agassi was returning pretty much all of Sampras serves, even hit a return passing shot winner against Sampras first serve. With Nadal and his athleticism and speed, and how far back he stands, giving himself a lot more time, would ferociously attack the Sampras serve.

Once the ball is in play, we can see Sampras is hitting his backhand almost going backwards, there is no penetration so not forcing Nadal back or wide. Nadal attacking the Sampras backhand with high top spin would set up many many points. In longer rallies, Sampras is losing most points against Agassi, and Nadal would punish Sampras on this aspect.

Since the serve is nullified, I don't see where Sampras has the tools to hurt Nadal, and would be second favorite for every single point once the ball is in play.

I would love to hear your opinion if you disagree with this, after all this is a discussion. Considering Sampras never made it to the final of the French, and even lost 6-0 sets himself, and Nadal dominated the 2008 French Open, winning three 6-0 sets and nine 6-1 sets, with an average of about 55% return games won - he would have no problems breaking and beating Sampras especially if other lesser players than Nadal have done it time and time again to Sampras.

I simply don't see any other outcome in this theoretical match other than a Nadal win.
 
Last edited:
#7
You just created the only scenario where PETE beats Rafa.Of course that excludes injuries e.t.c

But even then I doubt he would defeat 2008 Nadal. That man was as close to invincible as any can be. In my time of watching, only 2006 Rome Fraud and 2011Rome Novak pushes him to 4 or 5. But I will bet my life that Ralph wins easily in the end. The true beast incarnate tbh.
 
#9
You just created the only scenario where PETE beats Rafa.Of course that excludes injuries e.t.c

But even then I doubt he would defeat 2008 Nadal. That man was as close to invincible as any can be. In my time of watching, only 2006 Rome Fraud and 2011Rome Novak pushes him to 4 or 5. But I will bet my life that Ralph wins easily in the end. The true beast incarnate tbh.
Nadzebub? :eek:
 
#11
You just created the only scenario where PETE beats Rafa.Of course that excludes injuries e.t.c

But even then I doubt he would defeat 2008 Nadal. That man was as close to invincible as any can be. In my time of watching, only 2006 Rome Fraud and 2011Rome Novak pushes him to 4 or 5. But I will bet my life that Ralph wins easily in the end. The true beast incarnate tbh.
Well a straight match is no fair, it's hard to see where Sampras would get games. His serve is not as effective on clay, and Nadal is an excellent returner on clay.
 
#13
If Sampras has the benefit of having to train with today's technology and everything, yea he'd win in this scenario. It's not a David Ferrer serve exactly. One of the best of all time.

Also imagine the risks he would take with his world famous 2nd serve. He can afford losing serve cause he serves all the time anyway lol.
 
#15
How do you say that?

Sampras didn't get into a final of the French Open, and going up against Prime Nadal on clay?

Federer took a 6-0 beating against Nadal at French Open, and I'm sure we'd all say Federer's baseline game is a lot stronger than Sampras.
Roger's baseline game, on that day, was unrecognizable. Not representative of his skill at all, even Nadal said as much.

Any version of prime Sampras could've beaten Roger on that day too.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
#28
Pistol Pete would get crushed even if he did serve everytime. Bull would figure him out in the first set (perhaps even lose that opening set) and once he does, he'll send Sampras packing.
4-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1.
 
#33
He only needs to win 60% of his service games to win a set
And we’re talking prime Sampras, with today’s strings.

Come on, let’s not be silly. Sampras would win handily. Even in his best years on clay, Nadal maxed out at about ‘only’ 50% of return games won...against the field as a whole.
 
#35
Last edited:
#36
No matter what one conjectures, Pete is not beating nadal at to. At best Pete goes a set up. If kafelnikiv bagels Pete in his prime on clay, set 2 onwards the all serve advantage goes down the clay.
 
#39
A theoretical matchup between Prime Nadal and Prime Sampras at Roland Garros, but Sampras serves every game.

As a Federer and Nadal fan, I think these two have gone a level beyond the Sampras league, but to be fair we could have seen that years ago when Federer played Sampras at Wimbledon and beat him, Federer was very weak then but still beat Sampras, then, Wimbledon champion.

So we can take most versions of Nadal on clay here, but 2008 was probably the best form because he is the only player in history who beat prime Federer at Wimbledon. Federer didn't lose a set till the final of Wimbledon 2008, and in the run up to the French Open final he only lost I think a couple of sets on the way to the final.
There it is!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

@paranoidandroid You woke him.
 
#40
No matter what one conjectures, Pete is not beating nadal at to. At best Pete goes a set up. If kafelnikiv bagels Pete in his prime on clay, set 2 onwards the all serve advantage goes down the clay.
Bagels are aberrant outcomes. Even Nadal has gotten bageled on clay.

Sampras, for his career, has gotten bageled on clay three times in 450 or so sets. And again, it was much harder to hold in those days on clay, the numbers bear that out.
 
#42
Any scenario in which Sampras serves every game, whatever the surface and whoever the opponent, I'm afraid Pete wins in straights. The other guy would have to be returning out of his mind to be able to steal a set from him, and barely at that. Heck, *Isner* would win in straights against Nadal in that scenario, so Sampras? Forget it. Nadal should be able to score a couple of games here and there, though, but he wouldn't make a single set competitive, I'm afraid. You have to be less than 15 and know absolutely nothing about tennis pre-2005 (which is a fair number of posters here, granted) to entertain the thought that there's a chance Nadal (or anyone else, for that matter) would win in such a crazy scenario.
 
Last edited:
#45
With no break from Sampras serving, it's likely Nadal would figure out how to read his serve perfectly by mid match and the rest would be history. Not to mention the pressure and exhaustion Sampras would incur from constant serving. I would say Nadal wins something like 3-6,7-6,6-4,6-4.
 
#46
With no break from Sampras serving, it's likely Nadal would figure out how to read his serve perfectly by mid match and the rest would be history. Not to mention the pressure and exhaustion Sampras would incur from constant serving. I would say Nadal wins something like 3-6,7-6,6-4,6-4.
Gotta lol at a scenario in which anyone, even the best returner ever (which Nadal isn't, and by a long shot) breaks Sampras a whopping 21 times (plus the tiebreak) in a single match. :D
 
#48
Any scenario in which Sampras serves every game, whatever the surface and whoever the opponent, I'm afraid Pete wins in straights. The other guy would have to be returning out of his mind to be able to steal a set from him, and barely at that. Heck, *Isner* would win in straights against Nadal in that scenario, so Sampras? Forget it. Nadal should be able to score a couple of games here and there, though, but he wouldn't make a single set competitive, I'm afraid. You have to be less than 15 and know absolutely nothing about tennis pre-2005 (which is a fair number of posters here, granted) to entertain the thought that there's a chance Nadal (or anyone else, for that matter) would win in such a crazy scenario.
Look at Sampras record on clay, against many unknown players he lost, where was his serve then? His serve was there but on clay with Nadal standing back, it gives Nadal time to return it.

Once a ball is returned, and it would do on that surface, Nadal is favourite for every point. Sampras didn't like high bouncing baseline shots especially from his backhand side.

If Sampras couldn't damage the weaker field on clay back then, I don't see how he could damage Nadal - a player who made Federer the greatest of all time look average at times?
 
#49
Maybe a set and that's being generous.
Prime Nadal at RG doesn't need the generosity of anyone when he could bagel prime Federer in a final. He can very well take a set from Prime Pete too even with the American doing all the serve. 2 sets would be extremely difficult through. So, the likely result would be Pete winning in 4 sets.
 
D

Deleted member 756486

Guest
#50
There it is!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

@paranoidandroid You woke him.
The life of @REKX

Wake up
Watch Wimbledon 2008
Take a shower
Watch Wimbledon 2008
Get dressed
Watch Wimbledon 2008
Brush his teeth
Watch Wimbledon 2008
Go to school
Watch Wimbledon 2008
Come home
Watch Wimbledon 2008

In fact he doesn’t ever wake up because he’s always awake..

WATCHING WIMBLEDON 2008
 
Top