SaintPetros
Hall of Fame
to forever immortalize its stupidity
Prime Nadal vs Prime Sampras at the French Open - Only Sampras Serves - Who Wins?
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Because?
IIRC people just agree it's stupid without providing an argument on the conditions, yadayadayada.
because it’s funny how a thread asking this question got to 11 pages.
RS
Bionic Poster
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
'Let's get this party stopped' - Red Rick
D
Deleted member 777746
Guest
bahaha and Pete fans are the worst? Bahahahahahaaa
mehdimike
Hall of Fame
Hitman
Bionic Poster
I was born with an unfortunately incurable allergy for BS. It gets quite bad during the high pollen season.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Sampras wins 6-3, 6-4, 6-4
Maverick13
Semi-Pro
As far back as Rafa stands Pete’s serve would eat him alive with all the angles.
killerboss
Professional
Pete would win a match even with Nadal serving. He beat multiple FO champions at FO.
D
Deleted member 771911
Guest
Nadal
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
It’s always good to see this thread bumped every few months. RAFA to feed Peter bakery products.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Probably one of the most moronic threads I’ve ever had the pleasure of viewing. As such, it’s also one of my favorites.
Now if only the poll was made public...
Now if only the poll was made public...
D
Deleted member 780630
Guest
Only Sampras serves? If you only let one guy serve, he'd win easily every time. Even ranked 100 scrubs, let alone Sampras, win >70% of their service games. What kind of question is this?
Coming around to the undeniable fact that REKX is an ascended level of troll and basically has TTW on strings with every one of his posts, tbh
It would even be a tough match for Sampras to complete if they played in Wimbledon on fast grass. How long can you serve bombs without falling apart? And on clay it would be even worse since Sampras' serve matters a lot less, just like Nadal's serve has also never been the reason why he won Paris 13 times anyway.
Adam Copeland
Hall of Fame
Sampras will win easily
Not just Sampras, anyone who is a good server will win
Even if Nadal breaks 3 times in the set, still it will be 6-3
I think Bull's chances of pulling off a 5 set win in a scenario where Sampras gets tired are almost nil....
Not just Sampras, anyone who is a good server will win
Even if Nadal breaks 3 times in the set, still it will be 6-3
I think Bull's chances of pulling off a 5 set win in a scenario where Sampras gets tired are almost nil....
Last edited:
NonP
Legend
I thought I'd answered this Q here but it turns out that was a different joke thread from @King No1e. So after checking out the poll I thought at least half of the Nadal voters were trolling, but after skimming the 1st 2-3 pages it's clear they weren't. So about 40% of the TTW gang are certified morons. Makes sense.
But let's be generous and assume some of these literal jokers are interested in finding out why. Per UTS Fognini has won 54.7% of his service points and 60.6% of SGs vs. Rafa, vs. a career 60% and 70% respectively vs. the field. So even Fog of all people suffered only a 10% drop in SGW% and held serve vs. Bull about 60% of the time.
That's how comical it is to envision Bull beating any decent top player while receiving only. Yes even on clay. Unless you happen to be a glutton for self-mockery I suggest you educate yourself before mouthing off next time.
But let's be generous and assume some of these literal jokers are interested in finding out why. Per UTS Fognini has won 54.7% of his service points and 60.6% of SGs vs. Rafa, vs. a career 60% and 70% respectively vs. the field. So even Fog of all people suffered only a 10% drop in SGW% and held serve vs. Bull about 60% of the time.
That's how comical it is to envision Bull beating any decent top player while receiving only. Yes even on clay. Unless you happen to be a glutton for self-mockery I suggest you educate yourself before mouthing off next time.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
This thread isn't about a modern ATP pro, it's about a guy from the 90s.
Adam Copeland
Hall of Fame
A guy from the 90s cannot serve non stop for 3 sets ?
Is he a professional or an amateur ?
It is obvious that Sampras needs only 3 sets to win and he can afford to lose serve 2 or even 3 times to still take home a set 6-3
So even if it is 6-3, 6-3, 6-3, that is 27 service games.
He has the endurance to do it, otherwise he wouldn't be ranked 1 for 286 weeks.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
It's a fairly simple question in that it's "just" 50% serve points won but ITT people seem to ignore how quickly those stats can fall off a cliff with low ace%
Nadal has posted a 50% return points won vs a guy like Djokovic as recently as 2020.
Also you're gonna get a lot more fatigued in the shoulder serving with no breaks for 3 hours staight.
Adam Copeland
Hall of Fame
In an ideal match opponent serves too, that is when matches go to 3 hours. The 50% return points won is in a scenario where you have your own serve to comfort you.
However here only 1 man serves, so this means Sampras will be serving on Nadal's behalf to Nadal, he will be 4-0 up quickly if Nadal doesn't break serve twice, even if that happens, Sampras would serve it out ....
Nadal would have to break Sampras 6 times in a set to actually go for a tiebreaker .... haha ... seriously ? ..... nobody can do that..... The bull will lose this in straight sets.
NonP
Legend
Your opinion of the old-timers is clear, but are you seriously hinting Pete friggin' Sampras would struggle to hold serve more than Fognini?
Only newbs think a pro would hurt his arm serving for 3 hrs, LOL. Maybe at the end of a grueling fortnight, but a "theoretical matchup" implies both players at the top of their game.
50% in RPW still wouldn't amount to half of return games. We're talking as low as 30-35% here. That 6-10% difference for Fog is an anomaly which actually shows how godawful his serve is.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Once again no arguments presented, just "nobody could win 50% return points vs SIMPRAS". He regularly dropped 40% on clay and he never played a top 5 opponent at RG.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
At Roland Garros. Against Nadal?
I don't see why not.
A lot of Nadal matches that have been competitive vs top tier clay players have had him win ~45% return points won.
Like what's Sampras gonna do. Stay back on 2nd serve?
abmk
Bionic Poster
umm, because Sampras' hold% on clay is 81.5%
vs top 10: 78%
fognini's is 71.7%
vs top 10: 64.2%
NonP
Legend
Again even if we grant your fact-free assertion about the 40% and assume Bull winning half of all his return points that still doesn't add up to half of RGW. He'd need to win closer to 60% of his RPs for that.
P.S. Bull's career RPW% stands at 47%, RGW% 43%.
The likes of Fog and Schwartzman can still hang with Rafa on dirt because they almost make up for their useless serves with strong return games. RoS wouldn't come into play in this scenario. Do the math.
Adam Copeland
Hall of Fame
Nadal's return points won% at FO is 47.86% (45% vs top 10)
Djokovic's return points won% at FO is 43.44% (39.21% vs top 10)
Federer's return points won% at FO is 40.91% (37% vs top 10)
Sampras's return points won% at FO is 37.13% (28% vs top 10)
Nadal's service points won% at FO is 67.93% (66.14% vs top 10)
Federer's service points won% at FO is 67.85% (61% vs top 10)
Djokovic's service points won% at FO is 66% (61% vs top 10)
Sampras's service points won% at FO is 64.74% (63.35% vs top 10)
This means Sampras served better than Roger and Novak vs the top 10, he is clearly at an advantage when he is serving.
Adv. Edberg
Legend
Sampras would crush Nadal. Without Nadals poly strings he wouldn’t do much with the returns. Also Nadal doesn’t know how to play against S/V
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
50% return points equates to 50% games.
That's because they're adequate baseline players who win a non0% of baseline rallies off Nadal. Whats Simp gonna do, keep every point under 3 shots?
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
You introduce a lot of bias when you don't take into account Sampras never played any top 5 players, let alone never played Nadal at RG.
abmk
Bionic Poster
you making out Sampras to be Karlovic on clay just makes you look more and more ignorant.
abmk
Bionic Poster
you do realise there was more variation in surfaces back then leading to CC "specialists" being ranked lower?
Sampras faced prime Bruguera in RG 93, prime Courier in RG 94
also faced Burguera, Courier and Kafel in RG 96, along with Agassi in RG 92
NonP
Legend
PW and GW don't work like that. If you're lucky you can get away with only a 5% drop in the latter, but against top players you need a bigger cushion because you tend to play more points for a break. And against a GOAT server like Sampras? Chances are you need at least an extra 10%.
OK, let's assume Pistol would be just another glorified servebot in this era. Here's how Rafa did vs. two of them on clay (at least 3 matches) in terms of RPW% and RGW%:
Isner - 34.7%, 16.1%
Ljubicic - 44.9%, 40.4%
And vs. others on all surfaces (again at least 3 matches):
Karlovic - 29.4%, 11.6%
Muller - 36.1%, 20.8%
Querrey - 38.1%, 29.4%
Raonic - 36.6%, 19.4%
Roddick - 34.2%, 18.8%
So the best you can come up with is no-FH Ljubicic who still won 60% of his SG on clay. There's simply no conceivable way Bull breaks any top player with a not-sucky serve more than half the time even on his best surface, let alone a Sampras.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Title says “prime vs. prime” so we have to assume a 95 Davis Cup, or 94 Rom final Pete which makes the question a no-brainer.
NonP
Legend
This isn't unlike the perennial Q of whether Serena (or whatever female GOAT of choice) could beat a male journeyman. Only certified ignoramuses think she can, except in this case the "she" is Nadal and some of the ideological allegiances are switched.
Still to think 41.7% of this funny farm voted yes, JFC.
One more thing:
Even post-'97 Pistol ain't losing in this scenario. He'd have to put in a real stinker a la Fraud's '08 F to blow it, but I'm guessing this would be a winner-take-all or an old-school H2H series, which makes such outliers unlikely.
Still to think 41.7% of this funny farm voted yes, JFC.
One more thing:
Even post-'97 Pistol ain't losing in this scenario. He'd have to put in a real stinker a la Fraud's '08 F to blow it, but I'm guessing this would be a winner-take-all or an old-school H2H series, which makes such outliers unlikely.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Even post-97 Pete would of course easily win any H2H series but over 10 or more matches a complete off-day a la Fed 08 is absolutely not unlikely. If this is enough is another question, even if we take the Fed match as reference and make the simplified assumption that this match under the specific rule set would play out exactly the same than if we just remove Nadal’s service games, Nadal would only have barely won the first set against Fed, not certain that he would have kept up this level.
well our resident Hingis fan here was even sure she would beat prime Fed/peak Djokovic and since he is gone he is (surprisingly) praised as very knowledgeable and a great coach by many posters here, only because he predicted some early slam losses for Emma.
NonP
Legend
By "old-school H2H series" I mean one of those extended ones in the pre-OE days. So this would play out over a matter of weeks at most as opposed to a whole season with all the attendant unknowns, which is why I say stinkers like Pistol's '96 SF (fatigue) or Fraud's '08 F (brain fart) are unlikely. Of course I don't completely rule out Nadal taking a rare W here and there.
And if we're talking one single decider we must assume top form for both players, which would render your Qs moot.
I still remember him pretending to have some special insight about serving while making the literal rookie assumption that DF = bad. And that was after he went apesh!t about some very mild criticism I made about his Hingis obsession (think you were there for that show). The guy clearly thinks he's this hotshot now that he's made some $$$ off local hackers. Apparently nobody IRL has the heart to tell him that these coaching gigs are a dime a dozen in every bougie neighborhood and he'd do well not to oversell his qualifications.
And it's indeed amusing to see so many dupes going gaga over a bunch of predictions that probability all but guarantees will hit the mark after several failed attempts. I mean just last year alone I correctly called Rafa's FO campaign being in serious jeopardy AND Tsits pushing Novak to 5, the Tokyo Olympics likely producing surprise medalists, and Med ultimately bagging a HC major (following the AO) as well as spoiling Djoker's GS quest, but I don't get nearly as much buzz about it cuz 1) I find the prognostication game (or hairsplitting over draws, for that matter) rather uninteresting and 2) I don't care to make threads about my picks in hopes of getting likes and high-5s.
Thankfully nobody else seriously thinks Hingis would beat the best men, but many do sincerely believe she, Serena or their gal would be competitive with a top 100-200 male. As you know I don't care at all for the sexism/racism behind so much of the anti-Serena/XX sentiment and understand the impulse to go to bat for her, but that doesn't change the fact that no woman past or present would have a chance vs. a ranked man competing on the ATP.
Hence my carefully worded "ideological allegiances." There's enough informed consensus around both the current and top WTA-meh ATP questions for anyone to arrive at the correct answer, but ideology usually trumps reality and that's how we've got an embarrassing 90 out of 217 posters voting for no-serve Bull here.
T
TheNachoMan
Guest
PETE wins, but the fact you have to give Nadal a handicap like this shows how good he is on clay.
REKX
Rookie
To make this a fair discussion, we have to look at Nadal's stats. You can't quote Sampras' stats without considering Nadal 2008.
In 2008, Nadal won 51.03% of his return games on clay against the field. In Roland Garros 2008, this was even higher. I don't think people realise how brilliant the 2008 Nadal was.
61.4% return games won during Roland Garros 2008. I don't know how you are dismissing Nadal, the numbers don't agree with your assessment.
Daniel Andrade
Hall of Fame
What? How is this even a debate? Did people read the question?
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
