What has Sampras being a journeyman on clay to do with Sampras chances if he is serving every game? Its still a huge advantage to serve on clay. I have checked some stats and havent been able to find a single match on clay where Sampras is winning less than 50% of serve points. As others have said, Rafa is winning 43% of return games on clay on average vs THE FIELD. There is no way Rafa isnt a statistically huge underdog.
Prime Nadal vs Prime Sampras at the French Open - Only Sampras Serves - Who Wins?
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah I'm fed up with all these references to Lord of the Rings and Star Wars. It's so much references to those two movies I managed to get Fed up with the movies itself.
We need new standards and Snow White is a great start!
ak24alive
Legend
How about Harry Potter? Rafa is Voldemort.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I'm in for any meme I understand. Lord of the rings out. 
Never got that whole ''thing.''
Never got that whole ''thing.''
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
ak24alive
Legend
I haven't even watched Lord of the Rings lol. Obviously there's a Dark Side in LOTR, now I know. I was just trolling.I'm in for any meme I understand. Lord of the rings out.
Great picture btw.
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
You haven’t watched LOTR...I haven't even watched Lord of the Rings lol. Obviously there's a Dark Side in LOTR, now I know. I was just trolling.
Great picture btw.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I haven't even watched Lord of the Rings lol. Obviously there's a Dark Side in LOTR, now I know. I was just trolling.
Great picture btw.
I've seen bits and pieces of lord of the rings. Not my bag. I did see Harry Potter eventually. Not exactly running back to see it again. It was ok but a lot of meh.
AJ going through his fashionable phase. lol
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't know much about Spongebob. My son was never into that. (Fortunately. His tractor period was intense)What about Spongebob?
Federer is squidward.
ak24alive
Legend
Not yet. Honestly never felt like watching it. Will watch in the future hopefully.You haven’t watched LOTR...
REKX
Rookie
Wimbledon 2007 was good, but Nadal wasn't as good as he was from 2008 onwards.
And the Australian 2009 was also very good, I found it difficult to watch at the time because I was only a Federer fan then. So I never watched it until this year, and wow Federer was on fire, even his backhand. Think he was the better player over the 4 sets, and he just lost a bit from the tank at the end. And Australian 2009 was probably the last ever showing of Prime Federer, he never quite got back to that form ever again.
Wimbledon 2008 was the greatest because it was toe to toe every point, even right till the end. Outrageous winners and shot making from both players, it is no surprise that almost everyone associate with tennis say this was the greatest match.
ak24alive
Legend
I still have problem believing that both versions of AJ are the same person. Its absurd. He totally changed.
REKX
Rookie
Did you watch Rafael Nadal 2008? He dismantled the greatest player of all time, 6-0 set.
Your stats, Sampras never faced anyone even close to Nadal's 2008 form at the French, we may never see that level on clay again.
The stat in the French open will be higher for Nadal for return games won, because he has given great players 6-0, 6-1, 6-2 sets.
The successful French Open players which had good serves also have a very respectable baseline game, take Soderling for example. But Sampras is nowhere close to these type of players in the baseline department.
Simple play, Nadal stand back, get the ball back into play. From the baseline target Sampras backhand (or forehand really). If Sampras comes to net, it's an easy passing shot.
How else can this match go?
Lol i actually start to think you actually believe Nadal would win
alexio
G.O.A.T.
rafael nadal on clay
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
I know it's clay and that the ball slows down but the serve still gives you an advantage. This is not some club level serve it's Pete Sampras and no matter how under par Sampras was on clay but simply serving the whole match is just too much. Even on clay serve is your most important shot.
Nadal has no chance here. Good job convincing others though on something that would be impossible.
REKX
Rookie
Lol i actually start to think you actually believe Nadal would win
How can Nadal not win?
Sampras on Clay, Nadal on Clay - at Roland Garros.
A player which hasn't had a French Open final appearance against a player who has made Chatrier his home?
I have presented you the stats. If you dont believe them there is not much more i can do to convince you.
tennisfanboy
Rookie
Is this even a contest? Nadal won 33.5% return games on 'CLAY' in his career over the field. If sampras serves 100% of the time in the match and even if Nadal wins his average 34% against sampras (which is unlikely) he loses in straights. I'll go as far as saying, it will be tough for Nadal (or for that matter any player on any surface) to beat a Top 100 player if he doesn't serve in the match.
REKX
Rookie
Imagine we asked if Prime Nadal could beat Prime Federer at Roland Garros, and we would think it is impossible. Federer is a far far greater clay court player than Sampras, but Sampras beat Federer with a 6-0 set.
How can Sampras do any better than that? It is impossible that he would play better than Prime Federer on clay. Remember Federer got to the final of the French in 2008 just dropping a couple of sets maybe.
Sampras cannot match Federer's form on clay, Federer is one of the most accomplished players in history on clay with his wins, he just ran into a guy called Nadal a few times too many, otherwise we would be debating who is the greatest clay court player out of Borg and Federer.
REKX
Rookie
Sampras doesn't have a clay court game. We are not talking about say an Isner or Soderling who have a clay court game to back up their serve. I don't see how Sampras is favourite for anypoint after the ball is in play? Nadal in 2008 could get to any ball on the court, Sampras simply does not have the tools to push Nadal back or wide on Clay, and any serve and volley means instantly getting passed.
tennisfanboy
Rookie
You are kidding yourself if you believe that Nadal can break sampras enough even on clay to win sets against him without serving. Some people love to live in fantasy.
You are totally off. CAREER win% on serve games on clay for sampras is 81%. For Nadal its 85%. Its a 4% difference! On clay! Of course Nadal would win 100/100 matches if they played under normal circumstances. But to serve is a HUUUGE advantage. Even Nadal loses more games then he wins on clay vs the field. Its like playing chess without a knight.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Prime Nadal beat Federer 6-3, 6-1, 6-0 - so yes, a triple bagel against Sampras is within the realms of possibility for the clay God.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Which is why Sampras would be better on clay today along with there being no depth so the chances of playing a top clay courter in the QF like he did are low. Top servers routinely hold at close to 90% on clay and that makes a huge difference. Clay plays faster now and poly makes it easier for serves to penetrate the court. I can easily see Sampras making multiple semis and sneaking into a final as well like Murray did, his top level wasn't any worse on clay. Plus the whole mentality of top guys is different because there's no adjustment from tournament to tournament.
REKX
Rookie
This proves those figures mean nothing. Against the field etc.
You say it's only 4%, but that doesn't mean anything when you look at Nadal who won 11 French Open titles, Sampras didn't get into a final.
No one is explaining how Sampras would win this theoretical match up, there are no inroads for Sampras here, I don't see how when a ball is in play Sampras has any chance? Someone explain what happens when the ball is in play. Remember Sampras lost against nobodies on clay, and against Prime Nadal there is nowhere to go.
Even when the ball is play on Federer's serve, Federer always seems second favourite - so someone explain how Sampras wins points once the ball is in play?
You are constantly arguing based on how tennis is really played
. I really dont understand that you dont see the extreme difference between serving and returning. Sampras wins 81% of serve games on clay but just 24% of return games. It has nothing to say that Rafa won 11 FOs and pete 0 under normal circumstances.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Agassi was also a pretty good returner
This might give you a flavor for what it was like trying to return Pete's serve...
This might give you an idea of how useless was Sampras' serve on clay. (Please note Agassi was nowhere near as good as Nadal on clay).
True!
robincarlin
New User
The first 3 seasons are must watch. After that it fell when Stephen Hillenburg left.
He returned a couple years ago only to be diagnosed with ALS
.
Vish13
Semi-Pro
Oh yeah. Something which has happened only 5 times in Open Era of Grand Slams, is within realms of possibility to happen in a Nadal vs Sampras match
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Sampras is Mr. Crabs.What about Spongebob?
Federer is squidward.
JoelSandwich
Hall of Fame
Best movie of all timeI haven't even watched Lord of the Rings lol. Obviously there's a Dark Side in LOTR, now I know. I was just trolling.
Great picture btw.
Watch it
alexio
G.O.A.T.
best for kids
Sport
G.O.A.T.
False!
TheFifthSet
Legend
Okay, I respectfully disagree with this reasoning. I think if Sampras were to serve every game, the decreased pressure would free him up to play better, and the shorter points would mitigate whatever stress the constant serving would put on his body. I think Nadal having to break his serve 18 times (or more, if it goes to 4-5) in order to win would be far more draining proposition.
TheFifthSet
Legend
That’s a possibility, but I nonetheless think Nadal would be more exhausted trying to break Sampras’ serve 18+ times in order to win.
TheFifthSet
Legend
1. This was in 1992. Sampras holding % zips up from 85.6% in 1992 to 89.6% in ‘93, and would never be that low again, hovering around 90% for the rest of the 90s, with his ace %’s markedly improving too. So, he isn’t at his peak here.
2. The tour held at a much, much lower rate then, even on clay. Today’s field holds about 76.5% of the time on clay. In ‘92, it was 71.4%. This is almost entirely due to the strings they were playing with. Give Sampras today’s strings and his serve becomes more effective (and yes, poly HAS benefited the serve more than the return, this is demonstrably true.)
3. These are the perils of relying on small sample sizes; bad matches happen! Even Nadal has gotten broken close to or over 50% of the time in some of his matches. For Sampras, his serve has gotten broken 50% of the time in about 10 of his 143 CC matches. It isn’t a thing that would happen often, and Agassi, while he cannot compare to Nadal, did manage to break serve 36% of the time on clay in his career. That’s a very respectable mark.
Last edited:
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Always been jealous of Pete’s eyebrows.
Slightly D1
Professional
When’s the peak Sampras vs Fed at Wimbledon where Sampras serves every game thread?
The serve is without a doubt the most important part of the game and at the professional level it would be nearly impossible to win considering the importance and not too often breaks of serve. Sampras might win but I think it’s entirely possible Nadal wins a set when you consider Sampras’ serve is weakened severely on clay and Nadal’s ability to return almost anything on clay and at his athletic peak.
It should speak volumes when you have to tilt the odds so sharply just to even have a hypothetical for an all time great vs Nadal on clay.
The serve is without a doubt the most important part of the game and at the professional level it would be nearly impossible to win considering the importance and not too often breaks of serve. Sampras might win but I think it’s entirely possible Nadal wins a set when you consider Sampras’ serve is weakened severely on clay and Nadal’s ability to return almost anything on clay and at his athletic peak.
It should speak volumes when you have to tilt the odds so sharply just to even have a hypothetical for an all time great vs Nadal on clay.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Always been jealous of Pete’s eyebrows.
I'm jealous of his record in serve only matches.
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
Hypothetically I am jealous of him too.
ADuck
Legend
That is also possible. I don't know the effect it would have on both players. Btw I never said he would win but has an outside chance of taking a set if he goes on god mode but 18 breaks does seem like too much, but that is partly because you cannot break 18 times in a real match. In a match with only one server you will have twice as many oppurtunities to break. Therefore that's equivalent to breaking 9 times in a real match.
HolgerNova
New User
Pete wins the first set and almost surely wins the second set. After that you head into unusual territory. Serving like that is going to have to take a toll on your shoulder, especially if rafa is able to extend either of those two sets at all, let's say he loses 6-2 6-3. I'd say most likely scenario for sets 3-5 is:
1) Pete wins in 3
2) Pete wins in 4
3) Pete retires with rotator cuff tear
4)Nadal in 5
1) Pete wins in 3
2) Pete wins in 4
3) Pete retires with rotator cuff tear
4)Nadal in 5
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic beat him in Rome didn't he? I'd take 2012 Claydal over 2008. Other than the blue clay, which I don't think Nadal had ever played before, he didn't lose a match, and most importantly destroyed Djokovic handily on every occasion. Honestly Fed fans and even me, should count ourselves lucky that Nadal got injured after the clay, otherwise he could easily have had another 2010 run
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
