metsman
Talk Tennis Guru
You don't even know Borg's first name much less what kind of game he was playing.
Sampras Djokovic similarities
I can't agree. Making a slam final is an achievement in itself. Sampras not making a final isn't a superior performance to Djokovic being runner-up. It is always better making a slam final than losing before the final.
Slam wins - Sampras 2 ahead
Outside their slam wins in Grand Slam tournament play - their next best 9 are:
Djokovic 4 runner-ups plus 5 runner-ups
Sampras 4 runner-ups plus 5 semi-finals.
Its clear that losing 5 semi-finals (Sampras) is worse achievement than winning 5 semi-finals (Djokovic)?
You can't assume that if Sampras won those 5 semi-finals that he would have gone on to win the championships. That is giving him too much grace. It is like the whole Wawrinka myth of him being near unbeatable in slam finals. The problem is, we don't know, if he made more finals then he might lose more. I think Murray's slam record is miles superior to Wawrinkas. It has to be considered that way, as 8 runner-ups is superior to 4 semi's and 4 quarters. We must stop giving credit to players who don't reach finals, assuming they would win the final if they got there. There is no evidence of that.
Last edited:
Fiero425
Legend
Both Nadal & Nole have 2 USO's and issues w/ the summer; Nadal more so with both summer and fall failures! Nole @ least usually gets refreshed & has a winning record going into the YEC! Not many have that kind of staying power and consistency! It finally caught up w/ him last season though; almost a zombie after the FO & completion of his "Nole-Slam!"
Yes - and we should give me credit to those who have to work for it.
Yes - and we should give me credit to those who have to work for it. (Though Djokovic had a truck load of natural ability too - you don't win a slam at 20 without talent).
You may be right about players and time of year. But I have always thought that Nadal's problem with the time of year was the increasing speed of the courts. They generally go from Slow to Slow-Medium for the first half of the year to medium (and a very few medium-fast) in the second half of the year. Nadal can play well on these faster courts - but he has to be in peak form to do it eg 2008, 2010 and 2013. He is still able to win clay court tournaments and slow hard when he isn't near his peak.Both Nadal & Nole have 2 USO's and issues w/ the summer; Nadal more so with both summer and fall failures! Nole @ least usually gets refreshed & has a winning record going into the YEC! Not many have that kind of staying power and consistency! It finally caught up w/ him last season though; almost a zombie after the FO & completion of his "Nole-Slam!"
Djokovic is more complex. He seems to do really well in Autumn. It is just the summer swing. Cincinatti is about court speed. He game is nearly good enough to win there - but he isn't a fast court player (though better on fast courts than Nadal). Note: WTF is a medium-slow court.
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
Not the same. Borg came in a lot on grass. He played a much more defensive game on clay. Borg should be used as an example of how to adjust playing style to two completely different surfaces.
So was the french for most and wimbledon for the clay courters
Borg played W totally from the baseline; I watched him zillion times. He adjusted his game to different surfaces in a degreer Nadal/Djokovic/Murray/Federer adjust their games to different surfaces. If you are born after 1973 don't bother responding to me.
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
You must be watching the wrong Borg if you see him play totally from the baseline at Wimbledon. Federer is the only player you mentioned who adjusted marginally to different surfaces.
How old are you?
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
Age has nothing to do with my knowledge of Borg, but given how little you know about Borg, I am probably older than you.
I have seen on your profile that you were born on 1978. Telling me how Borg played is like a kid born in 2015 telling you how Roddick played.
Age has nothing to do with my knowledge of Borg, but given how little you know about Borg, I am probably older than you.
I told you not to respond if you were born after 1973 (and I was generous there). I have nothing to discuss with you as you were not there; you just didn't see it. It is like me discussing Fred Perry with a guy born in 1915.
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
Sorry, nothing is going to convince me after you told the world Borg played 100% from the baseline on grass that you actually saw Borg played.
So Federer is a part of Djokovic's generation for the purposes of calling Djokovic "the 3rd best player of his generation" yet his slams have come in a strong era whilst Djokovic's in a weak? How does that work again?
And if % of domination in comparison to peers is the yardstick, wouldn't Sampras greater be better than Federer too considering Federer has 2 other peers with double digit slams (and against both of whom he has a losing H2H) whereas Sampras nearly won twice as much as the next best player of his era and also dominated him in the H2H? Or are Nadal and Djokovic not considered Federer's peers for this purpose and we're only gonna consider the likes of Hewitt, Roddick et al?
And if % of domination in comparison to peers is the yardstick, wouldn't Sampras greater be better than Federer too considering Federer has 2 other peers with double digit slams (and against both of whom he has a losing H2H) whereas Sampras nearly won twice as much as the next best player of his era and also dominated him in the H2H? Or are Nadal and Djokovic not considered Federer's peers for this purpose and we're only gonna consider the likes of Hewitt, Roddick et al?
metsman
Talk Tennis Guru
I was born in 1920. You are full of crap when it comes to Borg. Like I said, you don't even know his first name.
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
I know kids like you who wants to be old. Youth is the greatest gift that should not be wasted. You'll get old one day and you will realize a real old man does not see the world the way you do now.
6august
Hall of Fame
Boy did Djokovic do serious damage on this guy. The hypocrisy and butthurt he is showing not just here but everywhere else can be seen miles away.
It's amazing how this fake Slam was so good at faking the authentic Slamness that both winning and losing it was an incredibly emotional moment for your darling.
It was also good enough at faking that while you are penalizing Djokovic for winning a record number of them, you aren't removing it from Federer's or Sampras' Slam count.
Also Djoker has never beaten best version of Nadal because Bull belongs to Fed's generation despite the 1-age gap. Bull's peak ended at his 24 yo.
Are you ready to put the money where your mouth is. Lets have a £20K bet that I am over 50.
C
Chadillac
Guest
Djok dominated for 2 years, Sampras for 5.
Im glad your able to remember your log in name, thank god for the cookie that saves your password
Im glad your able to remember your log in name, thank god for the cookie that saves your password
SinjinCooper
Hall of Fame
There's also no evidence Djokovic would get out of the first round at a Slam played on a fast surface completely antithetical to his game. While there is more than adequate evidence Pete could reach a semi at a slow one that suited his game every bit as poorly.
Yet another unnecessary advantage: Sampras.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Agassi was alright at it too but he has always had an OK net-game anyways.
TahoeTennis
Legend
Fiero425
Legend
Sampras: "I won more Slams than anybody else in my era!"
Djokovic: "I won a French and you didn't!"
"BTW Pete, I took 3 majors twice with 5/6 Masters 1000 events on all the surfaces finishing up my greatest season in 2015 taking the YEC!"
vex
Legend
You could say this about Sampras and literally any player tho...
vex
Legend
lol the butthurt
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
O no you ditten!
Ah, the Tatum effect. Can you imagine how few slams Nolé, rofa, and roger would have if they had married a succubus like tatum o'neal?!
O no u DITTEN!!!
Pete and Nolé.
Both come from Orthodox Christian backgrounds.
Thick eyebrows, similarly made for the sun.
Both tan well.
Both like a good wristband or two.
D
Deleted member 777746
Guest
So true, Pete would clearly have in the 20 range if there were 2 grass slams a year, HELL he coulda had that in his own conditions if not for untimely injuries/tragedies.
Having said that, Nole is by far the closest thing to Pete mentally we've seen since, and another layer to the irony of similarities is that Pete came up with his best stuff in pressure moments in general, but especially on his serve, while Nole does it especially on his returns.
D
Deleted member 777746
Guest
Pete would have had that if he hadn't played against a doper in a year he was certainly going to win the Open, suffered numerous injuries that prevented him from competing, had a stamina disorder etc. so basically if he'd had the modern nutrition/healthcare the big 3 enjoy he'd easily be in the 18-20 range. Give him 2 slams a year on grass, and well the record might well have been at 24 slams rather than 14.
CYGS
Legend
woulda shoulda coulda = not real
Not interested.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Both owned main rivals at their top 2 slams:
Sampras - Agassi Wimbledon h2h -> 2 - 0
Sampras - Agassi USO h2h -> 4 - 0
Djokovic - Fedal Wimbledon h2h -> 5 - 2
Djokovic - Fedal Australian Open h2h -> 6 - 1
Sampras king of 90s tennis, Djokovic king of 21st century tennis
Sampras - Agassi Wimbledon h2h -> 2 - 0
Sampras - Agassi USO h2h -> 4 - 0
Djokovic - Fedal Wimbledon h2h -> 5 - 2
Djokovic - Fedal Australian Open h2h -> 6 - 1
Sampras king of 90s tennis, Djokovic king of 21st century tennis
Similar threads
