Sampras is greater on grass than nadal is on clay. Opposition proves it.

[Druss]

2006-2007 Nadal did not have an equally good forehand or backhand, that is ridiculous. I never denied his decline in velocity, but because clay is the slowest surface, his improvement in forehand, backhand, serve, drop-shots and volleys make him a more complete player on clay. He doesn't need his absolute peak velocity to reach defensive balls in a slower surface like RG. In faster surfaces like the AO or WB he does need that extra velocity. And at the USO, Nadal is also much better in 2017-2019 than 2006-2007 but we are discussing clay so let us stay on the topic.

Blasphemy! Nadal’s FH in 2006-07 was on the same level as Fed’s (just different), fearsome, deadly weapon, by far the 2 best FHs on tour at the time. Need to rewatch some matches of Nadal in 2006-07 mate.
PS: Gonzo’s was up there, but nowhere near as consistent as Fedal’s.

 

[Ombelibable]

You might have a case if Sampras on grass were relatively close to Nadal on clay in achievements. He isn't. Nadal will probably have double the French Open titles to Sampras at Wimbledon. At that point there is no debate. Sampras would never win 12 or more Wimbledons against any field in tennis history, that is clear.

Done

 

[Otacon]

The sport has changed a lot, I came to the conclusion that it is absurd to compare champions from different eras, it evolves too fast.

 

[DSH]

In the 90s grass court tennis was so strong. Winning 7 Wimbledon’s in 8 years in the 1990s against that grass field is one of the all time greatest achievements in sports history. Never mind tennis history. Nadal has racked up 12 French opens by playing no clay court specialists or clay court monsters. Sampras has round after round pressure of an upset on super fast grass against some of the biggest servers ever. Nadal didn’t have any musters, Brugueras, couriers, corretjas, Kuertens,
Sampras 7 Wimbledon’s in a better record that nadals 12 French opens.


sampras opposition
ATG players
Agassi
courier
Becker
Edberg
Stich
Rafter

Grass court big serving monsters
Ivanišević
Krajicek
Philippoussis
Rusedski

Good grass court players
Pioline
Henman
Martin

who were nadals strongest opposition at the French?
djokovic and Federer and it’s both there worst surface by a distance!
Next gen mental midget Thiem?
David Ferrer? Bang average
Puerta? Terrible

By the way I admit that 90s grass court tennis on the whole wasn’t the best to watch. There were still serval classic matches but in general it was hard to watch. But that’s just the way it was and petes domination shouldn’t be counted against him.

 

[Kralingen]

Just compare the matches of Sampras-Agassi at Wimbledon 1999 with Sampras-Federer at Wimbledon 2001. While you may argue that Sampras was slighly better in 1999 than 2001 (only 2 years of difference), the main difference was in the rival's level not in Pete's level. Of course, Sampras was toying with Agassi, but as soon as he faced a much better opponent like Federer the party was over and he suffered a lot.

Hahahah oh my roflmao man what a classic

 

[Deleted member 758560]

unlikely

 

[DSH]

I'm one of the biggest Sampras' fan, and would love to agree with the OP. You can't disregards logic and facts, however.

Nadal at the French Open is the Greatest Achievement in the Greatest Era of Men's tennis. 12 titles at a grand slam is mind boggling and confounding.
It is an improbable feat but somehow still sustained through one and a half decade. Basically IMPOSSIBLE to repeat.

The future generations will endeavor and new records will be set up as the game evolves. But, of this there can be no doubt, no one will EVER match what Nadal has accomplished in Paris.

14 and counting for the Intergalactic Emperor of Clay.

 

[TennisFan3]

14 and counting for the Intergalactic Emperor of Clay.

When I wrote that post, I thought 12 was insane and ridiculous.
14 -defies comprehension. To have as many slams at one tournament on the most punishing surface.
Surely one of the GREATEST records in ALL of sports, not just Tennis.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

PETE.

 

[PSNELKE]

So Stich is an all time great while Goran is a grass court big serving monster? Uhmm ok

Goran has to be ranked as an elite player on grass. If not for Sampras he'd have 3,4 Wimbledon titles.

 

[PSNELKE]

Sampras isn't even the grass GOAT. Federer is. Laver and Tilden also have a case to be above him on grass. Maybe Gonzales too.

Laver? Rod would get murdered by any halfway decent player in todays Wimbledon draws. The dude is Diego Schwartzman sized. Nobody that size will ever win Wimbledon again. With all due respect for him and his achievements, he would get killed in todays tennis. While todays ATGs would have good predepositions to succeed in Laver's era.

 

[SamprasisGOAT]

Pete is on the same level if not better on grass than Nadal on clay for sure, but I must point out that it's only Federer and Djokovic's worst slam because Nadal kept beating them there. They would both be considered clay-court legends if not for an actual legend stopping them.

 

[Racquet_smash]

Federer and Djokovic are both top 10 clay courters in the open era, and Nadal defeated them 14 times to win his RG titles.

This not even to mention the other bunch of great clay courters Nadal dominated, like Coria, Soderling, Wawrinka or Thiem.

If anything Nadal had tougher competition at RG than Sampras at Wimbledon. The only grass all time great Sampras faced is Becker and the guy was not at his peak anymore then.

 

[cortadew]

Nah

 

[Razer]

Good thread and probably true, Sampras remains the true alpha male !!!

Give these benefits to Sampras :

- Don't slow down courts
- Don't change racquet tech in his 30s
- Give him Great Age Shift with advancements in medicines, training, physios
- Put Wimbledon in the same continent as Nadal has Paris close to home so that travelling won't be an issue.
- Give him 90s gen as next gen 10 years below him instead of Federer/Hewitt/Roddick who were all younger and more evolved.

I can imagine Sampras win 12+ Wimbledons and maybe even more.

 

[Razer]

Sampras lost the only match he played against Federer on grass. Djokovic is greater on grass than Sampras was. Opposition proves it.

(In case no one gets it, this message is irony, I'm just following OPs logic).

Terrible trolling @Sport

You are comparing a beggar/struggler with 3 wimbledon titles on his 31st birthday to Sampras who had 7 on his 29th? .... Nonsense....

Djokovic's entire resume in inflated on grass, everybody knows it... he is a Becker level player on Grass but his resume looks like Sampras's overall due to piling slams in 30s.

 

[Biotic]

It does look like Sampras played a lot of true great grasscourters of his era, which cannot be said for Nadal on clay. The closest he got is probably Coria for a couple of matches 20 years ago and nothing since than. True claycourters have been mising since early 00's, and while Djoko and Fred are pretty good on the surface, the lack of heavy topspin and a solid BH are excluding them from that conversation.

Maybe claycourters of past eras wouldn't exactly get to Ned's numbers in his place. Even so, it's not that hard to picture someone like Guga or Lendl get to like 10 RG with sufficient longevity and dedication.

 

[RS]

It's quite a stretch to give Guga and Lendl 10 RG's for me.

I suppose in Lendl's case you could say his longevity would make his career prolonged but still. Had Lendl got a few more RG's in his era maybe 10 would have been just about ok.