Not strange to me. I can think of occasions when a players' absolute best tennis still results in a loss, to an opponent who is either in a whole different league, or is playing in the 'zone'. Matter of fact I think it might be a good thread.
Top 50 clay courters all time (men)
- Thread starter granddog29
- Start date
Not strange to me. I can think of occasions when a players' absolute best tennis still results in a loss, to an opponent who is either in a whole different league, or is playing in the 'zone'. Matter of fact I think it might be a good thread.
Why is Rosewall "incognito" in your list? Muscles won 8 grass majors and reached 27 (!) grass majors' SFs. Cash cannot compete with Rosewall.
NatF, I agree regarding Gonzalez and Rosewall, two all-time great grass courters.
Dan, what is wrong with my claim that the 1968 RG was Gimeno's best performance in open era? Being almost as good as Rosewall on clay is always a sign of greatness.
Gimeno beat indirectly also Nastase, Kodes and Orantes in the 1972 FO.
Gimeno's field at the pros was stronger than Santana's field at the amateurs.
Gimeno was the world's No.3 for several years, Santana's best ranking was probably No.7 in 1966.
Well said, BTURNER.
kiki
Banned
Just for fun, the HtH among those three:
In official matches, Santana and Gimeno never really met.Their 1969 RG clash was tied two sets apiece when Santana retired for injury
Santana beat Orantes at the 1968 Gold medal match in the OG of Mexico.Not official but, after all, Olimpics are worthy the try.But of course, Orantes beat Santana at the 1969 Barcelona final ( he was just 20 yrs old)...which is a huge accomplishment for a spaniard, and moreso if he beats another spaniard in the finals.
I am not sure wether Gimeno played Orantes.I don´t recall any match on the Gran Prix tour right now.It may have happened but only at a National Championship.All European countries used to have one, ran by the National federation.
kiki
Banned
Next year, Santana, as I recall, had sweet revenge winning the Barcelona tournament, his last important success before retiring.He really demolished Laver, who at 32 was still arguably the best match player in the world.
Rarely is a player's best performance a loss.
Gimeno did not beat "indirectly" anyone.
He failed to meet them because they were upset and played below their best.
Laver, Emmo, and Peitrangeli at their best represents as strong a clay field as Gimeno beat in 1966.
kiki, In Belgium, 1972, Orantes d. Gimeno in 4 sets in the final.
In the same year, in the closed Spanish Championships, Gimeno beat Orantes in the final 4-6, 4-6, 7-5, 6-0, 6-0. I don't know if Orantes was injured.
Ignorant Dan, Of course can a loss be a player's best performance in a certain period. Gimeno did better than Laver in that 1968 French Open.
What more do you expect of a player playing against a top Rosewall?
Of course Andres beat indirectly Nastase, Kodes and Orantes. It's not his fault that the stars have lost before the final.
Laver and Rosewall in their prime are a stronger opposition than the amateurs Laver, Emerson and Pietrangeli. Stop trolling!!!
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Wrong. Nadal was not only winning the FO every year but also sweeping the preceding clay court season (Monte Carlo, Rome, Barcelona) every year.
Career winning % on clay:
Nadal 292-21 (93.3%)
Borg 246-39 (86.3%)
Seems fair to take out the 12 matches that Borg played and lost during his come back attempt in the early 90s. But even then the record would be 246-27 (90.1%)
6 more losses despite 40 fewer matches is not equal domination. In other words, 3.2 percentage points is not an insignificant difference at the 90% level.
During their very best 2-3 years, their level of domination may have been similar in terms of winning percentage. But it must be mentioned that the average ranking of, say, the top 10 players in the tournaments won by Nadal must be considerably higher than in the case of Borg because of the attendance requirements.
Nadal 292-21 (93.3%)
Borg 246-39 (86.3%)
Seems fair to take out the 12 matches that Borg played and lost during his come back attempt in the early 90s. But even then the record would be 246-27 (90.1%)
6 more losses despite 40 fewer matches is not equal domination. In other words, 3.2 percentage points is not an insignificant difference at the 90% level.
During their very best 2-3 years, their level of domination may have been similar in terms of winning percentage. But it must be mentioned that the average ranking of, say, the top 10 players in the tournaments won by Nadal must be considerably higher than in the case of Borg because of the attendance requirements.
borg number one
Legend
I'd agree with most all of that in terms of the numbers. You had the clay court specialist and grass court specialist dynamic in Borg's era though, so you had plenty of guys that would look to peak for the French Open each year, whereas they had no plans to go deep at Wimbledon. Now, you don't have that. I think Nadal deserves the top spot in terms of the numbers, yet, equalized for equipment, those two would have produced some barnburners. They are the two greatest clay courters ever. Those two both look like they were just born to slide around a clay court. Borg with a Babolat or Wilson and poly/gut hybrid strung to his specs and modern shoes!
Last edited:
kiki
Banned
well, the result is very rare.Orantes winning the first two sets and then getting two consecutive baggels? I don´t know.Thanks for the info.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
What about the 1974 French final?
Borg bt. Orantes 2-6, 6-7, 6-0, 6-1, 6-1.
Edit: I know this isn't 2 bagels but it's a huge turnaround against Orantes.
Edit 2: Mind you, Orantes got his own back in the US Open semi-final against Vilas in 1975...
I asked him once (Orantes) if he was hurt in the second half of the 1974 RG against Borg. He said he wasn't injured, just nervous. But on the other hand I know Orantes well enough to tell you that, had he been injured or hindered in any way, he would never tell it, he would never take anything away from that Borg win (unlike many top players do today).
kiki
Banned
I had a long post about Orantes, Mr Comeback.
Not the same losing to Gimeno at Spanish nationals than to Borg at RG
Orantes had a long streak of comebacks in his life.
I remember vividly that 74 RG final.I just couldn´t believe my eyes.it was similar to Wilander vs Vilas.
granddog29
Banned
The top 3 is very easy. Nadal is clearly 1st. Borg is clearly 2nd. Rosewall is clearly 3rd. It is after that where everything starts to get increasingly complicated. One thing that is pretty obvious is there is no way Federer is top 10 all time on clay though, top 10 in the Open Era maybe.
I do find the arguments between Orantes, Gimeno, and Santana interesting. I was always wondering how people rated that trio against one another on clay.
I do find the arguments between Orantes, Gimeno, and Santana interesting. I was always wondering how people rated that trio against one another on clay.
A couple of reports on the Borg-Orantes match --
The Age:
“Before the match I felt very tired,” Borg said afterwards. “Then I was losing two sets to love and it looked bad. But in the third set Manuel didn’t seem to try and I felt I had him after that.”
UPI:
Borg, habitually slow to get warmed up and tired after months of continual competition, could not match Orantes’ attack at the start of their match.
The 25-year-old Spanish number one was fresh and made few errors. Borg sometimes looked exhausted at the start of the three hour, 10 minute match.
But, after the first two sets, Borg began hammering his serve and slamming his tricky topspin forehand.
“After winning the first two sets, he was tired and I don’t think Orantes tried in the third,” Borg said afterward. “In the fourth set, I thought I must win the first two games to get back into the match and I did it.”
The 25-year-old Spanish number one was fresh and made few errors. Borg sometimes looked exhausted at the start of the three hour, 10 minute match.
But, after the first two sets, Borg began hammering his serve and slamming his tricky topspin forehand.
“After winning the first two sets, he was tired and I don’t think Orantes tried in the third,” Borg said afterward. “In the fourth set, I thought I must win the first two games to get back into the match and I did it.”
M
monfed
Guest
A tad defensive are we, Professor? It's just my list, never said it's the definitive ranking. :lol:
Anyway if this is a slam counting exercise and if Ralph is so far ahead of everyone else, then why make a thread about it when there is one already on the frontpage no less? :lol:
Last edited by a moderator:
borg number one
Legend
True. Ranking many great players is never easy, no matter how you slice it. Thanks Granddog29.
kiki
Banned
Borg had really played the tough and loaded WCT tour, with the likes of Tanner,Laver,Cox and Ashe in his group ( WCT was divided in three gorups of 21 players and he top two of each group and the two best thrisds went to Dallas for the finals).Hehad lost the WCT title to Newcombe and, a week before RG started , he had a great Italian Opn in, beating Solomon,Vilas and Ilie Nastase.
Orantes had not played the WCT tour.
CyBorg
Legend
How am I wrong. Borg was winning everything in his time as well. The only difference is that the tour wasn't standardized then.
Both players have the same percentages at peak play. The math has been done before. Very close.
Nadal deserves credit for staying in the game longer. People can rank him first if they like, but "clearly 1st?" Bollocks.
Last edited:
