Borg 6-0 in RG finals
Sampras 7-0 in WB finals
Djok 10-0 in AO finals
Nadal 14-0 in RG finals.
it's the 1st.
Not sure but it seems he's not too fond of Nadal.What do u mean, i didnt understood ur post
Not sure but it seems he's not to fond of THE Nadal.
Or first.Borg second highest.
This is a slippery use of "peak." Normally, the term in tennis has to encompass more than just one match, or one tournament. Conversely, if a one-time performance could be a "peak," then how about just a single dominating 6-0 set? Or maybe just one fantastic shot (as your video seems to suggest)? People will define the word as narrowly as desired to sweep in the intended result.That 2015 RG final was unbelievable performance
Opposite problem. These aren't peaks either. These are full-career results!Borg 6-0 in RG finals
Sampras 7-0 in WB finals
Djok 10-0 in AO finals
Nadal 14-0 in RG finals.
Relative to their fields both guys were similarily dominant, don't think there's much seperating their peaks. Nadal of course had the greater longevity for one reason or another. For sure there should be no debate about who the top 2 are.Or first.
I made a poll I think like 2 years ago and most people still took Djokovic's peak even in a direct matchup.Also, hot take due to the matchup, but I’d still take Novak’s peak over Wawrinka vs the field.
Borg 6-0 in RG finals
Sampras 7-0 in WB finals
Djok 10-0 in AO finals
Nadal 14-0 in RG finals.
![]()
That 2015 RG final was unbelievable performance
You can order them either way at 1 and 2. You are right the only thing separating them is Nadal’s longevity. Peak wise, when Borg retired he had the same number of FO than Nadal at the same age while not playing 1977 which would likely be his. Of course one can say he lost twice at the FO and Nadal (at that age) only once, but his loss to Panatta in 1973 would be the equivalent to Rafa playing in 2003 where he very likely would have lost as well. Borg’s 78 run with only 32 games lost is more dominant than any of Rafa’s runs but given the different eras and opponents I wouldn’t want to quibble too much about few games difference. Anyways, they are both well above the rest and there is no way anyone can say one is “clearly” more dominant than the other.Relative to their fields both guys were similarily dominant, don't think there's much seperating their peaks. Nadal of course had the greater longevity for one reason or another. For sure there should be no debate about who the top 2 are.
it was! man was hanging with Kuerten thanks to his forehand potency, Wawrinka is not doing thatI dare someone to say Ferrero's was better
2003 tennis FTWit was! man was hanging with Kuerten thanks to his forehand potency, Wawrinka is not doing that
Federer destroyed him in their 2011 match.I would argue that even Federer had a higher clay peak than Stan, or at least, peak Federer would’ve easily handled that version of Stan on clay.
Need to stop overrating Djokovic as this demi god measuring stick. Sure he may have the best resume but he is far from perfect… and has quite a few puzzling losses in his prime.
Djokovic is the 3rd best clay courter ever. Call me insane.It shows that calling Djokovic the 3rd or even more insanely the 2nd best clay courter ever is insanity.
He might be in open era.Djokovic is the 3rd best clay courter ever. Call me insane.
I think he is 4th behind lendl but I can stomach third as well if I am okay making Nadal excuse which I am not.Djokovic is the 3rd best clay courter ever. Call me insane.
Lendl and Kuerten are ahead.Djokovic is the 3rd best clay courter ever. Call me insane.
Agree to disagree. I could just about accept Lendl but Djokovic is quite clearly ahead of Kuerten.Lendl and Kuerten are ahead.
Very ahead of kuerten.Agree to disagree. I could just about accept Lendl but Djokovic is quite clearly ahead of Kuerten.
If we measure by vulturing on clay, he is first by a huge distance.Djokovic is the 3rd best clay courter ever. Call me insane.
Here's hoping there's at least one more DO to come.If we measure by vulturing on clay, he is first by a huge distance.
Ah the beautiful RG 2017 final.Stan was absolutely on fire in that 2015 RG final, but sometimes we talk about him like he won that entire tournament in straight sets. One big time win isn't nearly enough to confidently say he has the highest peak ever outside of Nadal.
He was absolutely zoning against someone he matches up well against, but that doesn't make it the highest peak ever. In order to definitely say that based on one tournament or one match, he would've had to have brought that level in the 2017 final against the Clay GOAT who he matches up against poorly. Then we could talk.
OP, Borg arguably had the highest peak, take a look at his RG 1978 win, he outdid even Nadal 2008 with games lost.![]()
This was an all-time great performance, and it was the one time that he really did completely out play Djokovic, but I’m not sure if we can say clay Peak from just one tournament. And, even in this tournament, had he wound up playing Nadal even the 2015 version of him, I’m not sure he would beat him.
Overall, he had a very strong 1.31 dominance ratio, which is strong, but not anything all-time great, even though he did face a very strong final opponent. His overall game, i.e., return, defense, etc., just simply had too much variability from match to match, set to set to put his peak at the top of peaks, and this is evidenced by looking at his total points won percentage, games won percentage, dominance ratio, etc.
Wawrinka's clay peak isn't even higher than Costa or Coria tbh