Who are top 10 of the Open Era per surface

[granddog29]

And how do you rate Nadal on grass with 5 finals?..yup thats what I thought

Yes hypocritical Federer fans using Nadal and final losses to build up Federer on clay, but refusing to do the same for Nadal at Wimbledon and on grass. That despite that Nadal unlike Federer at RG is a multiple Wimbledon winner, and beat Federer to win Wimbledon too.

 

[90's Clay]

I would probably put Ivanesivic over Nadal on grass. Peak wise, I think Goran was much more of a force than Nadal.

Sampras in his prime on fast grass was a tougher hill to climb than Fed was on slower grass as well.

Goran was one of the best Ive seen on grass when he had his game going. 1995, 1998, 2001 prove this

 

[kiki]

Old grass
1/Sampras
2/Borg
3/Laver
4/Mc Enroe
5/Becker and Newcombe
6/Edberg
7/Connors
8/Ashe
9/Smith
10/Kodes and Cash

Clay
1/Nadal
2/Borg
3/Lendl
4/Wilander
5/Kuerten
6/Bruguera and Vilas
8/Kodes
9/Nastase
10/Rosewall

Indoor
1/Lendl
2/Mc Enroe
3/Sampras
4/Becker
5/Borg
6/Rosewall
7/Connors and Nastase
9/Federer
10/Newcombe,Ashe,Smith

Hard
1/Connors
2/Federer
3/Mc Enroe
4/Lendl
5/Agassi
6/Djokovic
7/Rafter and Nadal
9/Borg
10/Wilander,Edberg,Safin and Hewitt

 

[TMF]

Old grass
1/Sampras
2/Borg
3/Laver
4/Mc Enroe
5/Becker and Newcombe
6/Edberg
7/Connors
8/Ashe
9/Smith
10/Kodes and Cash

Clay
1/Nadal
2/Borg
3/Lendl
4/Wilander
5/Kuerten
6/Bruguera and Vilas
8/Kodes
9/Nastase
10/Rosewall

Indoor
1/Lendl
2/Mc Enroe
3/Sampras
4/Becker
5/Borg
6/Rosewall
7/Connors and Nastase
9/Federer
10/Newcombe,Ashe,Smith

Hard
1/Connors
2/Federer
3/Mc Enroe
4/Lendl
5/Agassi
6/Djokovic
7/Rafter and Nadal
9/Borg
10/Wilander,Edberg,Safin and Hewitt

You should have said "grass" in general. But if you rank old grass then you must have a separate ranking for current grass.

Seem to me that you only consider Nadal is clay demon but doesn't rank him in top 10 in other surfaces. Where do you rank Nadal overall in all time great. In the top 5, or 10 ?

 

[kiki]

You should have said "grass" in general. But if you rank old grass then you must have a separate ranking for current grass.

Seem to me that you only consider Nadal is clay demon but doesn't rank him in top 10 in other surfaces. Where do you rank Nadal overall in all time great. In the top 5, or 10 ?

Current grass is relatively young

1/Federer
2/Nadal
3/Hewitt
4/Sampras
5/Ivanisevic/Roddick
7/Djokovic
8/Rafter
9/Henman
10/Berdych






I have Nadal in the top 10 on hard (Open era)

Nadal is top 10 in the open era; I think he is top 15 all eras accounted but I should give it some thought before...

 

[TMF]

^
Ok, I missed the part where you have Nadal in top 10 hard court.

 

[Mainad]

Current grass is relatively young

1/Federer
2/Nadal
3/Hewitt
4/Sampras
5/Ivanisevic/Roddick
7/Djokovic
8/Rafter
9/Henman
10/Berdych

Where on earth is Murray in your list? Unlike 4 of those names on your list, he has actually won Wimbledon, been in another final there, won the Olympics there and has 3 other grass titles to boot which is 3 more than Djokovic, Henman or Berdych?? :shock:

 

[ultradr]

No they are plain better. Kuerten whooped peak Federer at the French Open when he had a grandpa hip and was years past his prime.

I would not say Federer was in prime on clay. Federer under 2 slams under his
belt. Fresh slam champion vieing for #1. Definitely unsure about his future
on clay.

When he played Kuerten at french, Federer respected 3 time champion Kuerten
a bit too much.

I would put my money on Federer if he plays with Kuerten, Lendle and Wilander
on clay in their primes.

 

[Incognito]

Where on earth is Murray in your list? Unlike 4 of those names on your list, he has actually won Wimbledon, been in another final there, won the Olympics there and has 3 other grass titles to boot which is 3 more than Djokovic, Henman or Berdych?? :shock:

True. I rate Andy equal with Rafa on grass.

Rafa may have 2 wimbledons but Andy has the Olympic Gold + Wimbledon plus several other grass titles. Both are definitely above djokovic.

 

[bullfan]

And how do you rate Nadal on grass with 5 finals?..yup thats what I thought

Nadal won twice, both times after winning the French. The channel slam isn't easy to win. Nadal also made the Wimbledon finals after winning the French, when he lost.

 

[granddog29]

I would not say Federer was in prime on clay.

He was a hell of alot closer to his clay prime than Kuerten was, that is for sure. One was World #1 and already the games dominant player, and the other was a former #1 who was unseeded or had a really low seed (I forget which). Kuerten won 3 French Opens in a career shortened with injury, won both Monte Carlo and Rome (Federer won neither), and way past his prime whooped dominant #1 Federer badly at RG. I wont even hear of any nonsense arguments Federer should be over or even close to Kuerten on clay. It is about on par with trying to argue Nadal should be over Borg on grass at this point.



Anyway back to earth I agree with the poster who seperated old and new grass in fact. The two play nothing remotedly alike. In that case my rankings would be:

Old grass:

1. Sampras
2. Borg
3. McEnroe
4. Becker
5. Connors
6. Edberg
7. Laver (Open Era only)
8. Newcombe
9. Smith
10. Ivanisevic



New grass (began in 2002 I believe):

1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Murray
4. Hewitt
5. Roddick
6. Djokovic
7. Berdych
8. Tsonga
9. Grosjean
10. Del Potro

 

[granddog29]

True. I rate Andy equal with Rafa on grass.

Rafa may have 2 wimbledons but Andy has the Olympic Gold + Wimbledon plus several other grass titles. Both are definitely above djokovic.

Murray is way beneath Nadal on grass at this point. Nadal has 5 Wimbledon finals vs only 2 for Murray, and is 3-0 vs Murray at Wimbledon, losing only 1 set. He also played in 2 of the greatest grass matches in history vs one of the grass GOATs. Murray would need 3 Wimbledons to even have a case for Nadal on grass.

 

[Incognito]

Murray is way beneath Nadal on grass at this point. Nadal has 5 Wimbledon finals vs only 2 for Murray, and is 3-0 vs Murray at Wimbledon, losing only 1 set. He also played in 2 of the greatest grass matches in history vs one of the grass GOATs. Murray would need 3 Wimbledons to even have a case for Nadal on grass.

oh please. Nadal lost to djokovic, that itself lowers his credentials on the surface whereas Murray thrashed that pretender like a junior. Who cares about that "greatest match"? It was a close 5 setter. Murray thrashed Federer like nobody has done before. Anyway, it all about the titles.

You may be right, Rafa is still a little bit above Andy for now, but if Andy wins another wimbledon I'd put him above Rafa because they will both have 2 wimbledons but Andy has the Olympic Gold on grass.

 

[granddog29]

oh please. Nadal lost to djokovic, that itself lowers his credentials on the surface whereas Murray thrashed that pretender like a junior.

ROTFL you sound as desperate and delusional a Murraytard as the *******s right now. At the very Wimbledon Nadal lost to Djokovic, Murray got his behind handed to him (as always when they have played at Wimbledon thus far) by Nadal in the semis. This was the year Djokovic totally dominated, are you now going to suggest Murray likely would have beaten him.

Murray's Olympic Gold would still not overcome Nadal's making 5 Wimbledon finals in a row (apart from a year he didnt play) if both have 2 titles, and how badly he has been owned by Nadal at the event. Lastly so two amazing matches vs the great Federer (one which ended in victory for Nadal, which Murray cant even manage vs a much older Federer last year proved) means nothing, but Nadal losing to Djokovic while Murray beating a much declined Djokovic 2 years later is a factor. To quote you oh please!!!!!!!!!

I do think Murray has a chance to surpass Nadal on grass someday as Nadal's grass game has fallen apart lately, although he might still recover it, but he sure as heck wont do it without winning a 3rd Wimbledon. Lastly nobody in their right mind would give any version of Murray a chance vs the Nadal of the 2007 or 2008 Wimbledon finals.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

I think Incognito is turning into a bigger Djokovic hater than President.

Calling Djokovic a pretender? Are you serious?

 

[Incognito]

ROTFL you sound as desperate and delusional a Murraytard as the *******s right now. At the very Wimbledon Nadal lost to Djokovic, Murray got his behind handed to him (as always when they have played at Wimbledon thus far) by Nadal in the semis. This was the year Djokovic totally dominated, are you now going to suggest Murray likely would have beaten him.

Murray's Olympic Gold would still not overcome Nadal's making 5 Wimbledon finals in a row (apart from a year he didnt play) if both have 2 titles, and how badly he has been owned by Nadal at the event. Lastly so two amazing matches vs the great Federer (one which ended in victory for Nadal, which Murray cant even manage vs a much older Federer last year proved) means nothing, but Nadal losing to Djokovic while Murray beating a much declined Djokovic 2 years later is a factor. To quote you oh please!!!!!!!!!

I do think Murray has a chance to surpass Nadal on grass someday as Nadal's grass game has fallen apart lately, although he might still recover it, but he sure as heck wont do it without winning a 3rd Wimbledon. Lastly nobody in their right mind would give any version of Murray a chance vs the Nadal of the 2007 or 2008 Wimbledon finals.

And because Nadal couldn't beat him, Murray wouldn't either? what kind of a freakin' logic is that? Djokovic on his peak years hasn't taken a set off Andy on grass.


Good to know. If Tsonga wins 1 AO and Rafa doesn't win another one, Tsonga should be ranked higher knowing how badly he owned Nadal there.

If Andy wins another wimbledon, he is above Nadal on the surface because of the OLympic Gold and more overall grass titles!

 

[jean pierre]

Federer isnt, but the rest all could be. Muster dominated clay for 2 years. Vilas never dominated clay. Courier and Bruguera defended a French Open title. Vilas could only win one his whole career (and with Borg absent).

Vilas won 2 Grand Slams on clay (FO and USO).

 

[fatichar]

And because Nadal couldn't beat him, Murray wouldn't either? what kind of a freakin' logic is that? Djokovic on his peak years hasn't taken a set off Andy on grass.


Good to know. If Tsonga wins 1 AO and Rafa doesn't win another one, Tsonga should be ranked higher knowing how badly he owned Nadal there.

If Andy wins another wimbledon, he is above Nadal on the surface because of the OLympic Gold and more overall grass titles!

When we directly have Nadal - record to look at, why go djokovic route? And it's not a one off match, upsets do happen. Its a 3-0 record!

That way you say Nadal lost to Darcis and case closed!

Anyway djokovic's peak was 2011, not 12. He didn't play Andy then. Doesn't matter anyway, nobody except Chico would rank him above Murray on Grass.

And if you still want to go third player way, ponder on this

Peak Nadal lost to peak Roger in 5 sets.

Peak Nadal beat peak Roger in 5 sets.

Peak Nadal beat peak Berd in 3 or 4 sets.

Peak Murray lost to off peak Roger in 4 sets

Peak Murray beat off peak and tired Fed in 3 sets

Peak Murray beat off peak djokovic in 3 sets


So Murray hasn't yet beaten a grass player better than him at his peak.


About Australian Open, the surface is hard, and Nadal ownes him 6-2! (Remember we are talking about surfaces, not tournaments) . And has 3 HC slams and numerous other titles! How can you even compare even if Tsonga gets an AO!

 

[Mainad]

ROTFL you sound as desperate and delusional a Murraytard as the *******s right now. At the very Wimbledon Nadal lost to Djokovic, Murray got his behind handed to him (as always when they have played at Wimbledon thus far) by Nadal in the semis. This was the year Djokovic totally dominated, are you now going to suggest Murray likely would have beaten him.

IMO Murray lost that 2011 Wimbledon semi more than Nadal won it. He totally dominated Nadal in the 1st set and for most of the 2nd until his infamous choke after he missed that easy smash. After that his brain went completely awol and he became easy pickings. That match was by far the most winnable for Murray of his 3 encounters with Nadal at Wimbledon. As for Djokovic, his dominance that year was beginning to flag a little by Wimbledon. Murray had already given him a very close match in Rome on his, by far, weakest surface and if he had been as mentally strong as he became the following year, I feel he would have had at least a reasonable chance if he had made the final. I even think Nadal would probably have won in the final if his confidence against Djokovic had not already been shot to pieces by all the earlier defeats to him on both hardcourt and clay.

I do think Murray has a chance to surpass Nadal on grass someday as Nadal's grass game has fallen apart lately, although he might still recover it, but he sure as heck wont do it without winning a 3rd Wimbledon.

What...not even if he makes 5 finals like Nadal? I should think equalling the number of finals including 1 more title would level things up at Wimbledon. Having the Olympic gold on grass would put him over the top without necessarily having to win a 3rd Wimbledon title. Plus he has 2 more Queens titles than Nadal has.

Lastly nobody in their right mind would give any version of Murray a chance vs the Nadal of the 2007 or 2008 Wimbledon finals.

Not ANY version of Murray? Clearly the 2007-8 versions didn't have any chance. But no version at all? Not even post Olympic Murray who has not lost a game on grass since? Not saying he would have but I think that version might have had at least a chance. After all, even 2008 Murray did beat Nadal in their very next Slam encounter.

 

[Mainad]

Peak Nadal lost to peak Roger in 5 sets.

Peak Nadal beat peak Roger in 5 sets.

Peak Nadal beat peak Berd in 3 or 4 sets.

Peak Murray lost to off peak Roger in 4 sets

Peak Murray beat off peak and tired Fed in 3 sets

Peak Murray beat off peak djokovic in 3 sets

Lol..what the heck has Berdych got to do with anything? As for the 2012 final, Federer was enjoying a rare resurgence that year during which he had also beaten Nadal at Indian Wells. It was probably the last flicker of his former dominance. And if players were not at their peak or at their best when they met Murray, how is that supposed to be Murray's fault?

So Murray hasn't yet beaten a grass player better than him at his peak.

Well, he most likely never will given that there is no grass player better than him at present!

 

[fatichar]

Lol..what the heck has Berdych got to do with anything?

As for the 2012 final, Federer was enjoying a rare resurgence that year during which he had also beaten Nadal at Indian Wells. It was probably the last flicker of his former dominance. And if players were not at their peak or at their best when they met Murray, how is that supposed to be Murray's fault?

Well, he most likely never will given that there is no grass player better than him at present!

Don't be so picky. I just mentioned all the big grass final wins of both players. Hence the Berd.

Who is saying 'fault' here... No one is about to punish him! But surely beating a better player scores more? So does Rafa over Murray? Most people Put Fed Nadal Murray as best grass courters post 2003. Now Nadal beats the other two. Andy beats only Roger, that too at 32, that too outside a slam. Add to it 3 extra slam finals for Nadal. What remains?
He can very well hike his resume by adding 2 more Wimby titles and beating Nadal the next they meet.

 

[granddog29]

IMO Murray lost that 2011 Wimbledon semi more than Nadal won it. He totally dominated Nadal in the 1st set and for most of the 2nd until his infamous choke after he missed that easy smash. After that his brain went completely awol and he became easy pickings. That match was by far the most winnable for Murray of his 3 encounters with Nadal at Wimbledon. As for Djokovic, his dominance that year was beginning to flag a little by Wimbledon. Murray had already given him a very close match in Rome on his, by far, weakest surface and if he had been as mentally strong as he became the following year, I feel he would have had at least a reasonable chance if he had made the final. I even think Nadal would probably have won in the final if his confidence against Djokovic had not already been shot to pieces by all the earlier defeats to him on both hardcourt and clay.

I agree with you to a point. Nadal's confidence was low by the 2011 Wimbledon event though as you mentioned and it showed in his play. That Murray failed to find a way to beat him even in that state, does not speak well to his chances vs a peak Nadal on grass.

As for Djokovic's dominance declining by then, I dont really agree. That didnt happen until after the U.S Open. Regardless given Murray's performance in his first 3 slam finals, Murray was never beating an extremely confident Djokovic in the final that year.

What...not even if he makes 5 finals like Nadal? I should think equalling the number of finals including 1 more title would level things up at Wimbledon. Having the Olympic gold on grass would put him over the top without necessarily having to win a 3rd Wimbledon title. Plus he has 2 more Queens titles than Nadal has.

Your point there is valid, but I was assuming by the time Murray wins a 2nd Wimbledon, he wont have lost another 2 finals there in between. Of course if he makes another 3 finals and wins only 1 it becomes an interesting debate, but I wasnt thinking along those lines. IMO future Wimbledones for both Murray and Nadal will either be titles or earlier round losses. I dont see either losing when making a final, except obviously if they play one another, looking at the overall landscape of the current field on the surface.

Not ANY version of Murray? Clearly the 2007-8 versions didn't have any chance. But no version at all? Not even post Olympic Murray who has not lost a game on grass since? Not saying he would have but I think that version might have had at least a chance. After all, even 2008 Murray did beat Nadal in their very next Slam encounter.

Perhaps you did not see the 2007 and 2008 Wimbledon finals. Nadal played at an insanely high level in both. He completely dominated Federer off the ground in both encounters, something nobody else in the World can do on grass, and only Federer's serve and Nadal's sucky serve at the time (if he had his current serve he would have won both I am sure) kept the matches close. Federer even admited he was a bit lucky to win the 2007 final and that was prime Federer. Both Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon final win over Federer and the 2007 Wimbledon final are considered amongst the best matches in history and even have books written on them. Murray couldnt even give old Federer as tough a time in the 2012 final.

That isnt a diss on Murray, but nobody of the last 12 years but Federer could have even lasted on court with Nadal those finals.

 

[granddog29]

I think Incognito is turning into a bigger Djokovic hater than President.

Calling Djokovic a pretender? Are you serious?

Yet another clown poster. The same poster who said before the U.S Open Del Potro had 50% or better chance to beat Nadal if they played. Already should have been a red flag never to take seriously.

 

[Incognito]

Yet another clown poster. The same poster who said before the U.S Open Del Potro had 50% or better chance to beat Nadal if they played. Already should have been a red flag never to take seriously.

Juan Martin will always be the favorite me to win because he is my favorite player even if I know the odds are against it. I'm also a Nadal fan and have defended him when I could but it's getting harder and harder the more he wins, not because of Nadal per se, but because of fanatic idiots like you who come out whenever Nadal wins something. If there a clown in this forum, you are obviously the biggest of them all.

 

[Incognito]

I think Incognito is turning into a bigger Djokovic hater than President.

Calling Djokovic a pretender? Are you serious?

Nadal has been called worse by djerkovic fans. Have some perspective Sid, you are a great poster.

 

[Mainad]

I agree with you to a point. Nadal's confidence was low by the 2011 Wimbledon event though as you mentioned and it showed in his play. That Murray failed to find a way to beat him even in that state, does not speak well to his chances vs a peak Nadal on grass.

Not 2011 Murray, no. But the 2012 post Olympic version was much stronger mentally and more confident. That's all I'm saying.

As for Djokovic's dominance declining by then, I dont really agree. That didnt happen until after the U.S Open. Regardless given Murray's performance in his first 3 slam finals, Murray was never beating an extremely confident Djokovic in the final that year.

Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree a bit on this one. I think Djokovic's 2011 dominance was sllipping a bit by the time of Wimbledon. Don't forget that he had already lost to Federer in the semis at RG and, as I mentioned, Murray had already run him close in Rome on clay of all surfaces and maybe could have won if he hadn't still been in 2011 mental mode. Nadal was still mentally freaked out by Djokovic after all the previous beatdowns that year and I think that was a major factor in why he lost to him again in the Wimby final. A Federer-Djokovic final would probably have been much more interesting. Both Federer and Murray seemed to be playing with much more confidence against him at that time than Nadal was. Murray also became the only other person other than Federer to beat Djokovic that year in the final of Cincinnati. Okay, Djokovic retired from that match with a sore shoulder etc. but that very fact alone indicated to me that his hitherto legendary fitness was beginning to break down. He only narrowly scraped past a choking Fed in the USO semis and faced, surprise surprise, his favourite 2011 pigeon yet again in the final. That Nadal could not make an impression on Djokovic in the 4th set of that final despite the fact that Djokovic could barely serve (shoulder problems again) speaks volumes to me about Nadal's state of mind when facing Djokovic in that remarkable year.

Your point there is valid, but I was assuming by the time Murray wins a 2nd Wimbledon, he wont have lost another 2 finals there in between. Of course if he makes another 3 finals and wins only 1 it becomes an interesting debate, but I wasnt thinking along those lines. IMO future Wimbledones for both Murray and Nadal will either be titles or earlier round losses. I dont see either losing when making a final, except obviously if they play one another, looking at the overall landscape of the current field on the surface.

Do you forsee Nadal picking up his grass game in 2014? I can't imagine he would let himself go out of Wimbledon at the hands of yet another journeyman 3 times in a row! I'm still reeling from the shock that he managed to do it twice!

Perhaps you did not see the 2007 and 2008 Wimbledon finals. Nadal played at an insanely high level in both. He completely dominated Federer off the ground in both encounters, something nobody else in the World can do on grass, and only Federer's serve and Nadal's sucky serve at the time (if he had his current serve he would have won both I am sure) kept the matches close. Federer even admited he was a bit lucky to win the 2007 final and that was prime Federer. Both Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon final win over Federer and the 2007 Wimbledon final are considered amongst the best matches in history and even have books written on them. Murray couldnt even give old Federer as tough a time in the 2012 final.

That isnt a diss on Murray, but nobody of the last 12 years but Federer could have even lasted on court with Nadal those finals.

Just out of interest, do you include, say, peak Sampras in that estimation?

 

[granddog29]

No, I dont include Peak Sampras, hence why I said last 12 years which never included peak Sampras (only ******* who want to build up the 2001 wimbledon win say otherwise). Peak Sampras >>>> either Peak federer or peak Nadal on grass IMHO.

I do definitely forsee a better Wimbledon in 2014 for Nadal. Whether or not that means the title remains to be seen.

I do agree that of all the big 4 Nadal was the one with the least chance of beating Djokovic on anything but clay at the time (and he was even frequently losing to Djoko on clay). I have often said the 2 very narrow losses to Djokovic on hards to start the year, followed by his first ever loss to Djokovic on clay in straight sets shattered him mentally in that matchup for awhile. It all culminated with Nadal blowing the 2012 Australian open from a clear winning position at the end, by blowing an easy passing shot and some other careless mistakes.

I was simply addressing Incognito's ridiculous point that Nadal is somehow diminished in comparision to Murray for losing to Djokovic in a Wimbledon final, especialy in light that Murray lost to Nadal in the semis for the 3rd straight year (well first of three was a quarterfinal). Absurd logic you would have to admit.

 

[Mainad]

Don't be so picky. I just mentioned all the big grass final wins of both players. Hence the Berd.

But do you really regard Berdych as a big grass finalist? That 2010 Wimbledon is the only big grass final he's been in to date!

Who is saying 'fault' here... No one is about to punish him! But surely beating a better player scores more? So does Rafa over Murray? Most people Put Fed Nadal Murray as best grass courters post 2003. Now Nadal beats the other two. Andy beats only Roger, that too at 32, that too outside a slam. Add to it 3 extra slam finals for Nadal. What remains?
He can very well hike his resume by adding 2 more Wimby titles and beating Nadal the next they meet.

Okay, fair point. Maybe I misunderstood you slightly. Apologies for that. Still, I think playing aginst the world #1 player on any surface, even his weakest, shouldn't be completely discounted and in addition, Djokovic was, after all, a previous Wimbledon champion.

 

[bahamasboy32]

I go mostly by playing levels as opposed to achievements

Grass
First- Sampras
Second- Federer
Third- Nadal
Fourth- Borg
Fifth- Becker
Sixth- McEnroe
Seventh- Edberg
Eighth- Murray
Ninth- Roddick
Tenth- some old time player


Clay
First- Nadal
Second- Borg
Third- Kuerten
Fourth- Lendl
Fifth- Wilander
Sixth- Vilas
Seventh- Muster
Eighth- Courier
Ninth- Ferrero
Tenth- Agassi (I believe his sheer level was higher than Federer, old 32 year old Laver, etc...)


Hard Courted
First- Sampras
Second- Federer
Third- Djokovic
Fourth- Lendl
Fifth- Nadal
Sixth- McEnroe
Seventh- Connors
Eighth- Agassi
Ninth- Murray
Tenth- Edberg

 

[kiki]

Where on earth is Murray in your list? Unlike 4 of those names on your list, he has actually won Wimbledon, been in another final there, won the Olympics there and has 3 other grass titles to boot which is 3 more than Djokovic, Henman or Berdych?? :shock:

Sorry, take out Henman and put him in...one britton for the other, right?

 

[fatichar]

But do you really regard Berdych as a big grass finalist? That 2010 Wimbledon is the only big grass final he's been in to date!

Okay, fair point. Maybe I misunderstood you slightly. Apologies for that. Still, I think playing aginst the world #1 player on any surface, even his weakest, shouldn't be completely discounted and in addition, Djokovic was, after all, a previous Wimbledon champion.

No no, Berd is not in any list of biggies. I listed all - big or small - for fair comparison.

Again, no, not at all discounting Murray's straight set beating to djoker. Can't tell you how much that pleased me as a biased Nadal fan
That victory is what puts Murray firmly in the 3rd place for last 10 years on green.

 

[The Dark Knight]

Rafael Nadal is the current world number one. He has won 13 Grand Slam titles and at 24, is the youngest in the Open Era to complete the career slam. In fact, he is the youngest to complete the career golden slam.