They all belong in the same tier great. While Nadal is the only with the career slam, but he dominated only on one surface, but Borg and Sampras dominated on 2 surfaces. Sampras never won the FO, but at least he won 5 WTF while Nadal never won one, and Borg won 2. Under the ATP, all three players have won 64 single titles(Borg 77 if include non-ATP events).
Who had a better career: Borg, Sampras or Nadal ?
- Thread starter TMF
- Start date
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
I can't wait for the off-season to be over.
MatsPhilander
Legend
Nadal probably has 5 years plus left-how can he be compared to retired players when he could win 20 or more slams by the time he is done?
You're not interested because the thread topic is not involved with Nole.
The future is uncertain
Let's talk about now. Some say he's #1 and some say he's #3. Offer your reasons objectively.
Let's talk about now. Some say he's #1 and some say he's #3. Offer your reasons objectively.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
DerekNoleFam1
Hall of Fame
1. Sampras, 2. Nadal, 3. Borg.
Only real debate is between Sampras and Nadal due to same Slam count, and Sampras was more dominant - including 6 YE#1's.
If Nadal wins another Major he goes ahead.
Only real debate is between Sampras and Nadal due to same Slam count, and Sampras was more dominant - including 6 YE#1's.
If Nadal wins another Major he goes ahead.
tennis_commentator
Hall of Fame
Nadal because he's won more things, plus he's got a few more years of winning slams coming up.
He's already won slams for 10 years in a row, and will probably extend it to 13 or 14 years.
The next best is only 8 years in a row.
He's already won slams for 10 years in a row, and will probably extend it to 13 or 14 years.
The next best is only 8 years in a row.
Sampras more dominant than Nadal? That's debatable.
As for Borg, he didn't play the AO, but he made 4 USO finals while Sampras never the FO final.
Not to say you're incorrect, but these players have the pluses and minuses in their resume, and placing one player over another is debatable.
MatsPhilander
Legend
DerekNoleFam1
Hall of Fame
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Next thread should be who had a greater career: Federer or Navratilova?
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Part of the reason Borg had 0 AOs is because he only played the AO once, at age 18.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Why are you opening a thread called, "who had a better career" when Nadal's career is still ongoing? 
Stupid thread.
As for whose career I would pick, flip a three-sided coin because they have all had spectacular careers for various reasons.
It is almost a foregone conclusion that Nadal will surpass Sampras' slam count and with an extra slam plus the Golden Career Slam the majority of people will believe that Nadal has surpassed Sampras despite Sampras' better number one numbers and YEC record. For example, if the Tennis Channel does another list and Nadal has 15 slams compared to Sampras' 14 (plus the Golden Career Slam) you can bet your house that the list will have Nadal listed ahead of Sampras.
Stupid thread.As for whose career I would pick, flip a three-sided coin because they have all had spectacular careers for various reasons.
It is almost a foregone conclusion that Nadal will surpass Sampras' slam count and with an extra slam plus the Golden Career Slam the majority of people will believe that Nadal has surpassed Sampras despite Sampras' better number one numbers and YEC record. For example, if the Tennis Channel does another list and Nadal has 15 slams compared to Sampras' 14 (plus the Golden Career Slam) you can bet your house that the list will have Nadal listed ahead of Sampras.
I agree this area is a big plus for Sampras since both Nadal/Borg aren't in his league. However, Nadal/Borg has something that Sampras doesn't have. Nadal won 2 slams on his best surface without dropping a set. Borg is the only player to win 2 different slams without dropping a set(2 FO, 1 Wimbledon). Nadal was able to win 3 slams in one year. Borg had a 49 match win streak, and 2 seasons winning percentage over 90.
S
Sirius Black
Guest
It's ridiculous how underrated Borg is.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
He looked like he was on the seniors tour the last time he played though.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
He did but the monster will rise again.
heftylefty
Hall of Fame
From Roland Garros Red Clay to OG Wimbledon Grass. No one did it better than Borg.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Oops, meant to vote for Nadal, Sampras, Borg but accidentally voted Nadal, Borg, Sampras instead!
My reasoning about the order is quite simple and maybe not as sophisticated as some others:
Nadal and Sampras both have 14 Slams but Nadal has won all 4 of them whereas Sampras lacks RG. Borg's 11 Slams lack either an AO or USO title. Plus no-one has dominated any one of the Slams like Nadal has dominated RG. Nadal has been versatile across all 3 major surfaces, Sampras and Borg on just 2 of them.
My reasoning about the order is quite simple and maybe not as sophisticated as some others:
Nadal and Sampras both have 14 Slams but Nadal has won all 4 of them whereas Sampras lacks RG. Borg's 11 Slams lack either an AO or USO title. Plus no-one has dominated any one of the Slams like Nadal has dominated RG. Nadal has been versatile across all 3 major surfaces, Sampras and Borg on just 2 of them.
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah, he'll be back with a vengeance. How do you predict he'll perform in '15? I think he'll win one slam, probably a bit like this year, but more solid on the clay.
S
Sirius Black
Guest
Oops, meant to vote for Nadal, Sampras, Borg but accidentally voted Nadal, Borg, Sampras instead!
My reasoning about the order is quite simple and maybe not as sophisticated as some others:
Nadal and Sampras both have 14 Slams but Nadal has won all 4 of them whereas Sampras lacks RG. Borg's 11 Slams lack either an AO or USO title. Plus no-one has dominated any one of the Slams like Nadal has dominated RG. Nadal has been versatile across all 3 major surfaces, Sampras and Borg on just 2 of them.
Borg only played the Australian once, so its unfair to judge him based on not having won one. That's all. Otherwise I don't have a problem with your reasoning.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Hard to say with Nadal. I think Nadal is gunning big time for Federer's slam count despite the "nice guy" he plays in the press, and why wouldn't he gun for Federer's slam count? I would if I were in his shoes. I think he will probably win at least one slam in 2015 but possibly two. Just a gut feeling. I think 2015 will be better for him than 2014.
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
Oh, yes he definitely is. He won't stop chasing until he gets it or breaks down in the process imo. For a while I've had the feeling that they'll both end up at 17 when all is said and done.
S
Sirius Black
Guest
Oh god, can you imagine this place if that happens?
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
lol, considering how it is now, it would likely be catastrophic. The internet would break down permanently.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
It gets worse every time Nadal wins a slam.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
That is what I think is likely to happen as well.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
It's the posters who mostly frequent the Former Pro Player section that I'll feel sorry for when Fedal retire! :???:
J
John6239
Guest
Sampras for the reason he was dominant on both grass and hard court. He was just easy going. World number 1 ye 6 years in a row. The nadal antics on court (superstition, delay, problems with opponents) and his injuries take away from him a bit. He didnt have big stretches of being number 1. Very hot and cold. Borg had a more complete career for the time he played but nadal has played for quite a bit longer and has won all slams.
Sampras
Nadal
Borg
Sampras
Nadal
Borg
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
Absolutely. Seem to remember things getting quite out of hand after WO12 too.
I agree hc is not the same as carpet. Since some Nadal fans use the AO results to hold against Borg who didn't compete there, one can argue for Borg's prowess on carpet to hold against Nadal. Borg was well accomplished on carpet, but he's still behind McEnroe who most believe is the best. Sampras, Becker, Lendl arguably have better career than Borg.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
True, but if Borg chose not to play one of the 4 Grand Slams, that was his decision, wasn't it and the record books still have to record that it was one of the 2 Slams that he never won!
I bet you will use Nadal's Olympic Gold to hold against Borg.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Lol at chico placing nadal at third... lmao
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
World number 1 is just a consequence of winning titles and not the other way around..
As ANdre Agassi said sometime.. being number 1 is great for a week..after that you get used to it and its all about winning titles...
All the 3 have 64 atp titles
14 slams for Nadal and Sampras and 11 for Borg...
20 slam finals for Nadal, 18 for Pete and 16 for Borg..
I give the edge to Rafa...
Needless to say that that in absolute peak Borg was probably one , if not the most dominat tennis player ever... its just that he decided to retire too early... but well we cant give anybody the benefit of the doubt...
FanOfLu
Professional
OK. But zero US Open??? (with a zero percent conversion rate in those four finals). This is not something that one should omit so easily.
90's Clay
Banned
1. Nadal
2. Sampras
3. Borg
Borg is basically out of the equation now.
Some things in Pete's favor:
14 slams- same with Nadal
Year end #1 record
286 Weeks at #1
5 WTF
Domination at the most prestigious slam wimbledon
Things in Nadal's favor:
1. Most dominant on a surface ever
2. Career slam (Pete couldn't accomplish it)
3. Domination over ALL main rivals along with h2h advantage over top 30 in the world
4. Olympic Gold
5. Masters Record
I'll take Nadal without hesitation.. Maybe take Nadal as greatest of open era. He certainly has an argument
2. Sampras
3. Borg
Borg is basically out of the equation now.
Some things in Pete's favor:
14 slams- same with Nadal
Year end #1 record
286 Weeks at #1
5 WTF
Domination at the most prestigious slam wimbledon
Things in Nadal's favor:
1. Most dominant on a surface ever
2. Career slam (Pete couldn't accomplish it)
3. Domination over ALL main rivals along with h2h advantage over top 30 in the world
4. Olympic Gold
5. Masters Record
I'll take Nadal without hesitation.. Maybe take Nadal as greatest of open era. He certainly has an argument
Last edited:
Chico
Banned
Borg is extremely underrated since he skipped many AOs and retired at 26.
He is still ahead both Sampras and Nadal to me. Arguably he is still ahead of Nadal on clay - I think his domination on clay was more impressive and more difficult than Nadal's.
Sampras vs Nadal - I value multiple surface domination over one dominant surface and close to 70% of slams concentrated to one clam only.
Also Nadal overachieved due to luck on help from officials so his achievements are inflated while Bords are greatly deflated.
Due to all above reasons the correct answer is:
1. Borg, 2. Sampras, 3. Nadal
However, I still think this thread should have been in the Former Pro Player section since two are already retired and the third is on his way there.
Hehe, I like how you subtly snuck that in there:wink:
Similar threads
- Deleted member 77403
- General Pro Player Discussion
