Who had the harder Era and Rivals Pete Sampras or Rafael Nadal?

[SamprasisGOAT]

I'm making this poll/thread because the recent poll between these two was so close. I think Sampras is just winning by a few votes. But I personally see that as a sign of the times. He should be winning by much more I think but with most tennis fans I think it's close. So I'd like to see what people think about who had the hardest era and rivals. This may decide who's the greater player overall as they both have 14 slams. Personally I class federer as the clear cut GOAT despite my username. He'd have been great in any era.
Here's my open era GOAT list
1.federer
2.sampras
3.nadal
4.borg
5.mcenroe
6.connors
7.agassi
8.djokovic
9.lendl
10.becker

Here are each players top 10 rivals. They have to have played 10 times or over.

Andre Agassi h2h 20-14 highest ranking #1
Boris Becker h2h 12-7 highest ranking #1
Stefan Edberg h2h 8-5 highest ranking #1
Jim Courier h2h 16-4 highest ranking #1
Patrick Rafter h2h 12-4 highest ranking #1
Kalelnikov h2h 11-2 highest ranking #1
Thomas Muster h2h 9-2 highest ranking #1
Michael Chang h2h 12-8 highest ranking #2
Richard Krajicek h2h 4-6 highest ranking #4
Goran Ivanisevic H2h 12-7 highest ranking #2

Roger federer h2h 33-23 highest ranking #1
Novak Djokovic h2h 23-19 highest ranking #1
Leyton Hewitt h2h 7-4 highest ranking #1
Andy roddick h2h 7-3 highest ranking #1
Andy Murray h2h 15-5 highest ranking #2
Jaun Martin del potro h2h 8-4 highest ranking #4
Stanislas Wawrinka h2h 12-1 highest ranking #3
Nikolay Davydenko h2h 5-6 highest ranking #3
David ferrer h2h 22-6 highest ranking #3
Thomas Berdych 18-3 highest ranking #5


Look at the difference between both sets of rivals. Every single rival on the nadal list is a out and out baseliner. Sampras has a much harder mix to deal with of 5 serve and volleyers and 5 baseliners. 7 out of 10 of sampras rivals have been world number 1. Where nadals are 4 out of 10 have been. Also Sampras rivals have won a combined 32 slams while nadals have won a combined 30 slams. Also the surfaces Sampras and his rials played on we're in general much quicker than the ones nadal has played on. Quicker surfaces lead to more upsets. I think Sampras had the tougher era and rivals.

 

[sliceroni]

I'm making this poll/thread because the recent poll between these two was so close. I think Sampras is just winning by a few votes. But I personally see that as a sign of the times. He should be winning by much more I think but with most tennis fans I think it's close. So I'd like to see what people think about who had the hardest era and rivals. This may decide who's the greater player overall as they both have 14 slams. Personally I class federer as the clear cut GOAT despite my username. He'd have been great in any era.
Here's my open era GOAT list
1.federer
2.sampras
3.nadal
4.borg
5.mcenroe
6.connors
7.agassi
8.djokovic
9.lendl
10.becker

Here are each players top 10 rivals. They have to have played 10 times or over.

Andre Agassi h2h 20-14 highest ranking #1
Boris Becker h2h 12-7 highest ranking #1
Stefan Edberg h2h 8-5 highest ranking #1
Jim Courier h2h 16-4 highest ranking #1
Patrick Rafter h2h 12-4 highest ranking #1
Kalelnikov h2h 11-2 highest ranking #1
Thomas Muster h2h 9-2 highest ranking #1
Michael Chang h2h 12-8 highest ranking #2
Richard Krajicek h2h 4-6 highest ranking #4
Goran Ivanisevic H2h 12-7 highest ranking #2

Roger federer h2h 33-23 highest ranking #1
Novak Djokovic h2h 23-19 highest ranking #1
Leyton Hewitt h2h 7-4 highest ranking #1
Andy roddick h2h 7-3 highest ranking #1
Andy Murray h2h 15-5 highest ranking #2
Jaun Martin del potro h2h 8-4 highest ranking #4
Stanislas Wawrinka h2h 12-1 highest ranking #3
Nikolay Davydenko h2h 5-6 highest ranking #3
David ferrer h2h 22-6 highest ranking #3
Thomas Berdych 18-3 highest ranking #5


Look at the difference between both sets of rivals. Every single rival on the nadal list is a out and out baseliner. Sampras has a much harder mix to deal with of 5 serve and volleyers and 5 baseliners. 7 out of 10 of sampras rivals have been world number 1. Where nadals are 4 out of 10 have been. Also Sampras rivals have won a combined 32 slams while nadals have won a combined 30 slams. I think Sampras had the tougher era and rivals.

Imo Becker is the indoor carpet GOAT with winning records against everyone including Sampras. 1996 Becker/Sampras year end final was one of the best high-quality match I've ever seen. Sampras edged him out in the end.

 

[Bukmeikara]

I'm making this poll/thread because the recent poll between these two was so close. I think Sampras is just winning by a few votes. But I personally see that as a sign of the times. He should be winning by much more I think but with most tennis fans I think it's close. So I'd like to see what people think about who had the hardest era and rivals. This may decide who's the greater player overall as they both have 14 slams. Personally I class federer as the clear cut GOAT despite my username. He'd have been great in any era.
Here's my open era GOAT list
1.federer
2.sampras
3.nadal
4.borg
5.mcenroe
6.connors
7.agassi
8.djokovic
9.lendl
10.becker

Here are each players top 10 rivals. They have to have played 10 times or over.

Andre Agassi h2h 20-14 highest ranking #1
Boris Becker h2h 12-7 highest ranking #1
Stefan Edberg h2h 8-5 highest ranking #1
Jim Courier h2h 16-4 highest ranking #1
Patrick Rafter h2h 12-4 highest ranking #1
Kalelnikov h2h 11-2 highest ranking #1
Thomas Muster h2h 9-2 highest ranking #1
Michael Chang h2h 12-8 highest ranking #2
Richard Krajicek h2h 4-6 highest ranking #4
Goran Ivanisevic H2h 12-7 highest ranking #2

Roger federer h2h 33-23 highest ranking #1
Novak Djokovic h2h 23-19 highest ranking #1
Leyton Hewitt h2h 7-4 highest ranking #1
Andy roddick h2h 7-3 highest ranking #1
Andy Murray h2h 15-5 highest ranking #2
Jaun Martin del potro h2h 8-4 highest ranking #4
Stanislas Wawrinka h2h 12-1 highest ranking #3
Nikolay Davydenko h2h 5-6 highest ranking #3
David ferrer h2h 22-6 highest ranking #3
Thomas Berdych 18-3 highest ranking #5


Look at the difference between both sets of rivals. Every single rival on the nadal list is a out and out baseliner. Sampras has a much harder mix to deal with of 5 serve and volleyers and 5 baseliners. 7 out of 10 of sampras rivals have been world number 1. Where nadals are 4 out of 10 have been. Also Sampras rivals have won a combined 32 slams while nadals have won a combined 30 slams. I think Sampras had the tougher era and rivals.

Maybe Nadal is stronger and he gave less chances to his rivals than Sampras. Pete had better rivals only on clay and lately on grass(but Nadal doesnt win these tournaments). Nadal also has two AA++ class opponents in the face of Federer(best ever) and Djokovic while Sampras main rival was Agassi and he was away for some years. Not to mention that Edberg and Courier were far from their number 1 status when playing with Pete and Muster off clay noway near to Roddick or Hewitt or Davydenko.

I thing that you want to believe that Sampras had better opponents but apart from 2010-2012/2013 this is not the case. Its true Nadal gain a lot from the homogenezation of the game but you play who you get and in the end Federer-Djokovic-Murray beat any combo from Sampras era

 

[90's Clay]

Nadal generally had tougher slam final rivals. But then you think Is it really tougher? Nadal gets to play on his bread and butter slow surfaces all year.

Thats the equivalent of letting Sampras play in fast low bouncing surfaces all year. Would Sampras have it "hard" if these were conditions? I doubt it. He would probably snatch a good 23-25 slams

 

[Revenant]

Nadal generally had tougher slam final rivals. But then you think Is it really tougher? Nadal gets to play on his bread and butter slow surfaces all year.

Thats the equivalent of letting Sampras play in fast low bouncing surfaces all year. Would Sampras have it "hard" if these were conditions? I doubt it. He would probably snatch a good 23-25 slams

2 of the 4 Slams were very fast during Sampras's time. And 1 of the other 2 was played on Rebound Ace, which is not exactly a slow surface. So Sampras did have it good. 12 of his 14 Slams came on very fast surfaces. He was decent on medium surfaces, with 2 AO titles on Rebound Ace, and inept on genuinely slow surfaces with 0 French Open finals.

 

[NadalFed]

LOL! 90sclay is the most deluded poster here and that is saying something.

He lost to a Federer barely out of his teens, Nadal beat prime Federer. Sampras would have struggled to win outside of Wimbledon if his peak had coincided with Nadal's.

6-0, 6-0, 6-0 at RG for sure.

Btw Sampras had a losing record vs Hewitt, Roddick and Federer.
Nadal has a winning record against everyone including Agassi.

 

[Valdez737]

Nadal rival is 17 gs champion!! Its crazy that we had 2 goat contenders in the same generation Without each other they probably both be sitting on 20 plus slams.

 

[Revenant]

Nadal rival is 17 gs champion!! Its crazy that we had 2 goat contenders in the same generation Without each other they probably both be sitting on 20 plus slams.

Without Federer, Nadal would have 15 Slams. Without Nadal, Federer would have 23.

 

[TMF]

Nadal has the GOAT Federer, and Nole is a superior player than Agassi in the 90s. No question Nadal has a tougher rivals and overall superior competition.

Of course if Federer was born 10 years earlier that could tip the balance in Sampras's era.

 

[Man of steel]

Nadal screwed over Feds chance at more slams at Rg and Ao
Fed screwed Nadals chance at wimby in the 2 early finals
Djokovic screwed both of them in multiple majors
Fed and nadal screwed djokovic in multiple Majors
The rivalry is what made 2 of them Goat candidates and joker well on his way to being one if he keeps his level up and can bag a few more slams.

If fed had no rivalry with them 2 i doubt anyone else would have stepped up and challenged fed till he was in his late 20's to 30's
The same goes for Nadal and Djoker
Its to bad theres a 5 year difference from fed to nadal/djoker
I would have loved to see all of them all at their respective primes and peaks at thesame time.

 

[NadalFed]

Nadal generally had tougher slam final rivals. But then you think Is it really tougher? Nadal gets to play on his bread and butter slow surfaces all year.

Thats the equivalent of letting Sampras play in fast low bouncing surfaces all year. Would Sampras have it "hard" if these were conditions? I doubt it. He would probably snatch a good 23-25 slams

Sampras would have been like Murray if he had been in Nadal's era. He lost to 20 year old Federer, imagine what peak Nadal and peak Federer would do to him. He'd be their common punching bag and it'd be a contest to see who gave him more bagels and breadsticks.

 

[President]

Rafael Nadal.

 

[coloskier]

Nadal generally had tougher slam final rivals. But then you think Is it really tougher? Nadal gets to play on his bread and butter slow surfaces all year.

Thats the equivalent of letting Sampras play in fast low bouncing surfaces all year. Would Sampras have it "hard" if these were conditions? I doubt it. He would probably snatch a good 23-25 slams

Exactly. If Nadal plays on 1990's grass with 90's equipment he doesn't get a single grass title.

 

[NadalFed]

Exactly. If Nadal plays on 1990's grass with 90's equipment he doesn't get a single grass title.

Sampras would be lucky to win 2 slams anywhere if he had played in Nadal's era.

 

[Revenant]

Sampras would have been like Murray if he had been in Nadal's era. He lost to 20 year old Federer, imagine what peak Nadal and peak Federer would do to him. He'd be their common punching bag and it'd be a contest to see who gave him more bagels and breadsticks.

It wouldn't be much of a contest. Nadal would have the advantage because he'd pile up bagels against Sampras on clay.

 

[Man of steel]

It wouldn't be much of a contest. Nadal would have the advantage because he'd pile up bagels against Sampras on clay.

It wouldn't even be about whether sampras would win games on clay, but whether he would win points against nadal(peak or no peak)
Since Fed is like 1000 better on clay than sampras and fed gets owned like everybody else on clay against nadal the matchup would be laughable