Who is the 2nd best clay courter of all time

  • Thread starter Thread starter NadalAgassi
  • Start date Start date

2nd greatest clay courter ever

  • Total voters
    195
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Now that it is certain beyond debate Nadal is the greatest clay courter of all time who is the 2nd best. I would guess the general consensus would be Borg, but figured I would include the others just to see if anyone else has some backing. LaCoste, Cochet, and others belong in the poll over people like Federer or Vilas but would get no votes on this forum so I left them off for that reason.
 
I think it is close between Borg and Rosewall. Had Open Era tennis been in place Rosewall would probably have more French Opens than either Nadal or Borg, although he wasnt as inhumanly dominant on the surface as either.
 
10is said:
LOL! Nice loaded question by the purveyor of ******** assumptions. Borg is still considered by many to be the best claycourter of all time followed by Nadal.
Click to expand...

No, only be a few ******** souls like yourself, whose opinions are not even desired in the first place, thus the poll is set up nicely to exclude people like you altogether. A poll was already done BEFORE This years Roland Garros of best clay courter and Nadal won by a landslide, so the point of making one now after breaking his previous tie for the RG record with Borg, and now leading Borg in every important clay stat there would be the point of pointlessness. PS- wouldnt be surprised if you were one of TMF's 40 aliases.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the only way to settle this is to call Nadal the Most Accomplished Clay Court Player of All Time (the MACCPAT). That way we aren't trying to compare the play of Borg v. Nadal, something that is obviously impossible. Nadal has won more on clay, so he is the MACCPAT. Just like Roger is the Most Accomplished Player of the Open Era (the MAPOE). No judgement as to who is subjectively better.

Using this style of logic, then Borg is clearly the 2nd MACCPAT. :)
 
I'd say Borg, but of the current generation (or last) Kuerten is up there.
 
Federer polling second :lol:

I never would have guessed that in this forum :mrgreen:
 
Gangsta said:
In your books, what more does Nadal need to do to surpass Borg?
Click to expand...

Considering the dichotomy between RG and Wimbledon surfaces during Borg's era, what actually made his accomplishment all the more worthy in my consideration was his adaptability and versatility which allowed him to conquer both 5 consecutive times. I would even place Borg's Wimbledon exploits above Federer's and definitely above Sampras's in that respect.
 
10is said:
Considering the dichotomy between RG and Wimbledon surfaces during Borg's era, what actually made his accomplishment all the more worthy in my consideration was his adaptability and versatility which allowed him to conquer both 5 consecutive times. I would even place Borg's Wimbledon exploits above Federer's and definitely above Sampras's in that respect.
Click to expand...

that really does not answer why you would not place Nadal ahead of Borg on clay?
 
10is said:
Considering the dichotomy between RG and Wimbledon surfaces during Borg's era, what actually made his accomplishment all the more worthy in my consideration was his adaptability and versatility which allowed him to conquer both 5 consecutive times. I would even place Borg's Wimbledon exploits above Federer's and definitely above Sampras's in that respect.
Click to expand...

Wimbledon? :-? So, what you are saying is - Nadal needs to win more Wimbledon's to surpass Borg as the best clay courter of all time? LOL. You cannot be serious.

NadalAgassi said:
He has no answer of course as there is no valid argument for anyone to have Nadal not above Borg on clay anymore other than:

-I hate Nadal so much. I am a butthurt Federer fan.
-Nadal is boring, I hate his game.
-Nadal is a cheater. He takes too much time. Waaah.
Click to expand...

That last post makes me want to agree with this. :)
 
Obviously he is not in the same league as Nadal or Borg, but generally speaking I would say that Lendl is incredibly underrated on clay.

I mean over the years I've seen many people ranking the likes of Federer, Vilas and Muster over him on clay which is absolutely ridiculous. Lendl was far better than any of those 3 on the surface.

Outside of the top 2, his clay court CV is clearly better than anyone else's in the open era.
 
BigServer1 said:
Fed's my favorite player, but this is ridiculous. He's not in the top 5, imo, let alone #2.

Jesus...
Click to expand...

The other reason I made this poll was so I could laugh at how many votes Federer would get and something I can link to as proof of the extreme ****ism on this forum. :) I wouldnt be surprised if he even wins this poll, LOL!
 
NadalAgassi said:
The other reason I made this poll was so I could laugh at how many votes Federer would get and something I can link to as proof of the extreme ****ism on this forum. :) I wouldnt be surprised if he even wins this poll, LOL!
Click to expand...

I figured. Your poll is probably getting trolled a little bit, but even if any of those Fed votes are serious...Such a shame, lol.
 
I thought I'd give Muster a vote. His peak was short, but I'd have backed him against anybody on clay during that period, winning many matches on sheer guts and determination, saving match points etc. My favourite comeback win of Muster's was probably in the semi finals of the 1995 Stuttgart Outdoor against Bruguera. Muster was behind 6-7, 1-5, and 15-40 down on serve, only for Muster to save 4 match points, come back, and eventually win 6-7, 7-6, 6-2.
 
Last edited:
Just to highlight Lendl's case for being the best of the rest after Nadal and Borg.

He won 28 clay court titles and at least 2 titles at each of the 5 most prestigious tournaments available to him on the surface; RG (84, 86 and 87), Monte-Carlo (85 and 88 ), Rome (86 and 88 ), Hamburg (87 and 89) and Barcelona (80 and 81).

Lendl was also one of the greatest players of all time on both carpet and hard courts, and hence entered and won a lot of big tournaments on those surfaces. Thus it wasn't as if he adopted a clay court dominated schedule and padded out his record by racking up a lot of small, minor titles on the surface as well.

He has winning head to heads against Wilander (6-4) and Vilas (7-5) on clay, and in 1992 he beat both Muster (the Monte-Carlo champion that year) and Bruguera (the 1991 Monte-Carlo champion) on the surface.

Gomez (who lost to Lendl 4 times at RG in the 80s) thanked him for skipping RG in 1990, which goes to higlight his clay court reputation.

Wilander is not too far behind Lendl, but Lendl's overall clay court record is slightly better. None of the two time or one time RG champions are in his league.
 
Last edited:
Federer's 2nd in the poll, proving that forums are indeed surreal places to be :lol:
 
My all time rankings on clay would be:

1. Nadal
2. Rosewall
3. Borg
4. Lendl
5. Cochet
6. LaCoste
7. Wilander
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Federer

I expect Djokovic will make the top 10 somewhere from #5 to #10 by the time his career is over, bumping Federer out.
 
Gizo said:
Just to highlight Lendl's case for being the best of the rest after Nadal and Borg.

He won 28 clay court titles and at least 2 titles at each of the 5 most prestigious tournaments available to him on the surface; RG (84, 86 and 87), Monte-Carlo (85 and 88 ), Rome (86 and 88 ), Hamburg (87 and 89) and Barcelona (80 and 81).

Lendl was also one of the greatest players of all time on both carpet and hard courts, and hence entered and won a lot of big tournaments on those surfaces. Thus it wasn't as if he adopted a clay court dominated schedule and padded out his record by racking up a lot of small, minor titles on the surface as well.

He has winning head to heads against Wilander (6-4) and Vilas (7-5) on clay, and in 1992 he beat both Muster (the Monte-Carlo champion that year) and Bruguera (the 1991 Monte-Carlo champion) on the surface.

Gomez (who lost to Lendl 4 times at RG in the 80s) thanked him for skipping RG in 1990, which goes to higlight his clay court reputation.

Wilander is not too far behind Lendl, but Lendl's overall clay court record is slightly better. None of the two time or one time RG champions are in his league.
Click to expand...

Do you think Lendl is better than Rosewall on clay?
 
Gangsta said:
Wimbledon? :-? So, what you are saying is - Nadal needs to win more Wimbledon's to surpass Borg as the best clay courter of all time? LOL. You cannot be serious.
Click to expand...

Ohh, but he is serious. There are no limits to where certain members will go to attack Nadal, as he became the greatest clay courter, and won more titles on what was seen as his worst surface (grass) than Federer could on his (clay).
 
NadalAgassi said:
My all time rankings on clay would be:

1. Nadal
2. Rosewall
3. Borg
4. Lendl
5. Cochet
6. LaCoste
7. Wilander
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Federer

I expect Djokovic will make the top 10 somewhere from #5 to #10 by the time his career is over, bumping Federer out.
Click to expand...

No Courier on the list?
 
*Val* said:
If Rafa had never existed Roger would have 6 FO titles. Who would have stopped him?
Click to expand...

Yeah but the problem is, Rafa exists. So Roger can't be the second best, and he's not the third best or fourth best...Etc.

I think Roger is a top 10 all-time clay player, but his numerous failures against Rafa take him out of the top 5 imo (not to mention 2002, 2003 and 2004, when he was winning clay masters and beating top guys on clay, only to flame out early in RG each year).
 
Probably should have polled for 3rd and 4th best clay-courters. Rafa and Bjorn are, w/o question at the top. Would be interesting to how Federer, Kuerten, Rosewall and others would fare against each other. Of the current/active players, Federer would be 2nd. But probably not so overall.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
No Courier on the list?
Click to expand...

He didnt have enough clay success outside the French unfortunately. However his play at the 92 French was definitely some of the best ever on a clay court, against one of the toughest draws ever too. I could see putting him at #10 over Federer possibly however.
 
A much better poll would be who is third. I don't think anyone can make a case that any of those are better than Borg.
 
Courier is so difficult to rank in these 'best clay courter' lists.

He only won 5 titles in total on clay, but because of his nationality, he played on clay much less than the European and South American players. He wasn't overly interesting in coming to Europe to rack up minor clay court titles, and he hardly ever played at Monte-Carlo and Hamburg as well. Then again his peak level on clay was excellent, and he was very close to winning a 3rd consecutive RG title in 1993.

Bruguera had a pretty similar clay court to Courier. Both players won 2 RG titles, lost in another final, and reached another semi-final. Both players won 2 super 9 titles on the surface, Bruguera at Monte-Carlo in 1991 and 1993, and Courier in Rome in 1992 and 1993. Surprisingly Bruguera was never able to win his home city title in Barcelona where he lost in 2 finals.

Bruguera won 8 more titles than Courier in total on clay, then again he entered into far more events on the surface.
 
NadalAgassi said:
Do you think Lendl is better than Rosewall on clay?
Click to expand...

You are right, in an all-time list Rosewall would probably rank above Lendl on clay because of his sustained period of dominance on the surface, and he is closely matched with Cochet and Lacoste.

With regards to the open era he clearly has a better record than anyone apart from Nadal and Borg.
 
Speaking of Ferrero, just in the open era, I think he would definately rank in the top 15 on the surface.

I think his clay court CV is better than that of any other one time RG champion in the open era apart from Nastase, Vilas, Muster and Federer. He actually dominated on clay and was considered as the king of the surface for a short period.

In addition to his RG title, at Paris he reached another final in 2002 and 2 more semi-finals in 2000 and 2001 (both of which he lost to Kuerten). He also won back to back Monte-Carlo titles in 2002-2003, beat Kuerten to win the Rome title in 2001, won Barcelona in 2001, and was the Hamburg runner-up in 2001 as well. He won 13 clay court titles in total.

He came closer than any other player in the open era to completing the Italian and German Open double and in back to back weeks. That was when both tournaments had 64 player draws and best of 5 set finals.
 
BS thread.

Nadal is not the best clay courter of all time. He is the best of his era, playing against his generation, on current conditions, with current equipment.

Did he win RG under the same conditions, against the same field, with the same equipment that Borg did over 30 years ago? No.

And no, I am not saying Borg is the greatest either.

So, BS thread.
 
Obviously it's either Nadal or Borg who's the 2nd greatest cc, so it's pointless for the OP to list the other players.


BigServer1 said:
Fed's my favorite player, but this is ridiculous. He's not in the top 5, imo, let alone #2.

Jesus...
Click to expand...

Whether Fed is rank in the top 5, 10 or 20, he's a victim of his immense success outside of clay. Clay is his WORST surface, it's overshadowed from hc and grass which is easily to overlooked, thus he's rank low, and not to mention some people only see him as a 1RG champ, rather than his consistent run since 2005. Had he accomplish nothing on other surfaces, I think he gains more respect on clay. Guys like Muster and Guga...the first thing you think about them is clay, because that's what their hall of fame career are coming from this surface.

In a very similar situation for Nadal....he wins so much on clay which he doesn't get enough respect on other surfaces.
 
Of the men I've seen enough of to judge-
Nadal, Borg, Lendl and Wilander are my top 4. Looking at his overall record in the pro's too, Rosewall must have been some clay court exponent. I'm sure in their day, Cochet and Lacoste were great.
Federer would have multiple Roland Garros titles but for Rafa. Roger is a very good clay court player too, it's just his least preferred surface.
 
The current results of the poll are totally hilarious, Rosewall has no votes and Fed in 2nd. That is an insult to Rosewall, and says a lot about the dynamics of this forum. Fed barely deserves inclusion on this list and he is polling 2nd. I know what the reply will be... "if not for Nadal..." well...if that is the entire basis, it aint much. If not for Fed, Roddick would be the 2nd best or even arguably the best on Grass of the past decade...but yet..who would really even put him top 3 right now..probably no one. Sorry Fed fans...but no..he is not 2nd best.
 
NadalAgassi said:
My all time rankings on clay would be:

1. Nadal
2. Rosewall
3. Borg
4. Lendl
5. Cochet
6. LaCoste
7. Wilander
8. Kuerten
9. Laver
10. Federer

I expect Djokovic will make the top 10 somewhere from #5 to #10 by the time his career is over, bumping Federer out.
Click to expand...

Bruguera????
 
zcarzach said:
I think the only way to settle this is to call Nadal the Most Accomplished Clay Court Player of All Time (the MACCPAT). That way we aren't trying to compare the play of Borg v. Nadal, something that is obviously impossible. Nadal has won more on clay, so he is the MACCPAT. Just like Roger is the Most Accomplished Player of the Open Era (the MAPOE). No judgement as to who is subjectively better.

Using this style of logic, then Borg is clearly the 2nd MACCPAT. :)
Click to expand...

GBPFSOAT

10snifs
 
Federer top ten of best clay courters. Not top 2.

Borg deserves that distinction.

I can't believe Nadal isn't on the list....even through he is the best (1st) CC of all time. The ****s like myself could have enjoyed checking him as number 2.
 
sandiegoman said:
Agreed, if Nadal wasn't around... KFed would have 6 FO titles. Pwned
Click to expand...

Djokovic would have been in the 07,08 finals. Federer could lost the 08 one. 2005= Steroid Guy would still lose.

2006= Ljubicic on clay lol.

2007= Better than Djokovic so far. Though if they were to meet it would change the dynamic of Djokovic not choking the US open final.

2008= Djokovic wins.

2009=Soderling bends over.

2010= Soderling wins the thing.

2011= Murray or Djokovic in the final to lose.

2012= Djokovic wins.
 
NadalAgassi said:
Bruguera is definitely not better than any of those I listed. He isnt even better than Courier or Muster.
Click to expand...

In terms of PEAK ability...he is, *dependent* upon the matchup of course. You have to understand about him, that he all too often did NOT give his all. When FULL ACTIVIATED...he was to me for sure had one of highest PEAK levels on clay. How many of the great clay courters had Bruguera's level of wishy-washiness? His decidely chump-change endurance by comparison? He would oscilate between all-out effort and just going through the motions to outright keeling over in his matches. He was frequently an injury plagued player, and also a well-known *lazy* player as far as being willing to push himself in practice. But again, there were two different Brugueras. The Bruguera who came within two points of a 6-0 set against Sampras at the year ending indoors...and the Bruguera who would just let the match go by. He didn't FIGHT through "bad days" or "tight" days as well the other great clay courters, for whom this was their mainstay. It's *insanely* hard to duplicate Bruguera's forehand technique, just try it and recognize just how *extraordinary* the talent it took to time that technique against pro level pace/spin. It's simply...there is NO groundie technique (and I can duplicate them all at a very high level) that can even compare. To this day, there is no more single amazing shot in history to me as far as absolute difficult to upll off on a consistent basis than Bruguera's extraoridinary contortionist technique on the forehand...BRAVO, Bruguera, BRAVO!!!

His passing shots were simply sublime, out of this world...unlike Muster. It's a matchup dependent thing. Muster gave his all everywhere...Bruguera only gave his all for a day here and there, and at the French when healthy and/or motivated enough. Maybe not for an entire match, but his PEAK level of ability in stretches was for sure to me one notch above Muster/Courier. The mental side of the game should of course not be discounted, nor fitness; but in terms of ability, you are off/wrong. Dude could even volley too. He just toyed with Courier on the seniors tour after hardly playing for years, second tournament back, and he just destroyed him with almost *nothing* but drop shots, soft, sily, cutesy feathery angles stuff...was driving Courier nuts...yet winning virtually every single point playing this way. He had *feel* for the ball. The most dizzying array of spin modulation I've ever seen. Again, just try, just try and see to copy Bruguera's technique...*impossible.* Well, almost. Ain't nobody before or since hit with that technique...the man of the century still BLOWS MY MIND. Move over that guy from the beer commercial, Bruguera's dad looks like that guy, and Bruguera's beard is even scruffier. The world is not ready for such sexiness, such charisma, that is the only reason Americans little to nothing about the real extroadinary Bruguera...always semi-tanking, and not Tennis Channel back then...that and he might be semi-tanking on that day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
  • Poll Poll
Who is 2nd best female clay courter of last 15 years (after Henin)
Replies
14
Views
2K
kishnabe
kishnabe
jorel
Rafa- The Greatest Clay Courter of All Time
2 3
Replies
119
Views
9K
Mustard
Mustard
N
  • Poll Poll
2nd best female hard courter (after Serena) of last 15 years
Replies
18
Views
2K
egn
egn
kraggy
2nd Best clay courter - Joker vs Fed
2
Replies
64
Views
4K
<3tennis!!!
<3tennis!!!
C
Is Federer the 2nd greatest claycourter of all time?
2 3
Replies
140
Views
10K
Holmes
Holmes
Back
Top