Who is the better player
- Thread starter Henri kingston
- Start date
Razer
G.O.A.T.
If Nadal sustained his 2007-09 athleticism after 09 till 2015 then today he would have been the slams leader by a good margin, probably around 27-28 slams. The biggest factor in his favour is that he is invincible on his surface unlike anyone, no one would have stopped him.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
You have no evidence that YE#1 was more important to those 3 than slams. Everyone here except you and Sampras fans believes YE#1 is uncomparable to slams. Everything is always slam count, where's the thread predicting YE#1 next year? All I see is "predicting slam counts for 2026." YE#1 is bullcrap because it's just gauging overall performance at the end of one season, not the career as a whole. YE#1 is worth between WTF and a slam.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
2 slam diff Nadovic and 4 slam diff Fedovic > 6 slam diff Fedpras and 8 slam diff Nadpras
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
Because Donald Trump dominated the Republican primary and won the presidency first try he is thus a better Republican than Abraham Lincoln, who struggled to win elections multiple times.
ChrisJR3264
Legend
Nadal changed the game with not just equipment but high rpm and pace using power 100 sq in frame in more traditional times.
His style changed how everyone viewed tennis and had to make minor to major adjustments to their game.
He played a physical style and won 22 slams in the big 3 era. Sampras is not better than nadal. Maybe two different eras but if Fed struggled on the backhand with nadals style, I don’t know how Pete would’ve adjusted.
His style changed how everyone viewed tennis and had to make minor to major adjustments to their game.
He played a physical style and won 22 slams in the big 3 era. Sampras is not better than nadal. Maybe two different eras but if Fed struggled on the backhand with nadals style, I don’t know how Pete would’ve adjusted.
Racquet_smash
Hall of Fame
There isn't really an argument to be made for Sampras when he was far worse on clay than Nadal was on grass.
GoatNo1
Legend
nole
sampras
Pete Sampras: “I do think what Novak’s done over the past 10 years, winning the majors, being consistent, finishing No. 1 for seven years, to me it’s a clear sign that he is the greatest of all time.”
and, for him his 6 YE#1s was his biggest achievement not his 14 slams! he offered AO 1999 to finish 98 as no1. he said it many times.
fed
“I just wanted that record of being No. 1 six years in a row so badly," he told me. "The way I looked at it, I had just this one chance to do it in 1998 and I was obsessed. It was my one opportunity to break one of the all-time toughest records. I know how hard it is to stay at No. 1 and to do it for six straight years is a beast.
“Who knows if that will ever be broken?”
AI said:
In 2014, when asked whether he would prefer to be the year-end World No. 1 or win another Grand Slam title, Roger Federer stated that he would prefer to be the year-end No. 1. His reasoning was that the No. 1 ranking signifies an entire year of consistent performance, whereas a Grand Slam title requires being "hot for 2 weeks".
and
Reuters
Obviously this was a fan question and the response should not be taken too seriously but he said:
*Federer ponders question and looks bewildered*
"Uhh I would want to win.....[Changes response].....To be World Number 1. The feeling of being world number one is unlike any other and I would love to be at the top of the game again"
lol wut?
Does Roger...
he talk many times that the best filing is to be no1
muzza offered his career for reaching YE#1 in 2016!
GoatNo1
Legend
slams is not everything in tennis. YE#1, weeks at no1 and slams is T1 GOAT criteria.2 slam diff Nadovic and 4 slam diff Fedovic > 6 slam diff Fedpras and 8 slam diff Nadpras
sampras has MORE YE#1 than fed and rafa. and much more weeks at no1 than rafa. nole has 10 weeks more than DOUBLE rafas weeks at no1. sampras has greater no1 stat than fed and much greater than rafa!
slams are just one of the criteria not all! most people still have fed as greater than rafa despite 2 less slams. in most polls from last few years nole is over 65-70%, fed about 20-25 and rafa on single digits! and they are even on YE#1 so it is mostly due feds weeks at no1!! and that he was better on 2 out of 3 surfaces. for me, they 2 are about equal. as borg said too. fed has 6 to 0 WTF but rafa has 12 more masters so it is mostly 2 slams vs 101 weeks. and for me it is YE# = 50 weeks = slam! so it sound pretty even for them.
but most important... everything counts! slams are just one of many criteria, very important but not only important!
so
3 YE#1 + 219 weeks at no1 + 2 slams (and a lot of other things) is absolutely bigger gap than 1 less YE#1, 77 less weeks at no1 and 8 more slams!!!
and
3 YE#1 + 118 weeks at no1 + 4 slams (and a lot of other things) is also absolutely bigger gap than 1 less YE#1, 24 more weeks at no1 and 6 more slams!!!
if we gives 1 point for each slam and WTF and 1 point for 50 weeks at no1 (apr 1 year) we will get:
3 + 4,5 + 2 = 9,5 vs -1 - 1,5 + 8 = 5,5 so 9,5 > 5,5
and
3 + 2,5 + 4 = 9,5 vs -1 + 0,5 + 6 = 5,5 also again 9,5 > 5,5
Last edited:
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
#1 Sampras was ahead of the slam game by far in his time. Another YE#1 would provide more marginal utility since he was persuaded he was the GOAT already, with no challengers.nole
sampras
Pete Sampras: “I do think what Novak’s done over the past 10 years, winning the majors, being consistent, finishing No. 1 for seven years, to me it’s a clear sign that he is the greatest of all time.”
and, for him his 6 YE#1s was his biggest achievement not his 14 slams! he offered AO 1999 to finish 98 as no1. he said it many times.
fed
“I just wanted that record of being No. 1 six years in a row so badly," he told me. "The way I looked at it, I had just this one chance to do it in 1998 and I was obsessed. It was my one opportunity to break one of the all-time toughest records. I know how hard it is to stay at No. 1 and to do it for six straight years is a beast.
“Who knows if that will ever be broken?”
AI said:
In 2014, when asked whether he would prefer to be the year-end World No. 1 or win another Grand Slam title, Roger Federer stated that he would prefer to be the year-end No. 1. His reasoning was that the No. 1 ranking signifies an entire year of consistent performance, whereas a Grand Slam title requires being "hot for 2 weeks".
and
Reuters
Obviously this was a fan question and the response should not be taken too seriously but he said:
*Federer ponders question and looks bewildered*
"Uhh I would want to win.....[Changes response].....To be World Number 1. The feeling of being world number one is unlike any other and I would love to be at the top of the game again"
lol wut?
Does Roger...
he talk many times that the best filing is to be no1
muzza offered his career for reaching YE#1 in 2016!
#2 Sampras says "winning slams" first. The first thing that always comes to mind with criteria is slams.
#3 Federer is concerned with #1 (both year end and consecutive) because he knows he is owned at the slams by Nadovic. 1 more slam isnt going to put him ahead of the clay bogeyman so he wants to emphasize something he leads in, being no. 1 consecutively
#4 Why did you quote AI...
#5 Of course Murray would care the most about YE#1. He already had his slams and the only thing left to do was snag #1 from Djokovic (which he did when Fedal were out).
Moral is just pros have biases and even they shouldn't be taken word for word based on singular interviews post career. Ask any pro what they wanted the most as a kid and they're all going to say win slams, usually win Wimbledon. 2nd moral is don't use AI for research.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
Very subjective analysis.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
What about Indoors where Sampras is God and Nadal is just a 3rd class player ?
What about HCs where Sampras is better than Nadal ?
GoatNo1
Legend
1. sampras said that his biggest accomplishment are 6 YE#1 after he lost all records too. he said that many times.
2. he said inning slams but put precisely 7 YE#1 and consistency, he underlined it.
3. fed had both weeks and slams record when he talked about no1. he did it many times. lot of players has no1 as biggest goal. but to win slam is easier and more realistic to most players than to be no1. if you talk to young players, to become no1 is highest wish.
4. berceuse AI an quote old quotes that i can not fined so easy any more on the net.
no1 was always the ultimate goal for the greats! just no1 means you are the best player in that moment. YE#1 means you was the best that season. slam title means you was the best in that particular tournament!
GoatNo1
Legend
no. the most player think so. most players wanted most to be no1. it is the ultimate goal for all great athletes in the world. to be best in the world in their sport. slam title means you are best at that particular tournament. no1 means you are the best in the world. and then you have big titles that players do care a lot about. noles double golden master is one of the greatest tennis hachements for exemple!
Angrybirdstar
Professional
this is terminology abuse
think it's arguable that conditions + comp (Lendl + Connors vs Coria + Federer) make McEnroe's streak comparable or even better
GoatNo1
Legend
yea, calling 2010 for peak or prime nole when it was his literally worst season since the season there he won his first title (06) along with his injury lost 2017 season is pretty idiotical but typical for fedal fans! at the same time no fed nor rafa was peak or prime in any of 5-10 or maybe even more years when nole dominate. despite rafa is his peer and both fed and rafa was no1 and won multiple slams both before and after (11-16 for fed and both 11-16 and 18-21 for rafa, ok he was not no1 in 22 but won 2 slams and was no1 in 2019 and was leading race in 2022 for a long time).
Last edited:
Vincent-C
Legend
Not a single YEC for Great Warrior™ Raffi, useless indoors, and a measly two Wimbledons- one of them over a journeyman?
PETE, all the way.
Last edited:
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
We have to also keep in mind that Nadal, in reality, is a clay court specialist. Which is very obvious when we start looking at his titles and then you start looking into the stats of those clay title he’s won.
For me, what’s so amazing about him is that even with that clay court specialist game he was able to overcome those shortcomings and win on all surfaces against the best players in the history of the game.
For me, what’s so amazing about him is that even with that clay court specialist game he was able to overcome those shortcomings and win on all surfaces against the best players in the history of the game.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I agree that Nadal>Pete but if slams are supreme then 24>22
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
No way.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
I never denied that. This thread is not Djokovic vs. Nadal, there's no need to inject the primate GOAT debate here.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
It seems like a rite of passage for every New User to say some atrocious take with a straight face.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
AI is never reliable. I asked the esteemed ChatGPT to analyze the lyrics of Creep, which should be easy given how popular the song is, and it completely made up the lyrics on its own. Never trust AI and do the work yourself instead of letting a robot destroy your capability to do independent analysis.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
You think a Nadal-Pete debate is not part of the overall GOAT debate?
In any case I highlighted the consequence of saying slams are all because many here changed their mind when their fave lost the slam race
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Completely false.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
Pete has zero claim on the GOAT debate. The only ones with a claim need slams in the 20s, who are Nole Fed and Nadal, but it's fairly obvious that Nole has it in the bag.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal has some things over Djokovic, like their head-to-head in majors, being in the top 10 for 900+ consecutive weeks, winning a major for 10 straight calendar years and 15 in total. Nadal was the major leader when he was last playing near his top form, so Djokovic overtook Nadal in Nadal's absence.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
Clay skew has a lot to do with the major h2hs, and the top ten stat is nullified by the no. 1 stat. I'm afraid that even though my boy is Nadal these advantages aren't very significant (major h2h is still pretty big but is weakened by the clay skew).
I do however believe that a Nadal without Mueller Weiss would make things very, very different.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Sampras was better on hard and grass, and Nadal was better on clay. Nadal was so dominant on clay and played much longer than Sampras (won 7 more Slams at ages when Sampras was retired), that it makes it seem like Nadal is much better overall when I wouldn't say that. You can look at the weeks at #1 and see how dominant Sampras was, and he was the king of his era.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
Supremacy in an era doesn't have any commentary on who is a better player, because they played in different eras with different competition. And Sampras having the burning hole of not winning RG is far greater than Nadal not winning YEC.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Who mastered the surfaces better does though and Sampras was winning his YEC's on carpet, a surface Nadal would struggle on. When you break it down, Sampras' conversion rate at AO, Wimbledon and USO are all superior to Nadal's who played more at these tournaments than he did and still won less. So no, Nadal is not a much better player than Sampras.
Vincent-C
Legend
Not to mention Raffi getting constant [illegal att] coaching from his box; taking multiple, strategic MTOs; employing gamesmanship to win big matches over lower-ranked players (Shapovalov at AO '22 as one egregious example)..
Mustard
Bionic Poster
LOL. What the heck could Toni tell him? Rafa has to perform on the court.
Shapovalov got what he deserved at the 2022 Australian Open, i.e. a defeat. He was well over the top.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
The Nadal fans are going to be coming. Nevermind, I see that didn't take long at all. Lol. All jokes aside, the comparison with Nadal and Sampras is closer than a lot believe.
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
I will never understand clowns
who disregard someone with a degenerative disease just because they don't express pain as easily as weaklings like us mortals would when a papercut occurs.
Vincent-C
Legend
Then it should have been no problem at all for Nadal to obey the rules, like eveyone else.. but he didn't;
in fact he pointedly said- in public- that he wouldn't. "Elite" impunity is never pretty.
We disagree.
Last edited:
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Nadal and Novak are the same age, less than one year apart. If Nadal’s career followed an arc such that he couldn’t win as much as Novak that’s on him.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Agree that if you prioritize slams Pete is no longer a GOAT candidate
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal was a world number 2 in 2005, and way ahead of third place.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Yes, I don’t think anyone denies Nadal was the better player earlier in their careers. But a GOAT discussion involves the whole career and its results
4UTRMoutet
Hall of Fame
Once someone achieves > 5 slam lead ahead of the original highest slam count, that's my personal criteria for someone not being capable of contending GOAT.
LOL its not Sampras' fault that the grass season is basically 1 month +1 week since the Aussie turned.
Vincent-C
Legend
Not too shabby. Sampras was a big-game hunter.
MissileBackHand99
Professional
The comparison itself is flawed (and intentionally flawed by the OP, in my opinion). Sampras never had to deal with the # of career-threatening injuries Nadal had to go through (and somehow return to top form from) and the surfaces were vastly different in Pete's era (hence his lack of a French Open title or a Finals appearance
Weeks at #1 isn't the measuring stick for me, as the formula has changed many times over the years/decades...and again, Nadal has had to miss halves of seasons, many Slams (either outright or he's had to WD from), which affected his ranking/time at #1. The fact that he had over 200 weeks and #1 and finishes YE #1 5x is incredible in itself
Weeks at #1 isn't the measuring stick for me, as the formula has changed many times over the years/decades...and again, Nadal has had to miss halves of seasons, many Slams (either outright or he's had to WD from), which affected his ranking/time at #1. The fact that he had over 200 weeks and #1 and finishes YE #1 5x is incredible in itself
Vincent-C
Legend
Special pleading. I was always impressed by Nadal's PR team- they did superb work on his behalf.
Last edited:
GoatNo1
Legend
it is not analys, it is something that he said. and AI find it.
