Who is the Third Best Clay Court Player Ever?

[Nadalgaenger]

Nadal and Borg are obvious choices for the top two spots (you can still argue for Borg being best). Who is the third best of all time?

I don't know much about tennis history before the Fedal era but you can make a decent argument for Federer, no? Had he not played prime Rafa in 5 RG matches he might have 6 RG titles (realistically he would have had 3-4)

Other candidates might be Lendl, Wilander, and even Djokovic (who has been Fed's equal on clay).

Thoughts?

 

[Feddy Kruegerer]

Nadal and Borg are obvious choices for the top two spots (you can still argue for Borg being best). Who is the third best of all time?

I don't know much about tennis history before the Fedal era but you can make a decent argument for Federer, no? Had he not played prime Rafa in 5 RG matches he might have 6 RG titles (realistically he would have had 3-4)

Other candidates might be Lendl, Wilander, and even Djokovic (who has been Fed's equal on clay).

Thoughts?

Not anybody of this era, even though Federer is vastly underrated due to Nadal. The mere thought of Djokovic being considered for the spot is simply outrageous.

 

[Mainad]

Thomas Muster? He was reckoned to be the King of Clay at the height of his career (40 clay titles including 1 RG and 6 Masters) and was world #1.

 

[beast of mallorca]

Make a poll, then we'll see

 

[Feddy Kruegerer]

Thomas Muster? He was reckoned to be the King of Clay at the height of his career (40 clay titles including 1 RG and 6 Masters) and was world #1.

A good candidate, but not enough RG titles. There are so many candidates (even recent ones). Vilas, Guga...

 

[NatF]

Ken Rosewall would be the third best (6 clay majors), perhaps closely followed by Lendl.

 

[BobbyOne]

Ken Rosewall would be the third best (6 clay majors), perhaps closely followed by Lendl.

NatF, Thanks for mentioning Rosewall. I would also put Laver ahead of Lendl and Wilander.

 

[rosewallGOAT]

Thomas Muster? He was reckoned to be the King of Clay at the height of his career (40 clay titles including 1 RG and 6 Masters) and was world #1.

No chance, his RG record is just too lacking comparative to other greats I am sorry to say. My choice would be Borg, 3rd best behind Nadal and Rosewall. 4th best would be Kuerten whe would have 5 or 6 French Opens if his hip didnt go gaga.

 

[NatF]

NatF, Thanks for mentioning Rosewall. I would also put Laver ahead of Lendl and Wilander.

Why would you put Laver ahead of Lendl? Peak level of play?

 

[rosewallGOAT]

Nadal and Borg are obvious choices for the top two spots (you can still argue for Borg being best).

Based on what could you argue Borg. Nadal has his best in every mark. I dont even agree with the consensus of Borg being 2nd best clay courter which is what 95% of people seem to think Rosewall should be considered 2nd best. He would have about 9 French Opens had he not gone pro.

 

[nikdom]

Not Roger. Roger's game is made for hard courts. Although he's had success on clay, I have a hard time envisioning him as a clay-court all-time 3rd greatest.... perhaps one of the guys from the 70s like Vilas, Wilander or even earlier - Gonzalez and Rosewall.

 

[rosewallGOAT]

Not Roger. Roger's game is made for hard courts. Although he's had success on clay, I have a hard time envisioning him as a clay-court all-time 3rd greatest.... perhaps one of the guys from the 70s like Vilas, Wilander or even earlier - Gonzalez and Rosewall.

Vilas has a good claim as top 5 anyway. He would have won so many titles without Borg in his way. Then again is Borg is 2nd or 3rd Vilas has to be atleast a few places behind that as there was a big gap on them in ability.

 

[forzamilan90]

Kenneth Rosewall

Seriously that's the right answer. Nadal and Borg are clearly 1 and 2 however.

 

[abmk]

Not Roger. Roger's game is made for hard courts. Although he's had success on clay, I have a hard time envisioning him as a clay-court all-time 3rd greatest.... perhaps one of the guys from the 70s like Vilas, Wilander or even earlier - Gonzalez and Rosewall.

gonzalez was clearly worse than federer on clay.

in the open era, I'd place lendl, wilander, kuerten above federer overall ...vilas, muster, bruguera, courier at a similar level.

pre-open era, the best is probably rosewall ...

 

[abmk]

Based on what could you argue Borg. Nadal has his best in every mark. I dont even agree with the consensus of Borg being 2nd best clay courter which is what 95% of people seem to think Rosewall should be considered 2nd best. He would have about 9 French Opens had he not gone pro.

umm, peak level of play ?

 

[abmk]

NatF, Thanks for mentioning Rosewall. I would also put Laver ahead of Lendl and Wilander.

but of course, you have to pump up laver to pump up rosewall, no ?

 

[zam88]

I would definitely say that someone who's been to 5 RG finals, has 1 RG, and who's only opposition that would've kept him from 4 titles at a minimum was considered the best on the surface of all-time.. would need to be HEAVILY involved in teh discussion

 

[abmk]

Thomas Muster? He was reckoned to be the King of Clay at the height of his career (40 clay titles including 1 RG and 6 Masters) and was world #1.

you do realize that muster made it past the QF at RG only twice ? ( 1990 and 95 ) ... he's probably the most over-rated claycourter IMO ...

(cue : enter Mustard :twisted: )

 

[rosewallGOAT]

My top 10 would be:

1. Nadal- way ahead of all others



2. Rosewall
3. Borg
4. Kuerten
5. Federer
6. Lendl
7. Wilander
8. Vilas
9. Muster
10. Djokovic

Djokovic will probably rise to #4 or #5 eventually though.

 

[BobbyOne]

Why would you put Laver ahead of Lendl? Peak level of play?

NatF, Yes, Laver at his peak level was close to Rosewall's peak.

 

[BobbyOne]

but of course, you have to pump up laver to pump up rosewall, no ?

abmk, You just cannot resist to be nasty. You should accept the facts. Fact is that Laver was close to Rosewall on clay (about even in their hth).

As you have seen I have refused to give Rosewall the No.1 place on clay!

 

[BobbyOne]

My top 10 would be:

1. Nadal- way ahead of all others



2. Rosewall
3. Borg
4. Kuerten
5. Federer
6. Lendl
7. Wilander
8. Vilas
9. Muster
10. Djokovic

Djokovic will probably rise to #4 or #5 eventually though.

rosewallGOAT, Interesting list. I would include Gimeno and Segura instead of Muster and Djokovic and put down Federer several places.

 

[abmk]

abmk, You just cannot resist to be nasty. You should accept the facts. Fact is that Laver was close to Rosewall on clay (about even in their hth).

I go by achievements, not h2h.

purely peak level wise, I don't see that much of a difference b/w rosewall, laver, federer, bruguera, lendl, wilander, courier, muster, vilas etc on clay .. I'd place kuerten at #3 after nadal and borg in fact

As you have seen I have refused to give Rosewall the No.1 place on clay!

maybe you've realized you cannot put him above nadal or borg. peak level wise, they're clearly better .

 

[monfed]

Nadal is.

10c

 

[rickyvaldez]

Nadal is clearly 1st but Borg, Rosewall, Cochet, and LaCoste could all have a claim on 2nd. So it is tough to say who is 3rd when who is 2nd isnt even obvious. Why is anyone talking about Federer, he probably isnt even top 15.

 

[rickyvaldez]

you do realize that muster made it past the QF at RG only twice ? ( 1990 and 95 ) ... he's probably the most over-rated claycourter IMO ...

(cue : enter Mustard :twisted: )

I hated Muster's personality and playing style but the man was a beast on clay. He has like over 40 titles. That more than compensates for his dissapointing Garros record, since he did win it atleast one. He also played in a really tough clay era with Courier, Bruguera, Costa, a bunch of Spaniards, Medvedev, alot tougher than Nadal, Djokovic, and Federer have to face today.

 

[timnz]

You might want to see this other thread

Can I encourage you to look at this thread. It has been going for 4 years now, about the list of top clay court players of all time

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=261831

I like hoodjem list from that thread . I think though that Hans Nüsslein and Karel Koželuh should be a lot higher and perhaps Jaroslav Drobný too. Here is his top 10

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

In that thread Rosewall often came up as the number 3 clay court player with other people as well. He had 6 Major Wins at Roland Garros - (French Amateur 1953, French Open in 1968 + 4 French Pro wins at Roland Garros on Clay)

 

[zagor]

Guga IMO.

Nadal is.

10c

Well according to his fans Nadal:

-Won more than half of his FO titles in a weak era (2005-2007 and 2011).

-His main rival on clay for the majority of his career was a vastly overrated, mentally weak crybaby with no BH.


So maybe you do have a point.

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

RFederer/NDjokovic are certainly not the third best clay-court players in world history. They aren't even in the top 100.

 

[The-Champ]

My top 10 would be:

1. Nadal- way ahead of all others



2. Rosewall
3. Borg
4. Kuerten
5. Federer
6. Lendl
7. Wilander
8. Vilas
9. Muster
10. Djokovic

Djokovic will probably rise to #4 or #5 eventually though.

Why the hell is DJokovic in that list and not Ferrero, Bruguera, Moya, Agassi?

 

[The-Champ]

Playing level:

1. Nadal

2/3. Borg/Federer

 

[BobbyOne]

I go by achievements, not h2h.

purely peak level wise, I don't see that much of a difference b/w rosewall, laver, federer, bruguera, lendl, wilander, courier, muster, vilas etc on clay .. I'd place kuerten at #3 after nadal and borg in fact



maybe you've realized you cannot put him above nadal or borg. peak level wise, they're clearly better .

You go by achievements. I go by achievements plus playing level.

 

[Rock Strongo]

RFederer/NDjokovic are certainly not the third best clay-court players in world history. They aren't even in the top 100.

Name at least 97 players they're worse than.

 

[BobbyOne]

Nadal is clearly 1st but Borg, Rosewall, Cochet, and LaCoste could all have a claim on 2nd. So it is tough to say who is 3rd when who is 2nd isnt even obvious. Why is anyone talking about Federer, he probably isnt even top 15.

rickyvaldez, I guess because many younger fans don't know about very rich history. I agree that Federer is probably not top ten on clay, arguably even not top 15.

 

[BobbyOne]

Can I encourage you to look at this thread. It has been going for 4 years now, about the list of top clay court players of all time

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=261831

I like hoodjem list from that thread . I think though that Hans Nüsslein and Karel Koželuh should be a lot higher and perhaps Jaroslav Drobný too. Here is his top 10

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

In that thread Rosewall often came up as the number 3 clay court player with other people as well. He had 6 Major Wins at Roland Garros - (French Amateur 1953, French Open in 1968 + 4 French Pro wins at Roland Garros on Clay)

timnz, Nice list. I would increase Laver's place plus add Segura, Trabert and Gimeno. Good that you mention Nüsslein and Kozeluh!

I could also mention Hoad, Pancho Gonzalez, Nastase, Vilas.

 

[malbaker86]

Mats Wilander then Federer

 

[SStrikerR]

If you're not first, you're last.

 

[90's Clay]

Borg at #3.

I got Nadal at #1 and Rosewall at #2

 

[TMF]

I agree that Federer is probably not top ten on clay, arguably even not top 15.

The poll has Borg at #2 and Roger at #3 best cc player of all time.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=14131

 

[Tennis_Monk]

Nadal and Borg are obvious choices for the top two spots (you can still argue for Borg being best). Who is the third best of all time?

I don't know much about tennis history before the Fedal era but you can make a decent argument for Federer, no? Had he not played prime Rafa in 5 RG matches he might have 6 RG titles (realistically he would have had 3-4)

Other candidates might be Lendl, Wilander, and even Djokovic (who has been Fed's equal on clay).

Thoughts?

No. I wouldnt argue Borg for best...he probably was until Nadal came along...
Nadal is clear front runner...Borg is logical second...

I would say Guga..

 

[cc0509]

The poll has Borg at #2 and Roger at #3 best cc player of all time.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=14131

That poll is stupid. Roger is not the number 3 best clay court player behind Nadal and Borg! How can Roger who has 1 FO be considered better than guys like Kuerten, Wilander and Lendl who won 3 FO's? That makes no sense.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Can I encourage you to look at this thread. It has been going for 4 years now, about the list of top clay court players of all time

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=261831

I like hoodjem list from that thread . I think though that Hans Nüsslein and Karel Koželuh should be a lot higher and perhaps Jaroslav Drobný too. Here is his top 10

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

In that thread Rosewall often came up as the number 3 clay court player with other people as well. He had 6 Major Wins at Roland Garros - (French Amateur 1953, French Open in 1968 + 4 French Pro wins at Roland Garros on Clay)

Are you joking? Federer would smoke most of these guys on clay! He just had to contend with the one guy who tops your list year in and year out! He was able to take out Djokovic 2.0 on clay in 2011!

 

[Nadalgaenger]

That poll is stupid. Roger is not the number 3 best clay court player behind Nadal and Borg! How can Roger who has 1 FO be considered better than guys like Kuerten, Wilander and Lendl who won 3 FO's? That makes no sense.

Right well just remember that none of those guys had to deal with Nadal! How many FO titles would Wilander or Kuerten have won against Nadal?

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Fed would have torn these moonballers up on the clay:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc_DIK9aaIs

 

[Tennis_Monk]

Right well just remember that none of those guys had to deal with Nadal! How many FO titles would Wilander or Kuerten have won against Nadal?

So we ignore actual achievements and play a "What If" and reward Federer ?

 

[cc0509]

Right well just remember that none of those guys had to deal with Nadal! How many FO titles would Wilander or Kuerten have won against Nadal?

More than Federer would. The only reason Federer was number 2 in this era next to Nadal is because this is a weak clay era. IMO Federer is not a great cc player, he is a great grass and hc player.

 

[timnz]

History

Are you joking? Federer would smoke most of these guys on clay! He just had to contend with the one guy who tops your list year in and year out! He was able to take out Djokovic 2.0 on clay in 2011!

It all depends on how you judge. I was judging on historical achievement (which is how most people do when comparing players over the entire tennis history). Wilding for instance was unbeaten on clay for around 4 years covering a span of over 30 clay court tournaments. He won around 75-80 tournaments on clay. Drobny won around 90 tournaments on clay.

 

[zagor]

Right well just remember that none of those guys had to deal with Nadal! How many FO titles would Wilander or Kuerten have won against Nadal?

Guga at his best would challenge Nadal far more than Fed did IMO, Wilander while I don't like the guy was a far better tactician than Fed and would have a fair shot at beating atleast younger 2005-2006 FO version of Nadal.

Regardless, what if games are pointless, Fed won what he won, he can't be the 3d best CC player with one FO under his name as far as I'm concerned.

 

[cc0509]

Guga at his best would challenge Nadal far more than Fed did IMO, Wilander while I don't like the guy was a far better tactician than Fed and would have a fair shot at beating atleast younger 2005-2006 FO version of Nadal.

Regardless, what if games are pointless, Fed won what he won, he can't be the 3d best CC player with one FO under his name as far as I'm concerned.

Exactly!!!!!!!

 

[abmk]

Guga at his best would challenge Nadal far more than Fed did IMO, Wilander while I don't like the guy was a far better tactician than Fed and would have a fair shot at beating atleast younger 2005-2006 FO version of Nadal.

Regardless, what if games are pointless, Fed won what he won, he can't be the 3d best CC player with one FO under his name as far as I'm concerned.

agreed. If fed somehow won another FO, a long shot, then you could make a reasonably legit argument for him being the 3rd best clay courter of the open era ( over kuerten, lendl, wilander ) . Until then no.