Who was the greater clay court player - Vilas or Kuerten

[timnz]

there are some other threads on greatness list of clay court players. I thought I would have a focussed one on Vilas vs Kuerten

kuerten and Vilas were very close - guga has 3 clay majors and Vilas has 2. But Vilas has 3 runner ups at Roland Garros and 7 Masters 1000 equivalents on clay. Guga has 0 Roland Garros runner-ups and 4 clay masters 1000. Vilas has 49 clay court titles vs only 14 for Kuerten. Hence, I put Vilas over Kuerten. One more clay slam didn't outweigh 3 more runner-ups, 3 more Masters 1000 equivalents and 35 more clay court titles.

Thoughts?

 

[pc1]

I agree and now that I think about it, it's not really close. I will say that Kuerten, because his shots were more penetrating could reach a higher level of play. Two of my all time favorites. The summer tour in 1974 on television here in the United States seemed to be the Guillermo Vilas show. He was on every week it seemed played guys like Borg, Laver, Solomon, Dibbs, Orantes, Ramirez, Nastase. He became a huge favorite in the United States. I think I fell asleep a few times late at night watching matches like Vilas versus Solomon which could last forever.

 

[abmk]

How the hell is it fair to say just one more clay slam, when Kuerten didn't even have the chance to play a slam on green clay 3 times at his prime ?

3 RGs to 1. Way higher peak level. I don't think its particularly close.

 

[pc1]

How the hell is it fair to say just one more clay slam, when Kuerten didn't even have the chance to play a slam on green clay 3 times at his prime ?

3 RGs to 1. Way higher peak level. I don't think its particularly close.

Always the contrarian. One US Open to none also for Vilas. And since when did Kuerten ever have a year like Vilas in 1977? I don't think Kuerten ever had that peak level for a year that Vilas had. Vilas won about as many tournaments in that year as Kuerten won in his career! Vilas won I think 14 won clay court tournament that year with two clay majors. Kuerten won 17 clay tournaments I believe in his career with 3 French Opens.

I will agree with you that Kuerten was better for one match than Vilas.

Two fantastic clay players and I enjoyed watching both.

Like your avatar ABMK.

Edit-Your avatar just reminded me that Vilas had Borg in his way while Kuerten, while I think the world of him didn't have anyone on clay that level as his opponent.

 

[abmk]

Always the contrarian. One US Open to none also for Vilas. And since when did Kuerten ever have a year like Vilas in 1977? I don't think Kuerten ever had that peak level for a year that Vilas had. Vilas won about as many tournaments in that year as Kuerten won in his career! Vilas won I think 14 won clay court tournament that year with two clay majors. Kuerten won 17 clay tournaments I believe in his career with 3 French Opens.

I will agree with you that Kuerten was better for one match than Vilas.

Two fantastic clay players and I enjoyed watching both.

Like your avatar ABMK.

Edit-Your avatar just reminded me that Vilas had Borg in his way while Kuerten, while I think the world of him didn't have anyone on clay that level as his opponent.

Yes, Vilas did have Borg around, but he failed vs others as well at RG from 74 onwards - solomon twice, pecci, noah, wilander, orantes ...not impressive. the only time he won, borg wasn't playing at RG ( 77 ) and he only beat ramirez and gottfried ...uhh, no thanks ...

Look at kuerten's draw in 97 - Muster, Medvedev, Kafelnikov, Bruguera ...that's treacherous.
00 and 01 weren't easy either with : kafelnikov/ferrero/norman and kafelnikov/ferrero/corretja.


Re : peak performance in a year , but the conversation was not about year around performance, just about clay. To play the devil's advocate, Kuerten ended 2000 as YE #1 ( winning RG and YEC) ..Vilas didn't end any year as #1 ( not official anyways )

P.S. Regarding the avatar, yeah, wimby 09. I've had that since a long time though.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

I will go with Guga , Guga draw in 97 was really tough like Sampras in Us open 2001 or Fed in AO 2004.
I personally think even Fed and Novak has better peak level ( see Fed level in Rome 2006 , in 2009 or RG 11) than Vilas. Hell Novak has more masters on clay(8 masters) including prestigious Rome 4 times and MC 2 times and the only reason he and Fed has less masters or RG because of clay goat , legend Rafa.

 

[jean pierre]

They both won all the big clay tournaments (FO, Rome, Monte-Carlo, Hambourg ...). It's true that Kuerten won more Grand Slams on clay than Vilas : 3 vs 2. But I think that Vilas's results are better -by far : he played 5 Grand Slam finals (vs 3) + 2 SF (vs 0), and, especially, he won 49 titles (the record, shared with Nadal) vs 14 for Kuerten ! So, no doubt for me that Vilas is better on clay (and in general) that Kuerten.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

there are some other threads on greatness list of clay court players. I thought I would have a focussed one on Vilas vs Kuerten

kuerten and Vilas were very close - guga has 3 clay majors and Vilas has 2. But Vilas has 3 runner ups at Roland Garros and 7 Masters 1000 equivalents on clay. Guga has 0 Roland Garros runner-ups and 4 clay masters 1000. Vilas has 49 clay court titles vs only 14 for Kuerten. Hence, I put Vilas over Kuerten. One more clay slam didn't outweigh 3 more runner-ups, 3 more Masters 1000 equivalents and 35 more clay court titles.

Thoughts?

Another thing is Vilas played some years with 2 clay majors now if Guga can win YEC on fast hard then think in 2000 or 01, when he was best claycourter what he could have done in us open , hell he even went into quaterfinal in 99,01 when it was played on fast court.
Guga got injured and that killed his career, he was sure shot to get 5 RG and even with his small career he won more clay majors than Vilas

 

[jean pierre]

Yes, Vilas did have Borg around, but he failed vs others as well at RG from 74 onwards - solomon twice, pecci, noah, wilander, orantes ...not impressive. the only time he won, borg wasn't playing at RG ( 77 ) and he only beat ramirez and gottfried ...uhh, no thanks ...

Look at kuerten's draw in 97 - Muster, Medvedev, Kafelnikov, Bruguera ...that's treacherous.
00 and 01 weren't easy either with : kafelnikov/ferrero/norman and kafelnikov/ferrero/corretja.


Re : peak performance in a year , but the conversation was not about year around performance, just about clay. To play the devil's advocate, Kuerten ended 2000 as YE #1 ( winning RG and YEC) ..Vilas didn't end any year as #1 ( not official anyways )

P.S. Regarding the avatar, yeah, wimby 09. I've had that since a long time though.

He "only" beated Fibak, Ramirez and Gottfried in FO 77, but Fibak, Ramirez and Gottfried were top 10 players (it's like Nishikori or Raonic today). Gottfried was number 4 I think. He won several tournaments before the FO (beating Borg 2 times !). In USO, Vilas heated great clay players (Higueras, Solomon) before beating Connors.

 

[NonP]

Joke thread. A few things:

• Red clay and Har-Tru are not the same surface.
• Comparing player A's results at two majors with B's at just one event makes it moot.
  
• A zillion runner-up spots don't supersede a single actual championship, let alone two, despite what the bean counters like to think.
• Vilas won his sole RG title against a depleted field. The same can't be said of Kuerten's three titles.

And on a more subjective note, he might not have been as consistent as Vilas, Muster and other workhorses, but Guga in top flight would be a serious threat to any clay-courter in history, yes including Borg and Nadal. You're talking about a guy that could make the likes of Bruguera, Ferrero and Federer look like amateurs by comparison, and one who might well have grabbed a couple more FOs if not for his premature decline due to injury.

I'm generally reluctant to make sweeping pronouncements on players before my time but what I know and have seen from Vilas fails to convince me he belongs in the same exalted company as Kuerten. It's not even close between these two. The only guys who can challenge Kuerten as the 3rd greatest clay-courter of the Open era are Lendl, Wilander and maybe Bruguera and Courier, and with the only possible exception of Ivan I'd put Guga over all of them. The bean counters really need to get a grip and try harder not to miss the forest for the trees.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

Joke thread. A few things:

• Red clay and Har-Tru are not the same surface.
• Comparing player A's results at two majors with B's at just one event makes it moot.
  
• A zillion runner-up spots don't supersede a single actual championship, let alone two, despite what the bean counters like to think.
• Vilas won his sole RG title against a depleted field. The same can't be said of Kuerten's three titles.

And on a more subjective note, he might not have been as consistent as Vilas, Muster and other workhorses, but Guga in top flight would be a serious threat to any clay-courter in history, yes including Borg and Nadal. You're talking about a guy that could make the likes of Bruguera, Ferrero and Federer look like amateurs by comparison, and one who might well have grabbed a couple more FOs if not for his premature decline due to injury.

I'm generally reluctant to make sweeping pronouncements on players before my time but what I know and have seen from Vilas fails to convince me he belongs in the same exalted company as Kuerten. It's not even close between these two. The only guys who can challenge Kuerten as the 3rd greatest clay-courter of the Open era are Lendl, Wilander and maybe Bruguera and Courier, and with the only possible exception of Ivan I'd put Guga over all of them. The bean counters really need to get a grip and try harder not to miss the forest for the trees.

Yes totally agree with you , Guga at his peak can defeat both Rafa and Borg on RG and red clay in general and this is the biggest reason I went with Guga. For me Guga peak on red clay is even better than Lendl but this is different topic altogether.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Kuerten was one of the first player to use a polyester strings during the late 90's. How much this technology advantage accounts for his success? I feel it should be taken into account. Some players fade in part because they use the old technology, some rise in part because they use the new one. It's especially important in big technology shift like the early 80's and late 90's.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Always the contrarian. One US Open to none also for Vilas. And since when did Kuerten ever have a year like Vilas in 1977? I don't think Kuerten ever had that peak level for a year that Vilas had. Vilas won about as many tournaments in that year as Kuerten won in his career! Vilas won I think 14 won clay court tournament that year with two clay majors. Kuerten won 17 clay tournaments I believe in his career with 3 French Opens.

I will agree with you that Kuerten was better for one match than Vilas.

Two fantastic clay players and I enjoyed watching both.

Like your avatar ABMK.

Edit-Your avatar just reminded me that Vilas had Borg in his way while Kuerten, while I think the world of him didn't have anyone on clay that level as his opponent.

Good post.
It's also true that the clay field from the mid 90's to the mid 00's was wide open. Here are the last 4 players at RG from 96 to 2001.

96: Kafelnikov, Stich, Sampras, Rosset
97: Kuerten, Bruguera, Dweulf, Rafter
98: Moya, Corretja, Mantilla, Pioline
99: Agassi, Medvedev, Hrbaty, Meligeni
00: Kuerten, Norman, Ferrero, Squillari
01: Kuerten, Corretja, Ferrero, Grosjean.

The missing relevant clay player from this time frame is Rios, but he was very bad in slams.

 

[timnz]

Joke thread. A few things:

• Red clay and Har-Tru are not the same surface.
• Comparing player A's results at two majors with B's at just one event makes it moot.
  
• A zillion runner-up spots don't supersede a single actual championship, let alone two, despite what the bean counters like to think.
• Vilas won his sole RG title against a depleted field. The same can't be said of Kuerten's three titles.

And on a more subjective note, he might not have been as consistent as Vilas, Muster and other workhorses, but Guga in top flight would be a serious threat to any clay-courter in history, yes including Borg and Nadal. You're talking about a guy that could make the likes of Bruguera, Ferrero and Federer look like amateurs by comparison, and one who might well have grabbed a couple more FOs if not for his premature decline due to injury.

I'm generally reluctant to make sweeping pronouncements on players before my time but what I know and have seen from Vilas fails to convince me he belongs in the same exalted company as Kuerten. It's not even close between these two. The only guys who can challenge Kuerten as the 3rd greatest clay-courter of the Open era are Lendl, Wilander and maybe Bruguera and Courier, and with the only possible exception of Ivan I'd put Guga over all of them. The bean counters really need to get a grip and try harder not to miss the forest for the trees.

Don't forget Vilas' clay win at the 1977 US open (the thread was about clay, har-tru is clay) So that means he is only 1 clay major behind Kuerten and ahead on every other statistic on clay

 

[NonP]

Yes totally agree with you , Guga at his peak can defeat both Rafa and Borg on RG and red clay in general and this is the biggest reason I went with Guga. For me Guga peak on red clay is even better than Lendl but this is different topic altogether.

Guga wasn't among the very quickest/fastest players, at least not on par with Borg and Nadal, but he was unusually flexible which combined with his long limbs gave him tremendous court coverage. And as many including myself have pointed out Guga had no weak side (at least on clay, though I think his supposedly long backswing tends to be exaggerated) and his height would've meant that Borg's and Rafa's nasty topspin would be largely neutralized against him (the same reason why Guga himself struggled against Kafelnikov and Norman, and why Soderling was able to give Rafa occasional fits). What else? Bigger serve than Borg and Rafa (as Limpin noted on the other thread), fine transition game, and virtually boundless stamina, perhaps his most underrated asset (I really can't recall Guga ever running out of gas).

All that said Borg and Rafa were such rocks on their turf I still expect them to best Guga in an extended series, but he's probably the only one since '68 I'd give more than a puncher's chance to steal 3 if not more out of 10 matches from the two titans. There would be spells where Guga's brilliance would be too much even for the duo, especially in a FO final where they'd presumably meet as Guga like his contemporary Pete usually brought his best to his final appearances, and it's their unbeatable combo of all-time-great FH, seemingly telekinetic feel and feet for the dirt, and otherworldly consistency that would eventually carry them through.

As for Guga vs. Lendl, I do agree for the most part but Ivan was really second to none in workmanlike consistency which gives me some pause, plus there's that ATG FH of his own. But yes, I'd still back Guga against Lendl in a hypothetical FO final.

Don't forget Vilas' clay win at the 1977 US open. So that means he is only 1 clay major behind Kuerten and ahead on every statistic on clay

I'm beginning to think you may be hopeless. Did you even read my post?

 

[NatF]

I find it ridiculous to:

1) Equate Har-Tru with red clay
2) Ignore the advantage that playing 2 clay slams gives to Vilas with regards to his slam count

Kuerten's FO record is leaps and bounds better than Vilas', Vilas is leaps and bounds a head in the smaller tournaments. I'd bet on Kuerten in a match.

So edge to Kuerten for me.

 

[jean pierre]

I find it ridiculous to:

1) Equate Har-Tru with red clay
2) Ignore the advantage that playing 2 clay slams gives to Vilas with regards to his slam count

Kuerten's FO record is leaps and bounds better than Vilas', Vilas is leaps and bounds a head in the smaller tournaments. I'd bet on Kuerten in a match.

So edge to Kuerten for me.

Vilas won 49 titles on clay (Kuerten 14). Some of them are small tournaments, but only of them.

 

[NatF]

Vilas won 49 titles on clay (Kuerten 14). Some of them are small tournaments, but only of them.

Indeed, Vilas is miles a head in smaller tournaments - not necessarily small but smaller than majors is what I meant. Players played and won more tournaments in those days though which should be considered as well.

 

[timnz]

Guga wasn't among the very quickest/fastest players, at least not on par with Borg and Nadal, but he was unusually flexible which combined with his long limbs gave him tremendous court coverage. And as many including myself have pointed out Guga had no weak side (at least on clay, though I think his supposedly long backswing tends to be exaggerated) and his height would've meant that Borg's and Rafa's nasty topspin would be largely neutralized against him (the same reason why Guga himself struggled against Kafelnikov and Norman, and why Soderling was able to give Rafa occasional fits). What else? Bigger serve than Borg and Rafa (as Limpin noted on the other thread), fine transition game, and virtually boundless stamina, perhaps his most underrated asset (I really can't recall Guga ever running out of gas).

All that said Borg and Rafa were such rocks on their turf I still expect them to best Guga in an extended series, but he's probably the only one since '68 I'd give more than a puncher's chance to steal 3 if not more out of 10 matches from the two titans. There would be spells where Guga's brilliance would be too much even for the duo, especially in a FO final where they'd presumably meet as Guga like his contemporary Pete usually brought his best to his final appearances, and it's their unbeatable combo of all-time-great FH, seemingly telekinetic feel and feet for the dirt, and otherworldly consistency that would eventually carry them through.

As for Guga vs. Lendl, I do agree for the most part but Ivan was really second to none in workmanlike consistency which gives me some pause, plus there's that ATG FH of his own. But yes, I'd still back Guga against Lendl in a hypothetical FO final.



I'm beginning to think you may be hopeless. Did you even read my post?

I did read your post, especially your comments on har-tru. The thread was about clay courts - it didn't narrow it to European red clay. About the hopeless part, you get that the idea of the forum is to express opinions , right? The question is can someone express them without insults. I always think an argument is better on its own terms, without put downs.

 

[pc1]

He "only" beated Fibak, Ramirez and Gottfried in FO 77, but Fibak, Ramirez and Gottfried were top 10 players (it's like Nishikori or Raonic today). Gottfried was number 4 I think. He won several tournaments before the FO (beating Borg 2 times !). In USO, Vilas heated great clay players (Higueras, Solomon) before beating Connors.

I was amused when ABMK wrote that. Ramirez and Gottfried were excellent players and Fibak was very very good. Really top notch players. Gottfried was very tough against anyone in 1977. Ramirez is forgotten today but superb.

I find it ridiculous to:

1) Equate Har-Tru with red clay
2) Ignore the advantage that playing 2 clay slams gives to Vilas with regards to his slam count

Kuerten's FO record is leaps and bounds better than Vilas', Vilas is leaps and bounds a head in the smaller tournaments. I'd bet on Kuerten in a match.

So edge to Kuerten for me.

Okay. I can reasonably see that.

I'd still go with Vilas over the course of an average year during his prime for level of play. I will point out that Vilas had the US Open on clay for only three years from 1975 to 1977.

The advantage Kuerten has over Vilas is that his shots were more penetrating. I think Vilas had the edge in overall consistency on clay and perhaps slightly in speed.

They actually have a lot in common. Vilas, like Kuerten had a fabulous backhand which Bud Collins compared to Laver's backhand. Bud actually asked Laver about VIlas' backhand (after Vilas beat Laver on clay by the way) and how it compared to his own. Laver was very complimentary when discussing the Vilas backhand. Both were extremely likeable personalities.

VIlas actually reminds me a lot of Nadal. Both super heavy topspin on their forehands. Both with excellent to super speed with Nadal being faster. Both have good but not great serves. Both lefties who can rally forever. Vilas I believe had the superior backhand and Nadal the superior forehand. Both are very strong. I would love to see them arm wrestle. Vilas is one of those players who would have thrived with today's racquets.

 

[Phoenix1983]

there are some other threads on greatness list of clay court players. I thought I would have a focussed one on Vilas vs Kuerten

kuerten and Vilas were very close - guga has 3 clay majors and Vilas has 2. But Vilas has 3 runner ups at Roland Garros and 7 Masters 1000 equivalents on clay. Guga has 0 Roland Garros runner-ups and 4 clay masters 1000. Vilas has 49 clay court titles vs only 14 for Kuerten. Hence, I put Vilas over Kuerten. One more clay slam didn't outweigh 3 more runner-ups, 3 more Masters 1000 equivalents and 35 more clay court titles.

Thoughts?

This is a bit biased, because Guga only had one clay major available to play in, whereas Vilas had two (for a period).

If the US Open had been played on clay for a few years during Guga's peak, surely he would have won it at least once?

 

[Phoenix1983]

Joke thread. A few things:

• Red clay and Har-Tru are not the same surface.
• Comparing player A's results at two majors with B's at just one event makes it moot.
  
• A zillion runner-up spots don't supersede a single actual championship, let alone two, despite what the bean counters like to think.
• Vilas won his sole RG title against a depleted field. The same can't be said of Kuerten's three titles.

And on a more subjective note, he might not have been as consistent as Vilas, Muster and other workhorses, but Guga in top flight would be a serious threat to any clay-courter in history, yes including Borg and Nadal. You're talking about a guy that could make the likes of Bruguera, Ferrero and Federer look like amateurs by comparison, and one who might well have grabbed a couple more FOs if not for his premature decline due to injury.

I'm generally reluctant to make sweeping pronouncements on players before my time but what I know and have seen from Vilas fails to convince me he belongs in the same exalted company as Kuerten. It's not even close between these two. The only guys who can challenge Kuerten as the 3rd greatest clay-courter of the Open era are Lendl, Wilander and maybe Bruguera and Courier, and with the only possible exception of Ivan I'd put Guga over all of them. The bean counters really need to get a grip and try harder not to miss the forest for the trees.

Brilliant post, thanks for this. Certainly puts pc1 in his place.

 

[jean pierre]

This is a bit biased, because Guga only had one clay major available to play in, whereas Vilas had two (for a period).

If the US Open had been played on clay for a few years during Guga's peak, surely he would have won it at least once?

Yes but if the USO had been played on clay from 1978 to 1983, maybe Vilas would have won it several times ...
I don't think it's possible to say "if". If we just look the results, Vilas is better than Kuerten on clay, even if Kuerten won one more Grand Slam.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Yes but if the USO had been played on clay from 1978 to 1983, maybe Vilas would have won it several times ...
I don't think it's possible to say "if". If we just look the results, Vilas is better than Kuerten on clay, even if Kuerten won one more Grand Slam.

I really don't think he is. He won one FO when his great rival Borg was absent, otherwise he lost to Borg and many other clay court specialists there. He won lots of minor tournaments, sure.

Guga also displayed a higher level than Vilas and would've been more able to compete with prime Nadal and Borg.

 

[Moose Malloy]

I think its rather telling that Borg had a 30 match win streak the same time Vilas was having his 50 match win streak in 77. There were so many events held that year and top players had no requirements to play the same ones, so it was very easy to pick a favorable schedule and dodge other top players for basically an entire season. Basically Wimbledon, the USO, and the Masters were the only events that had all the top players entered that year. Vilas is a fine player, but using stats alone to make these sort of comparisons is pretty silly.

 

[jean pierre]

I think its rather telling that Borg had a 30 match win streak the same time Vilas was having his 50 match win streak in 77. There were so many events held that year and top players had no requirements to play the same ones, so it was very easy to pick a favorable schedule and dodge other top players for basically an entire season. Basically Wimbledon, the USO, and the Masters were the only events that had all the top players entered that year. Vilas is a fine player, but using stats alone to make these sort of comparisons is pretty silly.

In 1977, Vilas beated, in the tournaments he won, a lot of Grand Slam winners (Connors, Nastase, Panatta, Gerulaitis, Tanner, Smith, McEnroe, Kodes) and top 10 players (Gottfried, Fibak, Solomon, Ramirez, Pecci, Dibbs ...). I don't think it was favorable schedule, except maybe 2 or 3 tournaments.

 

[Limpinhitter]

there are some other threads on greatness list of clay court players. I thought I would have a focussed one on Vilas vs Kuerten

kuerten and Vilas were very close - guga has 3 clay majors and Vilas has 2. But Vilas has 3 runner ups at Roland Garros and 7 Masters 1000 equivalents on clay. Guga has 0 Roland Garros runner-ups and 4 clay masters 1000. Vilas has 49 clay court titles vs only 14 for Kuerten. Hence, I put Vilas over Kuerten. One more clay slam didn't outweigh 3 more runner-ups, 3 more Masters 1000 equivalents and 35 more clay court titles.

Thoughts?

In my view, in terms of peak level of play, Kuerten was the greater clay court player. In terms of career accomplishments, Vilas was the greater clay court player.

 

[NonP]

I did read your post, especially your comments on har-tru. The thread was about clay courts - it didn't narrow it to European red clay. About the hopeless part, you get that the idea of the forum is to express opinions , right? The question is can someone express them without insults. I always think an argument is better on its own terms, without put downs.

Again you're still trying to put traditional red clay and Har-Tru in the same nebulous category. Hundreds of players both amateur and professional have remarked on how differently the two surfaces play, and HT has never been more than a niche marketing gimmick that had its brief spotlight for those three years which proved to be a failed experiment, and is an almost complete non-factor today, used only by one minor WTA event and virtually unknown outside the US. And even if we were to count green clay we'd still be comparing Vilas' results from two majors to Kuerten's from one. What's the point of this comparison if it ain't gonna be apples to apples?

And you have this habit of taking the higher ground and asking to be open-minded. I'll grant that you're better behaved than I am and probably ever will be, but you really don't seem to be very open to exploring other people's opinions yourself. My main point was that numbers mean nothing without context and the RG-USO muddle was a textbook case I just cited, but you just ignore it and push this bean-counting approach that others agree is flawed. It may be time to ask yourself why.

Brilliant post, thanks for this. Certainly puts pc1 in his place.

Wasn't really meant for a particular poster. Looks like you have a bone to pick with someone.

I think its rather telling that Borg had a 30 match win streak the same time Vilas was having his 50 match win streak in 77. There were so many events held that year and top players had no requirements to play the same ones, so it was very easy to pick a favorable schedule and dodge other top players for basically an entire season. Basically Wimbledon, the USO, and the Masters were the only events that had all the top players entered that year. Vilas is a fine player, but using stats alone to make these sort of comparisons is pretty silly.

Not only that, but when he did face Borg at Nice and Monte-Carlo he promptly lost. And at the two remaining European pre-RG events of the spring CC season (Hamburg and Rome) he didn't even get past the QF. Of course there's the usual comeback that it was still Borg's fault not to compete at RG, but in addition to him Jimbo, Vitas, Orantes and Stockton skipped it. That's 5 of the year-end top 10 missing, hardly the same stacked field Guga had to deal with. I don't mean to belittle Vilas and do think it likely he would've eked out one FO eventually even with Borg and the others around, but to compare his sole RG title to not one but all three of Guga's is indeed stretching it.

And speaking of whom/which it is very arguable that Borg was the best clay-courter of '77, which means he was quite possibly the best player on both clay and grass for 4 straight years! This is why Borg will always be a GOAT candidate, and also why if pushed I'd still put him above Rafa and Novak. Nobody before or since has dominated his competition on such disparate surfaces to quite the same extent. Just unreal.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Joke thread. A few things:

• Red clay and Har-Tru are not the same surface.
• Comparing player A's results at two majors with B's at just one event makes it moot.
  
• A zillion runner-up spots don't supersede a single actual championship, let alone two, despite what the bean counters like to think.
• Vilas won his sole RG title against a depleted field. The same can't be said of Kuerten's three titles.

And on a more subjective note, he might not have been as consistent as Vilas, Muster and other workhorses, but Guga in top flight would be a serious threat to any clay-courter in history, yes including Borg and Nadal. You're talking about a guy that could make the likes of Bruguera, Ferrero and Federer look like amateurs by comparison, and one who might well have grabbed a couple more FOs if not for his premature decline due to injury.

I'm generally reluctant to make sweeping pronouncements on players before my time but what I know and have seen from Vilas fails to convince me he belongs in the same exalted company as Kuerten. It's not even close between these two. The only guys who can challenge Kuerten as the 3rd greatest clay-courter of the Open era are Lendl, Wilander and maybe Bruguera and Courier, and with the only possible exception of Ivan I'd put Guga over all of them. The bean counters really need to get a grip and try harder not to miss the forest for the trees.

I just want to clarify that red clay and Har-Tru are very similar to each other, and are closer to each other in every respect than they are to any other surfaces. Har-Tru is a slightly coarser dirt, and therefore slightly faster, than natural red clay. However, the French Open is not played on natural red clay. It is played on crushed bricks which may very well be closer to Har-Tru than to natural red clay. In any event, the game of tennis on natural red clay and Har-Tru is virtually identical.

 

[abmk]

I was amused when ABMK wrote that. Ramirez and Gottfried were excellent players and Fibak was very very good. Really top notch players. Gottfried was very tough against anyone in 1977. Ramirez is forgotten today but superb.

I didn't mean ramirez or gottfried were walkovers , but compare the draws kuerten had to go through

muster, medvedev, kafelnikov, bruguera in 97
kafelnikov,ferrero,norman in 2000
kafelnikov,ferrero,corretja in 2001

its an absolute no-contest

 

[pc1]

I didn't mean ramirez or gottfried were walkovers , but compare the draws kuerten had to go through

muster, medvedev, kafelnikov, bruguera in 97
kafelnikov,ferrero,norman in 2000
kafelnikov,ferrero,corretja in 2001

its an absolute no-contest

Thing is I know if I counter with another point this will go forever. I could argue points in some draws for Vilas too but to be honest I don't want to get into this because I also like Kuerten tremendously.

Overall I still feel Vilas had a better career and overall peak level for at least one year on clay judging by results. I feel subjectively that Kuerten was the superior player for one match and I think the more talented and gifted player. If I had to pick one of these guys to play for me in a big match I would pick Kuerten.

Let's just leave it here because my heart is not into this debate. Vilas and Kuerten are two of the coolest guys to ever play tennis.

 

[metsman]

I just want to clarify that red clay and Har-Tru are very similar to each other, and are closer to each other in every respect than they are to any other surfaces. Har-Tru is a slightly coarser dirt, and therefore slightly faster, than natural red clay. However, the French Open is not played on natural red clay. It is played on crushed bricks which may very well be closer to Har-Tru than to natural red clay. In any event, the game of tennis on natural red clay and Har-Tru is virtually identical.

Having played on red clay and har tru...har tru is something of a gimmick. Conditions are much different, movement/sliding is more important on red clay. You barely slide on har tru. Feels unnatural playing on it, it's not like playing on true red clay at all.

 

[borg number one]

I agree Timnz. I'd put Vilas above Kuerten as well. Vilas was something else on clay. So was Kuerten, especially when he was really feeling it and dialed in. Yet, day in day out over so many years, Vilas was always there as a big threat on clay. Both were sublime to watch on the surface too. Both great, but yes for the reasons you cited as to overall record, I'd put him above Kuerten.

 

[Winners or Errors]

It's hard to judge, because Kuerten did not really have ATG clay court competition. Vilas had Borg, who is the wooden racquet CGOAT, so how can you compare? If Borg weren't there, would Vilas have accomplished much more than Kuerten at the highest level? I think so.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Having played on red clay and har tru...har tru is something of a gimmick. Conditions are much different, movement/sliding is more important on red clay. You barely slide on har tru. Feels unnatural playing on it, it's not like playing on true red clay at all.

I disagree. I've been playing on HarTru for at least 45 years, and I've played on natural red clay many times during those years. In my opinion, they play almost exactly the same way in all respects, including sliding.

 

[Tshooter]

Vilas > Guga

 

[70sHollywood]

I think you can easily compare Vilas with Federer and Djokovic if you look at their RG records and h2h vs Nadal/Borg, so if you put Vilas over Kuerten you should probably put Federer and Djokovic above him also.

 

[KG1965]

Kuerten > Vilas on red clay
Vilas on har tru was a great player and ... US Open 1977 >> RG

Kuerten = Vilas on clay (red and hartru)

 

[KG1965]

on red clay

1974-76
1) Borg
....
....
2) Vilas , Orantes , Ramirez , Solomon , Dibbs , Nastase were close

1977
Vilas was clearly superior to the opponents but Borg never played because he decided another calendar

1978
1) Borg
2) Vilas
3) the others

Since 1979 begins the downward spiral of Vilas

 

[KG1965]

on har tru

The same big players on red clay was added only Connors .
Very balanced : they divided many titles between Washington Star , North Conway ( Volvo ) , Forest Hills ( US Open ) , Indianapolis ( US Open Clay ) , Boston ( US Pro) .

Perhaps Orantes , Connors and Borg were stronger Vilas, Dibbs, Solomon and Ramirez and Nasty .

But not in 1977 .


Borg clearly surpasses Connors and the others since 1979 but ... began the decline of the fields in har tru .. converted into hc .

The Stats had turned . It began the epic of Fushing Meadows .

 

[jean pierre]

I think you can easily compare Vilas with Federer and Djokovic if you look at their RG records and h2h vs Nadal/Borg, so if you put Vilas over Kuerten you should probably put Federer and Djokovic above him also.

The question is not only about RG, but about clay court in general.

 

[KG1965]

The question is not only about RG, but about clay court in general.

I agree : clay is any type of clay but for Europeans is only the red .

This is a problem because the tournaments on har tru are unlikely to be considered clay and not be considered hc ( ... also because they are not ... ) .
The problem is rather significant because in the '70 was disputed an important tournament on 3 ... on har tru .
Among the 15 largest tournaments were 5 on har tru .
Among the 30 largest troeni 10 they were on har tru .

 

[KG1965]

Among other things the two best invitational tournaments was played on the 70 har tru : Hilton Head and Boca Raton ....