Would you rather be King of Clay, Grass, or Hard?

Who would you rather be?

  • King of Clay

  • King of Grass

  • King of Hard

Results are only viewable after voting.
Red Rick said:
I'd prefer King of the WTA
Click to expand...

Radek_Stepanek_crop.jpg
 
It's quite clearly Hard. You're looking at a lot more money and Slams since although AO & USO aren't the same, if you're amazing at one you're likely at least contending at the other.
 
King of grass as it takes the most skill out of all the surfaces. I’d prefer more tournaments though.

Sport said:
I would rather be a king of clay by a giant margin (Nadal), than a king of grass (Federer) or hard (Djokovic) by a small margin.
Click to expand...

Djokovic isn’t king of hard, to be fair no one is but as of now Fed has a slight edge at the top for HC achievements.
 
None of those come close to this and the most iconic words ever spoken

 
Sport said:
I would rather be a king of clay by a giant margin (Nadal), than a king of grass (Federer) or hard (Djokovic) by a small margin.
Click to expand...

1. Nadal is only king of clay by a giant margin because Borg retired early.
2. Novak Djokovic isn't king of hard. That's Federer.
 
King of hard is the smart choice for obvious reasons.

King of grass would be awesome too but I don’t get this popular belief that this surface is more important and valuable than the other two.
 
MichaelNadal said:
Borg would not have won ELEVEN french opens.... stop.
Click to expand...

Didn't say he would have. However, had the conditions been exactly the same as in this era, he would have won probably 8-9 (certainly wouldn't have skipped the tournament in 1977 to play World Team Tennis, would have won in 1982 - when Wilander said Borg was thrashing him in practice - and probably in 1983 ahead of Noah).

Nadal at 11 FOs vs Borg's 8-9 would still have been KoC, but not by a "giant margin".

Also, note that Borg still holds the records for fewest games lost at RG (32, in his 1978 triumph) and most consecutive sets won at the tournament.

The point is that it's incorrect to say Nadal's supremacy over Borg on clay is greater than Federer's over Sampras on grass, other than due to longevity.
 
I'm going to say clay because it requires so much patience and you can't end points as quick as on hard or grass courts. Personally, I grew up on hard court and my game drops when playing on clay.
I'm a Fed fan but don't forget Fed grew up on clay in Switzerland; made 4 FO finals and won one. If it wasn't for Nadal, Federer would arguably have 3 or 4 FO trophies.
Clay is no doubt the toughest & most challenging surface for the all-time greats - Fed, Djokovic, Sampras, Agassi, McEnroe.
Nadal still makes grass and hard court slam finals (and has won) at a lesser clip than his clay record. However. it shows you he's not one-dimensional like Guga or Burguera were and that a person is able to cross-over with successful results on all surfaces.
 
Last edited:
Hard court. So I can rule both the AO and US Open. Clay second option. Grass last because there are hardly any grass tournaments left these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
  • Poll Poll
Would you rather have 4 Majors all on hard court, or all on grass/clay?
Replies
46
Views
2K
FrontHeadlock
F
kragster
Djoker's worst surface vs that of Fedal
Replies
9
Views
2K
nolefam_2024
N
Federiffic
  • Poll Poll
Vote Now for King of Tennis
Replies
39
Views
5K
cucio
cucio
Artificial Grass
  • Poll Poll
The more neutral surface - Clay or Grass?
Replies
15
Views
1K
Zeref
Zeref
J
  • Poll Poll
If Djokovic will win today and equal Federer record, could we say he is the goat of grass?
Replies
41
Views
2K
mike danny
mike danny
Back
Top