Nadal's clay records are great, but Borg is still the number 1 by far. I think a lot of people only started watching tennis quite recently and forget that unlike Nadal, he actually faced really great clay court players. He also retired at a ridiculously young age.
Your Nadal obsession is becoming a diagnose...
Nadal won more French titles, more clay titles and more clay matches. Period.
And please tell me more about that great clay court players defeated by Borg. Post peak Nastase? Or young yet undeveloped Lendl? C'mon.
For you and for all those who permanently repeat such absurd cliche about "weak era" stuff I found some article in Deuce magazine. Allow me to quote the part of it:
"Yet another factor is that Nadal is playing in the most clay-skilled era in tennis history. Great as Borg was on clay, he was a true revolutionary, the first player ever to so heavily whip the ball with topspin on both sides - in large part the prototype of contemporary tennis. Borg presided over clay in an era when many of his peers had one-handed slice backhands and were hardly able to match his proficiency or consistency from the baseline.
Ditto, but to a lesser degree, for Wilander and Lendl. Playing styles then were still varied. Many net rushers tried to ply their skills on clay, which from time to time made it easier for skilled baseliners such as Wilander and Lendl to earn clay court victories. But Nadal is playing in a time when his brand of grinding baseline play is the model on just about all surfaces. In other words, he faces versions of himself - albeit of lesser skill - in just about every round he plays."