[Johnny Groove]

I'm actually surprised Nadal has been able to play as long as he has thus far. If he schedules intelligently, I think he can be at a slam winning level another 3-4 years. No more than 5. Then again, he may retire tomorrow, I dunno.

But he's got a few more years, I think.

[fmolinari2005]

Originally Posted by luie

I would expect so , Nadull is one of the best movers in the game , and Sampras is almost 41 .

Brilliant!

Fair question though. But, most importantly, it is time for the Samprastards to switch their trolling to Nadal's achievements. This should give Samprastards a second wind ...

[Sunset of Age]

I don't have a crystal ball, so anything can/might happen, but I think it's reasonable to expect Rafa to at least come close to 14 GS titles and perhaps even surpassing Sampras.
He'll surely add up some more to his current tally.

[fmolinari2005]

Originally Posted by Johnny Groove

I'm actually surprised Nadal has been able to play as long as he has thus far. If he schedules intelligently, I think he can be at a slam winning level another 3-4 years. No more than 5. Then again, he may retire tomorrow, I dunno.

But he's got a few more years, I think.

We've been talking about Nadal burning out early since 2005. A lot of people would use Hewitt as an example when talking about Nadal back in 05/06. I lost track of the number of times his fans feared for his health.

I say this not as a Nadal hater. Specially after I read his bio. But Nadal has two amazing abilites:
1- Play through pain
2- Exagerate his health issues
One might overshadow the other depending on if you are a fan, a hater or neutral.

Given everything in consideration it is safe to say that Nadal didn't burn out as soon as people predicted. It is not likely that he will play beyond 30 yo. It is unlikely that he will stop at 11 GS titles.

Unlike Federer, Nadal is yet to go through an entire year without winning a GS title. I suppose we can start talking about a decline when it happens. And this will be moment when we can seriously start thinking where the finish line is for him.

[Roamed]

Rafa will get to at least 15 in my opinion.. things change quickly in tennis, sure, but a couple of years down the line we can't anticipate that he's going to have much opposition besides a getting-older-himself Djokovic, a more erratic Federer, and Murray doing who knows what. It's just four more slams; we can pencil him in at the FO for the foreseeable future, and before now he was on a streak of five straight slam finals across all surfaces.

[jonheres]

Originally Posted by Ash86

Your ranking is based too much on numbers without looking at context. 2-3 Wimbledon finals is not bad when you consider that 2 of those finals he lost to one of the greatest who ever played on that court. It shows consistency on the surface to have gotten to so many finals there.

Nadal has the career golden slam - more rounded achievements than Sampras. To add to that he adapted his game to be able to win Wimbledon & US Open - Sampras stuck to the same game plan throughout - even on clay.

As for YE no.1 - again - look at who was fighting Sampras for the no.1 title most years - Agassi was AWOL a lot of the time so there was no other all time great player threatening him. Nadal on the other hand had Federer to deal with from the start. No Federer = Nadal being no.1 in 05, 06, 07 too i.e. 5 YE no.1s already.

I'm not saying Nadal is better than Sampras - Sampras has a lot of slams, great time at the top etc. - but just pointing out that the context of some of the records needs to be looked at, as does the competition. Winning most of your slams vs Djokovic and Federer is pretty impressive. Can he get to 14? Perhaps. He just needs one good run - what if next summer the knees stick with him and he does the channel slam again? Suddenly he's at 13 and only needs 1. He'll probably play at least 2 more seasons - needs 3 out of 9 majors - possible - certainly not utterly beyond reach - given that 2 of those are the French Open.

Finally if Nadal reaches 14 then to me there's no question he exceeds Sampras -most players would go for a career slam; an overall record at a slam; a gold medal; multiple Davis Cups; winning H2H vs pretty much all your main rivals (Novak may change) including one of the best ever; winning the greatest match of all time and having many other "epic" matches; pretty much every clay record in the book - THAN Sampras' time at no1, his YECs etc. Both great but Nadal's career would overall be more balanced and complete.

Amazing Insight. I really like your logic in this post. Kudos on that!

[SheepleBuster]

I think Rafa could get 14 or more. If Nole does not get his act together. We have Nole to thank that Rafa already does not have 14 slams. He stopped Rafa in 3 slam finals, and Rosol did tennis a big favor. Now please have Rosol matched up with Rafa in the first round for the rest of his career.

[Arkulari]

Rafa can definitely get to 14 GS at least, 3 more RG are in the cards but I don't think he's winning more HC GS, he has a good shot at winning another Wimbledon if he's at 100%

[ossie]

the men's game is too strong for one player to dominate and win all slams atm so i am sure nadal will grab his chances and win a few more majors here and there. the days of him entering a major as a favourite are over though (except for the french open obviously)

[Mountaindewslave]

I mean the odds are pretty high at this point that Nadal will break Sampras's GS title #. Imagine if Nadal wins US OPEN in a few months, that would virtually gurantee he passes 14.

but overall there is no way his career will be as impressive, just not enough time left to have dominated like Sampras, I mean the YEC's alone put a nail in Nadal's coffin.

as far as history goes, I think they will be remembered as about equally impressive due to Nadal's insane clay status, despite him having a weaker career than Sampras. of COURSE, who knows, I guess a miracle could happen and Nadal could win slams after 27/28, it just seems like it would be very tough if it were to happen

[Mimi]

Originally Posted by Johnny Groove

As the #9 player of all time, my all time personal favorite Rafael Nadal is 3 slams short of the great Pete Sampras. Forget catching Federer, it ain't happening. Catching Sampras is at the far end of Nadal's potential, I think, similar to Fed winning 20 slams and 100 titles overall.

who are the 8 players in front of him in your opinion?

coz if you measure the grand slams won, he is in co-fourth position with Laver and Borg:

Roger: 17
Pete: 14
Roy Emerson: 12
Borg & Lavel: 11

[Johnny Groove]

Originally Posted by Mimi

who are the 8 players in front of him in your opinion?

coz if you measure the grand slams won, he is in co-fourth position with Laver and Borg:

Roger: 17
Pete: 14
Roy Emerson: 12
Borg & Lavel: 11

1. Federer
2. Laver
3. Tilden
4. Rosewall
5. Gonzales
6. Sampras
7. Budge
8. Borg
9. Nadal

Have you not seen my other thread, my dear mimi?

[Mimi]

Originally Posted by Johnny Groove

1. Federer
2. Laver
3. Tilden
4. Rosewall
5. Gonzales
6. Sampras
7. Budge
8. Borg
9. Nadal

Have you not seen my other thread, my dear mimi?

will check in later, thanks

[Clay Death]

Originally Posted by Johnny Groove

1. Federer
2. Laver
3. Tilden
4. Rosewall
5. Gonzales
6. Sampras
7. Budge
8. Borg
9. Nadal

Have you not seen my other thread, my dear mimi?

bullshit list jonathan. you really know how to piss me off. emerson is the one who sampras bases his greatness on. and then sampras is surpassed by fed.

dont forget about the guy who set the standard for greatness.

where is my main man emerson?

also nadal doesnt need 14 to equal sampy`s greatness. he has already surpassed the likes of borg and sampras.

they would have trouble winning games against peak nadal, let alone sets.

sampy was a single dimensional mug.


also how on earth can somebody surpass laver who has not one but 2 calender year grand slams?

step away from that crack pipe.


finally you cant compare across distant and different eras.

[chenx15]

very possible