Mens Tennis Forums banner

What is more valuable?

  • Sampras' 5 WTF titles.

    Votes: 23 52.3%
  • Nadal's career slam(or 1 AO title)

    Votes: 17 38.6%
  • About equal.

    Votes: 4 9.1%
1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,672 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Both have 14 slams. Nadal has the career slam(or 1 AO title) while Sampras has 5 WTF titles. Sampras also has several more weeks at #1 but lets just make this about the AO vs 5 WTF titles. Which is better?

Discuss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,145 Posts
Stop posting Nadal threads! :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
Sampras just didn't care on clay - he wasn't bothered to adapt and IMO his legacy is somewhat tarnished by it. 5 WTF's to 0 is quite the discrepancy but I will have to give it to Nadal for the Career Slam.
 

·
~♥ Magnus Norman ♥~
Joined
·
3,328 Posts
WTFs are important, but for me it's definitely the Career Slam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
I vote the WTF's. biggest reason I consider Sampras to have a better career over Nadal (that and weeks at #1)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,045 Posts
I'm not sure you can break it down like that. If you look at the distribution of their respective slam wins, Nadal's are quite obviously disproportionately weighed towards the French Open. Sampras may never have won the French, clay being by great distance his worst surface, but he split the other slams more evenly. It's always difficult to compare eras so nobody can definitively say player x from today is better than player y from the 90s, but I think it's a reasonable assertion to make that Sampras was the superior grass court and HC slam player whilst Nadal is the superior clay courter. Both are legends in their own right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,319 Posts
Clearly Sampras comes out better here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
810 Posts
I think Sampras is better overall. I am a big Nadal fan. Sampras is my favorite all time player. I think Sampras epitomized how the game should be played. All American men subsequent to him have tried to duplicate his style, and failed to do it at his level: big serve, big forehand, backhand is an afterthought.

In any case, I always hoped Nadal would win WTF at least once. It is looking less and less likely. I place Sampras above him not only for that reason, but as has been mentioned Nadal's slam distribution is far too skewed. A legend's career could be made of 1 Aussie, 2 USO and 2 W's, but when your other 9 slams come on clay you just can't be the greatest of all time. Sampras has 5 USO and 7 W's, and 2 Aussie's to boot. That is a pretty strong distribution. He dominated at two slams. Nadal still has time to remedy this though. Who knows if he will. Nadal is an incredible player in his own right though, no question. I place him slightly below Sampras overall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Honestly

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,026 Posts
Both have 14 slams. Nadal has the career slam(or 1 AO title) while Sampras has 5 WTF titles. Sampras also has several more weeks at #1 but lets just make this about the AO vs 5 WTF titles. Which is better?

Discuss.
Why dont you state the fact that Rafa has 1 OG and 16 m1000 more? Sampras has tons of atp 250 titles..

Rafa also has 2 slam finals more and 2 finals on his weakest tournament (wtf).. sampras has zero finals at RG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,026 Posts
I vote the WTF's. biggest reason I consider Sampras to have a better career over Nadal (that and weeks at #1)
Why weeks at 1# should be considered that important?

Weeks at 1 are result of points.. and points are result of titles...

Nadal has more titles, more slam finals (same amount of slams) and far more m1000 at younger age than Sampras retired... Which means Sampras domination back then wouldnt be enough today to pack as many weeks as 1 as he did in the 90's.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
6,702 Posts
Career Grand Slam is slightly overrated, Agassi is the only other recent Open Era one to have it - but it is not some trump card over every other accomplishment.
Hence Sampras domination at the end of year Indoor championships holds more weight.
Sampras never cared much for the French, he was concentrating on Wimbledon - ie the Slam he knew he had the best chance of winning.
Only now he slightly regrets never having properly prepared for or trained on clay, but it was not a big deal at the time.
Lendl not winning Wimbledon was a bigger deal, mainly because of how much effort he put into it, only to keep falling short.
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top