I don't see Pete losing those 3 WI finals against Novak, even today. Grass is still grass.In this era, yes. He would have lost 3 slams to Novak.
In the 90s, no. Nole would never have won 5 Wimbledons.
So if you are talking about slow homogenised grass Nole wins against Sampras.
Fast 90s Grass Sampras wins.
Sure, but you think that if he played is this era, he would retire at 32? Never. The big 3 would be around and winning a lot and he obviously would continue to challenge them. He retired because no one was ahead of him. But in the end, we will never know.In his mid to late thirties? No, he wouldn't because at age 38 he would probably waste his wild card and lose in the first round... again.
Ok that was maybe too harsh. Let's say Pete had continued playing after 2002 and taken tennis seriously. Does anyone think he wouldn't be losing to Federer every Wimbledon starting in 2003?