PDA

View Full Version : Sampras Major count & Federer Major Count


laurie
02-18-2007, 12:41 PM
I was thinking that the media always talk about the speed of Federer's success. Also there was a thread here recently about Sampras winning 14 slams in 12 years and Federer 9 slams in 3 years.

Sampras last week said Federer could win 17-18 majors in his career. What's not discussed is the fact that Sampras career was played at a similar pace. At the same age he played the same number of slam finals, losing two finals to Federer's one. Also, Sampras played in 18 finals so he could have ended up with 16 or 17 slams. He blotted his copy book with those US Open losses in 2000 and 2001. So I wonder how many slam finals Federer will play in his career?

So when you take that into account, despite Sampras' decline late in his career, his pace of achievement was still impressive and still stands favourably with what Federer is doing now. Just wonder what you think.

Alexandros
02-18-2007, 01:42 PM
Note that Sampras won his first major much younger than Federer did and that Sampras never enjoyed the dominance that Federer has had in the past three years.

avmoghe
02-18-2007, 02:59 PM
I was thinking that the media always talk about the speed of Federer's success. Also there was a thread here recently about Sampras winning 14 slams in 12 years and Federer 9 slams in 3 years.

Sampras last week said Federer could win 17-18 majors in his career. What's not discussed is the fact that Sampras career was played at a similar pace. At the same age he played the same number of slam finals, losing two finals to Federer's one. Also, Sampras played in 18 finals so he could have ended up with 16 or 17 slams. He blotted his copy book with those US Open losses in 2000 and 2001. So I wonder how many slam finals Federer will play in his career?

So when you take that into account, despite Sampras' decline late in his career, his pace of achievement was still impressive and still stands favourably with what Federer is doing now. Just wonder what you think.

Another Federer vs. Sampras thread.. yeaaahhh! :)

The media talk about Federer more because of his total domination of the sport. Sampras never came close to matching Federer's win-loss record during these past three years. Also to be considered is the fact that Federer is a far more complete player than Sampras ever was. People were quite often bored of Sampras' reliance on his serve and the 'one break per set' philosophy. Federer doesn't have Sampras' serve and tries to break as often as possible. Federer is widely recognized as a genius due to the incredible shots he pulls - Sampras is not (yes, I know some commentators may have called him genius once in a while).

No one is saying Sampras' reign was anything but impressive - its just that Federer's is even more so. Total domination of the sport, combined with aesthetic beauty are the reason why Federer is getting more attention than Sampras.

One French Open or 4 more non-French majors is all that Federer needs to surpass Sampras in most people's minds. (Heck, if you recall last year's French final, McEnroe was ready to pronounce Federer GOAT if he had won that match)

Nick Irons
02-18-2007, 03:31 PM
Let us look at the numbers:

Sampras turned pro in 1988 and won 9 Slams up till the current Federer mark today.

Federer turned pro in 1998 and has won 10 Slams at the same mark in time.

Sampras broke through at the age of 22 in spite of his first slam at 19.

Federer broke through at the age of 22 as well. I mean to break through and start a period of dominance; winning one Slam is not a break through IMO.

After this break though period:

Federer 5 year period 10 Slams
Sampras 5 year period 8 Slams (I am not including anything prior to the French on the timeline)

This point in Sampras' career is when he started cooling off; at about 26 years of age. He still dominated Wimbledon of course and nabbed that U.S. Open, but the reign of fire ended.

So, in my opinion; the year 2008 and beyond will be crucial for Roger. Assuming he wins Wimby this year and the U.S. Open (I'd bet on it) and assuming he does not win the French (I'd also bet on that)

He'd have 12 Slams. He'd have to notch 2 more to tie for 14. The question is? When will the period of dominance end ?

Disclaimer; I hope I did the number right.

prince
02-18-2007, 04:14 PM
laurie ,

dont worry too much - sampras was one of the greats but this guy roger is just better , just much better .

Nick Irons
02-18-2007, 04:25 PM
An overall better tennis player I think; sans the ability to not handle Pete's serve

fastdunn
02-18-2007, 11:51 PM
Note that the last a few years of his slam winning years
Sampras was basically holding on to winning Wimbledon
and sweeping indoor seasons.

When things are cooled off, will Federer continue to win
Wimbledon ? For some reasons, I don't think so.

Unlike 90's, all surfaces are being played similarly (relatively speaking_
and all from baseline. If Federer is being threatened in hard courts,
I don't think grass will be as safe as it was for Sampras.

I think Federer is and will be dominating like noe one ever did but
I don't think he will have longevity of Sampras' domination.
Federer will be all or nothing kind so to speak.
I don't think he will break Sampras' 6th straight year end #1
record...

capriatifanatic
02-19-2007, 12:06 AM
Note that the last a few years of his slam winning years
Sampras was basically holding on to winning Wimbledon
and sweeping indoor seasons.

When things are cooled off, will Federer continue to win
Wimbledon ? For some reasons, I don't think so.

Unlike 90's, all surfaces are being played similarly (relatively speaking_
and all from baseline. If Federer is being threatened in hard courts,
I don't think grass will be as safe as it was for Sampras.

I think Federer is and will be dominating like noe one ever did but
I don't think he will have longevity of Sampras' domination.
Federer will be all or nothing kind so to speak.
I don't think he will break Sampras' 6th straight year end #1
record...


I think you could be right that when Federer stops dominating he will stop winning Wimbledon the way Sampras did when he stopped dominating. I am not saying I think you are right neccessarily, but that you could be right on that.

However I disagree with you that Federer's wont atleast match Sampras's 6 straight years as year end #1. The guys in Fed's own age group or older will never take the #1 ranking away from him-guys like Nalbandian, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, will never do that. The guys from the younger age group-
Berdych, Safin, Djokovic, and Gasquet are so far behind Federer in skill and ability right now, any of them would take atleast 3 years to reach the point to have any shot of taking the #1 ranking away from Federer, Federer would have ended the year #1 6 times in a row by then. Federer will end the year #1 atleast 6 times in a row, maybe 7. Nadal and Bhagdatis have already peaked, and Monfils and Donald Young are the most overhyped non-phenoms since Kournikova and Lucic on the womens side.

caulcano
02-19-2007, 12:21 AM
Note that the last a few years of his slam winning years
Sampras was basically holding on to winning Wimbledon
and sweeping indoor seasons.

When things are cooled off, will Federer continue to win
Wimbledon ? For some reasons, I don't think so.

I think he will.


Unlike 90's, all surfaces are being played similarly (relatively speaking_
and all from baseline. If Federer is being threatened in hard courts,
I don't think grass will be as safe as it was for Sampras.


Still safe enough for FED to be favourite.


I think Federer is and will be dominating like noe one ever did but
I don't think he will have longevity of Sampras' domination.
Federer will be all or nothing kind so to speak.
I don't think he will break Sampras' 6th straight year end #1
record...

Well he's more or less guaranteed #1 for this year & his coach, Tony, expects FED to be in his prime in 2008 & 2009, so there more than a good chance.

capriatifanatic
02-19-2007, 12:39 AM
I definitely dont think Fed has played his best tennis yet. His forehand is about as good as it will get, the best he can hope to do is mantain his movement-he wont improve that into his late 20s either. His backhand has improved so much of late, I expect it to continue to get even better and be talked about as one of the great backhands ever seen eventualy. His return of serve is outstanding already, but I believe it will become more offensive, especialy off second serves in the next few years. His volleying game is where he shows the most potential to improve, he has so much untapped potential at the net and I think you will see him get start to push himself to come in more and more and develop into truly more a balanced all court player then he is right now, as the more matches he comes in frequently he will get more comfortable and secure in his volleying skills, and the natural talent for volleying I know he has will really shine like it hasnt yet. His serve will get more powerful then it is now, I see him adding up to another 10 mph average to both first and second serves in the coming years. I also believe he will become even a stronger and stringier competitor in coming years, conquering Nadal on clay this year will take his confidence to yet new heights.

The others may improve but Federer has huge improvements left in him. His forehand and his speed are two of the only areas that will just stay the same. Everything else will get alot better. I am excited about seeing his improvement over the next 3 years, I dont give didley squat about lack of rivalries, weak competition, whatever, I just want to see Federer continue to take his game to new levels, keep breaking records, and screw the rest.