How could someone call Sampras the Goat

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by tennisbuck, Jan 21, 2013.

  1. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,681
    Location:
    In The City
    Yes, also an American who believes that Rod Laver, an Australian, was a superior tennis player to both Sampras, an American, and Federer, a non-American. So the whole "he is a nationalistic fanboy" argument is nonsense. Bud Collins is probably more interested in the British guy who won Wimbledon in 1899, then Sampras.
     
  2. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,839
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and ┼╝eberka
    Let me translate this: "Let us only consider these these areas in which Sampras is better than Federer to prove that Sampras is better than Federer even though every other stat between them proves otherwise."

    The fact is - Federer broke every Sampras record. Sampras has absolutely nothing on Federer except the h2h where you have to consider factors such as:
    1) surfaces - 75% of the tournaments played throughout the year were at least medium fast, whereas today every single one is extremely slow. Fair.
    2) age - Sampras more or less the same age as Agassi (1,5 years younger to be exact) while Federer is 5 years older than Nadal. Fair.
    3) The no of matches played on particular surfaces. 50% of the matches on clay between Federer/Nadal, another 25% on riddiculously slow hard courts (AO, Miami), maybe 25% of the time the surface favored Federer - which is Dubai, WTF and Wimbledon. Out of 34 matches 29 were played on either grass, carpet or hard courts. Again, 14 out of 28 were on clay between Federer and Nadal. Fair.
    4) Match-up. Sampras only had problems with ultimate serve and volleyers and players who served bigger than him. He faced them app. once a year and very rarely in majors. Federer in the current era literally has to outgrind Nadal to win his matches. Fair again.

    I don't even consider other factors such as:
    5) Agassi being out for like 3,5 years smack in Sampras' prime (1993-1997), he only started to dedicate himself more after 1998 when Sampras was in his late 20's. Nadal hasn't dropped out of the top 4 since 2005, only now when he missed 8 months of the season he's down to no 5.
    6) Nadal on slow surfaces (especially clay) >>>> Agassi on any surface. Moreso when you consider how much stronger mentally Nadal is.
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2013
  3. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,839
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and ┼╝eberka
    So an oldie supporting another oldie. I wouldn't read into the "expert" opinions to be honest, every single one of them is biased in a way.
     
  4. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    17 over 14 is hardly "destroyed" a record. And weeks at #1 is DEFINITELY not a greater record than the slam record. Overall, I agree that Federer did not "Destroy" any Sampras' records.
     
  5. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,412
    That's a pretty conveniently framed version of how it was. You could argue that, since Nadal has as many French Opens as those guys combined and his career fell right in Federer's prime that Sampras was the one who had the easier clay era... I mean, if tons of guys can win it once or twice only is that an indication of high competition or that the players were too flakey to dominate? I say it's the later.

    As for grass?? Sampras having far higher competition? Whatever. Becker and Edberg were a spent force on grass by the time Sampras got the ball rolling at Wimbledon and from there he had Ivanisevic, Agassi, Krajicek, Martin, Courier, Pioline etc to contend with... the majority of whom go down in the tennis record books as one-hit wonders, if that even in the case of Martin and Pioline. To say this was "far higher" competition than what Federer faced is well framed indeed. So, was it such that Sampras had cakewalk draws on grass year after year.... or was he just that good on grass that he made it look so?... does the same apply for Federer or do you chose another metric to measure him by when it doesn't pan out?

    Also, you say Sampras had a better dominant run at Wimbledon, having won it 7 times in 8 years... Again, how conveniently framed for him. Actually, viewed a different way it is Federer had the most dominant run - he won 5 in a row as one point. Sampras only ever managed 4. Amusing that you looked at Sampras' 7 in 8 years and ignore that he lost in 92 and 91 when he was already a grand slam champion, and then in 2001 long before he won his final major.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  6. Blocker

    Blocker Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2012
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Revenge didn't happen at Wimbledon because Krajicek never made it back to the final, but Pete eventually got his man at the USO.

    Sampras v Krajicek in slams reads 1-1.
     
  7. World Beater

    World Beater Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,751
    Krajicek - sampras at wimbledon reads 1-0.

    Sampras cannot be GOAT on grass having a losing h-h to a top 10 rival.

    H-h reads
    6-4 Krajicek.
     
  8. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,189
    No RG finals is a big hole in his resume.
     
  9. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,879
    Sampras dominated his era more than anyone else has ever dominated their era by winning 175% the amount of slams as the next best of his era, Agassi.
     
  10. Stroke

    Stroke Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Messages:
    219
    Somehow I think no one is going to change their mind here.
     

Share This Page