Sampras' rivals. Who beat him?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by GS, Aug 17, 2011.

  1. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    Just finished reading Pete's book, "A Champion's Mind"---it was pretty good.
    Without doing an internet search, what 5 players do you think had a winning head-to-head match record against him? Yes, Krajicek was one of em. The 4 others are alittle surprising.
     
    #1
  2. HBK4life

    HBK4life Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Sergi Bruguera I think does.
     
    #2
  3. fed_rulz

    fed_rulz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,622
    Michael Stich
    Hewitt
    haarhuis
    paes
     
    #3
  4. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    Yep---Krajicek, Bruguera, Hewitt, and Stich.
    There's one other guy.
    (Sorry, I'm talking about singles, not doubles.)
     
    #4
  5. scotus

    scotus Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,708
    The Magician Santoro

    --------
    Just found out Santoro is actually 3-4 against Pete
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2011
    #5
  6. scotus

    scotus Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,708
    Paul Annacone

    Career head to head: Annacone 1, Sampras 0
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2011
    #6
  7. fed_rulz

    fed_rulz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,622
    Leander Paes beat Pete Sampras in singles, not doubles (new haven 1998)
     
    #7
  8. Tilden1893

    Tilden1893 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    42
    If we go by just grass...

    Ready for this one?

    Alex Corretja! 1-0

    AND it was best of 5

    AND the match WAS 5 sets!
     
    #8
  9. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    Ah, Pete didn't mention this in his book! (I guess he didn't consider him a rival.)
    But, there's one other guy who beat Pete in singles---Pete won 3 matches, but this guy won 4.
    Kuerten came close---Pete beat him twice, and Guga beat him once. Ferreira came close, too---Pete beat him 7 times against Wayne's 6 wins.
     
    #9
  10. World Beater

    World Beater Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,751
    Marat Safin.

    4-3
     
    #10
  11. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Bruguera, Stich, Krajicek, Federer, Hewitt and Safin. There's also Paes.
     
    #11
  12. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    Yep, Safin is the 5th guy.
     
    #12
  13. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    There's more than 5, though.

    1. Sergi Bruguera (2-3)
    2. Michael Stich (4-5)
    3. Richard Krajicek (4-6)
    4. Roger Federer (0-1)
    5. Lleyton Hewitt (4-5)
    6. Marat Safin (3-4)
    7. Leander Paes (0-1)

    There's also, looking at my notes.

    Derrick Rostagno (1-2)
    Jay Berger (0-1)
    Christo Van Rensburg (1-2)
    Yannick Noah (0-1)
    Paul Haarhuis (1-3)
    Gilbert Schaller (0-1)
    Christian Saceanu (0-1)
    Max Mirnyi (1-2)
    George Bastl (0-1)
    Andy Roddick (1-2)
     
    #13
  14. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    There's one other non-rival that beat Pete---Mark Keil, star of that "Journeymen" documentary. Mark beat him at Queen's Club in 1991.
     
    #14
  15. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Oh yes, and Mark Keil. Sorry, Mark.
     
    #15
  16. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,371
    If we include Hewitt, then we can add

    Roddick
    Safin
    Federer
     
    #16
  17. Tilden1893

    Tilden1893 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    42
    Rostagno's was at the Big W in 1991, IIRC.
     
    #17
  18. Tilden1893

    Tilden1893 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    42
    One of Rostagno wins was @ the big W of 1991, IIRC!
     
    #18
  19. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    Sorry, this thread was supposed to be about Pete's rivals that had a winning record against him, not lesser ranked players at the time.
    Pete also had winning records against Becker (12-7), Edberg (8-6), Chang (12-8), Ivanisevic (12-6), Lendl (5-3), and Philippoussis (7-3).
     
    #19
  20. BrooklynNY

    BrooklynNY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,627
    Also, since its the topic of rivals, I would think one would need to play more than 3 times to qualify as any sort of rivalry, for seems like it it's a fair number because if you play 3 times, someone doesn't have a chance to level it at 2-2.

    I would include Hewitt, and not include Roddick, by that standard.

    Also, you'd have to discount any 1-0 records, because they do not qualify as a rival.
    Federer was Pete's rival in the same way that Paul Annacone was.
     
    #20
  21. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    The appendix of Pete's book is entitled "About My Rivals", where he talks about his match record against Becker, Bruguera, Chang, Courier, Edberg, Ferreira, Hewitt, Ivanisevic, Kafelnikov, Korda, Krajicek, Kuerten, Martin, Muster, Philippoussis, Rafter, Rios, Safin, and Stich.
    These are the guys that Pete considered to be his rivals.
     
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2011
    #21
  22. Laurie

    Laurie Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,421
    Location:
    London
    And that list didn't include Rusedski or Henman. No wonder Rusedski hates Sampras.

    Well I suppose no rivalry, Sampras was a combined 16 - 2 against both players.
     
    #22
  23. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Where's Agassi?

    Here are Sampras' head-to-head records against Agassi and those players mentioned above:


    Pete Sampras 20-14 Andre Agassi (Pete Sampras 6-3 Andre Agassi in majors)

    Pete Sampras 12-7 Boris Becker (Pete Sampras 3-0 Boris Becker in majors)

    Pete Sampras 2-3 Sergi Bruguera (Pete Sampras 1-1 Sergi Bruguera in majors)

    Pete Sampras 12-8 Michael Chang (Pete Sampras 4-1 Michael Chang in majors)

    Pete Sampras 16-4 Jim Courier (Pete Sampras 6-2 Jim Courier in majors)

    Pete Sampras 8-6 Stefan Edberg (Pete Sampras 0-2 Stefan Edberg in majors)

    Pete Sampras 7-6 Wayne Ferreira (Pete Sampras 1-0 Wayne Ferreira in majors)

    Pete Sampras 4-5 Lleyton Hewitt (Pete Sampras 1-1 Lleyton Hewitt in majors)

    Pete Sampras 12-6 Goran Ivanisevic (Pete Sampras 4-1 Goran Ivanisevic in majors)

    Pete Sampras 11-2 Yevgeny Kafelnikov (Pete Sampras 1-1 Yevgeny Kafelnikov in majors)

    Pete Sampras 12-5 Petr Korda (Pete Sampras 1-1 Petr Korda in majors)

    Pete Sampras 4-6 Richard Krajicek (Pete Sampras 1-1 Richard Krajicek in majors)

    Pete Sampras 2-1 Gustavo Kuerten (Pete Sampras 0-0 Gustavo Kuerten in majors)

    Pete Sampras 18-4 Todd Martin (Pete Sampras 6-1 Todd Martin in majors)

    Pete Sampras 9-2 Thomas Muster (Pete Sampras 3-0 Thomas Muster in majors)

    Pete Sampras 7-3 Mark Philippoussis (Pete Sampras 5-2 Mark Philippoussis in majors)

    Pete Sampras 12-4 Patrick Rafter (Pete Sampras 2-1 Patrick Rafter in majors)

    Pete Sampras 2-0 Marcelo Rios (Pete Sampras 1-0 Marcelo Rios in majors)

    Pete Sampras 3-4 Marat Safin (Pete Sampras 2-2 Marat Safin in majors)

    Pete Sampras 4-5 Michael Stich (Pete Sampras 1-0 Michael Stich in majors)
     
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2011
    #23
  24. 1970CRBase

    1970CRBase Guest

    Miloslav Mecir has a winning H2H against Pete. :mrgreen:
     
    #24
  25. Laurie

    Laurie Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,421
    Location:
    London
    Because Agassi was discussed at length throughout the book, he wanted to talk about his other rivals and their strengths and weaknesses.
     
    #25
  26. Tagg

    Tagg New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    if i remember rightly, sampras discusses henman in detail in the actual text

    besides, lets be honest, it was not a rivalry. vienna 1998? ridiculous

    what was it, 6-1 to sampras eventually?
     
    #26
  27. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,371
    Whether if you play 1 time or 20 times, it still count as a win. Whether one player was(or wasn't) in his prime another story.
     
    #27
  28. Tagg

    Tagg New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    you can't classify 1 or 2 matches as a rivalry though

    takes 5 at least if you ask me

    consistent top players meeting each other
     
    #28
  29. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    Years ago, when Pete was still attending high school in L.A., he needed a match to keep him tough, so he played a friend of mine, a top player at nearby Pepperdine U. Pete beat him pretty easily.
     
    #29
  30. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,371
    It still count as a win. Especially at the grand slam when the loser happens to be a defending champion.
     
    #30
  31. robow7

    robow7 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    967
    So,
    Nadal is to Fed, as _______ is to Pete?

    Ummm?
     
    #31
  32. Laurie

    Laurie Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,421
    Location:
    London
    I put that match on youtube back in 2010. That really was a mauling, no other way to describe it :twisted:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmbervegakA
     
    #32
  33. Tagg

    Tagg New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    i've no idea why you're bringing federer(?) into this

    this is about sampras' rivals. federer was not a rival of his

    you're not actually answering what i said - takes more than 1 match for a rivalry. at least 5 i reckon


    for sure. sampras demolished henman that day

    the goatee look from the fatigue/year end no 1 chasing is hilarious, too
     
    #33
  34. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,371
    I can use another example besides Federer if you want me to.

    Whether if you think at least 5 matches makes a rival is up to you. I'm not saying that you can't makeup your own rules(and no one has to agree). My point is in a real match, a win is a win. Your suggesting a win(or a loss) doesn't count if they haven't meet at least 5 times. If that's what you're trying to tell me than I disagree.
     
    #34
  35. Tagg

    Tagg New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    i think you need to look up what rivalry means

    ri·val·ry
    /ˈrīvəlrē/
    Noun
    Competition for the same objective or for superiority in the same field.


    people like federer, von cristenberg, schaller, and whoever else sampras played once and lost (or played once and beat) to are not his rivals

    not sure why you can't grasp this

    it's like calling rosol a rival of nadal. he just isn't

    you're clinging to the fact that federer beat sampras once, not sure why
     
    #35
  36. Kalin

    Kalin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,515
    From all i remember, it was Krajicek who gave Pete the most trouble and the record seems to confirm this. I also remember one of Pete's wins vs. Krajicek at the US Open and even then it was obvious how difficult a match-up it was for Sampras... Krajicek was a couple of points away from a 2-set lead.

    Of course, at his best Krajicek was a monster to play against- huge serve, incredible net coverage and overall competent game. Pity he was often injured and never seemed to reach his max potential. Seems like a common theme for the really big guys in tennis
     
    #36
  37. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,209
    Himself was his greatest rival. If he had as much consistency as Federer, he would have won even more than 14 majors. Also, if he enjoyed the sport more, he would have played longer and won even more.
     
    #37
  38. Laurie

    Laurie Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,421
    Location:
    London
    I somewhat agree with you. I think it is unexplainable to win a major tournament and be fit and healthy and then stop playing. Sure he could have taken 6 months off and came back refreshed. It will also explain why he was playing so many exhibitions against younger men between 2006 and 2011. He won't say but I think deep down he must feel he made a mistake retiring at that stage.
     
    #38
  39. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,006
    Fed and Sampras played at least four matches against each other. Advantage to Fed. (3 to 1)
     
    #39
  40. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,981
    Location:
    U.S
    no, they didn't. They just played one match - on centre court @ wimbledon in 2001


    exos these days where most players clown around don't count ...
     
    #40
  41. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Unlike Federer, Pete is very prone to losing to lesser players sometimes, but we all know if he put his mind into it, he will beat anyone that stands in his way.
     
    #41
  42. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Pete could have won 20+ slams if he was even close to be as dedicatedly consistent as Federer.
     
    #42
  43. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,371
    True. And that's why in 2009 Pete said Roger is a greater player than him.
     
    #43
  44. fed_rulz

    fed_rulz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,622
    it's not that Pete chose to be inconsistent; he just wasn't as good as Federer.

    It's like saying "if Karlovic chose to hit BHs like Djokovic, he could've won 20+ slams"..
     
    #44
  45. fed_rulz

    fed_rulz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,622
    so tell us why he didn't put his mind to defeat Gilbert Schaller at RG? or his arch-rival Agassi at the AO?
     
    #45
  46. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,467
    It seems that it's the usual Federer versus Sampras argument again. Federer is simply more consistent than Sampras over the course of their careers and at their peaks. One of the things of Federer's career is that his level of play is such that he almost never loses to inferior players. So you can often bank on Federer going deep into every tournament. Federer's won at a higher lifetime winning percentage, higher winning percentage during their respective peaks, won more tournaments, a higher percentage of tournaments won etc.

    I think the one player that Sampras feared and he admitted it in his book was Stich. Stich had the big serve and volley with good groundies.

    When he first started playing pro tennis the player Sampras feared was Michael Chang but obviously he didn't fear Chang much after he became the Sampras we know about.
     
    #46
  47. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    "Rivals", Krajicek and Bruguera are the ones that come to mine, though those were pretty evenly matched.

    I wouldn't include Hewitt or Roddick since Sampras was on his way out or already retired by the time those guys hit their best.
     
    #47
  48. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    Its easier to be more consistent these days ( I think even Fed would agree with that deep down.).. IMO. In the 90s you almost HAD to play a higher risk game, which could cause you to be more prone to upsets. Then you take court specialists into account in an era like the 80s and 90s.. We have already seen 3 different guys just in the last 5 years alone win 3 slams in one year.

    Prior to that less then handful managed that in 40 years.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2012
    #48
  49. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    It's not that Pete wasn't good. Pete has ALL the tools to work with to win more slams. At his best, he is capable of blasting anybody off the court with his extremely risky and offensive game, but at his worst he could also lose to anyone at the same time. That's Pete's game, take all or nothing.
     
    #49
  50. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Exactly. It is the same as comparing Serena to Graf. Serena has more losses even in her best years since her game is higher risk and can go off more easily, but her absolute highest level is higher than Graf on all but clay, just like Sampras's absolute highest level is higher than Federer on all medium to fast courts, it just can go off alot more easily.
     
    #50

Share This Page