FYI that famous Yandell study of the Sampras serve came about after he saw how Fed in those exos seemed to be having a harder time returning it than he usually did Roddick's on tour, and while John didn't provide Andy's own rpm in his study he did say his analysis confirmed his suspicion that the Sampras serve was indeed "heavy" and had a higher topspin component than the average. Try to guess who wins the spin game between Sampras and Roddick.
Also I know some of you may be sick of moi making this point but it bears repeating: it's all but certain Pete would be serving above 60% in this era, probably not quite near Roddick's career 65% but at least pretty close to Fed's 62%, because today's racquets allow greater spin than Pete's old Wilson Pro Staff and Babolat natural gut, which helps not only with 1st-serve % but also with heavier 2nd serves. That's why, contrary to all the moaning about the courts slowing down, players today are holding serve more often and DFing less than ever.
Which gives me another chance to cite
@slice serve ace's useful comparison:
All in all while the margin is fairly small I still think it's clear whose serve is better. But even if you disagree hopefully you now understand these cross-era statistical comparisons aren't so simple.
These are the correct answers. I know I've mentioned him before but I used to know this bud who studied the Sampras serve closely and once hurt his shoulder so bad trying to copy it he had to skip tennis for two weeks, and one of the things he stressed was that disguise which separated Pete from so many other big servers. You'd really have to turn to the likes of Goran, Curren and Tanner to find a serve more unreadable, which is saying something. Alas many too have tried to emulate it but failed (hopefully without any injury!), because of that freakishly strong and flexible shoulder of his.
It was, and frankly it's not that close. In fact Stich probably is another one who also had a better 2nd serve than A-Rod. As I've noted from their
'92 Wimbledon QF you'd be often hard-pressed to tell between 1st and 2nd serves while watching Pete or Stich, and though Roddick's own 2nd had nasty kick it wasn't usually quite on that level.
In the last 20-30 years the only guy you can say had a better 2nd serve than Pete is Isner as many indeed have argued, and I actually can see why... if we're comparing the two in practice or in early rounds when there's next to no pressure. Of course tennis doesn't quite work like that in the real world, and with the caveat that I didn't catch all of Isner's marathon SF vs. Anderson at this year's Wimbledon I can tell you this: there's not a single 2nd serve I can recall from that match that Isner hit for an ace or even a would-be ace. That despite this being the 2nd-longest match ever at Wimbledon against a fairly mediocre returner. Can anyone really imagine Sampras failing to do more damage on his 2nd serves?
I know
@abmk once disagreed with me on the
'00 AO SF when I said its classic 4th-set TB is a fairly good indicator of how their matchup would've unfolded Down Under. That is, I said Agassi ain't nailing those big 1st serves down the T every time to win a, say, 10-match series, at which point abmk chimed in with the retort Pete's not hitting two 2nd-serve aces every time, either. Actually, while "every time" may be a bit of hyperbole I can see him coming pretty damn close, because we've seen Sampras hit one big 2nd-serve ace after another under pressure. (Plus he'd
injured his right hip flexor in the 4th game of the match which would sideline him for nearly a month.)
Which brings us to....
We know he averaged 110 mph vs. Fed for the entirety of their '01 Wimby match (120 would be indeed crazy for anyone), and not much less in the previous rounds. I'm sure I could find more examples if I tried (though not that many cuz, as you may know, they used to measure serve speeds at the net as opposed to when the ball left the racquet).
But more importantly you're missing the point if you take it literally that Pete's 2nd serve was better than many a player's 1st serve... because nobody serves at all times like they're serving 1st serves on their 2nd! What's more accurate to say is that Sampras served like that more often that just about anyone else but was able to make it work, because of an unparalleled combo of physique, technique and confidence. Like I said it's easy to serve the biggest bombs even on your 2nd serves when the pressure is low, but not when you're serving with your back against the wall in a major final (or an instance close enough).
I would've been very interested to see how much juice Kramer applies on his 2nd serves today as he was by all accounts the Sampras of his era. (In fact that's why I tend to think he of all tennis greats would've posed the toughest challenge to Pete on grass, but I digress.) Newk's own 2nd probably wasn't too far behind, if at all. If we're talking the last 20-30 years, though, you'd be a fool to pick anyone other than Pete to hit 2nd serves for your life, DFs be damned. When people look at the DF totals only they ignore how much damage strong 2nd serves can inflict when they do go in, and not only for the server as a smaller window on return would make the opponent work harder on his own service. That's why I like to say, somewhat ironically, that players today should be DFing more, not less.
