Originally Posted by flying24
I think the eras of Sampras and Federer will be split into two parts in history though and even out more or less. Yes the competition Sampras won half his slams against and had half his year end #1s from 1990-1995 was very strong. However the field from 1996-2002 where he won the other half of his slams and had half his year end #1s was very weak. The competition Federer had in winning 9 of his slams and ending #1 three times from 2003-2006 wasnt as strong. However the competition from 2007-onwards is very strong, a heck of alot stronger than the 96-2002 field Sampras had half of his achievements against, and Federer has already amassed 6 more slams and likely atleast two year end #1s vs that field.
I agree with this,kinda the way I see it as well.I was actually always surprised Sampras didn't win more slams than he did in 1996-2002 period,the competition was IMO significantly easier than 1990-1995 and you would expect that someone with Pete's amazing serve would have had more longevity and took advantage of that,instead he was mostly just winning Wimbledon in that period.
Granted he did have some bad luck(like missing '99 USO)and thallasemia minor probably affected his longevity and made it lesser than it should have been for someone who has one of the best serves ever.