Originally Posted by 90's Clay
Pete playing good enough at wimbledon that year? He almost went out to some bum in an earlier round.. Doubt Pete was going to win it that year. His grass game clearly hit a dead end by 2001
Sampras being forced to 5 sets isn't really an indication of his form at Wimbledon, he wasn't really that dominant from start to finish.
In 1993 he played a tough 4-setter against Neil Borwick in the 1st round, in the quarters he was pushed to 5 by a dead-wrist Agassi.
In 1995 he lost sets to Braasch, Palmer, Matsuoka in the first couple of rounds (was pushed to 5 sets in the SF by Ivanisevic)
In 1996 he lost sets to Reneberg and Kucera before being handed a straight set beatdown by Krajicek.
In 1997 he was pushed to a 5-setter by Kodra in the 4th round
In 1999 he was being killed by Philippoussis before Mark caught an injury.
In 2000 he lost sets to Kucera, Gimelstob and was forced into a tough 4-setter against Jan-Michael Gambill.
So once again, I don't see how this one 5-setter is a proof of him not playing well enough to win the championships, given that he won the other 2 matches fairly easily, in fact he led 6-3 6-2 in that match when he was pushed to 5 sets, one can assume he lost focus after winning so easily.