Stats for Sampras and Agassi (9 Slams)

[krosero]

So now we have threads for all 9 meetings in Slams between Sampras and Agassi.

1990 USO - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=196287

1992 RG - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=225210

1993 Wimbledon - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=229031

1995 AO - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=206448

1995 USO - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=230227

1999 Wimbledon - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=185518

2000 AO - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...27#post2836627

2001 USO - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...13#post2845813

2002 USO - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=224267


This thread is to compile what I thought were the most interesting stats in the 9 matches (some just for fun).


SERVICE

Sampras had his highest service percentage at 2000 AO, with 63.46%. His lowest was 41% at 1992 RG.

Agassi had his highest service percentage at 1990 USO, with 77%. His lowest was 43% at 1999 W.

The loser usually served more points than the winner, with two exceptions. At 1995 USO, Sampras served 6 more points than Agassi (because he served one more game). And at 2002 USO, Sampras served 27 more points than Agassi, mostly in the last two sets when he was tiring.


Sampras’ success on first serve (we don’t have stats for 1992 RG or 1993 W):

92% at 1990 USO
88% at 1999 W
86% at 1995 USO
80% at 2000 AO and 2002 USO
79% at 2001 USO
76% at 1995 AO


Sampras’ success on second serve (again minus 1992 RG and 1993 W):

58.8% at 1990 USO
58.7% at 2001 USO
54% at 1995 USO
52% at 2002 USO
49% at 1999 W and 2000 AO
44% at 1995 AO


WINNERS/ACES

Agassi’s FH was usually the stroke that produced the most clean winners, except at 1990 USO and 2002 USO (at the latter, the leading stroke was Pete's forehand volley).

However Sampras, except at 1992 RG, usually led all strokes with his aces.

Sampras served a career high of 37 aces at 2000 AO. This amounts to aces on 24% of all the points he served in the match, his highest rate in the nine meetings. And he had just 5 double faults (his second-lowest in the nine meetings), giving him a service "differential" of 32, possibly a career high too.

His low was 8 aces at 1992 RG.

Agassi served 18 aces at 2001 USO (I wonder if that was a career high for him), and none at 1990 USO.


The highest rate of winners belongs to Sampras at 2002 USO: he struck a clean winner or ace on 27% of all the points played. Next highest was his 24.7% at 2000 AO, and his 24.1% at 1999 W.

Agassi’s highest rate was 19% at 1995 AO.


ERRORS

Agassi usually made fewer total errors (forced and unforced) than Sampras. He made more than Pete only in the two Wimbledon matches.

Sampras served a high of 13 double faults at 2002 USO. Agassi served 7 at 1993 W and 6 at 1999 W -- the only matches in which he served more df's than Sampras.

Each man served just one double-fault at 1990 USO (and Agassi served one at 1992 RG).

Sampras usually led Agassi in drawing return errors, except at 1999 W and 2000 AO.


PUBLISHED WINNERS AND ERRORS

The highest “official” tally of winners belonged to Sampras at 2000 AO: 86 winners. He had 84 at 2002 USO and 80 at 2001 USO.

Agassi’s highest “official” tally was 55 winners at 2001 USO.

The highest published figure for unforced errors probably belonged to Sampras at 2000 AO: 56. I don’t have his figure for 1992 RG but it was probably lower.

Agassi’s highest published count was probably at 1993 W but I don’t know what it was.


MISCELLANEOUS

Their longest match in terms of points (338), games (52) and elapsed time (3:32) was their four-setter at 2001 USO. Their five-setter at 2000 AO tied that match in games but not in points (304) or in elapsed time (2:55).

They split 4-4 in tiebreaks, and 1-1 in five-setters.

The winner of the first set took every match except at 1995 AO and 2001 USO.

Sampras always came to net more than Agassi, except at 1992 RG (in fact Sampras had more winners there from ground strokes than from volleys and overheads, which also happened at 1995 AO).

Agassi always got more winners from ground strokes and rarely ventured to net. His 110 approaches to net in the 1988 RG semifinal against Wilander remain, I think, unique in all the stats we've done for him -- unless Moose knows of something else.

[krosero]

Finally I've calculated their Aggressive Margins where I have enough info to do so.

There's a clear trend or indication that both Sampras and Agassi got better as they grew older.


2002 USO Sampras - 30.32%
2002 USO Agassi - 21.30%

2001 USO Sampras - 34.62%
2001 USO Agassi - 30.47%

2000 AO Sampras - 24.34%
2000 AO Agassi - 26.32%

1995 USO Sampras - 21.61%
1995 USO Agassi - 16.53%

1995 AO Sampras - 18.29%
1995 AO Agassi - 23.35%

1990 USO Sampras - 21.51%
1990 USO Agassi - 6.40%


Thanks to Moose for pointing me to this method of measuring performances. I'm sure others here have heard about it already but I'll explain it for those who don't know.

A player's Aggressive Margin is a measure of how many points he is able to win with winners or forcing shots, compared to how many unforced errors he made. It's a measure of how efficiently aggressive he was.

All you need to know to calculate it is the Total Points Won and the unforced errors for each player.

If you know, for example, how many points Sampras won in a match, and you subtract from that number Agassi's unforced errors, the result is the number of points that Sampras won by hitting winners/aces or by getting forced errors from Agassi. Those are Sampras' Aggressive Points. Subtract from that number Pete's own unforced errors, and you have his Aggressive Margin. It's expressed as a percentage of the total points played in the match.

This method seems to accurately predict who won a given match. The method comes from Bill Jacobson and he has an article about it in Tennis Magazine from late 1994.

A detailed online article by Alberto Brignacca is here, and in HTML.

I don't have the Unforced Errors for the Sampras-Agassi meetings at RG and W, which in a way is a good because the list above is restricted to their meetings on hard court.

Jacobson writes that Aggressive Margins (AM's) "vary sharply by surface. On clay, longer rallies result in fewer winners and more unforced errors, and Aggressive Margins are 10-20% lower than on grass."

He says that Sampras' AM in winning Wimbledon in 1994 was 32.3%, but it's unclear to me whether he means the whole tournament or just the final.

Anyway what we've got on hard courts indicates that they were improving over time.

It also strikes me that the two men's performances at the 1995 AO are higher quality than what they produced at the USO -- even though you would expect the AM's to be lower on Rebound Ace, the slower court.

It gets a bit tricky here because this is the one match where I'm working without a precise number. The New York Times has Sampras making 50 ue's in the AO final, and Agassi committing "half as many mistakes", so I've given him 25.

If, for example, he really made 27, his AM would go down to 22.57%.

Just shows that there's a little bit of play there.

And that's really always the case with unforced errors, since they're not an exact science.

A final thing to keep in mind is that some of these percentages would change if published figures for Unforced Errors do not include the double-faults. I have several concrete indications that they do include them. For example, using the Unforced Errors at USO.org for the 2005 USO final, I get the same AM's as Brignacca does in his article. And Leo Levin, when discussing statistics, has said that a df is by definition an unforced error. I just can't say for sure that all sources at all times in the past have included df's when reporting Unforced Errors; I wonder if even a professional statistician can know that.

Having said all that, the '95 numbers remain intriguing -- particularly because you would expect the AM's to be lower on Rebound Ace than on the faster DecoTurf at the USO, but the numbers suggest that the AO final was a higher quality match.

Perhaps it just hasn't gone down that way because the USO match had all the buildup and drama.

[krosero]

In calculating the Aggressive Margins, I found a discrepancy for the 1990 USO and I found that I'd made a simple error in calculating Agassi's total errors there (nothing to do with unforced errors). He made 64, not 74. I've edited that thread; and no discrepancies came up for the other matches.

It doesn't affect the AM's above.

[krosero]

One more small correction. I streamlined everything in Excel to get the program to calculate as much as possible, with minimum input from me (now I just type in the ue's and Total Points Won). Excel added up the total points that each player won in the 1990 USO correctly; I had done that manually before (in my head) and I was slightly off.

The AM's are slightly affected: Sampras goes up 1.4%, Agassi almost half a percent. I've edited the post.

[Borgforever]

Regarding your stat-correction krosero -- I saw that glaring mistake before you posted your explanation. How could you even make such an unforgivable mistake in the first place? I almost spilled my coffee when I saw it didn't add up...

I mean if you can't count correctly in your head in a Las Vegas-casino -- you don't stand a chance of getting buried alive in the desert by Joe Pesci!

[krosero]

Originally Posted by Borgforever

I mean if you can't count correctly in your head in a Las Vegas-casino -- you don't stand a chance of getting buried alive in the desert by Joe Pesci!

I would get buried alive in the casino! I'd much rather be on a tennis court.

[edmondsm]

Agassi had his highest service percentage at 1990 USO, with 77%. His lowest was 43% at 1999 W.

Aww man. No wonder he lost that friggin match. C'mon Andre it's Wimbledon for christ sakes, get the serve in the box.

[Borgforever]

Hey krosero -- I wonder if you would like to describe your thoughts a little more in depth about the Sampras-Agassi-rivalry in GS-tourneys?

I would like to hear your analysis on it's development and what you consider were the major factors and the whys concerning how it played out.

I mean you seem to have a very good lock on this particular subject (among several others I believe)...

[krosero]

Originally Posted by Borgforever

Hey krosero -- I wonder if you would like to describe your thoughts a little more in depth about the Sampras-Agassi-rivalry in GS-tourneys?

Sure, I can do that. Right now I'm getting stats on some Borg matches and I'm going to concentrate on that; I do too much when I split my attention over two big topics. But when that's done I'd like to say more about the Aggressive Margins, and to get more of them if I can.

If anyone can find Agassi's unforced errors in '99W, and Becker's in '95W, we can get Pete's AMs for those two matches.

[Borgforever]

Cool. More Borg-stats? Hmmm... I can't wait...

[Rickson]

Looks like Sampras ownage.

[krosero]

Originally Posted by Borgforever

Hey krosero -- I wonder if you would like to describe your thoughts a little more in depth about the Sampras-Agassi-rivalry in GS-tourneys?

I would like to hear your analysis on it's development and what you consider were the major factors and the whys concerning how it played out.

Well Borgforever, I don't know that I have anything original to say about a rivalry that's been analyzed so much. And I don't think that our stats turned up anything really surprising, because a lot of their matches already had published stats, and our counts just added more detail.

But one thing did surprise me, not in their matches, but in Agassi's net approaches against Wilander at the 1988 French Open: 110 per NBC, and app. 90 in our own counts. He had 33 winners from volleys and overheads, 32 from ground strokes; I can't think of another match where a majority of his winners came at the net. Usually it's not even close.

Against Sampras, I counted 31 approaches at the '92 FO, and that may have been his highest number against Pete in a Slam. It was on clay and only a few years after the Wilander match, so I don't know, maybe he still had some of the adventurousness he showed in '88. Maybe he came in 31 times simply because he felt safer approaching with his ground strokes on clay. Or maybe it was because Sampras only approached 19 times himself.

Whatever the case, at the faster Slams he rarely did much at the net, and in that last USO final in '02 he approached just 13 times. So in a way you could say that in this rivalry, Agassi was coming in less as the years went by, while Sampras (due to Annacone) was coming in more.

The reason I think it's important is that Agassi never really found a way to take Pete out of his comfort zone. In his book, Sampras says that Agassi was good enough to force him to do more (like coming to net constantly on his second serve); but he also says that he wasn't taken out of his comfort zone.

So the rivalry was basically cast as the best server against the best returner. That was the big tag line in the buildup before their '95 USO final, and I remember thinking that by itself, a great serve against a great return wasn't going to make a great rivalry; on a fast surface the server will usually win, all else being equal (I think Andre had the edge on Rebound Ace, but not by much).

When I took the Wilander-Agassi stats, it was Moose who made the contrast against the later Agassi; I hadn't seen the Sampras-Agassi matches in years. Now I've seen them a lot, so when I went back recently to watch a set of the Wilander match, I was more surprised than ever, watching Andre run up to net and handle low and high volleys, stretch volleys, overheads, like they're no problem at all. His net game is not really mature; it does feel a little like a fearless experiment he's trying; but the talent is evident. And it does make you wonder what he could have done if he had mixed it up more.

Who knows what difference it would have made. But I'm coming at this from the perspective of having seen it make a difference for Wilander himself: he broke through in '88 by approaching the net more than he ever had: 137 times in the USO final against Lendl. At the start of '88, I did not think that Wilander was really going to find a way to get more aggressive. I'd seen him trying, with discomfort, to get up to net in the '87 USO final, so the last thing I would have expected was that he'd nearly double his net approaches in a rematch.

I had to see it to believe it was possible -- and that it could work.

Same thing with Borg, who was famous for camping out well behind the baseline to receive serve: I would not have believed that he'd ever return McEnroe's serves from inside the baseline, unless I saw it myself (at AKAI); nor would I have believed that it would work.

You get so used to seeing certain players in a certain part of the court, the least I can say is that it's interesting to see them break their own habits. Quite apart from the rivalry with Sampras, I would have liked to see Agassi mixing it up at the net more than he did.

[World Beater]

i know this thread is about former players...but it would be interesting to compute aggressive margins of current players and compare them to say guys like sampras and agassi

[bet]

Hello Krosero. Funny, I hadn't heard "aggressive margin" for quite a while. I was about to post about Bill Jacobson, founder of Computennis, when I saw you are aware of him.

One thing I noticed in skimming this is you mentioned:

"clear trend or indication that both Sampras and Agassi got better"

This is an interesting statement, which of course could be interpreted many ways.

A few points:

It's not clear to me that Agassi's margin was increasing. Particularly if you eliminate his abysmal 1990 final, where he hit one decisive winner in the entire match, which was over before he even shook off the nerves.

Sampras' numbers do appear to increase. Perhaps a result of his switch to SV play....or another very plausible explanation is to remember that they were both plausibly slower in the late years.....one also wonders if another reason might be increased familiarity with each others games and big occasions.

[bet]

Originally Posted by World Beater

i know this thread is about former players...but it would be interesting to compute aggressive margins of current players and compare them to say guys like sampras and agassi

I'd hazzard a guess that it would be higher for current players. It's a result of the style being played. A relatively one-dimensional baseline slugfest, for which the players are exquisitely trained. In essence, like long-time practice partners, they set each other up to hit their best shots. In the past, chip and charge, serve and volley, crush and rush, off-pace baseliners, flat hitters, tended to result in more errors.

[krosero]

All good comments, although I have not been able to confirm that the figures I used for unforced errors included double-faults. True, double-faults are only going to change the AM's by a few percentage points; but still that needs to be settled before you could really analyze, for example, whether these two players were improving, how they compare to current players, etc.

[World Beater]

Originally Posted by bet

I'd hazzard a guess that it would be higher for current players. It's a result of the style being played. A relatively one-dimensional baseline slugfest, for which the players are exquisitely trained. In essence, like long-time practice partners, they set each other up to hit their best shots. In the past, chip and charge, serve and volley, crush and rush, off-pace baseliners, flat hitters, tended to result in more errors.

you may be right but for the wrong reasons.

its quite difficult to hit a winner these days because players move and defend so well.

[bet]

Originally Posted by World Beater

you may be right but for the wrong reasons.

its quite difficult to hit a winner these days because players move and defend so well.

Not sure what you're saying, if it's that hard to hit winners today (I don't think it is), then the margin would be lower today. Particularly since play is overwhelmingly done at the baseline.

In any case, I think it's largely a myth that the players today are faster. They were ALWAYS fast. Very fast. That has always defined pro tennis. The fastest players from the 70's are ever bit as fast as the fastest players today. The average may have gone up but the amount would be absolutely miniscule if measured, it'd be amazing if the top 100 is 2% faster than the top 100 from 30 years ago. Even that figure is doubtful. Steroids and doping aside, human speed capabilities had maxed out long, long ago.

The idea that players today are so much faster, is an interesting sociological/psychological characteristic, it's basis in reality is.....rather weak.

[World Beater]

Originally Posted by bet

Not sure what you're saying, if it's that hard to hit winners today (I don't think it is), then the margin would be lower today. Particularly since play is overwhelmingly done at the baseline.

In any case, I think it's largely a myth that the players today are faster. They were ALWAYS fast. Very fast. That has always defined pro tennis. The fastest players from the 70's are ever bit as fast as the fastest players today. The average may have gone up but the amount would be absolutely miniscule if measured, it'd be amazing if the top 100 is 2% faster than the top 100 from 30 years ago. Even that figure is doubtful. Steroids and doping aside, human speed capabilities had maxed out long, long ago.

The idea that players today are so much faster, is an interesting sociological/psychological characteristic, it's basis in reality is.....rather weak.

well i compare this gen of players to prev gen for example.

federer, nadal, djokovic and murray are superior movers and defenders than sampras, agassi, becker, kuerten etc.

only hewitt, chang can compare but they are not as strong athletically to hit passing shots from several feet behind the baseline.

what im saying is that the aggressive margin might be higher but for reasons due to tennis level increasing. federer runs through most of his opponents like a hot knife through butter...destroying guys in his prime whereas sampras used to win sets 6-4 and 7-6 even against journeymen. the reason why pete did is not important but the result is his agg.margin is lower.

nadal is similar in that he is hyper consistent and almost always forces errors out of the opponent while making almost no errors himself. so his agg margin should be high as well.

the fact that the top players especially defend so well and are able to hit winners and force errors from seemingly defensive positions makes their agg.margins higher.

so there is a group of players who are becoming so consistent in performance and results that they are totally outclassing the rest of this competition. this group is federer, nadal, djokovic and now murray with davydenko being a honorable mention.

[bet]

Originally Posted by World Beater

well i compare this gen of players to prev gen for example.

federer, nadal, djokovic and murray are superior movers and defenders than sampras, agassi, becker, kuerten etc.

only hewitt, chang can compare but they are not as strong athletically to hit passing shots from several feet behind the baseline.

what im saying is that the aggressive margin might be higher but for reasons due to tennis level increasing. federer runs through most of his opponents like a hot knife through butter...destroying guys in his prime whereas sampras used to win sets 6-4 and 7-6 even against journeymen. the reason why pete did is not important but the result is his agg.margin is lower.

nadal is similar in that he is hyper consistent and almost always forces errors out of the opponent while making almost no errors himself. so his agg margin should be high as well.

the fact that the top players especially defend so well and are able to hit winners and force errors from seemingly defensive positions makes their agg.margins higher.

so there is a group of players who are becoming so consistent in performance and results that they are totally outclassing the rest of this competition. this group is federer, nadal, djokovic and now murray with davydenko being a honorable mention.

Well I completely disagree with your assertions about movement and I find this idea of an elite group rather strange. Even if their margins were higher, the tour in general wouldn't be doing very well with their margins against them.

In any case, Certainly Fed, Nadal, Djoko, Davy are not better than than Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Safin, etc. so, this would indicate a general lowering of the depth of the rest of the tour. I don't necessarily think this is the case, but if you wish to argue that those elite players have higher margins because they are so much better than their opponents, ok.

Again, I tend to think that changes in margin would more likely be due to the homogenization of game style.

This also in large part is why Nadal and Federer tend to win so many matches. Everybody they play is limited to playing their own baseline game which is not as good. As a result, they may have good rallies but invariably they tend to come up short. If Nadal and Federer had to play a Richard Krajicek, Stich, Mecir, Leconte....whoever, even though they may win more matches against these guys than lose, because they are better, they will also suffer more losses than they will playing inferior baseliners.

A SV player ranked 30 has a much better chance of taking advantage of a bad day from a top player than a baseliner ranked 30. The baseliner has to hit many balls and the top player has lots and lots of time to find his form and pull himself together. Especially when the baseliner plays the same topspin game every other baseliner does. He also knows he is a worse baseliner and fears that when the other player finds his form, it's all over. The SV'er may know he is not as good as the top player, but he also knows he has knockout punches, can potentially end it quickly and does not need to beat the top player at his own game.