When people compare Sampras' Masters 1000 total of 11, with Federer, Nadal, Djokovic having between 24 and 30 - some comment that - "well Sampras' didn't prioritize or compete in Masters 1000's in the 1990's because it was not compulsory to compete in them".
They are right when they say they weren't compulsory.
These are the facts though.
In the 1990-1992 period there were other equivalent (in terms of points and prize money) tournaments at the level of the Masters 1000's (about 8 to 9 a year) - we can give Sampras another 4 Masters 1000 equivalents (2 Philadelphia and 2 Indianapolis' in that period). From 1993 to 1995 the only comparable tournament (in terms of points and prize money) outside of the Slams and 2 season end finals was the Stuttgart Indoor. Sampras didn't compete at that tournament during those years. Hence, outside of the Stuttgart indoor, from 1993 at that level the masters 1000's were the only game in town. Lets look at 1993 through to 1999 (whilst Masters 1000's were non-compulsory):
By year how many Masters 1000's did Sampras compete in.
1993 7 out of 9
1994 5 out of 9 (that year he was out for a time with tendinitis in his left ankle)
1995 9 out of 9
1996 5 out of 9 (that year he suffered a strained Achilles' tendon - I don't know how long this caused him to be out - but he did miss the Olympics because of it)
1997 7 out of 9
1998 8 out of 9
1999 5 out of 9 (remember he significantly injured his back that year so was out for quite some time)
So there we have it - in those years Sampras did at least 7 out of 9 Masters 1000's except the years he was injured. That is a lot of Masters 1000's. 46 in fact.
Please understand me, I think that Sampras was one of the greatest players of all time (in fact I think he is the greatest fast court player of all time), but he doesn't get a free pass on the Masters 1000 front. He did compete in them - he just wasn't a successful there as the big 3 (or if you want to include pre-1990 equivalents to the 1990's Masters 1000 - Lendl 22 (probably a lot higher if you look at 1990, Connors 17, McEnroe 19, Agassi 17 official + 2 equivalent 1988 Forest Hills and Stratton Mountain = 19)
So Sampras' masters 1000 equivalents total is: 11 official + 4 equivalent = 15. Now you might want to add in the two Grand Slam cups (though I would rate it at a higher level like the WTF). Either way that is a lot less than Djokovic on 30, Nadal on 28 or Federer on 24.
I think it is time to honour the achievements of the big three for Masters 1000's. Those kinds of Masters 1000 totals are very impressive - and I don't think they are given credit enough for them. Saying, well they don't count when comparing Sampras and Nadal - both on 14 slams, is just not accurate.
They are right when they say they weren't compulsory.
These are the facts though.
In the 1990-1992 period there were other equivalent (in terms of points and prize money) tournaments at the level of the Masters 1000's (about 8 to 9 a year) - we can give Sampras another 4 Masters 1000 equivalents (2 Philadelphia and 2 Indianapolis' in that period). From 1993 to 1995 the only comparable tournament (in terms of points and prize money) outside of the Slams and 2 season end finals was the Stuttgart Indoor. Sampras didn't compete at that tournament during those years. Hence, outside of the Stuttgart indoor, from 1993 at that level the masters 1000's were the only game in town. Lets look at 1993 through to 1999 (whilst Masters 1000's were non-compulsory):
By year how many Masters 1000's did Sampras compete in.
1993 7 out of 9
1994 5 out of 9 (that year he was out for a time with tendinitis in his left ankle)
1995 9 out of 9
1996 5 out of 9 (that year he suffered a strained Achilles' tendon - I don't know how long this caused him to be out - but he did miss the Olympics because of it)
1997 7 out of 9
1998 8 out of 9
1999 5 out of 9 (remember he significantly injured his back that year so was out for quite some time)
So there we have it - in those years Sampras did at least 7 out of 9 Masters 1000's except the years he was injured. That is a lot of Masters 1000's. 46 in fact.
Please understand me, I think that Sampras was one of the greatest players of all time (in fact I think he is the greatest fast court player of all time), but he doesn't get a free pass on the Masters 1000 front. He did compete in them - he just wasn't a successful there as the big 3 (or if you want to include pre-1990 equivalents to the 1990's Masters 1000 - Lendl 22 (probably a lot higher if you look at 1990, Connors 17, McEnroe 19, Agassi 17 official + 2 equivalent 1988 Forest Hills and Stratton Mountain = 19)
So Sampras' masters 1000 equivalents total is: 11 official + 4 equivalent = 15. Now you might want to add in the two Grand Slam cups (though I would rate it at a higher level like the WTF). Either way that is a lot less than Djokovic on 30, Nadal on 28 or Federer on 24.
I think it is time to honour the achievements of the big three for Masters 1000's. Those kinds of Masters 1000 totals are very impressive - and I don't think they are given credit enough for them. Saying, well they don't count when comparing Sampras and Nadal - both on 14 slams, is just not accurate.
Last edited: