Top 10 Sampras career rivals?

SamprasisGOAT

SamprasisGOAT

Hall of Fame
Who in everyone’s opinion are petes top 10 rivals throughout his career?

1. Agassi
2. Ivanisevic
3. Rafter
4. Becker
5. Krajicek
6. Courier
7. Chang
8. Henman
9. Rusedski
10. Hewitt

Maybe edberg could of been included.

They are just off the top of my head. Hopefully other posters will disagree and improve the list.

I’m back posting on here after 3 years away. I hate how underrated Pete is now days. I also think most modern tennis is a terrible standard and poor viewing but I know I’m in a minority. 80s and 90s were such great eras. It’s actually abit of a disgrace how Sampras is spoken about. I still think Djokovic and nadal wouldn’t have won more than 14 grand slams in the 90s with the surfaces, rackets, balls, surface specialists and deeper competition. Federer is maybe a different matter but I’d still back Sampras head to head.
 
Djokodalerer31

Djokodalerer31

Hall of Fame
1.Agassi
2.Chang
3.Becker
4.Ivanisevic
5.Edberg
6.Ferreira
7.Krajicek
8.Korda
9.Martin
10.Courier

These are the people, he played at least 10 times throughout his career! I don't think we should count the likes of Henman, Hewitt, Safin or especially Federer, since they its too hard to compare it peak-to-peak, because they only started to rise, while Sampras started to decline around the time they faced each other...
 
T

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
SamprasisGOAT said:
Who in everyone’s opinion are petes top 10 rivals throughout his career?

1. Agassi
2. Ivanisevic
3. Rafter
4. Becker
5. Krajicek
6. Courier
7. Chang
8. Henman
9. Rusedski
10. Hewitt

Maybe edberg could of been included.

They are just off the top of my head. Hopefully other posters will disagree and improve the list.

I’m back posting on here after 3 years away. I hate how underrated Pete is now days. I also think most modern tennis is a terrible standard and poor viewing but I know I’m in a minority. 80s and 90s were such great eras. It’s actually abit of a disgrace how Sampras is spoken about. I still think Djokovic and nadal wouldn’t have won more than 14 grand slams in the 90s with the surfaces, rackets, balls, surface specialists and deeper competition. Federer is maybe a different matter but I’d still back Sampras head to head.
Click to expand...
I’m with you.
 
Phoenix1983

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
PETE didn’t have rivals, just guys who he let win from time to time before beating them up the next time they met.

Sure, Agassi had a few wins but when it came down to it on the biggest stages (W and USO), Pete had a perfect 6-0 record.

Krajicek? Yeah won at Wimbledon that one time but what else did he do?

Becker? Pummelled into submission in the 95 W final and 96 YEC final. Admitted that Pete’s best was superior to his own.

And who else? Goran? Stich? Henman? ROFL!!! Pete coulda beaten them with one hand behind his back. Nuff said!

That’s not cos they were weak competition mind, but cos PETE was the supreme tennis alpha male.

Now compare Federer. Pees his pants at the sight of Rafa and Novak. Hell even Murray had his number for a while. Yeah he has the most slams but he ain’t ever gonna be the real GOAT.
 
F

fezer

Rookie
SamprasisGOAT said:
Troll alert
Click to expand...
why do you think so?
i never trolled anyone on this forum
and dint have that in mind
i still think that Pete Sampras has a word in the goat discussion (open era - what i can assess)
but even these players have a little pain in the ass
if it was for Federer, i would say Rafter, or Davydenko for Nadal...
 
Cashman

Cashman

Hall of Fame
Agassi and Rafter are #1 and #2 comfortably. Sampras owned Rafter early on (hence their lopsided H2H) but in the late 90s they had a really hard-fought rivalry that got quite acrimonious at times.

If you are just talking about players that were competitive against Sampras - Stich, Kraijeck, Chang and maybe Ivanisevic stand out.

Becker, Edberg, Safin and Hewitt also racked up quite a few wins against Sampras, but you can argue that they benefited from catching him at either end of his career.
 
Last edited:
D

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
I think that Pete was vexed by the British/Canadian Rusedski, a player who seemed to annoy him. Partly because of Greg's opportunistic acquisition of

British citizenship to get career support.

Rusedski won an impressive Paris final against Sampras in 1998. This suggests that Rusedski was playing at a level near Sampras.
 
J

jasonbrown

Rookie
Phoenix1983 said:
PETE didn’t have rivals, just guys who he let win from time to time before beating them up the next time they met.

Sure, Agassi had a few wins but when it came down to it on the biggest stages (W and USO), Pete had a perfect 6-0 record.

Krajicek? Yeah won at Wimbledon that one time but what else did he do?

Becker? Pummelled into submission in the 95 W final and 96 YEC final. Admitted that Pete’s best was superior to his own.

And who else? Goran? Stich? Henman? ROFL!!! Pete coulda beaten them with one hand behind his back. Nuff said!

That’s not cos they were weak competition mind, but cos PETE was the supreme tennis alpha male.

Now compare Federer. Pees his pants at the sight of Rafa and Novak. Hell even Murray had his number for a while. Yeah he has the most slams but he ain’t ever gonna be the real GOAT.
Click to expand...

I agree mostly but Agassi was 14-20 vs Sampras. That is respectable and just as Pete never beat him at Wimbledon and the U.S Open, Pete never beat Agassi at the Australian (0-2) or French (0-1). Agassi was definitely a legit rival.

Krajicek could also be a sort of personal rival as he had a winning head to head with Sampras, and was his nemisis for quite awhile, although obviously not consistently on the tour are as far as greatness.

That is about it. Edberg I guess is a good crossover rival of Sampras, they have a very close head to head, and Edberg still held his own even when he was first going down, but unforuntately they werent true enough contemporaries to have a truly great rivalry. I think he was a tougher opponent for Sampras than Becker who was like a weaker version of Sampras.
 
J

jasonbrown

Rookie
I guess since you ask for a list.

1. Agassi
2. Krajicek
3. Ivanisevic- mostly a Wimbledon only rivalry though
4. Edberg
5. Becker

The rest are too meaningless to even bother going further.
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Agassi
Courier
Becker
Ivanisevic
Chang
Krajicek
Stich
Rafter
Korda
Kafelnikov
Edberg
Hewitt
Safin
Martin
Corretja/Phillippoussis

make the top 15

If you consider being a rival for atleast 2-3 years from 93-2000, it narrows down to :

Agassi
Courier
Becker
Ivanisevic
Chang
Krajicek
Rafter
Korda
Kafelnikov
Martin
 
T

Thetouch

Professional
Hard to tell. It depends on the surfaces as well. I think Becker had a slightly edge on Pete on carpet and maybe even at the AO, had they ever met there. Not sure about the FO but Becker did quite well there for like 5 years reaching 3 semis and even beating FO champions like Muster and Chang but he never really cared for clay anyway. Stich had Sampras' number on various occasions but he wasn't so consistent at slams and they barely ever met. Courier and Edberg were tough opponents for him in the early 90s and Agassi was obviously the best rival he ever had. Chang challenged him a lot too from what I remember. I can't really talk about the years past 1997 because it was then when tennis started slowly to decline in my oppinion and newer players came along.
 
H

Herald

Guest
SamprasisGOAT said:
Who in everyone’s opinion are petes top 10 rivals throughout his career?

1. Agassi
2. Ivanisevic
3. Rafter
4. Becker
5. Krajicek
6. Courier
7. Chang
8. Henman
9. Rusedski
10. Hewitt

Maybe edberg could of been included.

They are just off the top of my head. Hopefully other posters will disagree and improve the list.

I’m back posting on here after 3 years away. I hate how underrated Pete is now days. I also think most modern tennis is a terrible standard and poor viewing but I know I’m in a minority. 80s and 90s were such great eras. It’s actually abit of a disgrace how Sampras is spoken about. I still think Djokovic and nadal wouldn’t have won more than 14 grand slams in the 90s with the surfaces, rackets, balls, surface specialists and deeper competition. Federer is maybe a different matter but I’d still back Sampras head to head.
Click to expand...

Not with his suspect mental strength. He would handle many big servers very well with his reflex returning, but the skill serve volleyers like Edberg, Becker, Rafter, Henman would give him fits. Agassi would give him nightmares as well.

No, I think each era's champions would handle their eras better than champions from other time periods. If we're talking the 90s, the big 3 would all bow to Sampras.
 
H

Herald

Guest
Phoenix1983 said:
PETE didn’t have rivals, just guys who he let win from time to time before beating them up the next time they met.

Sure, Agassi had a few wins but when it came down to it on the biggest stages (W and USO), Pete had a perfect 6-0 record.

Krajicek? Yeah won at Wimbledon that one time but what else did he do?

Becker? Pummelled into submission in the 95 W final and 96 YEC final. Admitted that Pete’s best was superior to his own.

And who else? Goran? Stich? Henman? ROFL!!! Pete coulda beaten them with one hand behind his back. Nuff said!

That’s not cos they were weak competition mind, but cos PETE was the supreme tennis alpha male.

Now compare Federer. Pees his pants at the sight of Rafa and Novak. Hell even Murray had his number for a while. Yeah he has the most slams but he ain’t ever gonna be the real GOAT.
Click to expand...
This is closer to the truth than you intended. Particularly the last sentence (minus having the most slams of course)
 
H

Herald

Guest
Rosstour said:
"I'm a Federer fan, but I necromance threads from 2+ years ago that mention him in passing, just to have another go at his legacy and stir sh*t up"
Click to expand...
Likely drawing from the same Necrotome Agassi dug up to animate his bones in those 2004/5 Open matches
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
The one who got under Sampras' skin most, for whatever reason, was Rafter. It was there a bit in 1997, but it peaked in the summer of 1998 when Sampras lost his cool after the championship point and losing the match in the Cincinnati final, and after the US Open semi where Sampras got injured early in the third set and ended up losing in 5 sets to reigning champion Rafter who went on to retain the title. Rafter seemed to be of the tradition of play hard in competition, but have a beer with the boys afterwards, which obviously conflicted with Sampras' outlook.
 
S

stosurforehand

Rookie
I take issue with putting Ivanisevic as high as #2. He was probably Sampras's biggest rival at Wimbledon, but that was literally the only venue their rivalry existed at all. I would go with something like:

1. Agassi- no brainer
2. Becker- though #2 is hard to pinpoint but they had a big rivalry both on carpet, grass, and any indoor event.
3. Krajicek- maybe this is too high but he was arguably Sampras's biggest nemisis, had a long win streak over him at one point, and was the only one to interrupt his Wimbledon run.
4. Rafter- I thought of putting him #3. They had a big rivalry the late 97-2000 period.
5. Ivanisevic- again as I said, Wimbledon only rivalry basically, even though they did play in the 96 US Open semis and 96 YEC semis.
6. Courier- I thought of putting him higher but it was such a lopsided head to head, it wasn't that great a rivalry.
7. Stich- I only don't put this higher as they didn't play in more big matches. Even 92 Wimbledon quarters wasn't that big when in hindsight neither was ever winning this event, or probably even making the final, regardless who won.
8. Hewitt- I thought of putting this higher as they had a decently big rivalry when their careers crossed over in opposite ends in 2000-2002.
9. Safin- Possibly I should put him even higher. He took out Sampras in some huge matches for himself like 2000 US Open and 2002 Australian (which Sampras had a huge shot to win if he had won).
10. Kafelnikov, Kuerten, Chang, Martin, all have a case
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
stosurforehand said:
I take issue with putting Ivanisevic as high as #2. He was probably Sampras's biggest rival at Wimbledon, but that was literally the only venue their rivalry existed at all. I would go with something like:

1. Agassi- no brainer
2. Becker- though #2 is hard to pinpoint but they had a big rivalry both on carpet, grass, and any indoor event.
3. Krajicek- maybe this is too high but he was arguably Sampras's biggest nemisis, had a long win streak over him at one point, and was the only one to interrupt his Wimbledon run.
4. Rafter- I thought of putting him #3. They had a big rivalry the late 97-2000 period.
5. Ivanisevic- again as I said, Wimbledon only rivalry basically, even though they did play in the 96 US Open semis and 96 YEC semis.
6. Courier- I thought of putting him higher but it was such a lopsided head to head, it wasn't that great a rivalry.
7. Stich- I only don't put this higher as they didn't play in more big matches. Even 92 Wimbledon quarters wasn't that big when in hindsight neither was ever winning this event, or probably even making the final, regardless who won.
8. Hewitt- I thought of putting this higher as they had a decently big rivalry when their careers crossed over in opposite ends in 2000-2002.
9. Safin- Possibly I should put him even higher. He took out Sampras in some huge matches for himself like 2000 US Open and 2002 Australian (which Sampras had a huge shot to win if he had won).
10. Kafelnikov, Kuerten, Chang, Martin, all have a case
Click to expand...

A take I don't often see but one I agree with. Hewitt losing early due to chicken pox and Agassi withdrawing make this a huge chance for Sampras if he can get by Safin - he's a definite favourite over Haas and Johansson. Haas did give him a fairly competitive match at the USO later that year but would still have to back PETE.
 
H

Herald

Guest
andreh said:
Surely Edberg must make any list, having been one of the few who beat him in a GS final, despite it being early in Sampras' career. He also won their only other GS meeting.
Click to expand...
Edberg was a fantastic rival and player overall. A volley centric serve volleyer with a massive spin serve that drew weak returns from Pete's backhand and an impressive ability to close and cover the net to punish. The same type of serve volleyer who troubled Fed.
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
stosurforehand said:
I take issue with putting Ivanisevic as high as #2. He was probably Sampras's biggest rival at Wimbledon, but that was literally the only venue their rivalry existed at all. I would go with something like:

5. Ivanisevic- again as I said, Wimbledon only rivalry basically, even though they did play in the 96 US Open semis and 96 YEC semis.
Click to expand...
Ivanisevic beat Sampras in the 1996 Miami semis, 2-6, 6-4, 6-4. A very good win. Unfortunately, Ivanisevic then slept very awkwardly the night before the final and got a neck injury, meaning an early retirement from the final against Agassi after being 0-3 down, which caused a near riot among some of the fans there, as I recall.
 
S

stosurforehand

Rookie
NatF said:
A take I don't often see but one I agree with. Hewitt losing early due to chicken pox and Agassi withdrawing make this a huge chance for Sampras if he can get by Safin - he's a definite favourite over Haas and Johansson. Haas did give him a fairly competitive match at the USO later that year but would still have to back PETE.
Click to expand...

Johansson is so lucky that Safin won that match and not Sampras. No way would Sampras get drunk, not sleep, and show up with some half naked girls he slept with hours before, before the final. Even Haas, if he beat Sampras in the semis now, would not, and very likely would have put on a performance to beat Johansson.
 
S

Sampras-Bruguera 1993

Legend
Truthfully He didn't really have any other than the clay surface. When the 2nd half of the season hit, he had no equals as he prevailed more times than not on the big stage in the big matches. Not too many guys got multiple big wins in a row against Pete. It was rare. Maybe towards the end when he had the records and wasn't nearly as motivated but during his heyday in the 90's

Krajicek and Edberg may have been his toughest opponents
 
H

Herald

Guest
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
Truthfully He didn't really have any other than the clay surface. When the 2nd half of the season hit, he had no equals as he prevailed more times than not on the big stage in the big matches. Not too many guys got multiple big wins in a row against Pete. It was rare. Maybe towards the end when he had the records and wasn't nearly as motivated but during his heyday in the 90's

Krajicek and Edberg may have been his toughest opponents
Click to expand...
Other than when he fell off the map, Agassi was always a huge threat everywhere. Beat him at RG in '92. Took him 5 at SW19 in '93. Took him out in Australia in '95, then in '00. Is considered a pigeon because Pete got the best of him at the biggest moments but he was truthfully anything but.
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Herald said:
Other than when he fell off the map, Agassi was always a huge threat everywhere. Beat him at RG in '92. Took him 5 at SW19 in '93. Took him out in Australia in '95, then in '00. Is considered a pigeon because Pete got the best of him at the biggest moments but he was truthfully anything but.
Click to expand...
1995 was the peak of the Sampras vs. Agassi rivalry. Agassi won 3 of their 5 matches that year, but Sampras won the biggest one (US Open final). I liked all their matches that year. Agassi edged out the Australian Open final in 4 sets where the third set tiebreak was crucial, Sampras won in 3 straight sets in Indian Wells, Agassi came from a set down to win in a third set tiebreak in Miami, Agassi again came from a set down to win in 3 sets in Montreal, the US Open was even early on until Sampras won that killer set point that won him the first set and then used the momentum to go up 3-0 in the second set. Once Sampras was 2 sets up, Agassi was never really going to come all the way back.

Agassi actually went into all 4 of his US Open matches against Sampras as the favourite, and lost all 4.
 
M

MissileBackHand99

Semi-Pro
Herald said:
Other than when he fell off the map, Agassi was always a huge threat everywhere. Beat him at RG in '92. Took him 5 at SW19 in '93. Took him out in Australia in '95, then in '00. Is considered a pigeon because Pete got the best of him at the biggest moments but he was truthfully anything but.
Click to expand...
Sampras himself has said that Agassi was unequivocally his greatest rival. He said that some of the things he could "get away with" against other players...he couldn't with Andre. He also said Andre would expose Pete's backhand vulnerabilities and Pete said Andre made him "be a better player". Anyone pretending that Andre was Pete's pigeon (mostly due to Pete being 3-0 against him in USO Finals)...are idiots
 
C

ChrisRF

Legend
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
Truthfully He didn't really have any other than the clay surface. When the 2nd half of the season hit, he had no equals as he prevailed more times than not on the big stage in the big matches. Not too many guys got multiple big wins in a row against Pete.
Click to expand...
That's true, but his problem was different. He indeed wouldn't likely lose twice in a row against a certain player, but outside of Wimbledon he could possibly lose to anyone ONCE, even at a Slam. And this happened too often from 1997 onwards. That's why apart from his last tournament at the 2002 US Open he didn't win a hardcourt Slam (and obviously no RG either) after age 25. That was never enough to keep his record.
 
S

Sampras-Bruguera 1993

Legend
ChrisRF said:
That's true, but his problem was different. He indeed wouldn't likely lose twice in a row against a certain player, but outside of Wimbledon he could possibly lose to anyone ONCE, even at a Slam. And this happened too often from 1997 onwards. That's why apart from his last tournament at the 2002 US Open he didn't win a hardcourt Slam (and obviously no RG either) after age 25. That was never enough to keep his record.
Click to expand...

If they didn’t homogenize conditions it’s possible his record probably would have lasted. Maybe. No one really foresaw high bouncing slow-medium surfaces in the 90s-very early 2000s. We figured they were going to stay distinct from each other thus dividing up the slam wins more equally keeping a more competitive instead of 3 guys winning 98 percent of them
 
H

Herald

Guest
ChrisRF said:
That's true, but his problem was different. He indeed wouldn't likely lose twice in a row against a certain player, but outside of Wimbledon he could possibly lose to anyone ONCE, even at a Slam. And this happened too often from 1997 onwards. That's why apart from his last tournament at the 2002 US Open he didn't win a hardcourt Slam (and obviously no RG either) after age 25. That was never enough to keep his record.
Click to expand...
Anybody could lose anywhere when fields were deeper and conditions differed with genuinely fast court, low margin tennis. Notice how much players complain about "margins being small" at Wimbledon when they lose a close one? Yeah, in the 90s just one well struck return could make the difference in a match half the year. The fact that Pete was almost invincible at the lowest margin, most desired Slam shows a much higher level of dominance than his relatively small winning streaks suggest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T

thrust

Legend
SamprasisGOAT said:
Who in everyone’s opinion are petes top 10 rivals throughout his career?

1. Agassi
2. Ivanisevic
3. Rafter
4. Becker
5. Krajicek
6. Courier
7. Chang
8. Henman
9. Rusedski
10. Hewitt

Maybe edberg could of been included.

They are just off the top of my head. Hopefully other posters will disagree and improve the list.

I’m back posting on here after 3 years away. I hate how underrated Pete is now days. I also think most modern tennis is a terrible standard and poor viewing but I know I’m in a minority. 80s and 90s were such great eras. It’s actually abit of a disgrace how Sampras is spoken about. I still think Djokovic and nadal wouldn’t have won more than 14 grand slams in the 90s with the surfaces, rackets, balls, surface specialists and deeper competition. Federer is maybe a different matter but I’d still back Sampras head to head.
Click to expand...
EDBERG! I believe Stefan is one of the few players who has a winning H-H vs Pete, though it is very close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SamprasisGOAT
Top 10 most important tournaments in the 90s?
Replies
17
Views
1K
thrust
T
L
Agassi v attacking players then Sampras
Replies
23
Views
2K
Blocker
B
L
Comparing Sampras' and Federer's head to heads against top rivals
2
Replies
54
Views
19K
dominikk1985
D
S
Highest quality of Top 10 players of all time
Replies
21
Views
3K
Paul Murphy
P
S
Sampras & Agassi: H2H with attacking players reveals Sampras probably has the most complete game in history
2
Replies
79
Views
3K
Crazy Finn
C
Top