Better serve: Raonic or Sampras?

Better Serve: Raonic or Sampras?

  • Raonic

    Votes: 51 29.1%

  • Sampras

    Votes: 124 70.9%
  • Total voters
    175
U

ultradr

Legend
Nadalgaenger said:
Raonic serves faster obviously.
Click to expand...

Do we have a proof?:)

Sampras' days, clocked serve when it passed net. Now we measure right off the bat, AFAIK.

Sampras' serve had variety, accuracy, disguises and efficiency for both 1st and 2nd serves. Perfection. Male equivalent of Serena's serve. :)
 
J

JSummers

Rookie
Nadalgaenger said:
Why aren't Pete's stats better? If his serve was impeccable, why didn't he win more?
Click to expand...
Because Sampras went much deeper and run into better opponents overall more often.
Also, let's not forget that the radar gun measurement for speed is more optimistic compared to 90s (i.e. leaving racket vs mid-point)
 
llodra_fan

llodra_fan

Professional
Just for that killer 2nd service Pete is ahead of Milos. I think even Isner has a better 2nd serve than Raonic. As far as 1st serve is considered, I'll put Isner, Raonic and Karlovic in the same bracket from this generation and Pete and Goran from the 90s.
 
D

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
JSummers said:
Because Sampras went much deeper and run into better opponents overall more often.
Also, let's not forget that the radar gun measurement for speed is more optimistic compared to 90s (i.e. leaving racket vs mid-point)
Click to expand...
So is it possible that guys like Rosset or Rusedki were faster than Karlovic, Raonic etc?
 
Sysyphus

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
llodra_fan said:
Just for that killer 2nd service Pete is ahead of Milos. I think even Isner has a better 2nd serve than Raonic. As far as 1st serve is considered, I'll put Isner, Raonic and Karlovic in the same bracket from this generation and Pete and Goran from the 90s.
Click to expand...
"Even" Isner? Isner has the best second serve delivery of all time, better than Sampras's.
 
A

AngryBirds

Semi-Pro
Sampras' serve is the more consistent weapon due to its flawless motion. This is the main factor, which makes Sampras' serve the more efficient and reliable weapon in big maches.
 
L

Laurie

Guest
Dolgopolov85 said:
So is it possible that guys like Rosset or Rusedki were faster than Karlovic, Raonic etc?
Click to expand...

In the late 1990s, i.e 1998 and 1999, both Rusedski and Phillippoussis hit serves timed at 149mph in Indian Wells. I heard Sampras fastest serve was 138mph at Wimbledon in 1998 although I never saw it.
 
L

Laurie

Guest
I was looking for information on that 138mph serve on Google and found this amusing article from 1998 San Jose instead. I have bolded Sampras' words which captures the essence of the whole debate over the last few days, what a lot of us have been pointing out.

http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Sampras-handles-138-mph-serve-3105160.php

Sampras handles 138-mph serve
Michelle Smith, SPECIAL TO THE EXAMINER

Published 4:00 am, Friday, February 13, 1998

  • SAN JOSE - In the bang-for-the-buck category, those who ventured to the San Jose Arena for the Sybase Open got 138 miles-an-hour worth Thursday night.

    Jordi Burillo, a powerful 25-year-old Spaniard who had never before faced top-seeded Pete Sampras, served the No. 1 player in the world a diet of huge serves and blistering baseline shots before falling in two sets, 6-3, 7-6 (7-2).

    The result was a business-as-usual Sampras victory, his 12th in a row in San Jose. But there were some truly exceptional moments, including a second-set point in which Sampras somehow managed to return Burillo's 138-miles-an-hour serve and eventually won the point.

    "Speed matters, but it's not the main point. It doesn't matter as much as winning the point," Sampras said with a shrug. "I didn't realize it was that big. I just stuck my racket out and found something."

    Sampras moves on to the evening quarterfinal Friday against Australian Mark Woodforde, the No. 8 seed, at 7 p.m. Woodforde beat American MaliVai Washington in straight sets (7-5, 7-5) to advance.

    Andre Agassi, playing some of his best tennis in two years, faces unseeded Jan-Michael Gambill in the afternoon at approximately 3 p.m. with second-seeded Michael Chang taking on seventh-seeded Tommy Haas at 1 p.m. Todd Martin opens the day against Dutchman John Van Lottum, a qualifier who defeated Vincent Spadea in three sets Thursday.

    The Burillo serve, which caused a considerable buzz among the crowd of 9,278, ranks among the top five ever recorded on the ATP Tour, and the second best in tournament history behind Greg Rusedski's 139 mph serve last year. Burillo, an imposing figure at 6-feet-2, 188 pounds, also hit the radar gun at 137, No. 6 all-time, during the tiebreaker.

    "I normally serve strong," said Burillo, who collected seven aces in the match to Sampras' six. "I always look at the radar and try to do a faster serve. I always look there."

    A tour official joked that Burillo gave himself a case of whiplash in Santiago last November because the only radar display on the court was behind him.

    Sampras, on the other hand, pays attention only to matters affecting the outcome of the match. He seemed unfazed by the Spaniard's power. Sampras has a pretty fair serve himself. He was good on 71 percent of his first serves and won 80 percent of his first-serve points, allowing Burillo only one break for the match.

    "He came out swinging away, but we were both holding serve pretty easily," Sampras said. "And in the second set he continued to swing away and serve big. He had nothing to lose."

    Sampras had taken a 4-3 lead in the first set before finally getting a break and closing out the first set with an ace.

    The second set was tied at 5-5 when the two players exchanged breaks and went to the tiebreaker where Sampras ran out to a quick lead. A pair of unforced errors at the net by Burillo pushed Sampras to a 4-1 lead and ultimately the win.

    While Sampras said Thursday he has had trouble with Woodforde, the record would seem to indicate otherwise. Sampras is 9-0 in his career against Woodforde, their last meeting at the 1997 Australian Open in which Sampras won, 6-1, 6-0, 6-1.

    But Woodforde has twice taken Sampras to match point only to lose. Woodforde assessed his best chance of winning.

    "I hope he's going to be bored seeing me on the other side of the net," Woodforde joked. "A lack of enthusiasm on the other side might help me." <
 
D

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Laurie said:
In the late 1990s, i.e 1998 and 1999, both Rusedski and Phillippoussis hit serves timed at 149mph in Indian Wells. I heard Sampras fastest serve was 138mph at Wimbledon in 1998 although I never saw it.
Click to expand...

Karlovic is clocked at 156 mph. It would have been interesting to see how fast Scud would have clocked if indeed speeds are measured differently now compared to the 90s.
 
B

Blocker

Professional
It's funny to see the lengths some will go to to disprove a theory or a popular belief.

Ask any lay person on the street who has been around long enough and ask who has the better serve, Sampras or Raonic, and he or she will ask "Sampras or who?"

If I am not mistaken, Raonic modelled his game and serve on Sampras. Imitation is the best form of flattery.

The serve contributed to Sampras winning 14 slams and 6 year ending no 1s. The serve has contributed to Raonic winning jack ****. This is the bottom line, and quite frankly, where the discussion should end. But I'll continue.

Agassi, considered one of the greatest returners in history, certainly of his era, often looked all at sea when being bombed with Sampras serves. The look of helplessness on his face said it all really.

The clutch points, Sampras. I have seen Sampras save serve at 0-40 down by literally playing 5 consecutive unplayable serves.

Ask anyone, any tennis expert, even the Sampras haters, to pick one player in history to serve out a game for their life, and deep in the bowells of 99.99% of everyone's thoughts, is Sampras.

As others before me here have already said, stats and speed tell only one part of the story.

When Sampras was on fire, his serve is the single biggest weapon in the history of the game. Idiots trying to prove otherwise are idiots.

I bet that all of the numnuts quoting these stats aren't even convincing themselves.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
I am the Greatest! said:
Service is not the only thing that wins tennis matches, but service percentage alone doesn't make you a better server. Sampras' serve was better due to its sheer technicality, and this is where my anecdotes becomes important. Raonic has not yet proven anything with his serve. Sampras' serve has bailed him out on big matches countless times, and it's not an (my) opinion, it's a fact.
Click to expand...
Actually, it does. The guy who wins the highest % of service games is winning more with the serve itself, and the worse the overall movement is, the better the serve itself.

But what wins matches is the total of service games and return games. That's what gives the edge to players around 6' 1".

I would say Sampras is the best server ever or tied with best best server in his category of height. He easily had best service game of his era - period.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
If it is true that radar is now timing the ball as it comes off the racket, and used to time it as it crossed the net, that invalidates comparison speed comparison until we find out how much the ball slows down as it crossed the net. There should be a ballpark conversion to get close.
 
PrinceMoron

PrinceMoron

Legend
926f0fe61f8de2fa6f0c4b81dec79c0c.jpg
Steve Denton was the cat's whiskers..
 
I

I am the Greatest!

Professional
Gary Duane said:
Actually, it does. The guy who wins the highest % of service games is winning more with the serve itself.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the serve alone, or the whole service game? Raonic has the ability to out-ace Sampras, but Raonic cannot match Sampras (skill wise) when it comes to the serve alone.
 
I

I am the Greatest!

Professional
Blocker said:
It's funny to see the lengths some will go to to disprove a theory or a popular belief.

Ask any lay person on the street who has been around long enough and ask who has the better serve, Sampras or Raonic, and he or she will ask "Sampras or who?"

If I am not mistaken, Raonic modelled his game and serve on Sampras. Imitation is the best form of flattery.

The serve contributed to Sampras winning 14 slams and 6 year ending no 1s. The serve has contributed to Raonic winning jack ****. This is the bottom line, and quite frankly, where the discussion should end. But I'll continue.

Agassi, considered one of the greatest returners in history, certainly of his era, often looked all at sea when being bombed with Sampras serves. The look of helplessness on his face said it all really.

The clutch points, Sampras. I have seen Sampras save serve at 0-40 down by literally playing 5 consecutive unplayable serves.

Ask anyone, any tennis expert, even the Sampras haters, to pick one player in history to serve out a game for their life, and deep in the bowells of 99.99% of everyone's thoughts, is Sampras.

As others before me here have already said, stats and speed tell only one part of the story.

When Sampras was on fire, his serve is the single biggest weapon in the history of the game. Idiots trying to prove otherwise are idiots.

I bet that all of the numnuts quoting these stats aren't even convincing themselves.
Click to expand...

This thread is really funny. I don't know if the OP is trolling or what. Stats are **** when it comes to the big points, and Raonic has never proven anything even with his serve ALONE. Okay, let's give Raonic the stats. So what? Had he ever served 0-40 on big matches? Multiple times in his career? And some of the guys here are so persistent to put Raonic in Sampras' league by presenting stats, when we know, everybody ****ing knows, that they would choose Sampras to serve out for their lives. You would be so dumb/idiot/or whatever you call it if you choose Raonic. Bunch of ****ing hypocrites.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
I am the Greatest! said:
Are you referring to the serve alone, or the whole service game? Raonic has the ability to out-ace Sampras, but Raonic cannot match Sampras (skill wise) when it comes to the serve alone.
Click to expand...
I would look here:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/all/all/all/

I would check career and by years, then by surface. Take into account that when you compare the 1995 to 2015 the game has changed.

At the top you have the guys with the best serves TODAY, which has to be taken into consideration. Modern rackets put more speed and more spin on the ball, so today you can serve harder AND with more net clearance. So to convert what the guys were doing in the 90s to today I would had a couple percentage points.

That would put Sampras up around Raonic in winning games, and I think that is fair. He edges out Fed.

When you go to grass Sampras tied at 93%. Again, older rackets, older strings, but he is barely behind Karlovic and Isner.

So I would put his service game up with the best of the best. He rivals the servebots. However, Pete had amazing weapons to back up the serve. So his serve itself can't compare with Karlovic, who gets more free points because of the insane speed, which comes largely from his height.

The same is true of Fed to a large degree, but I do not think his serve is as intimidating. It isn't as big, even with the new equipment. He is less likely to hit a second serve that really is a first serve and ace with it.
 
L

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
TheFifthSet said:
For all the tripe about servers having it harder today, the stats show that servers actually hold far more often than they ever have. Seems to me that the racquet and string technology benefits the servers as much as they do the returners. Give Sampras today's racquets w poly strings and it's unlikely he only lands 59% of his first serves in. He'd have a bigger margin of error and the spin the racquets would enable him to impart would allow him to serve just as big (bigger) than he did in his prime while also landing them in at a higher percentage. Imagine that. Most of the great servers of that era simply could not serve at their biggest without trading in accuracy, like today's servebots can.

Now, I don't think Pete's serve blows Raonic's out of the water but after close examination I think I would give him an edge. For sheer pace Milos beats him out on the first serve, but everything else seems to be in Pete's favour, especially the "clutch" factor. Remember that Sampras lost serve 4 times in 7 Wimbledon finals. He also led the tour in % of service games won 7 out of 8 years, twice by over 3% (that's a massive gap). He didn't hold as often as Raonic but again, nobody in that era did, winning 91-93% of your service games was unprecedented then due to the racquets.
Click to expand...

Imagine Sampras serving with Fed's current racquet and string set up. Yikes! :eek:
 
L

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
metsman said:
raonic has also played nowhere near the number of matches Pete has and has not advanced far enough into tournaments to face the best. The difference in 1st serve points won is 82 to 81, considering those factors and racquet tech that clearly favors Pete imo
Click to expand...

This, with a racquet that was closer to wood than to today's racquets:

 
Nadalgaenger

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Gary Duane said:
I would look here:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/all/all/all/

I would check career and by years, then by surface. Take into account that when you compare the 1995 to 2015 the game has changed.

At the top you have the guys with the best serves TODAY, which has to be taken into consideration. Modern rackets put more speed and more spin on the ball, so today you can serve harder AND with more net clearance. So to convert what the guys were doing in the 90s to today I would had a couple percentage points.

That would put Sampras up around Raonic in winning games, and I think that is fair. He edges out Fed.

When you go to grass Sampras tied at 93%. Again, older rackets, older strings, but he is barely behind Karlovic and Isner.

So I would put his service game up with the best of the best. He rivals the servebots. However, Pete had amazing weapons to back up the serve. So his serve itself can't compare with Karlovic, who gets more free points because of the insane speed, which comes largely from his height.

The same is true of Fed to a large degree, but I do not think his serve is as intimidating. It isn't as big, even with the new equipment. He is less likely to hit a second serve that really is a first serve and ace with it.
Click to expand...
Racket technology favors the returner as much as the server.
 
Nadalgaenger

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
captainbryce said:
1st serve Raonic
2nd serve Sampras
Combined Sampras

Raonic has superior speed on the first serve, and nearly as good placement as Sampras. As far as placement goes, Sampras was second to none (on first and second). But I'd honestly take Isner's serves over both of them. Isner's second serve kick alone is its own weapon. I'm often astonished as to why he doesn't use it more often as a first serve, then come in behind it (for an easy volley). If Sampras had that kind of kick on his second serve, he'd have been an even greater serve and volleyer than he already was.
Click to expand...
Sampras won 53% of second serve points over his career. Fed is much higher. 57%. Highest in history.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/2nd-serve-points-won/all/all/all/
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Nadalgaenger said:
Racket technology favors the returner as much as the server.
Click to expand...
But has changed the whole game.

The % of games won by the ATGs has stayed amazingly similar throughout the Open era. The problem is that we are missing a ton of data, since there is nothing much before 1991 on games won and just about zero on points won.

My hunch is that the ratio of winning serve and return has stayed pretty steady but with one huge exception. The players win the highest % of games on clay, lowest on grass, and in between on HCs. This is true throughout the open era. The faster the surface, the smaller the margins.

It's VERY complicated.

Borg's winning % of games drops about 1.5% on HCs compared to clay. It drops about another % on grass.

Borg and Nadal were both incredibly high winning on clay. Part of that is that they were/are the two best of the open era on clay, but surface also drives up the margins.

Modern rackets are allowing players to return insanely AND return insanely when they are at the absolute top of the game. Somehow it gives the greatest players a bigger edge, probably because with older rackets mistakes were more random.

I'd still rate Sampras as an amazing server in the 90s, very close to Fed (either way) in dominating on serve, but in a very different way.

Unfortunately we are missing so much data, so we are guessing more than I would like...
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Nadalgaenger said:
No question Pete's serve is infinitely more appealing to the eye. But it's really a question of efficacy.
Click to expand...
Isn't it common sense that when two players have equally good mechanics in a serve, the guy who is much taller is going to have a more dangerous serve?

It's not accident that Karlovic, Isner and Raonic have been on the the top for a long time. The guy most famous for his serve decades ago was Pancho Gonzalez, and right now Kyrgios looks to be in that mold. Doesn't mean he is going to win majors, but if his return game continues to improve then he will.
 
W

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Obviously Raonic has the better serve.

Who has the better Service Game is debatable, but Raonic having the better serve is as obvious as Sampras being the better player!

Who has the better backhand, Sampras or Nalbandian?
 
-NN-

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Gary Duane said:
But has changed the whole game.

The % of games won by the ATGs has stayed amazingly similar throughout the Open era. The problem is that we are missing a ton of data, since there is nothing much before 1991 on games won and just about zero on points won.

My hunch is that the ratio of winning serve and return has stayed pretty steady but with one huge exception. The players win the highest % of games on clay, lowest on grass, and in between on HCs. This is true throughout the open era. The faster the surface, the smaller the margins.

It's VERY complicated.

Borg's winning % of games drops about 1.5% on HCs compared to clay. It drops about another % on grass.

Borg and Nadal were both incredibly high winning on clay. Part of that is that they were/are the two best of the open era on clay, but surface also drives up the margins.

Modern rackets are allowing players to return insanely AND return insanely when they are at the absolute top of the game. Somehow it gives the greatest players a bigger edge, probably because with older rackets mistakes were more random.

I'd still rate Sampras as an amazing server in the 90s, very close to Fed (either way) in dominating on serve, but in a very different way.

Unfortunately we are missing so much data, so we are guessing more than I would like...
Click to expand...

Perhaps it makes it more important than ever to be accurate on the serve. If the returner can get a racket on the ball then they can often create something, but a fast enough serve which is also accurate is never going to be touched but for good anticipation or 500 Sq.in racquets. The elite players have that extra precision and will punish the lesser players for their lack of it. Give the player a chance and perhaps one gets burned more than ever. Maybe a more consistent application of the body serve is something that could be improved upon most at the top of the game?
 
Sysyphus

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
Limpinhitter said:
Imagine Sampras serving with Fed's current racquet and string set up. Yikes! :eek:
Click to expand...

It's perfectly possible to serve bombs with a wooden racquet even. The modern tech doesn't magically elevate serving by some extreme extent. Strings helps some on second serves, and first % made has gone up probably for the same reason. That said, these improvements in serves stats have been gradual and very incremental and started before string tech arrived, so even attributing it all to tech changes is too simplistic.

Furthermore, Fed himself served perfectly competently with full gut and Sampras's racquet at the time he made the switch in mid 2002, even as a not fully developed player. Currently he still uses gut in the mains, and the change to 97 didn't really dramatically affect his serve one way or the other. So safe to say, a slightly bigger headsize and poly in the crosses wouldn't miraculously turn Pete into Karlovic or something like that. He'd be a slightly better server than Fed, though, no arguments on that one.
 
T

thrust

Legend
Nadalgaenger said:
I voted Raonic. Basically has the second best serve today after Isner. Natural height advantage and less overall game. Milo's has better first serve percentage won despite inferior tennis skills.
Also, conditions MUCH slower today, giving obvious edge to returner.

Imagine Milos serving on fast surfaces of 1990s!

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/1st-serve-points-won
Click to expand...
The problem IS that Milos is mentally inferior to Pete in every aspect of the game which is why he will never win a slam. When the match gets tense Milos crumbles, sad to say.
 
Nadalgaenger

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
The Green Mile said:
A 4% difference in this stat is pretty big. But yeah, Pete had a better 2nd serve, by quite some margin IMO.
Click to expand...

2nd serve stats are deceptive in a way, as for many players like Djokovic and especially Nadal, an outstanding ground game can compensate for a less than stellar 2nd serve. Nadal's percentage of second serve points won is tied with Fed for best all-time, though few would argue that his 2nd serve is just as good as Fed's.
 
Devilito

Devilito

Hall of Fame
if Petros was as tall as Milos, he wouldn't have been broken since 1990. Petros has a better serve, Milos serves harder due to his height. Same deal with Karlovic. HIs serve isn't anything special on it's own, it's his height. Take Milos, Karlovic and Petros; who's serve would be more successful to say, someone that's 5'-5" tall? That's the best measure of who's serve is better
 
Steve0904

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras easily. For someone with such a big serve Raonic's is not actually that good. At least not when he needs it to be against better players. He's simply not clutch at all. Maybe that's mostly mental, but I don't think you can totally overlook the success of the Sampras serve against the best returners in the biggest matches.

Better serve also means better combination of 1st and 2nd. In which case, Sampras runs away with it due to his devastating 2nd serve.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
I am the Greatest! said:
Stats are **** when it comes to the big points, and Raonic has never proven anything even with his serve ALONE.
Click to expand...
That's a BS claim. Raonic's numerous aces, among other things, is something he has proved with his serve alone.
Okay, let's give Raonic the stats. So what? Had he ever served 0-40 on big matches? Multiple times in his career?
Click to expand...
Maybe his serve is too good, in the first place, for him to be 0-40 down too often. He doesn't need to get to a crappy position to prove his serve's mettle if his serve allows him to not get to that crappy position.
And some of the guys here are so persistent to put Raonic in Sampras' league by presenting stats
Click to expand...
Actually, the stats put Raonic's serve ahead of Sampras's serve. Not just in the same league
when we know, everybody ****ing knows, that they would choose Sampras to serve out for their lives. You would be so dumb/idiot/or whatever you call it if you choose Raonic. Bunch of ****ing hypocrites.
Click to expand...
This is a different argument. I do believe that Sampras may just have the best service game of all time (or at least the Open Era, because Pancho Gonzales exists), so, sure, I would choose Sampras to serve out for my life over Raonic. But if I had to choose one serve, as a stand-alone shot, to win me a point, I'd definitely choose Raonic over Sampras.

The way you're presenting your arguments leads me to believe that you don't have a freakin' clue what you're talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

uncooling
Janowicz vs. Raonic
Replies
21
Views
4K
Bobby Jr
Bobby Jr
Cesc Fabregas
How is Raonic the next Sampras?
Replies
49
Views
6K
yellowoctopus
yellowoctopus
D
Sampras Serve vs. Roddick Serve
2 3
Replies
125
Views
19K
coloskier
C
bjk
Why is Querrey not a top 20 player
Replies
35
Views
2K
Mainad
Mainad
King No1e
  • Poll
Raonic or Sampras serve?
Replies
28
Views
1K
King No1e
King No1e
Top