Search results

Sorry to bump up an old thread. But I just searched for some stats and came upon this thread. I must thank you for this great info. Just wanted to clarify as to the timeperiod for the above stats for Sampras at Wim. Is it from from Wim 1993 to Wim 2000 ? Thanks in advance.

Hi, I've perused the older threads showing stats for the Borg-Mac 1980 Wim F. However, I couldn't find the overall net stats for both (points won vs. total approaches). Are these stats listed any where ?

I would say it was the 2008 FO/Wim double blow that brought on his "nerves" problems. First, it was only with Nadal. Then THE FH CC return against him on match-point in the 2010 USO SF brought on a similar problem against Djok.

It's funny that all of those who support the slowing down of the game point only to Wim during the 90's to bolster their argument. What about the other 3 slams ? If you look at the winners/finalists of the AO, USO, you will see plenty of S/V'ers AND baseliners winning it or making the finals...

Well, I think everything evens out in the end. For the 1st half of his career, Djok had to deal with TWO ATG's at their peak. That cost him quite a few majors. From 2003-2007, Fed had to deal with 0 ATG's at their peak outside of Clay, and Nadal had to deal with 1 (Fed). Now, the tables are...

Edberg in 1989 - FO F, Wim F, AO QF, Won the YEC

I think you've made some very good points about Fed's game. However I think you put the horse before the cart when you said "nightmare match-up". I think it was a nightmare match-up BECAUSE of the limitations in his game/mindset that you highlighted earlier, and not the other way around. Or...

Thanks. I actually didn't even check the ATP site believing that they wouldn't have statistics before 1990. I remember the numbers from the old website - tenniscorner.net.

Sweet ! Thanks for the clips. Miss his tennis so much. Best I've ever seen play on the faster surfaces.

I don't know his exact numbers for every year, but I do know that his best years were '86, '88, '89, and '90. Post '90 should be on the ATP site. If I remember correctly, '88 W/L was 56-9 , '89 W/L was 64-8, '90 W/L was 71-15. I think even '86 was pretty good: 66-12 or thereabouts, if I...

You are talking two different things here. You are mixing his ROS with his return game. Fed had a stellar return game, no doubt. But, looking at his return in isolation, he had a consistent ROS - he was tough to ace, but he rarely overpowered you with his ROS like an Agassi or Hewitt or Djok...

Your first point is correct - the level at which Nadal plays as well as his mental strength. I believe the same can apply to Sampras. Now, giving higher importance to Nadal's style in this equation, I think, that is sort of putting the cart before the horse. IOW, the "match-up" issue is not...

Hewitt had something which Fed doesn't, and which was something that troubled both Henman and Rafter - a great 2HBH ROS. This helped him to deal with their serves better than Fed did.

So Henman winning until 2004 Rotterdam (6-1) is on *pre-prime* Fed ? Hewitt winning against Fed is *pre-prime* Fed. Nadal winning against Fed is *post-prime* Fed. Any other excuses for Fed's losses ? HINT: By the time Henman last beat Fed in 2004, Fed was already #1, had 2 slams to his credit...

I think people are so focussed on Nadal's style that they forget that any style is only as great/successful as the player who plays it. It's simplistic to think that only players who play like Nadal - lefty, with high topspinning FH - can win often against Fed. Here is another example from...

Agassi-Fed 2001 USO. Agassi really got up for that one.

LOL ! No rhyme or reason ? Maybe you could just explain where I went wrong ? Show me one aspect/style where Fed is the greatest: S/V ? Baseline ? Well, everybody already agrees that Fed is the greater and more accomplished. If everything is settled by numbers, then there is no need for...

I don't believe it's grasping for straws at all. It's not unthinkable that a 14-slammer can come out victorious more often against a 17-slammer (we just saw that with Nadal-Fed). Also, a stroke by stroke analysis of Nadal and Fed would come out in Fed's favour overall but that didn't help Fed at...

Of course, it matter, esp. when you include the fact that the opponents he faced played much more diverse games on the same diverse surfaces. Playing Rafter in one rd, Agassi/Courier in another, a Becker/Ivanisevic in the next calls for a set of adjustments in mentality and tactics that are not...

I find this stroke by stroke kind of analysis really funky and funny. Can you do it vis-a-vis Fed-Nadal and see who comes out on top on paper ? Actually, Fed is not like Sampras at all. He's a much better version of Ivan Lendl. Fed is a baseliner at heart with very good volleying skills...

No, he was better than Borg. Only Laver could claim a separate place in history. Sampras was better than the rest in the Open Era.

First of all, Sampras retired with the highest/best records in the game in the Open Era. We're only looking at his record in hindsight. So, to me, it's strange calling Sampras' records as lower. My justification for Sampras not having more than 14 slams is that Sampras played in a more...

Because he played an entirely different set of opponents in an entirely different set of conditions. True. So the best you can ask of any great player is to dominate his era. If he could do that, he will always be in the conversation of "best ever". Unfortunately, nobody did this completely...

As per this thread, "who is better" is based on who will emerge victorious more often if they play each other multiple times in a hypothetical scenario.

The distinction here is between "better" and "greater". One does not automatically mean the other. Fed being called "greater" than Sampras is a fact based on their individual records. Sampras fans, at least myself, have come to terms with it since 2009. Fed being claimed to be "better"...

In that case, the accomplishments between Sampras and Hewitt/Safin is far more disparate. And yet it is used as some kind of proof.

Agreed, but by then he had lost a couple of big matches to Fed (AO 2004, Hamburg 2004, and finally Wim 2004). This ate into Hewitt's confidence while it boosted Fed's confidence. Such things matter, IMO, because players suddenly don't change their games between 20 and 23 (unless, of course, you...

Curious how you can say so conclusively that Federer is a better player overall than Sampras. Greater ? Certainly. But better ? Up for debate since they never competed in the same era. If anything, I can say that Sampras' great S/V game combined with his "timely" baseline prowess would make him...

What is the point in starting a thread in a forum where the majority are fans of current players, esp. Fed ?

He may well be, but I think he was better in 2001, 2002 - mainly mentally. He lost that intensity, that animalistic focus after 2003.