Another Sampras vs Federer analysis!

[Tambuyu]

Note
This was taken from a forum website.

OK I will try to break down their games by a rating usually based on my reading of a no of articles as well as watching the game closely.

Scores (out of 10)
SAMPRAS FEDERER
Forehand - 8 9
(both have gr8 forehands SAmpras -running forehand is amazing but fed has more angles and more vicious spins and makes very few unforced errors with it. Fed can control a game just based on his forehand)

Backhand- 7 8
( sampras's comparatively weaker side of his game. fed has very strong backhand but makes a number of unforced errors)

Serve - 10 7
(sampras - best serve in history. Fed gets broken more often than he likes to)

Volley- 9 7
(sampras's bread and butter..federer whenever he approaches the net makes classy volleys)

service returns- 7 9
(largely based on number of aces the opponent has served against them..rare to see more than 10 aces scored in a match against fed while sampras has yielded over 15 aces in a match on numerous occasions. Although Sampras's return from his backhand side wasnt great.)

Speed and athletism-9 9.5
( both of them are ballet dancers on court but I believe fed is slightly faster and has retrieved impossible balls on a number of occasions)

Defense 8 10
( Fed has probably the best defense in the game)

Endurance- 9.5 10
(Sampras (although he has won) has had to be carried out due to exhaustion on a couple of occasions. Sampras gets 9.5 coz of the number of 5 set matches he has won. Federer is a machine when it comes to endurance.)

mental edge - 10 8
(fed has had trouble finishing off straight forward matches while Sampras has won solely based on will power on a few occasions)

Consistent pressure 8 9
(Talking about pressurising the opponent. Most of the time Sampras does "just enough" to win while players playing against fed are on their toes through out their match.)

Playing the big points - 10 10
(This what made them so good. Playing the big points well)

playing incredible and fancy shots - 9 10
( Fed does it very often. Sampras gets 9 largely coz of his slam dunk style overhead smash)

Game strategy - 9 8
(Sampras faced a larger "variety" of oppposition so had to come up with different strategies. Have to give Sampras the edge on this one.)
Overall
SAMPRAS - 113.5 FEDERER- 114.5

Result - its very close. I would say its a 51% probability fed will win while 49% sampras will prevail. the match also depends on the other factors like conditions (grass- Sampras has more chance, clay- Federer , Hardcourts -difficult to say). Also the crowd backing (fed is the most popular of this generation while sampras was labelled boring during his time; Agassi as well as a few other superstars were more popular).

This is the best simulation I could run.
Hope you guys found this interesting.

 

[psamp14]

great post tambuyu! one of the better newer posters here already

although i would disagree slightly in the scores, give sampras another point on defense...his speed was very underrated and he too quickly turned defense into offense...

i know you didnt come up with these and they are from some other forum, but i see both of them equal in terms of game..

 

[Byakuya]

federer loved? and sampras boring? this thread needs to die...

 

[drakulie]

I'll play along.

Scores (out of 10)
SAMPRAS FEDERER
Forehand: 6 - 10
Backhand: 5 - 9
Serve: 10 - 8
Volley: 8 - 7
service returns: 5 - 8
Speed and athletism: 9 - 9
Defense: 6 - 9
Endurance: 5 - 8
mental edge: 10-10
Consistent pressure: 8 - 9
Playing the big points: 10 - 10
playing incredible and fancy shots: 8 - 10
Game strategy: 8 - 8
Overall
SAMPRAS - 98 FEDERER- 115

 

[krprunitennis2]

I'll play along.

Scores (out of 10)
SAMPRAS FEDERER
Forehand: 6 - 10
Backhand: 5 - 9
Serve: 10 - 8
Volley: 8 - 7
service returns: 5 - 8
Speed and athletism: 9 - 9
Defense: 6 - 9
Endurance: 5 - 8
mental edge: 10-10
Consistent pressure: 8 - 9
Playing the big points: 10 - 10
playing incredible and fancy shots: 8 - 10
Game strategy: 8 - 8
Overall
SAMPRAS - 98 FEDERER- 115

=( that's just sad....

 

[stormholloway]

I tend to think Sampras' forehand is overrated on this forum, but a 6 from drakulie is a bit too low.

What you guys aren't factoring in is how important each category is. One of Sampras' few edges is his serve but that is a HUGE factor. Also, Sampras' serve would definitely knock down Federer's return score because those two are related. Maybe each category should be weighted in terms of its importance. Get to work number crunchers.

 

[JBIMH]

I tend to think Sampras' forehand is overrated on this forum, but a 6 from drakulie is a bit too low.

What you guys aren't factoring in is how important each category is. One of Sampras' few edges is his serve but that is a HUGE factor. Also, Sampras' serve would definitely knock down Federer's return score because those two are related. Maybe each category should be weighted in terms of its importance. Get to work number crunchers.

you do have a point though I tend to believe that mental aspect of the game is by far the most important factor and directly affects the other ratings that a player has. for example a player can't consistently win big points if he doesn't have the right attitude.

 

[Feña14]

Scores (out of 10)

SAMPRAS - FEDERER

Forehand: 8 - 9
Backhand: 7 - 9
Serve: 10 - 8
Volley: 8 - 7
service returns: 6 - 8
Speed and athletism: 9 - 9
Defense: 6 - 9
Endurance: 6 - 8
mental edge: 10-10
Consistent pressure: 8 - 10
Playing the big points: 10 - 10
playing incredible and fancy shots: 8 - 10
Game strategy: 8 - 8

SAMPRAS - 104
FEDERER -115

FEDERER wins.

 

[psamp14]

SAMPRAS - FEDERER

Forehand: 9 - 9
Backhand: 7 - 9
Serve: 10 - 7
Volley: 9 - 7
service returns: 6 - 8
Speed and athletism: 9 - 9
Defense: 9 - 10
Endurance: 10 - 6
mental edge: 10-10
Consistent pressure: 8 - 9
Playing the big points: 10 - 10
playing incredible and fancy shots: 9- 10
Game strategy: 10 - 10

SAMPRAS - 116
FEDERER - 114

basically i have the same numbers, but as for endurance, i docked federer for his 9-10 5-set record, as sampras had a phenomenal 5-set record...i believe as stated in another thread, it was 21-7 up to the respective points each are in their careers...

many of you will think i'm a bit biased on the scores towards sampras but i dont think so

i enjoy federer's game as much as i did sampras', and federer has made us all marvel him so much that we've all really forgotten about just how great pete sampras really was..."out with the old and in with the new" sort of mentality

you are all entitled to your own opinions

 

[anointedone]

Sampras Federer

Forehand 10 7
Backhand 9 3
Serve 10 6
Volleys 10 2
Service Return 9 3
Speed and Athleticsm 10 6
Defence 8 6
Endurance 7 5
Mental edge 10 4
consistent pressure 10 2
playing the big points 10 7
playing fancy shots 9 6
game strategy 10 3

Total score: Sampras- 122, Federer-60, Sampras wins in a landslide

 

[AJK1]

Just goes to show how little people around here know about tennis. Where is the section on feet. Footwork in tennis is critical, and not one poster has rated them in this category.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

I think Federer would win a very close match. Much better groundies and returns than Pete. Pete has better serve but eventually Roger would get onto it and put Pete in trouble.......

 

[stormholloway]

Just goes to show how little people around here know about tennis. Where is the section on feet. Footwork in tennis is critical, and not one poster has rated them in this category.

Excellent point.

Footwork

9-7 to Federer.

 

[anointedone]

Sampras does EVERYTHING better then Federer. Sampras has the best serve ever, the best volley/net game ever, the best movement and overall coverage ever, the best overall athleticsm ever, the best forehand ever, arguably the best overall ground game, undisputably the best overall baseline game ever, one of the top 5 return of serves ever, one of the top 10 backhands ever.

Federer has a very good but not great forehand, a pretty good but not that good serve and movement, a weak fragile backhand and return of serve, horrable volleys, and shaky mental game. He is the best in the world today since it is the worst field of mens players ever.

 

[tricky]

Having my go . . .

Forehand -- 7 10
Yeah, I go back and forth with this one. Sampras and Federer are neck in neck with the single best shot in the game. On a low bounce surface, Sampras's cross-court FH is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to handle. But Federer's straight-arm forehand shot makes you run off the court to your BH side, and is truly surface agnostic. Sampras has the spinniest classic FH in the game, but nowadays players can match that pace with spinnier shots. Fed has a million and one shots, but needs time to set it up.

Backhand -- 6 9
Fed already has maybe the filthiest slice shot in the game. When the surface is low bounce, his topspin BH becomes a consistently lethal weapon affording him perhaps more angles than his FH. Also, his BH block is unusually good, maybe finer than his block on the FH side.

Serve -- 10 7
Goes without saying.

Volley -- 10 6
I give Sampras a 10 here in the sense that I thought his net approach movement and anticipation was superb. Yes, Rafter, McEnroe and Edberg were better. But you're talking the elite of the elite. Technically, Sampras was wonderful on both sides.

Returns -- 6 10
Fed blocks about as well as Hewitt did. It's not Agassi-esque, but there's really 2 different philosophies on the ideal return game.

Speed and athletism -- 10 8
Sampras is my ideal for tennis athleticism. The dude had hops and incredible arm span. Federer has the footwork of a footie pro.

Footwork -- 8 10
Federer's football talent shows always.

Defense -- 5 10
Fed is among the top 2 or 3 defensive players in the game today. Sampras, in playing an all attack game, didn't play in such a way.

Endurance -- 8 7
Most surprising aspect of Sampras's game was his record in 5 set matches. Yes, due to his blood disorder, he'd tank a lot of low-reward games. But, because he knew how to conserve and pace himself, he could on occasion outlast legendary grinders like Agassi at their own game. I think Fed's fitness is better now, but I don't know how much above average you would call it.

Mental Edge -- 10 7
This is misleading, perhaps. If Sampras were to get broken with some regularity, his mental edge would probably go to hell. He lived and died by his game plan. Likewise, if Federer can't break you, his own serve starts to drop in percentages. I mean, in a way, Federer worked like Agassi -- you can always tell his mental momentum by the ebb/flow of his first serve percentage.

Consistent Pressure -- 9 10
Sampras was about making you crack. Federer was about completely breaking you. You don't want to play either.

Big Points -- 8 10
This is where Sampras's speed and hops manifest themselves most (esp. into a smash or running shot), which would leave his opponents in awe. But I guess I would take the artistry of Fed's groundstrokes, which enables him to go for winners from both wings. It should be noted that many of Fed's big shots come from his BH rather than FH. Points are over early when you attack the forehand.

Circus Shots -- 8 10
Fed is the king of the circus shot.

Strategy -- 7 9

I want to give Fed a 10 here, but it's obvious that sometimes Fed is just screwing around out there.

Sampras -112
Federer- 123

 

[anointedone]

Having my go . . .

Forehand -- 7 10
Yeah, I go back and forth with this one. Sampras and Federer are neck in neck with the single best shot in the game. On a low bounce surface, Sampras's cross-court FH is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to handle. But Federer's straight-arm forehand shot makes you run off the court to your BH side, and is truly surface agnostic. Sampras has the spinniest classic FH in the game, but nowadays players can match that pace with spinnier shots. Fed has a million and one shots, but needs time to set it up.

I have to chuckle a bit at how you say Sampras and Federer are neck and neck on the forehand, then give one a 10 and one a 7. Regardless what my opinion is on your ratings, I dont see how you say they are neck and neck on the shot and then give one a score 3 out of 10 higher then the other. That is not neck and neck unless you consider a Federer-Hewitt snoozefest neck and neck.

 

[stormholloway]

Sampras has the spinniest forehand in the game?

There are probably 100 pros in the game today who use more spin than Sampras. He had a great forehand, but spinny isn't the one word I would use to describe it. I think it's "sharp" but not "spinny".

Don't get me wrong, the ball spun when he hit it. I just don't think of it as spinny, let alone the spinniest (though I do applaud the use of the word spinniest).

 

[Rafa's best friend]

Federer Will Win In 5 Sets, 8-6

 

[Morrissey]

You see Sampras fans how this board is pro Federer? Not even Sampras fans can outnumber Fed fans. I am known for bashing him, but I pick Federer over Sampras. Duh.

 

[stormholloway]

Personally, I don't pick either. I think Sampras has plenty of firepower for Federer. Also, we really haven't seen someone with an effective S&V component attack Federer. Henman? Past his prime.

Let's face it, today's field is weak. The only man able to challenge Federer at the US Open lately was an aging Agassi. Nadal is getting there, but after him it's pretty vacant.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

Federer has god-like abilities, that even Agassi had to admire in which he said in his press conferences. Andre always had admiration for Sampras but not like this, andre is almost in AWE of Federer when he is ON his game, He said this about Fed in the past but Never about Pete..............

 

[stormholloway]

It's harder to be in awe of a serve. I mean, you toss the ball up there. Federer has to run to the ball to do what he does best. This is more awe inspiring.

 

[crazylevity]

Sampras Federer

Forehand 10 7
Backhand 9 3
Serve 10 6
Volleys 10 2
Service Return 9 3
Speed and Athleticsm 10 6
Defence 8 6
Endurance 7 5
Mental edge 10 4
consistent pressure 10 2
playing the big points 10 7
playing fancy shots 9 6
game strategy 10 3

Total score: Sampras- 122, Federer-60, Sampras wins in a landslide

Note how the original post included detailed, rational, logical reasoning for scores given per category, and how this post is just plain fanboy-bashing-player-that-he's-not-a-fan-of.

TROLL!!!

 

[randomname]

please make all these topics stop

 

[tricky]

Sampras has the spinniest forehand in the game?

Ah, sorry -- what I meant was to say that Sampras had among the heaviest topspin for a person using Eastern and (mostly) classical swing. Sampras didn't have phenomenal pace on his FH unless it was running, but it was still heavy nonetheless.

I have to chuckle a bit at how you say Sampras and Federer are neck and neck on the forehand, then give one a 10 and one a 7.

Yeah, what I meant was the cross-court running FH vs. Federer's inside-out FH. In overall skill set on that wing, it's not close.

 

[prosealster]

Personally, I don't pick either. I think Sampras has plenty of firepower for Federer. Also, we really haven't seen someone with an effective S&V component attack Federer. Henman? Past his prime.

Let's face it, today's field is weak. The only man able to challenge Federer at the US Open lately was an aging Agassi. Nadal is getting there, but after him it's pretty vacant.

The reason we havn't seen an effective S&Ver is because current era is not conducive to playing that sort of tennis...sampras would have less success if he was born 10 years later....

Also you can't judge the strength of the field by 1 match AA played in US open...in that match... he played out of his mind.....the commentators at the time seems to think that way if i remembered correctly...and not mentioning the added pressure of Rog playing infront of a pro AA crowd... put tmen both in a more neutral country, and a surface which suits AA better.. i.e. AU open 2005... AA got hammered

 

[Maco_Andrej]

we need to see if federer can win more then 14 grand slams that proves everything.

 

[shakes1975]

i would think fed would beat sampras mainly not bcos he's a better player, but bcos he matches up better against sampras. sampras always had trouble with all-court players like stich, wayne ferreira, petr korda etc. and big servers like krajicek, philippoussis etc.

korda took sampras to 5 sets at wim in 1997, beat him in the USO that same yr. i think fed is a better all-court player than korda (esp. on the ROS), so should beat sampras.

OTOH, sampras will beat nadal more often than not bcos nadal has trouble against big servers.

you see, match-up issues always exist in tennis.

 

[VGP]

Hair - Sampras 5, Federer 9
Body Hair - Sampras 10, Federer 8
Hotness of Significant Other - Sampras 10, Federer 7
Kids - Sampras 2, Federer 0

 

[Grimjack]

please make all these topics stop

The web just celebrated the launch of its 100-millionth web site a week ago. Go to the address window in your browser, and type in any of the other 99,999,999 valid web addresses, and these topics all stop.

In addition, you could type in any of the infinitude of invalid web addresses, and these topics would stop as well. The resulting error screen likely wouldn't captivate you, but you'd get your wish all the same.

Beyond even that, you could go outside. Spend time with a loved one. Start a charitable organization. Help a stray cat. Diddle yourself. Eat a Hot Pocket. In fact, there is an entire universe of possibilities, out of which, the only one that could possibly continue to annoy a person dead set against reading the same old dull TW message forum topics is the exact one you've chosen to waste your valuable time on. And then you complain.

Math down? Way to go, Pythagoras.

 

[Feña14]

SAMPRAS - FEDERER

Endurance: 10 - 6

hmm I think Federer smokes Pete when it comes to endurance. We all know that Pete had that illness which caused him alot of problems. This is from Wiki:

Sampras has thalassemia minor, an inherited disease that causes anemia. Thalassemia minor limits physical and athletic endurance and causes those who have it to feel fatigued when forced to perform athletic feats. Sampras was generally able to control this condition, although he was not known for his endurance in extremely long matches. Sampras vomited on the court during his epic 7-6, 5-7, 5-7, 6-4, 7-6 win in the 1996 US Open quarterfinals against Alex Corretja - a match that lasted 4 hours and 9 minutes.

I think I would give the balance to Federer on that one which would tip the scales in Federer's favour.

SAMPRAS - 112
FEDERER - 117

 

[dysonlu]

The web just celebrated the launch of its 100-millionth web site a week ago. Go to the address window in your browser, and type in any of the other 99,999,999 valid web addresses, and these topics all stop.

In addition, you could type in any of the infinitude of invalid web addresses, and these topics would stop as well. The resulting error screen likely wouldn't captivate you, but you'd get your wish all the same.

Beyond even that, you could go outside. Spend time with a loved one. Start a charitable organization. Help a stray cat. Diddle yourself. Eat a Hot Pocket. In fact, there is an entire universe of possibilities, out of which, the only one that could possibly continue to annoy a person dead set against reading the same old dull TW message forum topics is the exact one you've chosen to waste your valuable time on. And then you complain.

Math down? Way to go, Pythagoras.

LMAO!

 

[DarkSephiroth]

Feña14, I don't think that you can judge such a thing based on a disease... I say, look at their 5-set records, and it speaks for itself. Obviously, Sampras had control over it.

 

[tennis_hand]

people find Sampras' games boring because Sampras finished his game fast, in the vertical style of S&V. It is undisputed that people wanna see more rallies, but he is the player who had to win the games. Both sides are understandable.

 

[randomname]

The web just celebrated the launch of its 100-millionth web site a week ago. Go to the address window in your browser, and type in any of the other 99,999,999 valid web addresses, and these topics all stop.

In addition, you could type in any of the infinitude of invalid web addresses, and these topics would stop as well. The resulting error screen likely wouldn't captivate you, but you'd get your wish all the same.

Beyond even that, you could go outside. Spend time with a loved one. Start a charitable organization. Help a stray cat. Diddle yourself. Eat a Hot Pocket. In fact, there is an entire universe of possibilities, out of which, the only one that could possibly continue to annoy a person dead set against reading the same old dull TW message forum topics is the exact one you've chosen to waste your valuable time on. And then you complain.

Math down? Way to go, Pythagoras.

ouch, maybe you should do some of that instead of spending your time being a condescending jackass on the internet. it is entirely possible that im just annoyed with people not being satisfied with the other hundred sampras vs. federer threads and believing that they're saying anything different than whats already been said.

 

[Kalin]

Creative Accounting

Handicapping players like this is fun, but it reminds me when I used to evaluate projects in a previous job- you could equally easily show a project being profitable or unprofitable just by fudging a few numbers. And you could have a perfectly good explanation for either calculation.

Same here- change a few 10/7's into 9/8's and you can have either player come on top with ease.

But it makes it no less fun

 

[35ft6]

Note
Game strategy - 9 8
(Sampras faced a larger "variety" of oppposition so had to come up with different strategies. Have to give Sampras the edge on this one.)

Federer can implement a lot more different kinds of strategy than Sampras. You knew what you were getting with Sampras, he didn't play differently for different people.

Result - its very close. I would say its a 51% probability fed will win while 49% sampras will prevail. the match also depends on the other factors like conditions (grass- Sampras has more chance, clay- Federer , Hardcourts -difficult to say). Also the crowd backing (fed is the most popular of this generation while sampras was labelled boring during his time; Agassi as well as a few other superstars were more popular).

This is the best simulation I could run.
Hope you guys found this interesting.

It was interesting, but it seems like you're afraid of taking a stance. 49% to 51%? Federer wins in most of your categories.

 

[fastdunn]

Speed and athletism-9 9.5
( both of them are ballet dancers on court but I believe fed is slightly faster and has retrieved impossible balls on a number of occasions)

I think you are off on this one. Sampras is the symbol of the quintessential,
ideal atheticism in tennis. He is the closest thing I've ever seen to the
ideal player atheletically...

Federer is superb in game intellegence, court sense and anticipation.
I actually think his foot speed is one of his realtive weaknesses that
players like Nadal or Nalbandian exploit via moving him left and right.

Another thing is that Federer might have more tools to win points
but not all points weigh same. Sampras had more sure shots that can
win those critical points. Sampras was pure key point players.
That's where most statistical analysis fail...

 

[anointedone]

I think you are off on this one. Sampras is the symbol of the quintessential,
ideal atheticism in tennis. He is the closest thing I've ever seen to the
ideal player atheletically...

Federer is superb in game intellegence, court sense and anticipation.
I actually think his foot speed is one of his realtive weaknesses that
players like Nadal or Nalbandian exploit via moving him left and right.

Another thing is that Federer might have more tools to win points
but not all points weigh same. Sampras had more sure shots that can
win those critical points. Sampras was pure key point players.
That's where most statistical analysis fail...

If somebody wants to rate Federer a 9.5 in athleticsm and Sampras only a 9.0then they are entitled to. Just because your opinion is that is wrong does not make it wrong, do not try and bully people into having the same opinion as you. Bullies are mean people who should not be a part of this world.

 

[shakes1975]

I think you are off on this one. Sampras is the symbol of the quintessential,
ideal atheticism in tennis. He is the closest thing I've ever seen to the
ideal player atheletically...
Federer is superb in game intellegence, court sense and anticipation.
I actually think his foot speed is one of his realtive weaknesses that
players like Nadal or Nalbandian exploit via moving him left and right.

yes, i think sampras is a better athlete than federer (his slam dunk overhead is inimitable). But federer is not much behind, and has better footwork (never seems out of balance, ever) and anticipation. so, end result is both move equally well. sampras is slightly better in moving forward, federer has the edge in lateral movement. but, all in all, about the same.

Another thing is that Federer might have more tools to win points but not all points weigh same. Sampras had more sure shots that can
win those critical points. Sampras was pure key point players.
That's where most statistical analysis fail...

aah, but there is a catch here. On his own serve, sampras is a key point player bcos most of the time, even when he's on autopilot, he's very much used to winning cheap points on his serve; an ace, a couple of service winners, an easy volley etc. and he holds.
so when he's facing a break-point, he just shifts from his autopilot mode into the next gear, which is not very difficult for him bcos he was only playing at 75% till then.

but, against someone like federer (and hewitt, considering they are such good returners, movers, passers), sampras will not be able to play on autopilot because federer plays every point with the same intensity. when u combine fed's returns with his movement, anticipation, ability to hit the most wicked of angles etc., sampras will have to be switched ON in every service game. that's why fed dishes out so many bagels.

that's why agassi said, after last yrs U.S.Open Final, "he's the only guy I've ever played against where you hold serve to go 1-0 and you're thinking, "All right, good" (laughter). And I'm not just making fun of it, I'm literally telling you the way it is. He can hurt you at any point. You're serving 30-Love, he wins the point. It's 30-15, the pressure you feel at 30-15 is different than anybody else. So there's a sense of urgency on every point, on every shot. You know, it's an incredible challenge."

and i feel this will, ultimately, prove too much for sampras.

and, on sampras' return game. it's definitely good, much better than people give him credit for, but it's not as good as agassi or hewitt. notice that, all through his career, sampras had trouble facing the big servers like krajicek, ivanisevic, becker (when he's playing well), philippoussis etc. bcos his returns are not as good as agassi's or hewitt's or federer's. so, federer can hold his own serve pretty well.

So, my verdict is this: when sampras is REALLY ON his 100%, he'll beat federer in a match. but if they play a number of matches, fed will win h2h mainly bcos sampras will not be able to play at his absolute peak consistently.

 

[prosealster]

yes, i think sampras is a better athlete than federer (his slam dunk overhead is inimitable). But federer is not much behind, and has better footwork (never seems out of balance, ever) and anticipation. so, end result is both move equally well. sampras is slightly better in moving forward, federer has the edge in lateral movement. but, all in all, about the same.



aah, but there is a catch here. On his own serve, sampras is a key point player bcos most of the time, even when he's on autopilot, he's very much used to winning cheap points on his serve; an ace, a couple of service winners, an easy volley etc. and he holds.
so when he's facing a break-point, he just shifts from his autopilot mode into the next gear, which is not very difficult for him bcos he was only playing at 75% till then.

but, against someone like federer (and hewitt, considering they are such good returners, movers, passers), sampras will not be able to play on autopilot because federer plays every point with the same intensity. when u combine fed's returns with his movement, anticipation, ability to hit the most wicked of angles etc., sampras will have to be switched ON in every service game. that's why fed dishes out so many bagels.

that's why agassi said, after last yrs U.S.Open Final, "he's the only guy I've ever played against where you hold serve to go 1-0 and you're thinking, "All right, good" (laughter). And I'm not just making fun of it, I'm literally telling you the way it is. He can hurt you at any point. You're serving 30-Love, he wins the point. It's 30-15, the pressure you feel at 30-15 is different than anybody else. So there's a sense of urgency on every point, on every shot. You know, it's an incredible challenge."

and i feel this will, ultimately, prove too much for sampras.

and, on sampras' return game. it's definitely good, much better than people give him credit for, but it's not as good as agassi or hewitt. notice that, all through his career, sampras had trouble facing the big servers like krajicek, ivanisevic, becker (when he's playing well), philippoussis etc. bcos his returns are not as good as agassi's or hewitt's or federer's. so, federer can hold his own serve pretty well.

So, my verdict is this: when sampras is REALLY ON his 100%, he'll beat federer in a match. but if they play a number of matches, fed will win h2h mainly bcos sampras will not be able to play at his absolute peak consistently.

Great post... the only thing is that if Sampras is playing 100% vs Fed playing 100% ... on a neutral surface... I don't think you can say sampras will win.. Even on grass it can be a toss up..just because the way Fed returns, and also I don;t think sampras will be that effective at breaking Fed's serve... will probably lead to tiebreaks which becomes a lottery really..

 

[avmoghe]

I still don't understand this fascination for head-to-head ability comparisons. It is of no consequence... It makes absolutely no difference whether Sampras or Federer would win in matches against each other. Fifty years from now young players will come along and look at today's tennis as a joke (much like we think of pre-open era tennis now). Racket technology evolution and physical fitness advances will constantly improve the game.. there is no way around it.

Is there anyone here who claims that the Laver forehand is a better stroke than the Agassi forehand? (even ignoring racket technologies...) Is there anyone who cares? And yet Laver is the GOAT while Agassi is somewhere in the top 10-15. The question of who was the better tennis player in terms of ability is meaningless....

What is uncertain (and worth discussion) is whether someone fifty years from now will be able match Federer or Sampras' accomplishments..

There is no such ranking as the "best player of all time" (aka.. player with best strokes/ability)....only "greatest player of all time" ( aka.. player who accomplished the most).

The *only* ranking that matters in tennis is where the player ends up on the GOAT list. Sampras is at number 2 behind Laver and Federer is catching up rapidly. Nothing else really matters...

Oh well continue on... I suppose it doesn't really matter what I think...

 

[DANMAN]

What becomes a lottery is hoping Sampras does not serve well. Sampras may not have the best return, but when serving well, he does not get broken. That sort of confidence allowed him to play for tiebreakers and to whale on his returns just hoping to string a couple together. All of this Federer would win is nonsense. You can't just compare categories and pick an overall winner. Federer wouldn't have a 10/10 forehand against Pete's attacking style and his return wouldn't be the x/10. Pete's the type of player that can ace you on first and second serves in either corner. There is no way to beat that. There were fery few matches that Pete lost when he played his best tennis, and I think that is the case here. Pete at his best is practically unbreakable. Realistically, Roger and Pete would have never played each other at their best on the same day (and they never will). If Pete serves up to his potential, he wins. If not, Roger wins.

 

[Feña14]

Feña14, I don't think that you can judge such a thing based on a disease... I say, look at their 5-set records, and it speaks for itself. Obviously, Sampras had control over it.

Sampras did well considering he had it. How many times though did you see him be sick on court, or have to be carried off? I read that he was feeling it during the 1993 Wimbledon final against Courier aswell.

When have you ever had to see Federer be carried off or be sick on court? The answer is none.

How someone can say Sampras' endurance is 10 compared to Federer being 6 is complete madness.

 

[shakes1975]

What becomes a lottery is hoping Sampras does not serve well. Sampras may not have the best return, but when serving well, he does not get broken.

the logic is flawed. thinking along the lines that bcos sampras' actual opponents found it difficult to break his serve, federer will find it difficult too. we can only go by the evidence we have. fact is, fed is the toughest guy to ace. and i believe that federer can do that to sampras as well. all the best servers in the game find their aces/service winners drop drastically when facing fed.

fed's returns vary depending on his opponent. against baseliners, fed is content to block back the serves, but against s/v'ers, he chips them low and to the side so that the volleyer has to bend and lunge to make the volley. so, either the volleyer has to kill the volley right away or risk leaving the court open for the pass. since fed's anticipation and speed is superb, there is a very high possibility that fed will make the pass.

so, we have to assume that sampras will hit his second serve as hard as his first bcos otherwise fed will win the point. no question.

That sort of confidence allowed him to play for tiebreakers and to whale on his returns just hoping to string a couple together.

this strategy will not be possible precisely bcos of the points i made above. also, people always talk about sampras' serve, but fail to see fed's serve against sampras' returns. take a look at this from their only match:

Sevice Statistics
Sampras Federer
Aces 26 25
Double Faults 9 6
1st Serve Percentage 69% (132/189) 62% (113/181)
1st Serve Points Won 76% (101/132) 82% (93/113)
2nd Serve Points Won 45% (26/57) 51% (35/68)
Break Points Saved 78% (11/14) 81% (9/11)

can u imagine sampras having nearly 70 % first serves, and still losing ? what's more, fed hit so many return winners right through the match. sure, sampras was slow in his movement but that hardly affected his serve. in fact, those times, he used to serve harder than he ever did before.

All of this Federer would win is nonsense. You can't just compare categories and pick an overall winner. Federer wouldn't have a 10/10 forehand against Pete's attacking style and his return wouldn't be the x/10. Pete's the type of player that can ace you on first and second serves in either corner. There is no way to beat that. There were fery few matches that Pete lost when he played his best tennis, and I think that is the case here. Pete at his best is practically unbreakable. Realistically, Roger and Pete would have never played each other at their best on the same day (and they never will). If Pete serves up to his potential, he wins. If not, Roger wins.

it's not a question of pete serving to his potential. it's a question of pete serving 2 1st serves (instead of a 1st and a 2nd like everyone else) every time he is down in his service game. can pete do that ? maybe once or twice, but not everytime.

pete's return game is good, but not as good as hewitt's or federer's, or even agassi's. consider this: agassi doesn't serve as hard as fed, doesn't move as well as fed, is not good at the net, but still beat sampras enough times. i've no doubt fed can do better than that.

 

[Feña14]

Interesting post shakes1975, the figures from their only meeting was interesting. Sampras' serve was as good as ever during that match, the only thing that was slightly off was his movement which hindered his backcourt game but the number of times he was at the baseline was rare.

Federer finds a way to beat ANYONE, he munches serve/volleyers for breakfast, and as people have stated before .. he is possibly the greatest returner ever. Agassi was fantastic but Federer has a knack of getting any ball back and with something extra on it.

If I had 3 wishes one of them would be for these 2 to meet in their prime. I think alot of people would be shocked by the result, I simply can't see Federer losing.

 

[sugmasterflex]

Forehand 9 9
Backhand 7 7
Serve 10 7
Volleys 8 6
Service Return 7 8
Speed and Athleticsm 10 7
Defence 7 9
Endurance 7 7
Mental edge 9 7
consistent pressure 8 8
playing the big points 10 7
playing fancy shots 8 8
game strategy 8 8

Sampras = 108, Federer = 98

 

[shakes1975]

sampras federer
--------------------------
Forehand 8 10
Backhand 6 8
Serve 10 7
Volleys 8 6
Service Return 6 8
Speed and Athleticsm 10 10
Defence 6 9
Endurance 6 9
Mental edge 9 7
consistent pressure 6 8
playing the big points 10 10
playing fancy shots 6 9
game strategy 8 8

Sampras = 99, Federer = 109

 

[prosealster]

If Pete serves up to his potential, he wins. If not, Roger wins.

Not necessarily....pete still have to find a way to break Roger's serve (assuming roger playing at 100% as well - will be difficult for pete to break) ... unless if you say pete's potential is getting 80% of 1st serve or something....shakes1975 showed pete can lose even if serving at 69% 1st serve....I am not saying Fed will win... but Pete is far from being a certainty

 

[The Grand Slam]

Another pointless Sampras vs Federer analysis!

FIX'D/ten!