I think, the more important question, than who would win hth, is, who would finish on a one year tournament tour. While i would probably give Sampras a slight edge on fast courts, overall Federer seems to be more consistent. Sampras always needed some time to regroup, Federer holds a high standard throughout the year, although he is protecting his record by clever scheduling, normally not playing back to back tournaments.
Another Sampras vs Federer analysis!
- Thread starter Tambuyu
- Start date
Sampras Federer (10 = Best; 9.5 = Top 5; 9 = Top 10; 8.5 = Top 15; 8 = Top 20; 7.5 = Top 25)
----------------
Forehand 9.5 10
Backhand 8.5 9.5
Serve 10 9
Volleys 9.5 8.5
Service Return 8.5 10
Speed & Athleticism 8.5 9
Footwork 9.5 10
Defence 7.5 9.5
Endurance 8.5 9
Mental Edge 9.5 9.5
Consistent Pressure 9 10
Playing The Big Points 9.5 9.5
Playing Fancy Shots 8.5 10
Game Strategy 9.5 9.5
Sampras = 126, Federer = 133
(Ave = 9.0), (Ave = 9.5) for 14 categories
----------------
Forehand 9.5 10
Backhand 8.5 9.5
Serve 10 9
Volleys 9.5 8.5
Service Return 8.5 10
Speed & Athleticism 8.5 9
Footwork 9.5 10
Defence 7.5 9.5
Endurance 8.5 9
Mental Edge 9.5 9.5
Consistent Pressure 9 10
Playing The Big Points 9.5 9.5
Playing Fancy Shots 8.5 10
Game Strategy 9.5 9.5
Sampras = 126, Federer = 133
(Ave = 9.0), (Ave = 9.5) for 14 categories
Couldn't resist making my own (mostly in response to Tricky) . . .
Standing Forehand -- 8 10
Running Forehand -- 10 9
I had to break up this category into Standing Forehand and Running Forehand not only because one hits one shot better than the other, but because these 2 shots are so different: one is more or less a standard rally shot, the other is turning a potential defensive shot into an offensive shot, often in pressure situations. Only a handful of points would separate these 2 players in (hypothetical) match. The key points and pressure situations would decide the match.
Backhand -- 7 9
Judging by the stroke itself, Federer would win the backhand score hands down, because his backhand has the variety and control. But what Sampras lacked in backhand technique he compensated for with strategy. He'd roll a high bouncing backhand making it difficult to be attacked or slice to prevent being dictated. How many times have we seen players try to exploit his backhand only to find out that not only would it holds up, but somehow they'd lose the point.
Serve -- 10 7
"Goes without saying." Agreed! Of all the stats and analysis we do, Sampras has an answer to it all: his serve. If he serves to his potential, that shot alone can keep him in the match. He may not break Federer's serve, but at least he won't lose his. And when the set goes to tie-break, you have to go with the Sampras' serve's chances.
Volley -- 10 6
Sampras's volley placement was impeccable! He could do more with a volley in a seemingly dire situation than most people could in a normal situation. Federer has firm hands at net, but volleying is by no means his bread and butter. If the list had a Half Volley category, it wouldn't be close.
Returns -- 7 10
It's abnormally tough to ace Federer. Federer can also deal with pace. But Sampras knew how to deal with ace machines too. His matches against Ivanisevic come to mind.
Speed and athleticism -- 10 8
Sampras was quite possible the best tennis athlete. The jumping smashes, dead-run running forehands, and improvisation that look "boringly" easy to the untrained eye, that's all attributed to his athleticism-making the extraordinary look ordinary.
Footwork -- 10 10
I don't see why this category is in here. I mean, I understand if "Agility" is in here, or "Balance", but "Footwork"? We should be concerned with the result of the footwork, not the prettiness of the footwork itself, no? That's why I rate these 2 the same. Both cover a lot of real estate, stay on balance, always in position, and very fast.
Defense -- 7 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." I agree. But I do think his defense is consistently underrated. How do people think Sampras got himself into all those running forehands? He had to "defend" his opponensts' approach with the backhand and then "run" to the forehand for the pass.
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."
Well said. I mean we've all seen matches when Sampras looks like he was going to die out there (literally puking and sobbing), and somehow, he just kept winning.
Mental Edge -- 10 7
I think I've seen Sampras lose his cool maybe like 5 times in his entire career. And whenever that happened, he came back with ice cold firing of 3 or 4 consecutive service winners. Federer is one cool customer, but in the rare occasion when things don't go his way, you're more apt to see him yelling at himself or the umpire.
Consistent Pressure -- 9 10
"Sampras was about making you crack. Federer was about completely breaking you. You don't want to play either."
Haha well said. I would chime in by saying:
"Playing Sampras, you despair because you never see the light at the end of the tunnel. Playing Federer, you don't have time to despair because you're too busy being attacked by hundreds of bats."
Big Points -- 10 10
The big points manifest themselves ,more often, in different ways. Sampras played the big points extremely well on his serve. 0-40 is routinely the situation where he played for real and the opponent is left wondering what the heck just happened? Federer doesn't seem to tighten up much. His strokes are as free on the big points as they are all the time. And tie-break pressure? I've never seen a better tie-break player than Sampras.
Circus Shots -- 8 10
"Fed is the king of the circus shot." Agreed.
Strategy -- 8 9
Federer sometimes doesn't have a plan and just hits winners (I guess that is a plan). But he can figure out his opponent pretty quickly and adjust accordingly. Sampras didn't change his game plan much, but then again, he didn't have to, because his strategy worked so well.
Sampras -132
Federer- 132
(ran the number 4 times)
BTW the list does not include: smash, approach, half-volley, and I'd point out that the list includes "defense" but does not include "offense".
Standing Forehand -- 8 10
Running Forehand -- 10 9
I had to break up this category into Standing Forehand and Running Forehand not only because one hits one shot better than the other, but because these 2 shots are so different: one is more or less a standard rally shot, the other is turning a potential defensive shot into an offensive shot, often in pressure situations. Only a handful of points would separate these 2 players in (hypothetical) match. The key points and pressure situations would decide the match.
Backhand -- 7 9
Judging by the stroke itself, Federer would win the backhand score hands down, because his backhand has the variety and control. But what Sampras lacked in backhand technique he compensated for with strategy. He'd roll a high bouncing backhand making it difficult to be attacked or slice to prevent being dictated. How many times have we seen players try to exploit his backhand only to find out that not only would it holds up, but somehow they'd lose the point.
Serve -- 10 7
"Goes without saying." Agreed! Of all the stats and analysis we do, Sampras has an answer to it all: his serve. If he serves to his potential, that shot alone can keep him in the match. He may not break Federer's serve, but at least he won't lose his. And when the set goes to tie-break, you have to go with the Sampras' serve's chances.
Volley -- 10 6
Sampras's volley placement was impeccable! He could do more with a volley in a seemingly dire situation than most people could in a normal situation. Federer has firm hands at net, but volleying is by no means his bread and butter. If the list had a Half Volley category, it wouldn't be close.
Returns -- 7 10
It's abnormally tough to ace Federer. Federer can also deal with pace. But Sampras knew how to deal with ace machines too. His matches against Ivanisevic come to mind.
Speed and athleticism -- 10 8
Sampras was quite possible the best tennis athlete. The jumping smashes, dead-run running forehands, and improvisation that look "boringly" easy to the untrained eye, that's all attributed to his athleticism-making the extraordinary look ordinary.
Footwork -- 10 10
I don't see why this category is in here. I mean, I understand if "Agility" is in here, or "Balance", but "Footwork"? We should be concerned with the result of the footwork, not the prettiness of the footwork itself, no? That's why I rate these 2 the same. Both cover a lot of real estate, stay on balance, always in position, and very fast.
Defense -- 7 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." I agree. But I do think his defense is consistently underrated. How do people think Sampras got himself into all those running forehands? He had to "defend" his opponensts' approach with the backhand and then "run" to the forehand for the pass.
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."
Well said. I mean we've all seen matches when Sampras looks like he was going to die out there (literally puking and sobbing), and somehow, he just kept winning.
Mental Edge -- 10 7
I think I've seen Sampras lose his cool maybe like 5 times in his entire career. And whenever that happened, he came back with ice cold firing of 3 or 4 consecutive service winners. Federer is one cool customer, but in the rare occasion when things don't go his way, you're more apt to see him yelling at himself or the umpire.
Consistent Pressure -- 9 10
"Sampras was about making you crack. Federer was about completely breaking you. You don't want to play either."
Haha well said. I would chime in by saying:
"Playing Sampras, you despair because you never see the light at the end of the tunnel. Playing Federer, you don't have time to despair because you're too busy being attacked by hundreds of bats."
Big Points -- 10 10
The big points manifest themselves ,more often, in different ways. Sampras played the big points extremely well on his serve. 0-40 is routinely the situation where he played for real and the opponent is left wondering what the heck just happened? Federer doesn't seem to tighten up much. His strokes are as free on the big points as they are all the time. And tie-break pressure? I've never seen a better tie-break player than Sampras.
Circus Shots -- 8 10
"Fed is the king of the circus shot." Agreed.
Strategy -- 8 9
Federer sometimes doesn't have a plan and just hits winners (I guess that is a plan). But he can figure out his opponent pretty quickly and adjust accordingly. Sampras didn't change his game plan much, but then again, he didn't have to, because his strategy worked so well.
Sampras -132
Federer- 132
(ran the number 4 times)
BTW the list does not include: smash, approach, half-volley, and I'd point out that the list includes "defense" but does not include "offense".
Yes, the "in their prime" hypothetical is what most people want to know. I'd say they would've gone to several tie-breaks giving the slightest edge to Sampras during tie breaks.
All the best servers in the game find their aces/service winners drop facing Fed, but there's also the volley behind it which Pete's excellent at.
What is equally flawed is thinking that if Federer does well returning against other players, he can do equally as well returning Sampras's serve.
If you say we can only go by that one professional match they played (and excluding Macau) then the whole question of who's better or who would've won if each in their prime questions can not exist.
Yes. Tennis matches are won not by total number of points as in basketball, but in WHICH key points you win.
If you want to only talk about their only professional match, then you can easily point to the unforced error column especially the missed overheads by Pete. When does that ever happen??
It is about Pete serving to his potential when we're talking about pitting Sampras's best vs Federer's best.
Yes, Agassi did win matches against Sampras. But if you're saying Pete's best or doesn't matter, then watch the match Pete gave Agassi in Pete's words "a clean thrashing" at 1999 Wimby final. When Pete's at his best, he walks on water.
flyinghippos101
Legend
pame
Hall of Fame
There wont be a next time, your bant as soon as a mod see's a user who registerd today bumping threads from 2006
Forgive me being too lazy to check but is that seriously in the site rules? I'd never seen the thread before and found it more interesting than many of the other Fed v. Samp threads.
If it is against site rules, miltyu7, just wanted to say that I found this so witty:
That's probably why his running forehand was such a killer: he's actually running foreward along the baseline.
Big bomb servers give everyone a harder time.
Korda gave Sampras a hard time partly because he was a lefty.
Pete thrived in night matches and grass and had little success on clay for the same reason.
The balance would really depend on the surface if each are playing their best.
Even if I give you that it's a toss-up on a neutral surface, the tiebreak lottery favors the cheap points winner and the better server.
I don't see any point of this thread. If it was in 2006, then yeah, there's good comparison since Roger still hasn't reach Sampras's feat. But now, Federer proved that he's above Pete and the majority of the public also believe Roger is better. Analyze all you want, Roger's game/stature will always be ahead of Pete. Plus, his continuation of success from now on will only distant himself from Pete even further.
I agree. The interesting discussion is who would win at their best-not who would win if one was at their best while the other was not.
So both at their best, you can forget about breaking serve and we'll see you at the tie-break. The best tie-break player ever, is Sampras.
Yes, Federer can reach a lot of serves, but you have to do better than reach the ball if your playing Sampras. We're not talking about a Roddick here.
My sentiment exactly.
One guy carries a pistol and somehow we're to believe all the shot-for-shot comparisons are fair??
Changmaster
Rookie
Scores (out of 10)
SAMPRAS FEDERER
Forehand: 8 - 10
Backhand: 7 - 9
Serve: 10 - 8
Volley: 9 - 8
service returns: 7 - 9
Drop shots/lobs: 7 - 9
Movement(combining footspeed and footwork): 8 - 10
Defense: 7 - 9
Endurance: 7 - 9
mental edge: 10-10
Consistent pressure: 8 - 9
Playing the big points: 10 - 10
Shotmaking ability: 8 - 10
Overall
SAMPRAS - 106 FEDERER - 120
SAMPRAS FEDERER
Forehand: 8 - 10
Backhand: 7 - 9
Serve: 10 - 8
Volley: 9 - 8
service returns: 7 - 9
Drop shots/lobs: 7 - 9
Movement(combining footspeed and footwork): 8 - 10
Defense: 7 - 9
Endurance: 7 - 9
mental edge: 10-10
Consistent pressure: 8 - 9
Playing the big points: 10 - 10
Shotmaking ability: 8 - 10
Overall
SAMPRAS - 106 FEDERER - 120
prosealster
Professional
although i agree that tie breaker favor the better server, but it doesnt mean that sampras has the upper hand come tie breakers....as we have to consider the relative return games to each other's serve....ie although pete is a better server, but fed is a better returner, and hence fed i think will have less issues dealing with pete's serve than vise versa....this of course is all speculation...we could also look at their career records... and i remember seeing stats of tie breaker played and won...fed had outstanding record of it during his prime years, the only one that had similar tie breaker record during their best years was mac and not pete
D
Deleted member 54563
Guest
This post is far too not up-to-date, I would rate as follow:
Hair - Sampras 5, Federer 10 (Still waiting for a Federer shampoo sponsorship and/or commercial)
Body Hair - Sampras 10, Federer 8.5 (Federer is coming there)
Hotness of Significant Other - That's irrelevant
Kids - Sampras 2, Federer 2 (I would even give Federer a slight advantage, since Fed's 2 kids came at once)
LMAO, you're funny
Similar threads
