Comparing Federer and Sampras at ATP World Tour Finals

[McEnroeisanartist]

Appearances
Federer - 10
Sampras - 11

Championships
Federer - 5
Sampras - 5

Championships won without losing a match in the round robin
Federer - 4
Sampras - 0 - (In three of his championships, the player he lost to in the round robin, he defeated in the final. In two of his championships, he lost in the first round of the round robin)

Sets won 6-0
Federer - 8
Sampras - 1

Sets won 6-1
Federer - 11
Sampras - 4

In short, Federer has clearly been a more dominant player at this tournament.

 

[angler]

Right, Fed appeared more times (10>11) and won more times (5>5) as well. Talking about sets and RR is of no importance. However, Fed is close to 6th win, the way he and his nemesis play at the moment.

 

[TMF]

Appearances
Federer - 10
Sampras - 11

Championships
Federer - 5
Sampras - 5

Championships won without losing a match in the round robin
Federer - 4
Sampras - 0 - (In three of his championships, the player he lost to in the round robin, he defeated in the final. In two of his championships, he lost in the first round of the round robin)

Sets won 6-0
Federer - 8
Sampras - 1

Sets won 6-1
Federer - 11
Sampras - 4

In short, Federer has clearly been a more dominant player at this tournament.

Thanks for the stats. Fed was more dominant than Pete on indoor.

Lendl also won 5 WTF, i'm curious how his stats compare to these two players.

 

[BeHappy]

Yeah but Sampras won his WTF's against players like Becker and Agassi, Federer won his against players like Ferrer and Blake.

That's not to talk down Federer's indoor game, he would probably have been very successful anyway. It's just with the tour being slow courts 11.5 months of the year, by the time the WTF comes around it's basically Federer against a bunch of clay court specialists. If the WTF had been an open tournament over the last 10 years you would probably have seen players like Karlovic in the final.

Although the court is really weird these past two years.

 

[Carsomyr]

Thanks for the stats. Fed was more dominant than Pete on indoor.

Lendl also won 5 WTF, i'm curious how his stats compare to these two players.

Lendl, I'm sure, blows both of them away, as he's won several championships without dropping sets.

 

[PCXL-Fan]

I'm a Fed fan, but the thing is its hard to quantitatively compare the 2 based on their record here because 50% of the equation depends on the the field of opponents they were facing.

 

[tennis_pro]

Yeah but Sampras won his WTF's against players like Becker and Agassi, Federer won his against players like Ferrer and Blake.

That's not to talk down Federer's indoor game, he would probably have been very successful anyway. It's just with the tour being slow courts 11.5 months of the year, by the time the WTF comes around it's basically Federer against a bunch of clay court specialists. If the WTF had been an open tournament over the last 10 years you would probably have seen players like Karlovic in the final.

Although the court is really weird these past two years.

yea like Becker in 1996 was in his very prime
yea like Federer isn't 4-0 and 8-1 in sets against Nadal at this very event or something but of course you had to mention 1 single match against Blake
yea like Federer at 29 didn't owe every single top 5 player en route to his victory and recorded wins over Djokovic, Murray, Hewitt, Roddick, Nalbandian beating them several times in WTF

Sampras had his fair share of joke draws as well look at his 1997 draw
RR Moya, Rusedski, Rafter/ Bjorkman in the semis and Kafelnikov in the final

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

It's really beyond me how everyone always invokes the 'field' strength argument. Field strength is very complex and extremely subjective, you cannot definitively say anything about any field by simply dropping a few names like Becker, Agassi or Lendl, etc etc. It's just meaningless.

If there are former multi-slam winners hanging around in your era (eg. Agassi in mid 2000s), it doesn't really mean they are a threat anymore and are likely past their prime. At the same time if there are contemporary multi-slam winners in your field then you have to ask yourself why you couldn't take those slams away from them. Just goes around in circles and therefore becomes meaningless. Ferrer and Roddick cannot be judged as any less than Becker or Agassi in terms of comprising a weaker field. There is no such thing.

 

[BeHappy]

yea like Becker in 1996 was in his very prime
yea like Federer isn't 4-0 and 8-1 in sets against Nadal at this very event or something but of course you had to mention 1 single match against Blake
yea like Federer at 29 didn't owe every single top 5 player en route to his victory and recorded wins over Djokovic, Murray, Hewitt, Roddick, Nalbandian beating them several times in WTF

Sampras had his fair share of joke draws as well look at his 1997 draw
RR Moya, Rusedski, Rafter/ Bjorkman in the semis and Kafelnikov in the final

Becker was at his very best in 1996, he won the AO, beat Sampras in Stuttgart his final against Sampras was one of the best matches of all time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPsu-zL2Ah0

Rusedski, Rafter, Kafelnikov and even Bjorkman were all WAY better indoor players than any of the modern clay court specialists who go to the WTF every year.

The only players who can actually play on indoors in Federer's time have been Nalbandian and Hewitt. And both of them were only good on indoor for tiny periods of Federer's prime. Nadal is not good on fast indoor courts at all.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Becker was at his very best in 1996, he won the AO, beat Sampras in Stuttgart his final against Sampras was one of the best matches of all time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPsu-zL2Ah0

Rusedski, Rafter, Kafelnikov and even Bjorkman were all WAY better indoor players than any of the modern clay court specialists who go to the WTF every year.

The only players who can actually play on indoors in Federer's time have been Nalbandian and Hewitt. And both of them were only good on indoor for tiny periods of Federer's prime.

Very true. The competition today indoors is nothing like the 90s. David Ferrer is one of the top indoor players today, LOL!

 

[NadalAgassi]

yea like Federer isn't 4-0 and 8-1 in sets against Nadal at this very event or something but of course you had to mention 1 single match against Blake

Yeah like Nadal is or ever was tough competition for anyone indoors, LOL!

 

[BeHappy]

Very true. The competition today indoors is nothing like the 90s. David Ferrer is one of the top indoor players today, LOL!

Put that in your signature.

That criticism doesn't apply anymore though, with the super slow courts of London.

edit: oh you've already changed it

 

[DeShaun]

Sampras was a McLaren F1, a specialized supercar untouchable when running on closed tracks.

Federer has been Bugatti Veyron, meant for more general use on public roads.

 

[Moose Malloy]

Thanks for the stats. Fed was more dominant than Pete on indoor.

That's not to talk down Federer's indoor game, he would probably have been very successful anyway

2 of Fed's 5 WTF's were played on outdoor hardcourt.

And Fed has never played a WTF on carpet, so even his indoor WTF's were played under very different conditions than what Lendl & Sampras dealt with(the difference is bigger than the difference between the old & new grass at Wimbledon, grass is still grass, indoor hardcourt is not carpet, per the ATP it is considered a different surface. a surface that Fed was instrumental in getting the the ATP to remove - due to supposedly 'unsafe footing' - imo I don't think Fed really likes truly fast surfaces)

 

[Sentinel]

Aren't you repeating one stat in many variations. If Fed has not lost a set in the RR 4 times to Shampras's 0, then your 6-1 and 6-0 stats will follow.

Also, Federer had to face Nadal. So it was weak competition, LOL. Not sure whom Shampras faced but they must have been decent players.

 

[zagor]

2 of Fed's 5 WTF's were played on outdoor hardcourt.

Yup, both in Houston, beat Agassi and Hewitt in the finals.

 

[jackson vile]

Right, Fed appeared more times (10>11) and won more times (5>5) as well. Talking about sets and RR is of no importance. However, Fed is close to 6th win, the way he and his nemesis play at the moment.

Didn't the final used to be best of 5 sets?

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

More dangerous indoor players in Pete's day. Nobody would like to face Ivanisecic, Becker and Stich on carpet.

 

[BeHappy]

2 of Fed's 5 WTF's were played on outdoor hardcourt.

And Fed has never played a WTF on carpet, so even his indoor WTF's were played under very different conditions than what Lendl & Sampras dealt with(the difference is bigger than the difference between the old & new grass at Wimbledon, grass is still grass, indoor hardcourt is not carpet, per the ATP it is considered a different surface. a surface that Fed was instrumental in getting the the ATP to remove - due to supposedly 'unsafe footing' - imo I don't think Fed really likes truly fast surfaces)

The faster the surface the better Federer is. Look at Federer's record in Basel and the USO before the slow down.

 

[jackson vile]

More dangerous indoor players in Pete's day. Nobody would like to face Ivanisecic, Becker and Stich on carpet.

Good point.

 

[PONG]

2 of Fed's 5 WTF's were played on outdoor hardcourt.

And Fed has never played a WTF on carpet, so even his indoor WTF's were played under very different conditions than what Lendl & Sampras dealt with(the difference is bigger than the difference between the old & new grass at Wimbledon, grass is still grass, indoor hardcourt is not carpet, per the ATP it is considered a different surface. a surface that Fed was instrumental in getting the the ATP to remove - due to supposedly 'unsafe footing' - imo I don't think Fed really likes truly fast surfaces)

Shanghai 2005 was on carpet. An injured Federer beat Gaudio 60 60 LOL