Comparing Federer and Sampras

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
Sampras
Total weeks: 286
Consecutive: 102
Age When First Ranked No. 1: 21 years, 8 months
Age When Last Ranked No. 1: 29 years, 3 months
Consecutive years in top 5: 7 years, 10 months

Federer
Total weeks: 302
Consecutive: 237
Age When First Ranked No. 1: 22 years, 5 months
Age When Last Ranked No. 1: 31 years, 3 months
Consecutive years in top 5: 10 years, 6 months

Damn, now Federer even has greater longevity. I guess that was the last nail in the coffin in Federer vs Sampras. Any debates are now officially over.
 

helloworld

Hall of Fame
Sampras
Total weeks: 286
Consecutive: 102
Age When First Ranked No. 1: 21 years, 8 months
Age When Last Ranked No. 1: 29 years, 3 months
Consecutive years in top 5: 7 years, 10 months

Federer
Total weeks: 302
Consecutive: 237
Age When First Ranked No. 1: 22 years, 5 months
Age When Last Ranked No. 1: 31 years, 3 months
Consecutive years in top 5: 10 years, 6 months

What about year end Number 1 and consecutive year end number 1? Those are the two stats that Sampras has over Federer and you seem to completely ignore it, as always.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Update on WTF performance/result

WTF/Master Cup

Total Titles
Federer - 6
Sampras - 5

Finals
Federer - 9
Sampras - 6

Career winning percentage
Federer: 48-11(81%)
Sampras: 35-14(71%)


Year(s) went undefeated
Federer - 5
Sampras - 0

Given out most bagels
Federer - 9
Sampras - 1
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Compare with Lendl and Nole

WTF/Master Cup

Total Titles
Federer - 6
Sampras - 5
Lendl - 5*
Nole - 4

Finals
Federer - 9
Lendl - 9
Sampras - 6
Nole - 4

Career winning percentage
Federer: 48-11(81%)
Lendl: 39-10(80%)
Sampras: 35-14(71%)
Nole: 23-9(72%)


Year(s) went undefeated
Federer - 5
Lendl - 5
Nole - 3
Sampras - 0

Given out most bagels
Federer - 9
Nole - 2
Sampras - 1
Lendl - 1




*Lendl's 2 titles in 1983 and early 1986 were not a 5-match format.
His 3 titles in 1982, late 1986, and 1987 were a 5-match format.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Le/I/Ivan-Lendl.aspx?t=pa&y=0&m=s&e=605
 

ultradr

Legend
It's the 6 straight year end #1. Only 4 players in entire tennis history.

Pre-Open

1880s: Willian Renshaw

1950s: Pancho Gonzales
1960s: Rod Laver

Open era

1990s: Pete Sampras
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
It's the 6 straight year end #1. Only 4 players in entire tennis history.

Pre-Open

1880s: Willian Renshaw

1950s: Pancho Gonzales
1960s: Rod Laver

Open era

1990s: Pete Sampras
1 Rios, Marcelo (CHI) 3,719
2 Sampras, Pete (USA) 3,678
3 Rafter, Patrick (AUS) 3,548
4 Korda, Petr (CZE) 3,172

hapssh.gif
 

ultradr

Legend
Sampras never had a season where he had a winning % above 88%. Federer has had four seasons with a winning % above 88%.

Different environemnt. Meaningless to compare these.

in 90's, you had more obligation to play but ATP would
calculate 9 best results. You have more motivation to pace yourself.

Post 2000, less obligation but calculate 13 best results. Plus it's basically one surface game
entire year. You have to win all to dominate.

It's always
1. whether you dominated tennis or not
2. for how long?

For Federer, it's 2004-2007 domination over Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Nabandian.
Even during that time, the question is Nadal.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer is one win away from being the only 3 players in the open era to win 1,000 matches.


Most matches won
1. Jimmy Connors 1253
2. Ivan Lendl 1071
3. Roger Federer 999
4. Guillermo Vilas 929
5. John McEnroe 875
6. Andre Agassi 870
7. Stefan Edberg 801
8. Ilie Năstase 779
9. Pete Sampras 762
10. Boris Becker 713
 

xFedal

Legend
Federer surpassed Sampras even more after nearly 3 years.


17 slams > 14
6 WTF > 5 WTF
302 weeks at #1 > 285
22 Master Shields > 11
80 single titles > 64
6 consecutive YE#1 > 4
6 YE#1 >5
1 Rome title >0

Sampras still has some good records.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
6 consecutive YE#1 > 4
6 YE#1 >5
1 Rome title >0

Sampras still has some good records.

1 Rome title isn't a record, 7 is the record...

Sampras didn't win the Roger's cup, is that a negative for him compared to Federer?
 

Thorondor

Rookie
6 consecutive YE#1 > 4
6 YE#1 >5
1 Rome title >0

Sampras still has some good records.

As impressive as that is, weeks at no. 1 is the more complete and important measure. YE#1 is merely one of the 52 possible discretizations of 52 individual measurements into a single measurement, and thus loses much of the original information that weeks at no. 1 captures.
 

xFedal

Legend
1 Rome title isn't a record, 7 is the record...

Sampras didn't win the Roger's cup, is that a negative for him compared to Federer?
I had forgotten that it's not a record I would just highlighting things that Pete has done that Fed hasn't.
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
1000 events weren't obligatory in the 90s, thus the players can ignore those events and geared up for slams instead. Pete was the slam guy, so it's obvious he didn't take any other tournament apart from the slams seriously.
Well he won Cincinnati 3 times so he did take some of the pre slam tournaments at least a little bit seriously. ;)
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
Unless Djokovic slows down, in a few short years he'll make both these players obsolete! :)
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras wasn't competing with someone of Nadals caliber for ye#1

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
1998 was an easy year for Sampras to reach the year end #1. There was no one chasing him and he only needed to win 4 titles that year.
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Non mandatory status back then, he did well in the american masters. Federer has only won it twice as well - both times when it was in Toronto. The GOAT's know Cincy is where it's at ;)
Not gonna lie mate, that last part did sting a little bit. ;)
 

90's Clay

Banned
Sampras never had a season where he had a winning % above 88%. Federer has had four seasons with a winning % above 88%.


Sampras also played in an era with the most polarization of conditions vs. the most varying display of specialists the game has ever seen.

Its not that difficult to dominate under homogenized conditions. (As the Big 4 have proved). Playing under slow medium conditions today would be like giving Sampras year round fast conditions in the 90s.

You can't compare the eras in this regard. Hell Nadal may not have a winning percentage over 30 percent if he played in the 90s. Nole as well. Fed wouldn't have fun playing against Specialists all year either on every surface. You have to plan for a gazillion different styles of players under various conditions

I could dominate Call of Duty Black Ops 1 year after year and destroy 95-98 percent of the competition on earth with a CONSISTENT 25 or 30-5 K/D ratio. Why? Because its the only multiplayer I like an play and and have found I can play the same way all the time and dominate playing the same way over and over with the SAME GUN the Famas and Same load out. (Nadal, Nole, Federer baseline.. No need for all court play, and different tactics and schemes), After 5 years of playing the game and getting good doing the exact same thing (Same Create a class, Same type of game style, I RARELY have ran into anyone who could up me in that game. . My domination wouldn't be as good if I had to play all 3 COD Black Ops games along with Advanced Warfare and The Older Modern Warfare games (Mens game in the 1990s) . Its too much varying Gameplay all the time to see year round domination
 
Last edited:

xFedal

Legend
Sampras also played in an era with the most polarization of conditions vs. the most varying display of specialists the game has ever seen.

Its not that difficult to dominate under homogenized conditions. (As the Big 4 have proved). Playing under slow medium conditions today would be like giving Sampras year round fast conditions in the 90s.

You can't compare the eras in this regard. Hell Nadal may not have a winning percentage over 30 percent if he played in the 90s. Nole as well. Fed wouldn't have fun playing against Specialists all year either on every surface. You have to plan for a gazillion different styles of players under various conditions

I could dominate Call of Duty Black Ops 1 year after year and destroy 95-98 percent of the competition on earth with a CONSISTENT 25 or 30-5 K/D ratio. Why? Because its the only multiplayer I like an play and and have found I can play the same way all the time and dominate playing the same way over and over with the SAME GUN the Famas and Same load out. (Nadal, Nole, Federer baseline.. No need for all court play, and different tactics and schemes), After 5 years of playing the game and getting good doing the exact same thing (Same Create a class, Same type of game style, I RARELY have ran into anyone who could up me in that game. . My domination wouldn't be as good if I had to play all 3 COD Black Ops games along with Advanced Warfare and The Older Modern Warfare games (Mens game in the 1990s) . Its too much varying Gameplay all the time to see year round domination
Which Cod game is your favorite and do you actually play which console?
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
I had forgotten that it's not a record I would just highlighting things that Pete has done that Fed hasn't.

Win a slam with an 85" racket. Fed tried but couldn't get it done.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Makes you wonder why threads like this one still exist. I guess the door is not yet shut apparently.
It's a 5 years old thread. Achievements, stats and records are in favor Federer so the debate is over. However Nadal vs. Sampras is an open door for debate since their achievements are so close and arguments can go either way.
 
Top