Federer beats Sampras at 287 Weeks at No.1

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Sampras has still 1 major record left - 6 years finished at no 1 but if Federer ends 2012 at the top of the rankings, Sampras won't have a single big record - all of them will be either topped by or shared with Federer.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras has still 1 major record left - 6 years finished at no 1 but if Federer ends 2012 at the top of the rankings, Sampras won't have a single big record - all of them will be either topped by or shared with Federer.
Before Fed won his 7th Wimbledon, Sampras said he's use to hear Fed breaking his record. I guess it's not that painful anymore for him.
 

spiderman123

Professional
Sampras has still 1 major record left - 6 years finished at no 1 but if Federer ends 2012 at the top of the rankings, Sampras won't have a single big record - all of them will be either topped by or shared with Federer.
6 *consecutive* years. Will take a while to be broken.
 

scineram

Professional
Federer did finish number one for six consecutive years. The years ending with Wimbledon, 2004-2009.
 

JeMar

Legend
Sampras has still 1 major record left - 6 years finished at no 1 but if Federer ends 2012 at the top of the rankings, Sampras won't have a single big record - all of them will be either topped by or shared with Federer.
I wonder if Federer will put together a HUGE push to keep #1 at the end of the year like Sampras when he got his 6th year.
 

ledwix

Hall of Fame
Sampras is a very arrogant past champion. Compare to Borg, McEnroe, Laver, etc. and it's a joke how much bigger his head is than theirs. I used to like him more, but I hope his records are all broken now so that he becomes a grumpy old man who complains about how much easier it is to win these days and how much tougher he had it in the 90s.
 

USOpenfan

New User
I grew up watching Sampras dominate the game so this is kind of sad to me. To me I enjoy the modern matches more so that the old S and V style, but there is a charm in the way Sampras played. I love fed and respect him as the GOAT up to this point in time but Sampras has a special spot in my heart. Congrats to Federer as he just keeps making an argument for any other GOAT harder and harder.
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
I thought the years end at the....year end championship tournament :)
If you were to use the week after wimbledon as the cutoff for one year to the next (IE the year starting the second week after wimbledon and ending the next year on the first week after wimbledon), Federer was ranked number one each time from 2004 to 2009.
 

DeShaun

Banned
Sampras is a very arrogant past champion. Compare to Borg, McEnroe, Laver, etc. and it's a joke how much bigger his head is than theirs. I used to like him more, but I hope his records are all broken now so that he becomes a grumpy old man who complains about how much easier it is to win these days and how much tougher he had it in the 90s.
I used to think the exact same thing. There was just something smug or arrogant about him as I saw him in the videos on the internet. But that all changed when I actually saw him playing live in the Champions League (or whatever it's called) last year, and he spoke to the crowd afterwards. Don't get me wrong--there was definitely an aloofness to his presence while he was playing and it was obvious to me that Pete is definitely socially awkward to a very high degree, but the man underneath was not so bad after all once I heard him and the--I would almost say--humility with which he addressed the crowd. It was sincerely touching, and I had previously disliked everything about his personality. . .but that changed. Pete's actually alright.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Before Fed won his 7th Wimbledon, Sampras said he's use to hear Fed breaking his record. I guess it's not that painful anymore for him.
I think he (also) said that if anyone breaks his records he'd rather it be Fed.
 

surfvland

Semi-Pro
Sampras is a very arrogant past champion. Compare to Borg, McEnroe, Laver, etc. and it's a joke how much bigger his head is than theirs. I used to like him more, but I hope his records are all broken now so that he becomes a grumpy old man who complains about how much easier it is to win these days and how much tougher he had it in the 90s.
I agree to an extent. Sampras was my favorite player before Fed came into prominence.
 

Gizo

Hall of Fame
I'm not saying that Sampras is completely humble or anything, and he definately was arrogant when he was on the tour (as most great players have been). However there's no way that he was more arrogant than McEnroe, who is one of the most self-obsessed and ego-centric players in tennis history.

The main reason why McEnroe does his tennis pundit work for various tv stations is to remain in the limelight and remind people of how good he was.

Sampras on the other has rejected many tv commentary gigs and interviews since he retirement. Also if you have heard him talking about his career, he has pretty much forgotten which years he won which of his 14 slams, and who he beat along the way.
 

scineram

Professional
End of year is arbitrary. All weeks are equal. You should also fix your reading comprehension problem first.
 
Last edited:

jukka1970

Professional
Well I've been waiting a long time for this record to happen. Congrats to Federer, as he really has earned it. Complete dedication and love for the sport. And sorry, but am happy to watch Sampras' records go, and this was the last of the real big ones.

They've each got 7 Wimbledons so that record's no longer solely held. And quite honestly the only one that Sampras really has now is finishing number 1 six years in a row. And for as much as I dislike Sampras, finishing number 1 six years in a row is one hell of an achievement. And I do belive that this one is going to stay in the record books for quite a while.
 

SQA333

Hall of Fame
End of year is arbitrary. All weeks are equal. You should also fix you're reading comprehension problem first.
My reading comprehension is completely fine. Your claim was that Federer finished the year #1 from 2004-2009, which has been soundly disproved. He spent the last week of 2008 as #2, so therefore finished the year as #2.

Also, it's 'your', not 'you're'. I don't know if it's me, or if you're the one with an English problem. :twisted:
 
I gotta interject something here:

In most (if not all) tennis circles, the year-end #1 is what people refer to when saying Sampras was 6 times the consecutive #1. Otherwise, we simply say that the player that wins the Aukland Open or Chennai Open to start the calendar year is the #1 player for that given year. There have been several instances in which a player has held the #1 ranking at some point in the season, only to not be the year-end #1. Examples include 1995 (Thomas Muster), 1999 (Carlos Moya), 2004 (Roddick), 2008 (Federer), 2012 (possibly Djokovic). So, in other words this argument about Federer being #1 between 2004-2009 is not a true comparison to Sampras' record.
 

SQA333

Hall of Fame
I gotta interject something here:

In most (if not all) tennis circles, the year-end #1 is what people refer to when saying Sampras was 6 times the consecutive #1. Otherwise, we simply say that the player that wins the Aukland Open or Chennai Open to start the calendar year is the #1 player for that given year. There have been several instances in which a player has held the #1 ranking at some point in the season, only to not be the year-end #1. Examples include 1995 (Thomas Muster), 1999 (Carlos Moya), 2004 (Roddick), 2008 (Federer), 2012 (possibly Djokovic). So, in other words this argument about Federer being #1 between 2004-2009 is not a true comparison to Sampras' record.
Indeed. Let's also not forget Boris Becker, who is obviously a former world #1, but has not actually finished any year as #1.
 
End of year is arbitrary. All weeks are equal. You should also fix your reading comprehension problem first.
You claimed he finished the year #1. You were wrong. Why can't you just accept it and move on? It's not that big of a deal. #1 in the world gets a trophy signifying he was #1 for that year. Fed didn't get it.

In fact, you arbitrarily chose a time when Federer was #1. I could easily do that for Nadal at other points in the year. There is nothing arbitrary about the end of a tennis season or a year.

And now you're lying. Classic ********* baseline tactic.
You should stop typing things on the internet.
 
Top