First set Roland Garros 2020, replace Djokovic with Sampras, what happens?

Would Sampras get bageled?

  • Total voters
    24
GhostOfNKDM

GhostOfNKDM

Hall of Fame
We all know Sampras never reached a clay slam final, nor was he very comfortable on the surface, but let's just assume we drop him in there - as a finalist, in his peak form, same conditions as Novak faced against an aging Rafa. What would happen?

On this forum, Sampras is recognized as the mentally toughest slam champion with the greatest serve ever.

So I wondered what would happen if the greatest serve and toughest mindset on an unfavorable surface... would that enable him at least be able to win a game and stave off the dreaded bagel?

He'd probably still get clobbered by Nadal in the match, but would he at least avoid a 0-6 embarrassment?
 
I guess any normal elite player wouldn't get bageled in that first set.

That strategy was probably the worst thing Novak could have tried to implement, possibly Ivan's idea.

Try to blow Nadal off the court on clay and deliver him 50 free points of unforced errors was just terrible, like he didn't learn anything from Fed.
 
Last edited:
In his peak form? I'd say he grabs some games. What you have to realize is that Djokovic was terrible in that opening set, and I think that while Pete wasn't exactly what we'd call a clay specialist, I think that at his very best, he'd find a way to get on the scoreboard.
 
If Novak couldn't avoid the bagel, very doubtful Pete could have. Nadal was very very good in the opening set of the RG 2020 final.
 
Djokovic played his best tennis and it wasn't enough to win games, but it was a very competitive set in terms of the way each point was won.
Djokovic thought he'd hit winners, and Nadal hit the most bizarre shots to simultaneously turn defense into extreme offense.
I've never seen Djokovic look more shocked.
 
NADALalot said:
Djokovic played his best tennis and it wasn't enough to win games, but it was a very competitive set in terms of the way each point was won.
Djokovic thought he'd hit winners, and Nadal hit the most bizarre shots to simultaneously turn defense into extreme offense.
I've never seen Djokovic look more shocked.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it was his best tennis -- he only made ~40% of his first serves, bricked a few ill-advised drop shot attempts, and didn't return well by his standards -- but it's true that he striking the ball very cleanly from the baseline, hitting with very good depth and pace. Overall he was pretty good, but it wasn't nearly enough.
 
Sampras might win a game in each set based on his serve, but he would still get smoked harder than Djokovic.
 
Let’s put it this way, PETE better bring cream cheese to the court :p

tumblr_n4th9ezDyg1s7o5fdo1_400.gifv
 
Im pretty sure TTW knows better what tactis Djokovic should use and thinking why hes hiring wrong coaches?We have much more better coaches here which would couch for x50 less price.
 
daggerman said:
Sampras would avoid getting bagelled most of the time, but so would Novak. Novak had about 10 game/break points in the first set. I'd imagine 98+% of the time he wins at least one of those points.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think what people miss here is that Nadal bageling Novak in that first set doesn't suddenly make it the most likely scenario to happen if you switched the opponent to any other elite player, including, say, just a slightly different Djokovic. It was a low percentage scenario that happened to occur because sometimes low percentage scenarios occur.

6-1 or 6-2 is always a more likely score.
 
Nadalgaenger said:
Sampras serve makes him very hard to bagel. Nadal 6-2
Click to expand...
Maybe. But damp clay makes the serve less decisive a shot, so it could be. If that were to be their first match, if a bagel is happening, unlikely in the first, 'cause Nadal would stand in Lille for the return until he had a feel for reading the serve
 
GhostOfNKDM said:
We all know Sampras never reached a clay slam final, nor was he very comfortable on the surface, but let's just assume we drop him in there - as a finalist, in his peak form, same conditions as Novak faced against an aging Rafa. What would happen?

On this forum, Sampras is recognized as the mentally toughest slam champion with the greatest serve ever.

So I wondered what would happen if the greatest serve and toughest mindset on an unfavorable surface... would that enable him at least be able to win a game and stave off the dreaded bagel?

He'd probably still get clobbered by Nadal in the match, but would he at least avoid a 0-6 embarrassment?
Click to expand...
Yeah he'd get a game or two, sir.
 
NADALalot said:
Djokovic played his best tennis and it wasn't enough to win games, but it was a very competitive set in terms of the way each point was won.
Djokovic thought he'd hit winners, and Nadal hit the most bizarre shots to simultaneously turn defense into extreme offense.
I've never seen Djokovic look more shocked.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not.
Please don't make nadal fanbase look bad by putting such weird statements, gentleman.
 
Apollo17 said:
Peak PETE got bagelled by KafelniLOL ROFLMAO.
Click to expand...

After beating two 2 time RG champions back to back in five sets.....Can you blame him for being exhausted by the time he got to that third set? It's hardly a ROFLMAO moment.

But, Nadal would have comfortably beaten him in those slower conditions, since the serve would be effectively rendered useless.
 
Apollo17 said:
Peak PETE got bagelled by KafelniLOL ROFLMAO.
Click to expand...
In fairness, he played three five-setters (2R against Bruguera, 3R against Martin, and QF against Courier) before the SF and his stamina wasn't necessarily the greatest aspect of his game so it's an understandable bagel.
 
Maybe a breadstick, like in his '93 QF vs. Bruguera, but no way peak Pistol does worse than Novak who really played like a Djoker in that 1st set.

Also while Rafa would end up with an impressive 70.9% of GW for the fortnight (for the record his 4th highest, not 3rd - I missed his '17 run which netted him a historic 76.8%) he was averaging low to mid-70%s in SGW earlier in the CC "season" which is Fognini territory. Obviously that had to do with the shortened calendar and whatever rust after the long hiatus and he'd eventually make up for it with a more normal 87.0% (seasonal) in the end, but that came vs. an underwhelming draw consisting of nobodies and underperforming contenders (Diego brought his form from Rome only to the 3rd set and we already know about Novak). OTOH '93 Sergi faced arguably the most stacked draw of any FO champ in the OE with not one but two members of the 60% Club in Pistol (yes, for real) and Courier, the latter pushing him to the utmost limit in an underappreciated classic between two CC heavyweights, and yet he still posted 68.8% in GW, the 10th highest at RG in the OE... and Pistol was able to push that Bruguera to 4.

So I say this hypothetical matchup also goes to 4, with Pete stealing one set and likely receiving a 1-6 or 2-6 in exchange, provided that it happens in a "blank slate" with no baggage from past encounters. Otherwise I might grant that Rafa does take it in 3, though it'd definitely be more competitive than the downer we did see.

Third Serve said:
In fairness, he played three five-setters (2R against Bruguera, 3R against Martin, and QF against Courier) before the SF and his stamina wasn't necessarily the greatest aspect of his game so it's an understandable bagel.
Click to expand...

Pete did run out of gas after the 1st set at the very latest. Pretty obvious to anyone who's seen the match, and widely reported to boot.
 
Third Serve said:
In his peak form? I'd say he grabs some games. What you have to realize is that Djokovic was terrible in that opening set, and I think that while Pete wasn't exactly what we'd call a clay specialist, I think that at his very best, he'd find a way to get on the scoreboard.
Click to expand...
Djokovic can play like that first set and he'll sleepwalk Sampras on clay 100% of the time every time, every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.
 
Red Rick said:
People way overreact to that bagel. There were a lot of absolute quality rallies which just went 80% to Nadal which is why Djoko started dropshotting like a ******.
Click to expand...
Djokovic was certainly better than the scoreline reflected, but he's played much better on clay and I think Sampras playing at his best level on the surface was a bit better based on some of his close matches with some of the 90's claycourters (as much as you'd like to say "lol 90's", it'd still be a stretch to say that beating Bruguera in five sets translates to a well below par Djokovic crushing him). Of course, we're assuming equal conditions and enough time for each to adjust and all that.
 
Pistol PETE would bring down CLUTCH second serve ACES (which Fed failed to do in his 40-15s ROFLMAO) and would have CLUTCHED some key overheads (which Djoker couldn't do ROFLMAO). He would chip and charge to take the game out of Rafa's hands. He was too MeNtAlLy StRoNk and would have hit GOAT LEVEL RuNiNiNg FoReHaNdS. PETE only lost at the French in a golden era of GOAT level clay competition, Oldal wouldn't stand a chance.

tl;dr: Federer is a weak era vulture.
 
Third Serve said:
Djokovic was better than the scoreline reflected, but he's played much better on clay and I think Sampras playing at his best level on the surface was a bit better based on some of his close matches with some of the 90's claycourters (as much as you'd like to say "lol 90's", it'd still be a stretch to say that beating Bruguera in five sets translates to a well below par Djokovic crushing him).
Click to expand...
I was gonna say "it's 90s clay, so yes"

Then I checked, saw that the match you reference was a 2nd round, and Bruguera didn't make a SINGLE clay semi that year. And Sampras gets by with 0.75DR and 0.85DR vs Todd Martin etc.

Djokovic on an 11 match clay winning streak and frankly being undefeated barring DQs isn't gonna lose to frigging Sampras on a clay court in poly era. That's preposterous.
 
Last edited:
When you think that some Djokovic fanboys have been laughing over the years at the 2008 RG beatdown that Fed received, then the 2020 RG F came.From Nadal with love :D :D
 
Red Rick said:
I was gonna say "it's 90s clay, so yes"

Then I checked, saw that the match you reference was a 2nd round, and Bruguera didn't make a SINGLE clay semi that year.

Djokovic on an 11 match clay winning streak and frankly being undefeated barring DQs isn't gonna lose to frigging Sampras on a clay court in poly era. That's preposterous.
Click to expand...
That clay match winning streak was hardly anything special, though. Rome was a joke of a draw and the RG draw wasn't an awful lot better. And Djokovic himself wasn't stellar in either event. Would go as far as saying even Sampras's RG 1996 draw was tougher and that, as you observed, didn't include the highest-quality opponents. I'm not saying PETE was even that good on clay, but at his very best I'd favor him over Djokovic playing the way he did in the RG 2020 final. Literally every other RG match vs. Nadal (except for 2006 and maybe 2007) was better.

Added an edit to the first post clarifying that I'm assuming equal conditions and enough time to adjust for each of the two. It's a tough thing to assume which is why I feel more content to say Sampras at his clay best played at a higher level relative to the conditions of his time than Djokovic relative to his own conditions.
 
Third Serve said:
That clay match winning streak was hardly anything special, though. Rome was a joke of a draw and the RG draw wasn't an awful lot better. And Djokovic himself wasn't stellar in either event. Would go as far as saying even Sampras's RG 1996 draw was tougher and that, as you observed, didn't include the highest-quality opponents. I'm not saying PETE was even that good on clay, but at his very best I'd favor him over Djokovic playing the way he did in the RG 2020 final. Literally every other RG match vs. Nadal (except for 2006 and maybe 2007) was better.

Added an edit to the first post clarifying that I'm assuming equal conditions and enough time to adjust for each of the two. It's a tough thing to assume which is why I feel more content to say Sampras at his clay best played at a higher level relative to the conditions of his time than Djokovic relative to his own conditions.
Click to expand...
I don't think Djoko plays as bad vs anyone other than Nadal who suddenly hits a level way above what you expect to face. Same thing every RG final since like 2017.
 
Red Rick said:
I don't think Djoko plays as bad vs anyone other than Nadal who suddenly hits a level way above what you expect to face. Same thing every RG final since like 2017.
Click to expand...
He was playing some pretty lackluster stuff against PCB in the QF and Tsitsipas in the SF. Maybe he doesn't play as bad if it's anyone other than Nadal, but he was shaky, even in those two matches without that specific Spaniard on the other side of the net.
 
Third Serve said:
Djokovic was certainly better than the scoreline reflected, but he's played much better on clay and I think Sampras playing at his best level on the surface was a bit better based on some of his close matches with some of the 90's claycourters (as much as you'd like to say "lol 90's", it'd still be a stretch to say that beating Bruguera in five sets translates to a well below par Djokovic crushing him). Of course, we're assuming equal conditions and enough time for each to adjust and all that.
Click to expand...

LOL, I see our dear Rick is up to his old tricks. I'll give him one thing, though: Bruguera was indeed coming back from an ankle injury in '96, and he'd never replicate the same statistical dominance he used to post in '93-'95.

But that doesn't mean Sergi didn't almost manage to punch well above his then weight in that 5-setter. See for yourself:


When he won that 4th set I doubt there were many observers who weren't expecting him to complete the comeback, but Pistol held it off with a fab (long) return game to break for 2-0 in the 5th (don't miss the wild rally that sets up the original 3 BPs). And though this has no commentary I still remember this British broadcast that said Pete was somehow getting it done "the Bruguera way" - quite a contrast to the usual canard about Pete attacking a lot more than usual during that run due to the terre battue somehow playing unseasonably fast.

And that wasn't even Pete at his CC best as he struggled with his return game all year long. He was still able to almost overcome it this time because his old coach Tim Gullikson had just died and he was extra inspired to "win it for Gully." Now Kafelnikov was having a great run himself and I won't say '93 or '94 Pistol - or even his '95 version who won the DC finals almost single-handedly on watered-down clay, and vs. Yevgeny on his own home turf to boot - would've been favored in the SF, but it sure would've been a lot closer and whoever advances almost certainly wins the whole shebang, given Stich's lackluster performance in the final.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hitman
  • Poll Poll
Fifth set Wimbledon 2008, replace Federer with Sampras in those very same conditions, what happens?
2
Replies
80
Views
3K
blablavla
B
A
McEnroe on Sampras
Replies
15
Views
3K
rightytopspin79
rightytopspin79
R
Roger Federer and Pete Sampras: Not Greatest of All Time Article
Replies
31
Views
2K
IvanAndreevich
IvanAndreevich
Prabhanjan
[FICTION SERIES 1] Sampras does not stop Nadal from winning 14 slams
Replies
26
Views
1K
Prabhanjan
Prabhanjan
A
Andre Agassi says In His Prime on grass sampras Would Beat Federer
9 10 11
Replies
530
Views
30K
reini0100
R
Back
Top