Is Pete Sampras a top 5 tennis player of all time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RS
  • Start date Start date

?

  • Total voters
    74
MeatTornado said:
Incredibly impressive, of course. I'm not trying to take anything away from Pete, it just doesn't hold up when making a 1:1 comparison with Fed & Novak.

Losing to Nadal & Murray in 08/13 says more about how the game changed than Fed/Novak's specific skills on grass. If those matches were played in like 93 & 98, you couldn't fathom Pete losing to baseliners like that on grass. But that's not the world Fed & Novak were playing in at the time. If Pete tried to play his way in 2008 & 2013 against returners like Nadal and Murray, you better believe he's getting broken more than 4 times.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I clearly disagree with that. I believe the main reason for their losses is the type of game they play on the surface, rather than the change/evolution of the sport.

You had a player like Kevin Anderson who blew the best returner in today's game (or in the last 20 years) off the court with 40 aces and almost beat him during his best Wimbledon run (vs Djokovic in 2015), you had a journeyman serve and volley player with a winning record against Nadal at Wimbledon, out of three matches they played, and it says something about the skills that are highly effective on this surface.

Sure, the 2008 version was a formidable opponent, but the match was still played on his terms, he managed to drag his opponent into a baseline contest, who couldn't exploit his biggest weakness on grass (the return of serve). Old or new grass, it's still grass and it rewards huge serves, sharp volleys, first-strike tennis, etc.
 
Kralingen said:
59326.jpg
Click to expand...
NonP isn't active anymore
 
The issue about Petros is that while he was a monumental geass courter as well as an amazing hard courter, his game just wasn't versatile to all kinds of surfaces. It's not like he was great on clay and not as good as he was on the faster surfaces. He doesn't even break into the top 50 of the open era there.

On the other end, Borg wasn't just a top dog everywhere, he was THE top dog. Clay, grass, carpet, he was the best player of his time on all of these surfaces. 64 titles at 25 years of age speak for themselves.
 
GuyForget said:
Sampras would blow Borg off the court on anything other than clay, he's a clear Number 4 + still the best on fast grass
Click to expand...

Maybe, but Borg would beat Sampras at clay by a far bigger margin that Sampras would Borg at grass or hard. So he could easily end up leading the H2H.
 
TheGoldenEra1990’s said:
What’s wrong with that competition on those surfaces? Bruguera, Kafelnikov, Becker, also among others.

That’s far more depth than the crap today on tour
Click to expand...

Agassi was a part time player compared to today's pros. Wasted so much time/opportunity and he was still Pete's greatest rival

Edberg, Courier...had pretty short windows. Muster won ONE Slam.

Ivanesevic was a head case who got lucky near the end of his career, if not for Federer he'd have gone down to PETE like he always did. He's like the Kyrgios of the 90s

In contrast Rafa is the ultimate clay competitor. Fed beat everyone else on clay including the Djominator in his absolute best season

Even Murray is a far better player than anyone PETE faced
 
NatF said:
All-time, no. Open Era, yes. If you talk about the level of play he achieved then you could put him in the discussion still probably. I would put Fedalovic + Laver and Gonzalez definitely ahead, I think the discussion is basically PETE versus Rosewall and Tilden. The problem with PETE in the all time comparisons is his longevity and the fact that he really picked his spots compared to other ATG's. Rosewall had some years of dominance but his claim to the GOAT discussion is his longevity and the sheer amount he won in totality. Tilden is a guy that has a GOAT peak in terms of numbers but in a much shallower era, but he also had ridiculous longevity competing with Don Budge into his 50's. For me PETE is in the 6-8 range.
Click to expand...
I can imagine it might be difficult to access in Tilden's case but his numbers look pretty crazy.
 
NatF said:
Weak era but basically impossible to do better.
Click to expand...
Yeah even if somebody dominates even a weaker period there is a degree were it's just too much to ignore and I think Tilden clears that.

Also I guess if posters value level of play it might be hard because Tilden is too far back for most footage to be available you have to rely on accounts of other people for that.
 
NatF said:
All-time, no. Open Era, yes. If you talk about the level of play he achieved then you could put him in the discussion still probably. I would put Fedalovic + Laver and Gonzalez definitely ahead, I think the discussion is basically PETE versus Rosewall and Tilden. The problem with PETE in the all time comparisons is his longevity and the fact that he really picked his spots compared to other ATG's. Rosewall had some years of dominance but his claim to the GOAT discussion is his longevity and the sheer amount he won in totality. Tilden is a guy that has a GOAT peak in terms of numbers but in a much shallower era, but he also had ridiculous longevity competing with Don Budge into his 50's. For me PETE is in the 6-8 range.
Click to expand...
You have inspired me to join this forum, sir.
 
Let’s put it this way. While he may not have the record (records were always meant to be broke anyways and you ultimately can’t compare records across eras anyways) , if there was one player I would want playing for me if my life was on the line and it was off clay, it wouldn’t be Federer or djokovic or Borg etc. It would be Sampras


Sampras was a true killer on the court and could mess with your rhythm and take your head out of the game like no other player could do
 
Last edited:
BauerAlmeida said:
OE yes, for sure. Big 3, Borg & Sampras. All time I'd say it's them and Laver. He is somwhere between 4-6.
Click to expand...
same. the clay thing definitely tarnishes his standing next to the others...i think in part he just 'picked his poison' with regards to his game style/stroke production, way better suited to the low bounce...but as an overall athlete, shotmaker, competitor etc...i think there's an argument for him in the top 3 even.
 
Rosstour said:
Agassi was a part time player compared to today's pros. Wasted so much time/opportunity and he was still Pete's greatest rival

Edberg, Courier...had pretty short windows. Muster won ONE Slam.

Ivanesevic was a head case who got lucky near the end of his career, if not for Federer he'd have gone down to PETE like he always did. He's like the Kyrgios of the 90s

In contrast Rafa is the ultimate clay competitor. Fed beat everyone else on clay including the Djominator in his absolute best season

Even Murray is a far better player than anyone PETE faced
Click to expand...
Oh Rt how i love to disagree with you(!) I will remind you of gorans hh with pete 6-12 with many of them close matches. He also beat everyone of note on grass. He was more unlucky not to win 2 or 3 wimbledons than lucky to win any. Also he racked up 20 odd titles and won all but one of 600 matches. Spearheaded the croatian/balkan armada.

So yes federer took care of pete but then pete was losing to a lot of people after 1999 with his last slams just being 'form is temporary, class is permanent' exhibits.

Goran beat players of note, including difficult matchups in all but one of his 7 matches at wimbledon. The only luck was not to draw sampras, agassi or hewitt early. However he had not made a semi or final at any event for ages so this was some feat. People can rave about federers 2017 comeback from knee injury (which never went away ultimately) but this was also impressive as some of the old weapons and movement had gone. He had to use his patience and tactical side like never before.

I suggest looking up the moya match if you can. It was pretty watchable and i saw it all first time on the (then) new on demand stream so nostalgia holds me to a rewatch these days.


Edberg was a real factor for 8 or 9 seasons.. fairly standard for the time. He also made all 4 slam finals.. which is better, like it or not, then sampras' sf showing in 96.
Muster is one of the best of the single slammers and it is debatable if his car accident episode prevented him from achieving more.
 
RS said:
Yeah even if somebody dominates even a weaker period there is a degree were it's just too much to ignore and I think Tilden clears that.

Also I guess if posters value level of play it might be hard because Tilden is too far back for most footage to be available you have to rely on accounts of other people for that.
Click to expand...
Level of play in an absolute sense is a bit unfair on Tilden. But for his time he was obviously superb, even writing a book on tennis technique. He was also somewhat competitive with younger generations into his 50's, perhaps a sign of the times but also of his skill.
 
It is hard to justify Petros (Sampras) above the Big 3. Throw in Rod Laver and Sampras is hovering at spot #5.
I do not know enough about players before open-era . Not sure, if there are any that would push Sampras further down.

Bottom line is , Petros was best during his time. "Of all time" , not as much. If he made top #5, it is barely.
 
NatF said:
Level of play in an absolute sense is a bit unfair on Tilden. But for his time he was obviously superb, even writing a book on tennis technique. He was also somewhat competitive with younger generations into his 50's, perhaps a sign of the times but also of his skill.
Click to expand...
Not sure if we will ever see someone being competitive in there 50s ever again. Even with the surge in modern medicine.
 
Last edited:
I think he's top 10 most definitely. Could listen to a story or 2 about top 5, doesn't feel like the most unreasonable suggestion ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Tennis_Monk said:
It is hard to justify Petros (Sampras) above the Big 3. Throw in Rod Laver and Sampras is hovering at spot #5.
I do not know enough about players before open-era . Not sure, if there are any that would push Sampras further down.

Bottom line is , Petros was best during his time. "Of all time" , not as much. If he made top #5, it is barely.
Click to expand...
it turns out that the game was around before our time. You could argue for Tilden, Budge, Kramer, and Gonzales. Laver and Borg from the Open Era. Those guys and "The Big 3" are all pretty close.
 
NAS said:
In open era he is still fourth, but overall very difficult to put him in top five with Laver, Pancho, Til dene, Rosewall also in the list
Click to expand...
What do you think Sampras would need to have included in his achievements to guarantee a top 5 spot, or is it more a question of the strength of his field and level of play?

Sampras is such a historical lynchpin imo. I think more than any other single player he might have been the biggest influence on the current day obsession with majors and the devaluing of the other tiered events because of his own career choices and the way he yielded such control and agency in his career. He has also become a very important link point between the 80s and the oncoming avalanche that was the Big 3 and the slow court era for me because we saw the vulnerability in his game in real time.

He keeps such a low profile but it’s going to be very hard for him to not always be front and centre in tennis history giving his position as the best OE American male player ever with the USA being such a huge tennis market and traditional superpower in the sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NAS
TheGoldenEra1990’s said:
Let’s put it this way. While he may not have the record (records were always meant to be broke anyways and you ultimately can’t compare records across eras anyways) , if there was one player I would want playing for me if my life was on the line and it was off clay, it wouldn’t be Federer or djokovic or Borg etc. It would be Sampras


Sampras was a true killer on the court and could mess with your rhythm and take your head out of the game like no other player could do
Click to expand...
Sampras would be a good choice as he was such a terrific match player....Borg would be my choice right behind him.....he could solve nearly any problem....just not at the USO....put the match there and I want Connors playing for my life :cool:
 
Subway Tennis said:
What do you think Sampras would need to have included in his achievements to guarantee a top 5 spot, or is it more a question of the strength of his field and level of play?

Sampras is such a historical lynchpin imo. I think more than any other single player he might have been the biggest influence on the current day obsession with majors and the devaluing of the other tiered events because of his own career choices and the way he yielded such control and agency in his career. He has also become a very important link point between the 80s and the oncoming avalanche that was the Big 3 and the slow court era for me because we saw the vulnerability in his game in real time.

He keeps such a low profile but it’s going to be very hard for him to not always be front and centre in tennis history giving his position as the best OE American male player ever with the USA being such a huge tennis market and traditional superpower in the sport.
Click to expand...
Tennis abstract Jeff Sachman puts Sampras outside of all time top 10 let alone top 5.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Tennis abstract Jeff Sachman puts Sampras outside of all time top 10 let alone top 5.
Click to expand...
The Tennis 128 is a Herculean achievement. One of the best lists ever. Love reading Jeff Sackmann’s writing and statistical analysis.

The only issue most of us have with such an amazing list is that The ELO system of measurement surveying the 3 key per-determined survey eras to generate the list leaves the great players of the 90s slightly out in the cold because, bizarrely, 90s tennis has a dearth of written match charting data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

onehandbh
Pete Sampras announces plans to...
Replies
11
Views
1K
BenC
BenC
Legends of Sport
The Arrival of Pete Sampras
Replies
9
Views
1K
smoledman
smoledman
A
Pete Sampras-all court player
Replies
8
Views
1K
PROTENNIS63
P
thor's hammer
Pete Sampras beats Jim Courier in Champions series opener
2
Replies
55
Views
13K
Datacipher
D
P
What is Pete Sampras all black racquet
Replies
5
Views
8K
drakulie
drakulie
Back
Top