Sampras' opposition

FedForGOAT

Professional
all the debate around who the GOAT is seems to be primarily revolving around two players right now: Federer and Sampras. most debators on both side seem to admit that Fed is dominating much more completely than Sampras ever did. however, most debators on Sampras' behalf claim that he faced tougher opposition in the top echelons (Agassi, Edberg, Becker, Ivanisevic, Muster, Courier, Kuerten, etc.) while Federer is playing in a weak era with noreal challengers. Federer supporters counter that Federer is so dominant that he makes others look weaker. there is no way to settle that but to look at Sampras' true opposition...
here are Sampras' results in the U.s open including matches over notable opponents, dropped sets, etc.
U.S. Open
1989 fourth round loss to Jay Berger (highest is #7) in straight sets (Berger has 3 titles no grand slam titles.)
1990 Champion def. Agassi in straight sets dropped fourth round tiebreaker against Muster, def. Lendl in five-set QF and McEnroe in 4-set SF.
1991 quarterfinal loss to Courier in (close) straight sets 2 tiebreakers (Where’s the clutch serving?)
1992 lost final to Edberg 4 sets lost a tiebreaker extended to 5 sets by wildcard todd Martin (although Martin did reach 4 SF and 2 more F in his GS career) and 13th seed Guy Forget (11 titles #4) in third and fourth rounds.
1993 Champion def. Pioline (15th seed highest #5) dropped a set against Chang in the QF and Daniel Vacek (#26)
1994 fourth round loss to Jaime Yzaga (highest #18) dropped a set in 3rd round against qualifier roger smith (highest #96)
1995 Champion def. Agassi in 4 sets dropped a tiebreaker against Philippoussis in 3rd dropped two 6-4 sets to Agassi and Courier (SF)
1996 Champion def. Chang in straight sets was extended by Jiri Novak (career high #5) to five sets in 2nd round ((6-4) in the 5th) extended to 5 sets against Alex Corretja (career high #2 though best on clay courts) winning 7-9 in a fifth set tiebreaker (saved a match point) dropped a tiebreaker (11-9) against Ivanisevic (SF)
1997 4th round lost to Petr Korda (15th seed highest #2) in five sets (losing two tibreakers 2-7 and 3-7 and one 5-7 set)
1998 SF lost in five sets to Rafter (winning a first set tiebreaker 10-8) dropped a set against wildcard Paul Goldstein (highest #58)
1999 did not play
2000 finalist lost in straight sets against Safin extended to 4 sets by Krajicek two close tibreakers vs. Hewitt
2001 finalist lost 7-6 6-1 6-1 to Hewitt (who was taken to five sets by Roddick!) dropped a 4th round tiebreaker against Rafter famous QF against Agassi defeated Safin in straight sets (albeit one tiebreaker).
2002 champion def. Agassi in 4 sets dropped 4th round tiebreaker against Tommy Haas.

So as you can see Sampras dropped many sets and matches to players who he really shouldn't have, and he didn't beat his notable opponents that many times. (He did not play becker, did not beat Edberg, beat Muster twice and Ivanisevic once).

now the AUS Open
Australian Open
1989 first round 3 sets against Christian Saceanu (highest #60) (4-6 4-6 6-7)
1990 4th round to Yannick Noah in 4 sets defeated 6th seed (career high #7) Tim Mayotte in five sets (7-6 6-7 4-6 7-5 12-10) defeated Jordi Arrese (career high #23) in 2nd round after suffering a first set bagel
1991 did not play
1992 did not play
1993 lost SF to Edberg in 3 sets (two tiebreakers) lost a set to Magnus Larsson (career high #10) in 2nd round
1994 Champion def. Todd Martin (9th seed) in straight sets, extended to five sets by Yevgeny Kafelnikov in the 2nd round (9-7 in the fifth) dropped a 6-1 set to the lowly ranked Stephane Simian, def. Lendl (15th seeded) in tight three sets, Courier in 3 in the SF and dropped a set to Mangus Gustafsson (#10) in the QF
1995 finalist lost to Agassi in 4 sets defeated Larsson and Courier in five setters in the 4th round and QF respectively defeated Chang in the SF in four sets. Lost a tiebreaker to Larsson, two to Courier, and one to both Chang and Agassi did not win a single tiebreaker.
1996 lost 3rd round in straight sets to Philippoussis (two tiebreakers) dropped a second round set to Michael Joyce (highest career ranking #64)
1997 Champion def. Moya in 3 sets pushed to five by Dominik Hrbaty (#12 highest) (4th round) and Albert Costa in the QF def. Muster in 3 sets in the SF. Agassi did not play 1998 lost QF to Karol Kucera in 4 sets. Did not drop a set till then
1999 did not participate
2000 Lost a five-set SF to Champion Agassi (two points from victory) dropped sets to qualifier Wayne Black (highest #69) in 3rd round and Slava Dosedel (highest #26) in 4th round
2001 lost a four setter to Todd Martin in the fourth round was extended to four sets by Kucera and Bohdan Ulirach (highest #22) in the first and second rounds and to 5 sets by Chela in the 3rd round.
2002 lost fourth round to Safin in fourth set tiebreaker (8-10) was extended to four sets by Chela in the 2nd round and to five sets by Escuede (30th seed highest #17) in the third.

again, he did not defeat his famed opponents so many times (lost to Agassi twice and to Edberg) and dropped sets and matches to players he really shoud not have. so the notion that Sampras dominated his fellow champions is quite incorrect. he sometimes lost to them and did not dominate them all the time.

also, most people concede that the depth in tennis nowadays is higher, meaning a top 50 player now is better than a top 50 player back in Sampras' time. even those who think Sampras faced tougher opponents (including Sampras) admitt this. Since Federer is dominating all of those, and Sampras dropped quite a few matches and sets to lowly ranked players in his time, we can say that Federer is the greater player.

lastly, I did not post Sampras' wimbledon record because although he was pushed there a couple of times, he truly was dominant there and deserves great respect for that record. I do not mean to detract anything from Sampras' stature as an all-time great. I simply think that Federer is the GOAT and deserves to be recognized as such.
 

tbini87

Hall of Fame
i think if fed stays on the track he is on, he will clearly be the GOAT. talk about fed not having quality opponents is bogus.
 
L

laurie

Guest
Well despite Federer's dominance the statistics of both players at the same period of October 1997 and October 2007 are almost identical

http://www.tennis28.com/studies/Federer_Sampras.html

By end of October 1997 Sampras had 50 titles including Grand Slam Cup and with Federer's defeat today Federer has 51 titles.

All the other stats on that sheet are very similar. So Sampras' dominance was not a joke. Federer fans need to recognize that and stop going on about how much more dominant Federer is. As Federer is so dominat you Federer fans shouldn't have anything to worry about right?

What will be interesting is whether Federer's performance will start to drop further in 2008 just like Sampras' performance started to dip in 1998. Right now even though Federer won 3 slams his play has looked much more vulnerable this year than it did in 2006, his rivals are getting closer and chipping away at his aura. I think they are starting to believe more they can beat him.
 

Phil

Hall of Fame
Well despite Federer's dominance the statistics of both players at the same period of October 1997 and October 2007 are almost identical

http://www.tennis28.com/studies/Federer_Sampras.html

By end of October 1997 Sampras had 50 titles including Grand Slam Cup and with Federer's defeat today Federer has 51 titles.

All the other stats on that sheet are very similar. So Sampras' dominance was not a joke. Federer fans need to recognize that and stop going on about how much more dominant Federer is. As Federer is so dominat you Federer fans shouldn't have anything to worry about right?

What will be interesting is whether Federer's performance will start to drop further in 2008 just like Sampras' performance started to dip in 1998. Right now even though Federer won 3 slams his play has looked much more vulnerable this year than it did in 2006, his rivals are getting closer and chipping away at his aura. I think they are starting to believe more they can beat him.
Bingo! Fed fan boys feel the need to bring up Fed's weaker competition about every two weeks here, as if they aren't so sure about it themselves...a bit insecure, maybe?

Federer is 10-0 and 14-1 or whatever against the "top" players, because, well, theso-called top players in the ATP today aren't all that good when measured against the top 10 during Sampras' era, and before. The field is weak. Get over it, fedfanboys.

This fact doesn't mean that Federer would not be a great, great player in any era...he would. Only...that he wouldn't have it so easy.
 

FedForGOAT

Professional
Sampras' best year was 77-12. Fed's was 81-4. and fed is going at a faster pace than pete, he just broke through later in his career. Pete is still a legend though
 

CyBorg

Legend
There are so many fallacies in this abortion of a thread one wouldn't even know where to get started.
 

ninman

Hall of Fame
I think you also seem to forget that of Federer's 51 titles 29 are at Master Series or higher, that's 14 MS, 3 MC and 12 GS. I very much doubt that Sampras had that many in October 1997.
 
L

laurie

Guest
I think you also seem to forget that of Federer's 51 titles 29 are at Master Series or higher, that's 14 MS, 3 MC and 12 GS. I very much doubt that Sampras had that many in October 1997.

Who bloody cares?
 
L

laurie

Guest
Good, we agree on something.

This thread is a total waste of time. I'm off.
 

superman1

Legend
Anyone who knows anything about tennis knows that if you are playing Sampras or Federer in a tournament, that means you must be pretty damn good. All of these pros have the potential on any given day to play amazing tennis. Looking at names doesn't tell you anything -- watching matches does. I guarantee you that these guys Sampras lost to were playing great tennis, just like Canas, Volandri, Djokovic, and Nalbandian were on their days.
 
Anyone who knows anything about tennis knows that if you are playing Sampras or Federer in a tournament, that means you must be pretty damn good. All of these pros have the potential on any given day to play amazing tennis. Looking at names doesn't tell you anything -- watching matches does. I guarantee you that these guys Sampras lost to were playing great tennis, just like Canas, Volandri, Djokovic, and Nalbandian were on their days.
Djokovic ;)
 
Top