Snob
‘91, ‘94, ‘96, ‘97, ‘99
This way to look at it is not really fair, since Federer and Djokovic never got the chance to play a second tournament like the GSC that would add to their tally. It is really likely that they would get more than 7 had that been the case. Even if we ignore that and follow your logic, Mac would objectively be the most successful as we then have to include WCT finals as well. While not the most successful, I agree with you though that Pete’s peak level on carpet is the best of all times, so while no GOAT, I agree on BOAT.
Your personal dislike for Pete shining through. 96 YEC and 97 DC were great matches. But this was a WIMBLEDON final. Our super bowl. Show me a better display at Wimbledon by anyone else? I don’t think you can. And your trying to downplay it.
1995 final with 0 UFEs in play was even better imo, but this is up there for sure. 1995 final, 1999 final and 2003 SF are the 3 best Wimbledon performances of the modern racquet era
Lol to this post. If you know any of my posting history you would be aware that I am a big Sampras fan. I cannot expect people here to follow my steps, but even from the very post you quoted I cannot see how you conclude that I have a dislike for Pete. I simply said, that the match which is discussed is not his absolute best even though a very great one overall. This is downplaying for you? If anything it is praise since even with such a great match he still had others where he was even better.
Is an 85 really a modern racquet?
Fair point lol
Probably better to call that the peak of old racquets before calling it the start of modern.
Great video as both played very well. Even Pet's backhand, which IMO has always been underrated, was very impressive
The biggest Sampras hater on tennis warehouse adds his piece
I’m not saying Pete is the YEC GOAT, and if I were, I wouldn’t try to prove it with numbers alone; but I’m saying jorjipy has no right to scoff at Pete’s record and call me ignorant at the same time.
‘Modern’ = Graphite
Maybe takes a bit more than that looking back.
I’ve been a member of this forum for 10 years and I’ve always fought petes cause. I was just a little lad in England when Sampras became my idol in 1998 when he beat henman in the Wimbledon semi. Me and my dad watched it together. Epic times. I genuinely still believe he’s the true GOAT of tennis.
Sampras competition was weak?
I take that as evidence of a stronger era, not a weaker one. It certainly reflects the diversity of surfaces. Every surface plays the same now and has for twenty years.
This one really deserves a mention. Courier had won the sunshine double that year, had won his first slam at the FO, and in the very tournament had not lost even one single set on his way to the final, beating defending champion Pete and crowd-carried Connors along the way. He was in great form and also did not really play bad in the final. Top notch display by Edberg to destroy a very good opponent.
In 1974, the said ATG was almost 40. I give you 84, but Jimmy always had a very weak serve (among the weakest of all ATGs), so even on fast grass, holds are not as easy for him as for others.
Does not change the fact that Rosewall was way past his prime. And as you say yourself here:
He had a very weak serve which makes it harder to hold especially when you are outmatched from the baseline. Connors had a pretty weak serve as well. When I said worst among ATGs I was more referring to players whose career completely happened during the OE. Agassi had a mediocre serve, not exactly great, but by the time of the 99 final it wasn’t too shabby (he had improved over the time).
.Too bad Ken had to play Connors in both of those slam finals in 74. Chances are he probably would have won at least one of them had he not have to play Jimmy. Ken beat Newcombe in both and John then beat Connors in the AO final a couple of months later. Imagine how many more titles Ken would have won if he had a very good, if not great serve.
Agassi had a chance with a break point in the middle of the first set. He failed to take it. I think the match would have been very different had he taken it. Sampras might have still won, but it wouldn't have been what it became.
