socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I thought the Wimbledon 2015 final was very high level. Both players were in great form with Federer not losing a set before the final and Djokovic in the middle of his BOAT-year.
jl809
Legend
Good point, cheers
What's your take on 11 Fed at Wimb vs his level there in 14, 15? A freak result against a zoning opponent or was his game better on grass in those later years? I remember even though Fed lost in 11 his stats were pretty damn good for that match
NonP
Legend
I've long maintained that famous demolition job is the single most dominant performance of the OE, on any surface, but what I've said about Mac against the entire field vs. fellow ATGs also applies to him vs. Pistol on grass. Or, as Mac himself would put it, you could still play your game against him if you managed to get enough of his serves back in. Not so much against Pistoling Pete.
Of course that's zero UFEs off the ground cuz he did serve 7 DFs, but that's because he basically went for two 1st serves, LOL.
P.S. '02 Rusty ain't losing to '03 A-Rod at SW19. Even their '09 matches on grass were close and that's when injuries had already taken their toll on Hewitt. Vs. '04 Roddick is more debatable, but I still prefer Rusty.
In all seriousness I'd rank 'em like this:
1. 1994 and 1995 (final only)
2. 1997 and 1995 (overall)
4. 1999
5. 1993 and 2000 (final only)
6. 1998 and 2000 (overall)
'97 could've been up there if he were pushed a little more cuz I'm 99% positive he never served better, with even more topspin than his already heavy-AF usual (hence the noticeable extra kick on his serves that fortnight). No wonder he'd go on to hold serve a mind-boggling 98% of the time that summer up to 8 service games into that 5-set L to Korda at Flushing.
I mean, they played at Queen's Club in 2004, with Roddick winning 7-6, 6-3. Not peak Hewitt, but still a pretty good version of Rusty, who finished #3 that year and lost to (1) Federer at the three Majors Roger won; and (2) Gaudio on Gaston's way to the French title.
TheNachoMan
Legend
mightyrick
Legend
I agree completely regarding Sampras and how the match went when he was "on". Personally, the most boring matches I've ever watched were Sampras matches. I don't know how many I've watched that were 2 hour matches of 6-4, 6-3, 6-4... or scorelines like that. Years of that stuff. First serve almost didn't matter. If Sampras' second serve was firing, he was untouchable.
However, to the original question, that finals performance by McEnroe was just god-like. Against Connors in his second peak after having just won the US Open in 83. I've never seen Sampras do that to any ATG in any major final -- ever. In fact, I'd argue that McEnroe's 1984 Wimbledon final performance is probably the greatest all-court performance in the Open Era. People really need to watch it to understand. Connors didn't play badly at all. In fact, he played GREAT.
The 08 French Open Final between Nadal/Federer felt like a similar demolition, but Nadal's performance didn't even come close to McEnroe in the 84 Wimbledon Final. NOT CLOSE. And consider it is so much more difficult not to make errors on grass than clay.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
It was more than that in 2001, Sampras had his worst overall Jan-Jun performance since 1991 when entering Wimbledon 2001 - I mean, it was 2017-2018 Djokovic-level bad.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
I thought Pete played above himself for Wimbledon in particular though. He looked clearly better than in most of the 2001 season, though obviously not near his best of course
Holmes
Legend
The Cowan match should make it clear PETE wasn't playing well at the tournament as a whole though he served very well in the match with Roger. He couldn't approach quick enough to justify the high mph on the serve though. Probably would have been better off averaging 105-110 but with significantly more rpms to give himself time to get in and throw Rog off.
Absolutely. There was a reason why CC was referred as his home at one point.
how do you know how 1984 final mcenroe would have played against peak sampras? maybe it would be a 7:6, 6:4, 6:4 win for sampras and mcenroe never has a break point.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Indeed, and the match was quality, which is all that really matters.
RS
Bionic Poster
I usually avoid level comparisons from players that far apart.
He was not good, especially if you compare his performance there to Henman’s QF showing. Henman did better in all non-serve departments - and that really shows how bad Pete was by then
He only played well in his USO run (before the final, of course)
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Dis-a-gree, handsome is he, Ali Ababwaaaa!
Pheasant
Legend
Mac in 1984 was unbeatable. He out-rallied Connors from the baseline in that 1984 final. He had some killer topspin lobs when Connors approached the net. And his spinning lefty serve out-wide is very underrated. Connors maybe had a few 30-30 games at best on Mac’s serves. But I don’t ever recall any break points. I’d wish there were stats. But I would bet that Mac had the highest winning pct on his serve ever in 1984. And that 1984 Wimbledon final was the perfect case in point. Mac couldn’t do anything wrong against very solid grass court player.
That was definitely great revenge for when Connors took out McEnroe in that classic 5-set final in 1982.
My vote obviously goes to 1984 Mac. He absolutely destroyed a very good grass court player; one that won 2 Wimbledons + had 4 runner ups there + a grass court slam title at the USO + a grass court slam title at the AO.
That was definitely great revenge for when Connors took out McEnroe in that classic 5-set final in 1982.
My vote obviously goes to 1984 Mac. He absolutely destroyed a very good grass court player; one that won 2 Wimbledons + had 4 runner ups there + a grass court slam title at the USO + a grass court slam title at the AO.
Here's Waspsting's match report. Zero break points for Connors. McEnroe won 34/40 (85%) of his first serve points.
Pheasant
Legend
Thanks for the link! Waspsting is a legend. It sounds like Connors had 0 break point opportunities as well.
abmk
Bionic Poster
fed's level was better in Wim 11 than in Wim 14&Wim 15.
Tennfan123
Legend
Sampras 99
most overrated peak for sure.
Tennfan123
Legend
I watched the thing spellbound.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
But QF is a late stage
Yeah, and in the 1993 QF, he needed 5 sets to beat an injured Agassi, in 1995, he dropped a set to Matsuoka, in 1999, he lost the opening set to Philippoussis before Flip injured himself early in the second set, and in 2000 he dropped a set to Gambill.
I'm not saying Sampras was chopped liver in Major QFs, just that he upped his level for Major finals.
philippoussis qf 99 cant be ignored.
about 99, you dont know if sampras played better in the final than against flip. that was peak flip, definetely much more dangerous to sampras on grass than any version of agassi.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And then played better at Wimb-USO like Djokovic in 2018
Razer
G.O.A.T.
The concept of someone having the mental powers to raise the level of their game in the finals/big stages for guys like Sampras and Djokovic is actually something beyond the grasp of Federer and his fans. Like Federer was in disbelief during the US open 2011...
Pete 2001 was more like 2017 djokovic, though.
It makes a lot easier to look impressive when your opponent[Agassi] average first serve was 42.9%. LOL
And for the Fed-detractors who underrated Sampras's performance in 2001 Wimbledon, Sampras average first serve was 76.5%, in compare to 1999, it was 59.1%
Go figure
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nah, way better than that
in wimby 1999 sampras needed to raise his game in the quarterfinal against scud, the only opponent who could beat him and had a set lead.
i am tired to read that that final against agassi is the greatest ever peak from a player ever at wimbledon. yes pete was great in that final, but agassi on grass is no match to a well playing and especially well serving sampras.
Last edited:
NonP
Legend
Yes, a good W for A-Rod, but '04 was arguably his very best GC season. Rusty's own peak was '02 while Andy wouldn't reach the 2nd week of Wimbledon for another year. Just don't see '02 Hewitt losing to '03 Roddick.
ICYMI you and I are on the same page re: '84 Mac, and for that matter re: his '84 Wimbledon F vs. Nadal's own demolition of Fed at '08 RG. I do think Superbrat poses such a unique set of challenges and everything was working so well for him in '84 that he'd be laying waste to the vast majority of the field like no other regardless of era.
But the key phrase there is "vast majority." On paper drubbing a two-time champion like Connors 6-1, 6-1, 6-2 is more impressive than edging out a one-timer like Ivanisevic 7-6, 7-6, 6-0 or even an ATG like Becker 6-7, 6-2, 6-4, 6-2, but such a straightforward comparison ignores the tiny fact that Jimbo had the weakest serve among all modern (read: Open Era) Wimbledon champs while Goran and Boris wielded two of the strongest.
And even that Connors in '84 was no longer his same youthful self. Compare his serving in the '74 USO F (where, BTW, he spanked Rosewall by the even more dominant score of 6-1, 6-0, 6-1):
With this in the '84 Wimby F (granted it's harder to follow the ball here):
It's clear which Jimbo had the bigger serve. Simply put '84 Connors with that old serve wins more than 4 games even against SuperMac. Now imagine what he could do with Boris' boomer or Goran's even more untouchable rocket.
Again Mac's '84 Wimby F is up there with anyone's among ATG performances. I just doubt even that Mac would do better against fellow Wimby champs than Pistoling Pete.
We can't compare Pistol and Djoker at the majors from the QFs on by Svc. In-play Pts. Won % (yes, due to the double counting for the '90s Slams), but we can look at the Fs only:
Sampras - 69.27% vs. (unadjusted) 70.1% in all rounds (71.40% outside RG)
Djokovic - 63.8% vs. 67.71% (64.78% vs. 68.35% off clay)
So Pistol wins by a landslide as expected, but what about their return in-play %s? Let's see:
Sampras (all unadjusted) - 36.41% vs. 38.09% in all rounds (38.13% off clay)
Djokovic - 39.86% vs. 43.16% (40.08% vs. 42.88%)
Novak's smallish 3.3% fall is damn impressive in its own right, but see how Pistol's own %s are all but unaffected even on return. In fact his ranking among all guys since '91 leapfrogs by a whopping 153 places from #177 for all rounds to #24 in the Fs only... or by 113 places from #127 to #14 off clay!
Now let's look at their GW%s from the QFs+ and in the Fs which should be pretty accurate. On serve:
Sampras - 89.71% from QFs+/88.69% in Fs vs. 90.32% in all rounds (91.11%/88.69% vs. 92.00% outside RG)
Djokovic - 83.45%/80.48% vs. 87.05% (85.20%/82.42% vs. 87.99% vs. off clay)
That's why Pistol is the single greatest hold machine in tennis history. Competition almost didn't matter for him.
And on return:
Sampras - 18.86% from QFs+/18.93% in Fs vs. 23.39% in all rounds (19.57%/18.93% vs. 23.33% off clay)
Djokovic - 26.95%/24.64% vs. 32.66% (27.02%/25.10% vs. 31.60%)
Here Pistol's drop-offs are more noticeable, but see how they're still less steep than Novak's. In fact Pete broke serve MORE often in his Fs than in the QFs/SFs!
I mean what else can I add? Pistol really is the Clutch King of the OE and quite possibly ever, yes even over Djoker.
LOL, he actually served 69.8% and was in the middle of his worst drought of his career. But then you never cared about the facts anyway.
69 8 % first serve is the probably the highest sampras ever served, much higher than in all his grand slam finals. he also served faster than ever in that match. so even if he worse in everything compared to years before, the service performance evens it out. cause the serve on grass is as important as all other things combined.
NonP
Legend
Lemme follow up on one thing I forgot to highlight earlier (yeah I was in a rush):
Moving on:
And dude, Pistol was serving 70% and routinely over 130 mph in his 2nd exo vs. your boy 5 years into his retirement. Obviously much of that can be chalked up to radar, but you're dreaming if you think Pistol never hit those marks in his actual prime and saved his absolute best for his only official meeting with Fed.
Y'all (non-mugs) already know about Pistol coasting on return. Well, there's your proof, namely that unlike his RGW%s his %s of in-play RPW barely dropped in his Slam Fs - or from the QFs on, for that matter, as he averaged (unadjusted) 35.81% or 36.26% outside RG. He clearly didn't try too hard returning strong serves (including aces, obviously)... but when he did get the ball back in he had a better chance of winning the point than most.
Moving on:
Uh, he actually had served 69.6% just a few days ago in the Cowan match which also went 5 sets. Some "even[ing} it out" that was. You're talking nonsense as usual.
And dude, Pistol was serving 70% and routinely over 130 mph in his 2nd exo vs. your boy 5 years into his retirement. Obviously much of that can be chalked up to radar, but you're dreaming if you think Pistol never hit those marks in his actual prime and saved his absolute best for his only official meeting with Fed.
The Guru
G.O.A.T.
Come on this is silly. Pete got taken 5 by Barry Cowan (who?) in the second round. Maybe more like 18 FO Djo. Getting closeish to back but not there yet.
RS
Bionic Poster
Long time no see
mental midget
Hall of Fame
sampras or mac most likely. i think stich deserves a mention here, he was absolutely on fire during his run to the title. took out edberg and becker, both of who were playing very, very good tennis.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
So? He clearly played better vs Fed. And was always ahead vs Cowan
And let’s not compare Cecchinato even to young Fed
Last edited:
RS
Bionic Poster
Would Djokovic destroy Pete if they played?
PMChambers
Hall of Fame
Cowan is not even a Journey man. Sampras was well past it. He served better against Fed but his game was not there. The following year he lost to Basti, a guy who never got past 1rnd. 2001 & 2002 Wim where like 1988-1989 level. Fed was closer to his best than Sampras was in 2001/2002, for whatever reason, age, desire, injury, etc.
