Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
301 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I would like to know where the fact that Sampras had better competition at W is coming from.

Let's analyze their contenders.

Sampras had: Becker, Agassi, Courier, Ivanisevic and Rafter.

Of all these 5 players, only 2 were W champions when Pete played them: Becker and Agassi. After them only Goran managed in the end to win a W title. Rafter despite not winning W still reached 2 finals so he proved himself as a strong grass contender. Courier only reached 1 final so let's rule him out.

So the W champions whom Pete defeated for his titles are Becker, Agassi and Ivanisevic. All 3 have 5 W titles together.

Now,Federer had: Hewitt, Roddick, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray.

Of all these 5 players, only 2 were W champions when Fed played them: Hewitt and Djokovic. After them Nadal and Murray managed in the end to win W titles. Roddick despite not winning W still reached 3 finals so he proved himself as a strong grass contender.

So the W champions whom Fed defeated for his titles are Hewitt, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Together they have 5 W titles.

It looks like Fed defeated more W champions than Pete who have won the same amount of W titles as Pete's competition.

So i do not see how Pete had tougher competition. Their comp looks equal to me, statistically speaking. Sure some may use subjective data such as: player X has a game more suited to grass than player Y. But the grass conditions have changed, compared to the 90's so it is useless to bring up thir argument. If the conditions change, obviously the competition changes as well. Fact is, it only matters how many finals you have reached and how many titles you have won. Not how good your game is suited for grass. Goran has a game very well suited for grass, but he still has the same number of W titles as Djokovic, whose game is not exactly suited to grass. So accomplishemnts are the ones that matter.

Please discuss
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,535 Posts
he's played djoker an murray at Wimby only twice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,009 Posts
I have never seen a more ridiculous and less thought-out post.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,733 Posts
Sampras fluked his wimbledons thanks to serve and weak opposition

glad fraud finally ended his record of 7
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,577 Posts
Federer would have gotten nowhere near the amount of Wimbledon titles he did if the grass was anywhere near the speed and low bounce it was during the 90s. There's a reason the ATP slowed down the surfaces as much as it did, and that reason is Roger Federer.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
I would like to know where the fact that Sampras had better competition at W is coming from.

Let's analyze their contenders.

Sampras had: Becker, Agassi, Courier, Ivanisevic and Rafter.

Of all these 5 players, only 2 were W champions when Pete played them: Becker and Agassi. After them only Goran managed in the end to win a W title. Rafter despite not winning W still reached 2 finals so he proved himself as a strong grass contender. Courier only reached 1 final so let's rule him out.

So the W champions whom Pete defeated for his titles are Becker, Agassi and Ivanisevic. All 3 have 5 W titles together.

Now,Federer had: Hewitt, Roddick, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray.

Of all these 5 players, only 2 were W champions when Fed played them: Hewitt and Djokovic. After them Nadal and Murray managed in the end to win W titles. Roddick despite not winning W still reached 3 finals so he proved himself as a strong grass contender.

So the W champions whom Fed defeated for his titles are Hewitt, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Together they have 5 W titles.

It looks like Fed defeated more W champions than Pete who have won the same amount of W titles as Pete's competition.

So i do not see how Pete had tougher competition. Their comp looks equal to me, statistically speaking. Sure some may use subjective data such as: player X has a game more suited to grass than player Y. But the grass conditions have changed, compared to the 90's so it is useless to bring up thir argument. If the conditions change, obviously the competition changes as well. Fact is, it only matters how many finals you have reached and how many titles you have won. Not how good your game is suited for grass. Goran has a game very well suited for grass, but he still has the same number of W titles as Djokovic, whose game is not exactly suited to grass. So accomplishemnts are the ones that matter.

Please discuss
You haven't shown anything in your post. In fact, you've shown the opposite. The competition on grass was just as strong in the 90s.

One major flaw of your premise is this: you think that maybe other guys don't have titles BECAUSE Sampras and Federer existed?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,577 Posts
You haven't shown anything in your post. In fact, you've shown the opposite. The competition on grass was just as strong in the 90s.
In what world is a clay courter like Nadal and a pusher like Murray in the same league as Becker, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Agassi...? :spit: The 90s actually had grass court specialists. There's no such thing today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
301 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
In what world is a clay courter like Nadal and a pusher like Murray in the same league as Becker, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Agassi...? :spit: The 90s actually had grass court specialists. There's no such thing today.
That's because grass is different today. So the competition changes
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,577 Posts
That's because grass is different today. So the competition changes
The grass is different to suit the competition. You think if Federer and Nadal were serve and volley masters the ATP wouldn't have drastically increased court speeds?

Get real.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
301 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
You haven't shown anything in your post. In fact, you've shown the opposite. The competition on grass was just as strong in the 90s.

One major flaw of your premise is this: you think that maybe other guys don't have titles BECAUSE Sampras and Federer existed?
Just as tough yes, but i don't see why Sampras had it tougher than Federer
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top