IN DEFENSE OF PISTOL PETE AS GOAT

The Assyrian-Armenian-Iranian-Nevadan-American had just dropped a sloppy service game to his eternal rival. It was the most crucial 8th game in the opening set of what was eventually their last ever meeting. It meant that the slam-dunking big-serving Greek-Angeleno had the opportunity to serve the set out and take a gigantic step towards his record equalling 5th US Open title. He had been in this position for the 3rd year in a row. The big hitting 20 year old Tatar denied him the first time and the counter-punching 20 year old New South Welshman the second. 

He quickly raced to a 40-15 with trademarked serving and followed that with some slipshod tennis, losing 3 points in a row to give the Las Vegan an opportunity to get back on serve. The first serve went wide. It lit up the bald man's eyes. This was his zone. His prowess on eating up the second serve was legendary. As his adversary tossed the ball up, he stepped inside the baseline to take it on the up and put the Californian on the back foot. BOOM went the ball straight down the T almost as quickly as a first serve. Agassi couldn't have reached it even if he was 8 feet tall. Yet another patented second serve ace from "Pistol" Pete Sampras.

The Deadliest Shot In Tennis

This is not the aforementioned 2nd serve ace

He went on to win his first title for two years to extended his own record of most Slams won and retired a year later just before the US Open. He wasn't sure if he wanted to retire but kept pulling out of tournaments in 2003. Ultimately, he decided the daily grind wasn't worth it after he proved he could do it one more time. In his own words:

I won't play just for money. I won't play just to say goodbye. I play to win and once that left me. It was time for me to face facts and say I'm really retired. 

By 2000, Pete Sampras was near universally acclaimed as the greatest player of all time. In 2005, he was named the greatest tennis player of the last 40 years by TENNIS magazine. As late as 2012, he was named the 3rd greatest male tennis player behind Roger Federer & "Rocket" Rod Laver. Nadal's superb 2013 season & Djokovic's dictatorship of 2015 & 2016 has possibly pushed Pistol Pete further down the list in many people's list but Sampras' domination of the tour was in no way inferior to the "Big 3" of this era. 

The image of Sampras being just a big server is an extremely myopic unmerited view. He was in some ways the best combination of the big serving of Boris Becker, the delicate touch & feel of Stefan Edberg & the baseline "power tennis" of Ivan Lendl. As tennis was shifting from the wooden to graphite rackets from the 80s to the 90s, Pete Sampras was in many ways the epitome of the change. He could not only hang in from the baseline against grinders like Courier & Chang but also blow them away from both the baseline and near the net. 

The above point is basically Pete Sampras in a nutshell. Great court coverage, fantastic anticipation, extreme angles and a powerful forehand and this was 28 year old Sampras in 1999! The gif is from this video by the Youtube user Burns Tennis, clearly a massive Pistol Pete fan. He has split great Sampras points into forehands, backhands, baseline rallies, volleys, passing shots, banana shots, second serve aces and his 2nd best shot: the running forehand. I highly recommend watching that channel during your free time. Trust me, it is TOTALLY WORTH IT!

EL NUMEROS

Let us delve into some numbers. A comparison between the 4 10+ Slam winners since 1990 during their respective peaks. In the Open Era, most multiple slam winners have had a 6 year peak period when they won most of their slams. Borg won 9 of his 11 Slams between 1976 & 1980 reaching multiple Slam finals in 5 of those 6 years. McEnroe won all his Slams between 1979 & 1984 and Lendl 7 of 8 in 1984-89. Unsurprisingly, Sampras, Federer, Nadal & Djokovic follow the same exact pattern.

Table I: Slams Won

	SAMPRAS	FEDERER	NADAL	DJOKOVIC
	1993-1998	2004-2009	2008-2013	2011-2016
Grand Slams Won	10	14	10	11
Grand Slam Finals	12	20	13	18
2nd Most Slams in the period	Agassi (2) Bruguera (2) Rafter (2)	Nadal (6)	Djokovic (6)	Nadal (5)
Win Percentage	83.33	70.00	76.92	61.11

Federer is by far the leader of the pack. A stunning 14 slams in a 6 year peak period but Sampras is no slouch when compared to Nadal or Djokovic. Sampras is Federer's equal when it comes to outperforming his contemporaries. He won 8 Slams more than his nearest rivals Rafter (2) & Agassi (2) exactly as much lead as Federer had over Nadal. Sampras' utter domination of his favourite Slam, Wimbledon (5), is identical to Federer (5 Wimbledons), Nadal (5 French Opens), Djokovic (5 Australian Opens) dominating their respective favourite Slams.

Table II: Slam Matches Win Percentage

	SAMPRAS	FEDERER	NADAL	DJOKOVIC
	1993-1998	2004-2009	2008-2013	2011-2016
Slam Matches Win-Loss	118-14	149-10	115-11	143-13
Win Percentage	89.39	93.71	91.27	91.67

Table III: Tournaments Participated

	SAMPRAS	FEDERER	NADAL	DJOKOVIC
	1993-1998	2004-2009	2008-2013	2011-2016
Grand Slams	24	24	21	24
ATP World Tour Finals	6	6	4	6
ATP Masters 1000	42	44	47	49
ATP 500s/250s	41	25	26	16
Total Tournaments	113	99	98	95

Table IV: Total Titles

	SAMPRAS	FEDERER	NADAL	DJOKOVIC
	1993-1998	2004-2009	2008-2013	2011-2016
Titles Won	42	50	37	48
Finals	53	66	56	64
2nd Most titles in the period	Muster (31)	Nadal (36)	Djokovic (34)	Murray (28)
Win Percentage	79.25	75.76	66.07	75.00

The first thing that strikes one is the high number of ATP 500s/250s that Sampras has participated but it is just a practice of the times. The ATP Masters 1000 tournaments, barring Monte Carlo, weren't mandatory back then and players scheduled tournaments based on travel & surface. Sampras participated in Philadelphia, San Jose, New Haven, Newport because he was an American. Even as late as 2004, Roger Federer played just 6 Masters 1000 and 6 500s/250s winning 3 each. Even then Sampras outperforms Muster by 26.19% which is comparable to Federer's 28% and much better than Nadal's 8.11%. Djokovic is the clear leader out performing his closest rival Murray by a massive 41.67%. In Djokovic's peak, Nadal (25) & Federer (22) have also 20+ titles! A stunning degree of consistency and dominance by the Serbian.

Table V: Total Weeks At Number 1 out

	SAMPRAS	FEDERER	NADAL	DJOKOVIC
	1993-1998	2004-2009	2008-2013	2011-2016
Weeks	251	262	115	223
2nd Most Weeks at No 1	Agassi (32)	Nadal (46)	Djokovic (101)	Nadal (41)
Year End No 1	6	5	3	4

Weeks at number 1 is where Pete Sampras (87.25% better than Agassi), relative to his contemporaries, leads Federer (82.44%) & Djokovic (81.61%) by 5% and absolutely crushes Nadal. Not a surprise given that Pete Sampras was obsessed with the number 1 ranking. He scheduled extra tournaments in 1998 to prevent Marcelo "El Chino" Rios from overtaking him at the year's end.

Table VI: Average Points Gained In The Years Players Finished Year End No 1

	SAMPRAS	FEDERER	NADAL	DJOKOVIC
Years at No 1 (No of times)	1993-1998 (6)	2004-2007, 2009 (5)	2008,2010,2013 (3)	2011-2012, 2014-2015 (5)
Average Year End Points	9407.5	12355	12450	13623.75
Average Year End Points of Player Finishing No 2	6950.83	8570	10030	9645
Difference	2456.67	3785	2420	3978.75

In the interest of brevity only the average points gained by each player in the years they finished as the year end number 1 player is shown. Sampras' playing more ATP 500s/250s are clearly evident as he's finished nearly 3000 points behind FEDALOVIC who are in the 12000-13000 range. Federer compensates for a lack of Masters 1000 with 3 extra slams and Djokovic has compensated for the lack of Slams by winning 8 extra Masters 1000. Relatively speaking though, Sampras (26.11%) has surpassed his number 2 ranked opponents in the same ball park as Federer (30.64%) & Djokovic (29.20%) and is nearly 8% ahead of Nadal (18.37%).

INFERENCIAS

Let us first talk about the elephant in the room: Sampras' struggles on clay. Pistol Pete's Pistol typically got jammed by the dirt. He took part in just 9 Clay Masters 1000 out of the possible 18 (Monte Carlo, Rome & Hamburg) in the 6 years of his peak period. He made the semifinals in the only time he played at Hamburg and lost to clay specialist Andriy Medvedev. He won the prestigious Rome Masters once and made another semifinal in 1994. 

During his best performance at the Roland Garros in 1996, Sampras, famously defeated former French Open champions, Sergi Bruguera and Courier, from 2 sets to love down no less, in 5 sets. He needed another 5 sets to beat Todd Martin. The strain of 3 5-setters proved too much in the semifinals against Kafelnikov as Sampras was beaten in straight sets. These instances clearly prove Sampras had the ability to adjust playing on clay. According to the man himself:

I felt like I could have done better looking back at my time. Maybe tried a bigger racket at the French. I could've worked a little harder. I mean I worked hard but you know you always look back at your career and feel "I should've done this, I should've done that".

This adjustment proved a hindrance during his favourite Slam two weeks later as the big serving Dutchman Richard Krajicek beat him in straight sets in the quarterfinals, Sampras' only loss at SW19 between 1993 and 2000. With a 3rd round exit at Melbourne Park, Sampras' season was wobbling but he saved his season by winning the US open & the Tour Finals. The US Open included an epic quarterfinal win over Alex Corretja where Pistol Pete beat cramps & a match point. He was too tired to even lift his arms in victory. Pistol Pete decided it wasn't worthwhile to adjust his game for clay and give up his strengths on grass & hard courts. The following year (1997) was probably his 2nd best year on the tour during which he was number 1 throughout year and won 2 Slams, 2 Masters 1000s & the Tour Finals. 

This was predicated by the 90s where the surfaces were really polarized and diversified. The season was split and dominated by specialists. Bruguera, Muster etc were clay court specialists. Big serving Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Philippoussis et al would come into their own during the summer grass courts and indoor hard court/carpet seasons in the fall. The hot-in-the-zone big hitting players were much more dangerous on faster courts as they wouldn't be worn down in the battles of attrition that are ubiquitous these days. The absence of poly-strings would make it impossible for guys like Nadal or Djokovic hit passing shots from 20 yards beyond the baseline.

Sampras' Slam win percentage is really close to the "Big 3". Adjusted for 132 matches that Sampras played, Federer would have had 124 wins, Nadal 120 & Djokovic 121. Despite being handicapped by awful displays in the red dirt of Roland Garros where Nadal pretty much had a bye every year in Paris, Sampras is in the same ball park of the uniform era "Big 3". If we account for surface singularity and poly-strings, Sampras' record must probably be upgraded. There is no way Nadal hits this passing shot in the low bouncing 1990s zippers of SW19 especially in week 2 at Centre Court.

Much as I love Roger Federer and firmly believe he is GOAT, I cannot, in good conscience, deny that Federer hasn't benefited from the surface homogenization to which he adapted early unlike his contemporaries like Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian etc who were decimated by injuries as tennis entered the grinding baseline era. Those guys weren't used to the slog and their bodies broke down under the strain. We all know Federer's resume is not without holes and Nadal despite dominating Federer and Djokovic (either side of a 7 match losing streak), has still managed to just tie Sampras' Slam record. It just goes to show how good Pistol Pete was in the big matches.

Of his 14 Slam final wins, Pete Sampras won 8 in straight sets viz as many as Federer had when he was on 14 Slams. Nadal & Djokovic have just 4 and 2 straight sets wins so far. Sampras was pushed to 5 sets just once, same as Federer once again but 1 less than both Nadal (2) & Djokovic (2). That Federer's Slam records are eerily similar to Sampras is probably why many consider their 4th round meeting at SW19 as the changing of the guard. Sampras had a winning record against all his contemporary Slam winners except Richard Krajicek (4-6) whereas Federer's Achilles' Heel against Nadal is well documented.

Pistol Pete deserves more in the GOAT discussion. He combined the best of power serve & volley and power baseline tennis. Only Roger Federer can lay claim to that style of play. Roger Federer is still GOAT but Pistol Pete deserves his place in the pantheon of greats. Nadal & Djokovic are not done with their careers but at this point in time, the closest GOAT to Federer is Petros "Pete" Sampras.

P.S: I HATED Pete Sampras during his playing days. I was a Becker & Ivanisevic fan and Sampras would always end their runs at Slams. I derided him as nāi (dog in tamizh) because he'd hang his tongue out like a dog when he served but the bugger sure can play.

P.P.S: A detailed XLS file can be downloaded here. It contains detailed ranking points of each year before 2009 adjusted for the latest points system and some more detailed comparisons. If you find any errors please let me know so I can fix them.