Roger Federer and Pete Sampras are legends who have made massive contributions to the game of tennis. It is because of players of their stature, that watching tennis has been worthwhile and invaluable. They played just once against each other in 2001 Wimbledon, wherein Federer squeezed past Sampras in a gripping 5 set match.
It wouldn’t be wrong to say that the baton was passed on from an ebbing legend to the future maestro of tennis. They dominated in different eras altogether, so it would be unfair to compare both of them. It is essentially because the approach of the game has entirely changed over the years; right from the technology used in the racquets to the physical and mental training and even the grass at Wimbledon which now provides bounce to the ball.
But for tennis aficionados, it would be a delight to pit them against each other and find out who has better results.
Pete Sampras turned pro in 1988 and retired around the time when Federer’s career had just about started to flourish. Federer had an initial vantage of two years until Nadal came into picture in 2005. Whereas, Sampras faced heavy competition from players like Boris Becker and Andre Agassi, who were at the pinnacle during early 1990s. In between 2003 and 2005, Federer had already won five grand slam titles, a major reason why he had an edge over other players.
But, in order to come close to comparing them, let us have a look at some numbers that might help draw a comparison between them.
I am pursuing B.Sc.(Hons.) Mathematics from Jesus and Mary College, Delhi University. I am an avid follower of tennis and enjoy watching cricket as well. My interest lies in portrait sketching and swimming.