Sampras: Will Federer overhaul him?
Andy Schooler ranks his best players of Wimbledon's Open era - do you agree? < Back to Story
-
Day 13 round-up
-
Day 12 round-up
-
Day 11 round-up
-
Player Profiles
Wimbledon History: A glance back in time
Who's the greatest?
Andy Schooler chooses his top Wimbledon players
Wimbledon Photo Galleries
Wimbledon - Day 13
Pictures from men's final day at the All England Club
Wimbledon - Day 12
Pictures from ladies' final day at the All England Club.
Wimbledon - Day 11
Pictures from men's semi-finals day at the All England Club.
Wimbledon - Day 10
Pictures from ladies' semi-finals day at the All England Club.
Wimbledon - Day Nine
Pictures from men's quarter-finals day at the All England Club.
Wimbledon - Day Eight
Pictures from women's quarter-finals day at the All England Club.
Wimbledon - Day Seven
All the best pictures from 'Manic Monday' at the All England Club.
Wimbledon - Day Six
All the best pictures from day six at the All England Club.
Comments (32)
Nick Wills says...
Having been a Wimbledon addict for 53 years I have no doubt that the four greatest men players (as their records indicate!) are Laver, Borg, Sampras and Federer. It's impossible to pick just one as the greatest as each possessed a unique genius. I'm only sad about three things in a (near!) lifetime's watching tennis: that I was too young to see much of the wonderful Lew Hoad and Pancho Gonzales, the very mediocre standard of men's doubles and the decline of serve and volley (thank heaven for Mario Ancic!). For people below 50 may I say something about Rod Laver. He, even more than Federer, made tennis look simple in the way that Bradman and Hobbs must have made batting look simple. He combined power and subtlety, forcing his opponent way out of court with the precision of his left handed serve. His volleying was almost faultless and his smash unerring. His running topspin backhand pass down the line was a dream. His anticipation was fantastic; he was a master of angles and he was almost never wrong footed. Not least, he was unrivalled in his modesty, manners and sportsmanship. Not once did I ever doubt that he loved every minute of being out on court. And, like most of his generation, he played doubles at the highest level. Ask Borg, Sampras and Federer who was the greatest! (oh, and he never bored the spectators by 'endless' bouncing of the ball before serving - once was enough. Rafa and Novak please note! No grunts, no shaking of a fist at his opponent and no obsessive and pointless looking up at the box whenever he lost a point - and no palm slapping with his doubles partner after every point. He didn't need to self indulge in rubbish like that. Rod was never the wunderkind that the other 3 were He looked for a time as if he would be a perennial runner up. But nobody worked harder to build himself up physically and master every shot in the book. His concentration and determination were fantastic.
Posted 22:35 27th June 2008
Judith Williams says...
You were mistaken in leaving out Andre Agassi. The greatest, a true ambassador of the sport, he played magnificently and was always a sport whether he won or lost! The Greatest!
Posted 10:52 24th June 2008
Martin Gall says...
First let me startwith the ladies. To suggest that the williams sisters have destroyed tennis is a bit of a joke. They are playing the game that Chris Evert played just that they have added the dimension of power. I know rthat Martina has said that if she had Venus' physical gifts that she would have been unstoppable. Venus just never learned to play tennis the way it is supposed to be played- the "Martina Way". The Nick Bollateri tennis academy has a lot to answer for ; check how many players have been schooled there; Borg and Lendl and Connors and that crowd came along and "uglied up" the game and now 99% of players both male and female play the same ugly game. I think Martina and Steffi are 1&2 but if Monica Seles had not been injured she would have dominated for 10 years straight -- not a beautiful thought(not Monica the game) Now to the mens game. My favourite players are Sampras McEnroe Edberg and Federer. On the old grass of Wimbeldon Sampras would win most of the time if not all the time. Federer plays in a different time when those with any idea of playing on grass is very limited, but he plays the beautiful game. He is not a serve and volleyer, but his all court game is superior to any other today.I dont believe that he could have beaten Mcenroe or Sampras on the old Wimbeldon turf. Edberg had the most beautiful backhand volley that is humanly possible, McEnroe's touch and finesse were sublime, Sampras combined touch ,power and athleticism to a degree never seen before. So in tennis heaven some day I'm going to watch Martina and Steffi have it out as the preliminary to the riches whic hSampras McEnroe Federer and Edberg will bring.
Posted 18:21 22nd June 2008
Megan Gibbes says...
Have you forgotten about the famous New Zealander, Anthony Wilding, who won Wimbledon for 4 consecutive times between 1910 and 1913 and narrowly lost his fifth attempt for the 1914 title. He was ranked as number 1 in 1911,1912 and 1913. He also won the Australasian Championships in the Davis cup. He played first class cricket, twice for Canterbury and in addition to this, he was educated at Cambridge University and qualified as a barrister and solicitor. Sadly,while still at the top of his game,he went to serve his country and in May 1915, he was killed in action during World War 1. What a man what an achievement!
Posted 13:23 22nd June 2008
Olutosin Olawumi says...
How about Andrea Agasi ? what do you think, I think he is one of the greatest player with all his qualities.
Posted 12:07 21st June 2008
John Curley says...
1. John McEnroe, if he hadn't met Tatum O'Neill would have won at least 5 Wimbledons. 2. Billy Jean King, had Margaret Court (what about her?) maria Bueno and Chris Evert to contend with.
Posted 23:46 20th June 2008
Linton Cornwall says...
McEnroe has got to be in the top 5. We are talking about tennis talent and performance not behaviour.
Posted 20:35 20th June 2008
Ian Mccann says...
Billie Jean King is definately the best and the most modest womens champion. Rod Laver is inmy view better perhaps than anyone with the exception of Borg How about the worst player at Wimbledon-I would nominateFrancoise Duerr !
Posted 19:32 20th June 2008
Paul C says...
For me Borg had the lot, how can anyone forget his match with John Mc, I would put Borg right at the top, based on the amount of class players he destroyed
Posted 18:33 20th June 2008
Jojo Dancer says...
i never watched laver or borg but i was privileged to watch becker, sampras, agassi and federer at wimbledon. for my money becker and agassi were outstanding but fall short of sampras and federer. as for who would win if they were both at their peak at wimbledon, well i think that people here are selling sampras short. it is true that federer is the more complete player and is much less prone to making mistakes than pete but on his day, when playing his best, pete was unstoppable. therefore for me is a very even contest and one unfortunately we never got to see
Posted 16:08 20th June 2008
Christopher Woodward says...
Anyone who has followed the game for the last 50 years will have no doubt - Bjorg. His number of consecutive wimbledon titles may have been matched. However, amongst these three of them were Wimbledon and French Open titles also consecutively. None of these others players have ever done this even once. Only Agassi (not mentioned in the top five) has won both titles, not in the same year though. Had Bjorg concentrated on Wimbledon and not done too much elsewhere we may well have been seeing him for another ten years at Wimbledon
Posted 15:36 20th June 2008
Iain Wilson says...
While i agree that at the moment Sampras is the number 1 i was astonished to read the comments by John Mc. How can you possibly say Federer has had it easy. Thats a stupid comment and comes from someone who obviously knows nothing about the game. To say Sampras is a million miles ahead of Federer is another stupid comment. It is obvious that your comments are a personal attack on Federer and not a reasonable argument about who is best. No one that has played the game would agree with such comments and they will all agree that Federer is a tennis great. I am sure he will win wimbledon as many times as Sampras and will pass his record of Grand Slam wins. Give Federer some credit instead of having a cheap shot at him.
Posted 09:07 20th June 2008
John Mc says...
Pete Sampras is the best a million miles, on his best form federed couldnt live with him, Federer it has to be said has had no one to beat, its been so easy for him until last years final when nadal pushed him, hewitt has played a good match since 02 and roddick since 05 other than them since sampras and agassi went at the best maybe 10 years ago theres been no one, even nadal is a bit of a one trick pony, yes he won queens and was runner up last year at wimbledon but thats all, other clay he does nothing, its time for him to prove, also Novak djokovic although i fear this year is to early is a top player and may along with rafa finally provide federer with a test. Roger has had it easy FACT, if any proof were neede just look act the fact nadals been no2 for 3 years and djokovic for 2. Sampras is in total differnt universe to federer.
Posted 15:16 19th June 2008
Rodger Pillay says...
I totally agree Schooler's top 4 mens rating but then would have chosen Agassi instead of Becker, he was a able to change the perception that grass was for serve and volley! Federer is still playing the game and would certainly have enough time prove himself to number 1, although it is only now that Nadal and Djorkovich can pose real challenges to him.Sampras had better competition during his reign!
Posted 12:09 19th June 2008
Bennis Bennis says...
Federer at his peak vs Sampras at his peak, who wins? i will put my mony on Federer. While Sampras had a good offensive game, his defensive game cannot match Federer. If they play 5 matches, I belive Federer will comes out on top more often then Sampras. Therefore I will rank Federer as no.1 and Sampras no. 2.
Posted 11:52 19th June 2008
Mcebisi Mtshali says...
while roger is great, i believe that he has only really had to compete against two better than average players, being rafa and novak, and because they have yet to peak, i believe fed has had it easy compared to sampras. pete went up againts really great players in pat rafter, becker, agassi, gus kuerten etc. i think sampras is still the greatest of all time even tho the french open eluded him.
Posted 10:37 19th June 2008
Olanzo Jackson says...
I kno i mite be to young to argue a piont but i've been asking elderlies all over about these great tennis players... Pete was a great athlete,great player but every one believe Roger is the world greatest play,,, look at this guy stats and still running, it is so sad he trying so hard to add the french to it but this guy is class on all sirface,,, to me Roger is my number one and not just a great player but also a great personality as well..On the women side yes no.1 is ok but i am not satify wit Venus in at five,,, i would of love to see Martina Hengis up there... watch a great player she was.
Posted 01:46 19th June 2008
Dev Dutt says...
lendil king of clay never won wimbledon, ken Roswall best back hand nevr won. best final smith and nastase first on sunday after rain. no mention. I hav been in person to all the finals since santana won the wimbledon, no one has been so good as laver with old lines judgedes rain affected balls etc, etc and no proffessional payments etc. media ,trainers phsio. imidiate on court treatment , scan etc. or spray of anesthetics on abdomen in final againt Nastase etc. Laver stands out on its own,as agreatest player of all, Bekers, Kerry Pekers or Mary Dckers all come and go but remain in debate whuch can go on forever.
Posted 20:21 18th June 2008
Gavin Mcelhinney says...
The author has argued his case well for the inclusion of his chosen players in the respective top fives, however the level of competition they faced doesn¿t seem to have been taken into account. Borg¿s rivals were not in the same league as Federer¿s. When his equal finally appeared, in the shape of a young up and coming McEnroe, Borg decided to abandon tennis in what should have been his prime years. For me its Sampras, Federer, Laver, McEnroe then Borg.
Posted 14:28 18th June 2008
Olivia Merlin says...
Though, I agree with the five top Men analysis, I donnot agree with the fifth Woman. How can people think that Venus Williams is a great champion ? She is not able to hold a top position (i.e. number 1 or 2), like the Queen Martina has done it, outside the Grand Slam titles.
Posted 08:38 18th June 2008