Author Topic: agassi v sampras head 2 head  (Read 2800 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline david

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 29
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« on: March 18, 2005, 08:39:49 AM »
i was wondering what the final head 2 head score was between the two.  i have it 6-3 sampras in grand slams but i dont know about the rest

Offline Tennis4you

  • Administrator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 24868
  • Gender: Male
    • Tennis4you
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2005, 08:41:58 AM »
Allow me to check the ATP site for that info, one moment please.  :)

20-14 Sampras
Good Luck on the Court!!!
Scott Baker
http://www.tennis4you.com

Offline david

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 29
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2005, 08:44:08 AM »
that was quick are you always online?

Offline Tennis4you

  • Administrator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 24868
  • Gender: Male
    • Tennis4you
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2005, 08:49:45 AM »
I work from home and draw on the pc all day.  So I do nothing but sit in front of a pc or play tennis really.  With one click of a button I am on the forums.  :)
Good Luck on the Court!!!
Scott Baker
http://www.tennis4you.com

Offline david

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 29
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2005, 08:53:21 AM »
fair enough, thanks for the stat

Offline kittens25

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 11200
  • Gender: Male
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2005, 09:51:55 AM »
Sampras always won the big matches at Wimbledon and the U.S open.   Agassi won the big matches at the Aussie and French usually.   They split alot of matchups in Indian Wells and the Lipton(with its future name changes).

Offline david

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 29
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #6 on: March 18, 2005, 10:48:57 AM »
i think they only played roland garos once in 92 with agassi winning because sampras had not become the great player yet but i think agassi would have beet him any year on clay

Offline gm3106

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 3399
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2005, 01:52:23 PM »
It's funny that everyone thinks that Ande had Pete's number on clay, because Andre only leads 3-2 on clay against him, and Sampras one the last two:

Monte Carlo 1998 - straights to Pete
Houston 2002 SF- straights to Pete

Offline david

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 29
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2005, 04:58:28 AM »
98 agassi wasnt 2 good, so you cant say much about that

Offline gm3106

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 3399
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2005, 06:56:45 AM »
To be honest with you, the correlation betweent the outcome of Agassi and Sampras matches and the type of surface is not all that strong

Ausralian Open:

1995 Final: Agassi won
2000 SF: Agassi won

OK, so the slower highbouncing surface used at the AO obviously favours Agassi more, but in both matches Sampras was in a winning position, and he was only two points away from winning in the 2000 SF before Agassi somehow pulls out the win.

Clay:

Agassi leads 3-2.

Agassi marginaly leads the head to head on this surface, but at the FO I would always favour Agassi because of the best-of-five sets format which, because of the fact that surface suits Agassi's game more, increases the chanes of Andre winning.  It is debateable how much you can read into the last two defeats of Agassi on clay by Sampras because they were minor tune-up events, but they nonetheless proved that Sampras could beat him on clay.

Wimbledon:

Sampras leads 2-0.

These were the only times they met on grass and they were both at Wimbledon: the first time was in the 93 QF when Agassi was defending champion, and Sampras only barely got past him in five sets, and the second occassion was a complete demolition in the 99 final, when Agassi was probably in the best form of his career.

US OPEN:

Sampras leads 4-0

There 's no doubt that Sampras had his number here on this fast hard court: in the four meetings none of them went to four sets, and the 1990 final was a straights sets demolition.

CARPET:

Sampras leads 5-2

Sampras, not surprisingly, also has his number on the fast indoor surface of carpet.

CONCLUSION: Playing on slower, higher bounce surfaces like the AO and clay increased Agassi's chances of beating Sampras, but Sampras had a better chance of beating Agassi on these surfaces than Andre had of beating Pete on faster surfaces such as grass, fast hardcourt (USO). This is shown by the fact that Agassi only marginally leads the clay head to head, and because Sampras was in a winning position on both of their meetings at the AO- a type of hardcourt that favours Agassi more.

In contrast, a combined record on fast surfaces  (grass, carpet, USO) of 11-2 to Sampras, shows that Agassi could barely make a dent on Pete's favoured surfaces, probably because it increased the number of points Sampras could win on hi first serve, and therefore prevent Agassi from taking control of the point from the baseline.

Offline philip

  • Tennis Enthusiast
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #10 on: March 19, 2005, 07:14:57 AM »
Quote from: "Tennis4you"
I work from home and draw on the pc all day.  So I do nothing but sit in front of a pc or play tennis really.  With one click of a button I am on the forums.  :)


what a lucky man you are, that would be nice to be able to do that!

Offline kittens25

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 11200
  • Gender: Male
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #11 on: March 19, 2005, 10:36:30 AM »
I agree.   Sampras had a fair chance against Agassi on any surface, at any time.   Agassi had a good chance on his favorite surfaces, when he was in peak form.   On Samprass favorite surfaces, or on any surface when Agassi was not in form, he had virtually no chance.

Offline david

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 29
agassi v sampras head 2 head
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2005, 05:03:53 AM »
you people don't half go into things in detail, its not interesting its just boring over analysing takes just takes the fun out of it