Who's the GOAT? Sampras thrashes Vilas

Eurosport - Thu, 01 Apr 08:00:00 2010

Pete Sampras has comprehensively beaten Argentine Guillermo Vilas in three sets to make it safely through to the quarter-finals of our Greatest of All Time tournament.

TENNIS 2002 Pete Sampras - 0

Several of our more astute readers spotted that a big difference in these two players was the tennis technology available to them at the time.

Vilas played with a wooden racquet in the 1970s and 80s while Sampras only turned pro in 1988 with a lighter-weight composite racquet.

The only real point of contention between you is who would win the set on clay between these two - with Sampras easily winning the grass and hard court clashes.

Some of you point to the fact that Vilas, very much a clay court specialist, only managed to win one French Open title, in 1977.

But he was competing at the same time as, and frequently beaten by, Bjorn Borg - virtually unbeaten on the surface at the time - finishing runner-up at Roland Garros on another three occasions.

And the Argentine also won the US Open, also in 1977 - back when it was played on clay - beating Jimmy Connors in four sets in the final.

However, there is no doubt about who would emerge victorious from this clash, with Sampras winning 5-7 6-3 6-3 to earn a second-round encounter with John McEnroe.

Poll results (at 1230 BST on April 1): Guillermo Vilas v Pete Sampras

Vilas: 13 per cent (792 votes)

Sampras: 87 per cent (5175 votes)

Best of your comments:

Bocala12: A reason why it's hard to compare past and present … Vilas' wooden racquet. A lot of the 'big games' of today can be attributed, at least in part, to the improvement in tennis technology. You really need to think about both at their peak … and with the same kind of racquet. You wouldn't be seeing these 140+mph serves if they were still using wooden racquets

hubert_haudique: Quite an easy result to predict this time. Vilas will win easily on clay, like 6-3. These are 2 of the most powerful players. Sampras will win easily on grass. His serve will be decisive on hard court.

tonyrear2002: I would say that while Vilas only one the one French Open, he also wont he US Open on clay in 1977. The other thing is that he got to three other French Open finals. Who beat him in those finals? Bjorn Borg - probably the only other player at the time consistently better on clay, and an all-time great on that surface - and Mats Wilander, who would go on to win another 2 French Opens.

carolcoupland: I think Sampras will win 3-0 but the clay court will be close maybe a tie-break. Grass and hard court will be 6-3 6-1 to Sampras. More to do with their style of tennis than the racquets that they used or how fit they were.

WHO'S THE GOAT? - THE DRAW

Top half

1-Roger Federer

---------------------> Roger Federer 6-0 6-2 6-0

16-Jim Courier

-

8-Mats Wilander

---------------------> Boris Becker 6-2 4-6 7-5

9-Boris Becker

-

5-Ivan Lendl

---------------------> Rod Laver 6-2 5-7 7-6

12-Rod Laver

-

13-John Newcombe

--------------------> Jimmy Connors 6-4 6-2 6-2

4-Jimmy Connors

+++

Bottom half

3-Bjorn Borg

------------------> Bjorn Borg 6-2 6-2 6-2

14-Ken Rosewall

-

6-Andre Agassi

------------------> Andre Agassi 4-6 7-6 6-3

11-Rafael Nadal

-

7-John McEnroe

------------------> John McEnroe 5-7 6-4 6-2

10-Stefan Edberg

-

15-Guillermo Vilas

------------------> Pete Sampras 5-7 6-3 6-3

2-Pete Sampras

Log on to Eurosport Yahoo! on Friday when Simon Reed runs the rule over the first quarter-final match-up: Roger Federer v Boris Becker

Eurosport

Comment 1 - 18 of 18

Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

  1. Jeff I think it says in the article that the three sets­ represent hard court, clay court, and grass court. So­ it those that win 3-0 or 2-1 merely would win on all­ three surfaces over their opponent or on just two of­ the three. But still enough to secure the victory.

    From Brian, on Tue 6 Apr 2:54

  2. Don't forget Vilas had a lot of heart.. you­ can't measure that sort of thing....

    From cybershot, on Mon 5 Apr 9:16

  3. First of all I would drop Newcombe and Rosewall and­ replace them with Don Budge and Bill Tilden. And I­ would also say that Rafa would beat Agassi. Rafa covers­ too much ground for Agassi to hit the ball by him.

    From RaiderCO, on Mon 5 Apr 6:16

  4. Roger only lost 2 games to Jim? LOLLLLLLLLLLL

    From Michael, on Sun 4 Apr 11:42

  5. It would have made more sense to have the all-timers­ from each decade of their dominance to compete against­ one another and to have only gone back to the 1960s,­ the decade that featured the advent of open tennis.­ That would allow for changes in equipment, training,­ etc. to be at least somewhat taken into account, yet­ would recognize the era when amateurs and professionals­ both were allowed to play the majors (although there­ was some difficulties with that proposition from 1968­ through approximately 1973, when there were multiple­ classifications of pros, some of whom could play the­ majors, some of whom could not). Players from the same­ decade, generally speaking, would be facing similar­ tools. So you would have the best from the '60s­ playing one another, the best from the '70s, etc.­ Then you could attempt the almost impossible task of­ having the best from each decade play one another for­ GOAT.

    From Michael, on Sun 4 Apr 6:14

  6. Yes Agassi would be Rafa..Agassi held his style of play­ to a different standard than Rafa has yet to prove he­ can hold his style of play with those weak knees..dont­ get me wrong..these are my two favorite players of­ all-time! I would love to see a doubles match with­ nadal/agassi vs sampras/federer and watch those big­ serves meet the greatest returners ever to play the­ game..and who cares about agassi's drug spur..can­ you blame him for the childhoood he had? you people are­ soooooo perfect aren't ya..their human beings get­ over it

    From Wettlin, on Sun 4 Apr 2:42

  7. Agassi should loose to Nadal

    From Dolores, on Sun 4 Apr 1:09

  8. what an utterly absurd stupid and pointless exercise

    From Tennis Chump, on Sun 4 Apr 0:11

  9. lol how could agassi beat nada?

    From de_outrageous_1, on Sat 3 Apr 22:56

  10. What the hell is Laver doing at 12th seed? And where­ are Don Budge and Bill Tilden? Obviously, this thing­ isn't for grownups.

    From marks, on Sat 3 Apr 12:17

  11. can someone please explain why some of these matches­ are best 2 out of 3 and some 3 out of 5??? very­ confused

    From Jeffrey, on Sat 3 Apr 8:27

  12. LoLoL... that's a good one!

    From M, on Sat 3 Apr 3:55

  13. Sampras was such a cute little boy. Love his smile.

    From , on Sat 3 Apr 3:16

  14. Federer wouldn't beat Courier now 0, 2, 0. ­ Courier is the type of player that would give Federer­ fits....

    From Lee B, on Fri 2 Apr 10:12

  15. There are some egregious mistakes: Wilander over­ Becker, Nadal over Agassi.

    From charlesgso, on Fri 2 Apr 7:25

  16. its deffo gonna be a federer vs sampras final!

    From charlesgso, on Fri 2 Apr 3:35

  17. Thrashed? Says Sampras dropped a set.

    From laithtarr, on Fri 2 Apr 3:24

  18. andre beat nadal? huh?

    From doni g, on Fri 2 Apr 3:01
Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

Not already a Yahoo! user ? to get a free Yahoo! Account