Sure to spark intense debate, Pete Sampras claims tennis players are the finest athletes in the whole wide world.
Gearing up for an exhibition match with old sparring partner Andre Agassi next week in Macau, Sampras’s contentious assertion will no doubt stir the emotions of rival sports enthusiasts across the globe.
Among others, elite boxers, gymnasts, cross-country skiers, surf lifesavers, triathletes, basketballers, handballers, cyclists, squash and soccer players and AFL footballers – in no particular order – could all argue they’d be the most supreme athletes on the planet. Sampras, though, says tennis stars ace the lot.
“People don’t talk about it. I mean, in tennis, these athletes are incredible,” the legendary American told ATP World Tour Uncovered.
“What these guys do on the run … the guys that aren’t maybe playing well and they come back – they’re down two sets to love and they have the resolve to come back and can go on and on.
“You look at the NBA and you look at some of these guys and they’re doing all these things and I think ‘that’s the best athlete’.
“But (then) I think tennis players are the best athletes, in my opinion.
“I’m not being biased. I know what it takes, I know hand-eye coordination. In an individual sport, you can’t hide.”
The vexing question of which sport boasts the greatest athletes is, of course, one which will never be truly answered, and probably best saved for backyard barbecues.
But Sampras’s qualified opinion is certainly worthy of consideration.
This is the very man whose clutch serve, breathtaking backhand and unrivalled work ethic delivered him 14 grand slam titles, a record six successive year-end No.1 rankings and $US43 million in prize money during a career statistically inferior only to the mighty Roger Federer.
There was little luck involved, even if Sampras says so himself.
“It was huge,” Sampras said of his crowning achievement, the half-dozen straight years at the pinnacle of his sport.
“I did it for five years and it was a close race at the end of the sixth year; (Marcelo) Rios was pushing me and I remember I was over in Europe and I played like seven straight weeks to get it.
“And I wanted it. (Jimmy) Connors had five; I wanted six.
“And to be consistent in any sport is tough to do, and six years in a row is a lot of work, some stress involved and a great achievement.
“To dominate for the six years was not easy … I sacrificed and worked hard and won some tennis matches along the way, but it wasn’t easy.”
Hence why even Sampras marvels at the remarkable Federer, who surpassed the American’s grand slam tally with a 15th major crown this year – at just 27.
Sampras was 31 when he won his 14th and last slam at the 2002 US Open, yet is not the slightest bit surprised the Swiss superstar has already established a new benchmark.
“I accepted that he was going to break this record a few years ago,” Sampras said, in a rare interview with the humble champion.
“I mean, he was winning them with ease and was obviously a great player and he was just dominating the sport.
“So I knew it was just a matter of time. If not at Wimbledon, then the US Open or (at) the majors next year.
“He was going to do it eventually. So I’m not bitter by any means.
“If anything, I’m amazed by what this guy’s been able to do.”
Retired now for seven years and happily married for 10 with actress Bridgette Wilson, Sampras admits filling the tennis void has its ups and downs.
“I’m still trying to figure it out – retirement’s a work in progress,” he said.
“I’ve got two kids – six and three – which is a lot of work and I’m enjoying life; playing golf, having some fun, playing poker and basketball and having some fun with that.
“Life’s good. I couldn’t complain. I wanted to be the centre on the tennis court. Other than that, I was pretty content just being sort of put to the side.”
He satisfies his craving for the game these days sometimes on the seniors circuit but mostly playing exhibitions.
“Still playing okay,” Sampras said.
Damn right he is; the Washington-born, LA-based Sampras even upstaged Federer in one match of their exhibition series last year in Asia.
“Still playing well and hitting the serve like I used to be able to do and still hitting a few volleys,” he said.
“What is does for me, when I’m home, it keeps me focused. It keeps me sharp, it keeps me in shape. That’s what I’m looking for.
“It’s not like I need to play tennis matches in front of people.
“I’m not going to come out of retirement and I’m not going to beat some of these young kids. I’m not too worried about it.”
Dining on strawberries and cream, rather than taming his rivals and enthralling royalty on The All England Club’s Centre Court, is more difficult for Sampras.
“I miss Wimbledon,” he said.
“I miss the majors. I miss the buzz of winning, playing in front of a lot of people.
“I don’t miss the stress, the pressure, the travelling. I don’t miss those days.
“But I miss being active. I miss the focus. But those days are over and now it’s off to some other things.
“I miss it. I miss it a few weeks of the year but, other than that, I’m pretty content.”
Jameswm
Guest
No sledge Not endurance - they move anaerobically and catch their breath before the next point, so put that one away. Golf requires more technical precision than tennis. Skill and technical precision are the same thing. Lleyton won 2 grand slams and made it to world no.1 without any particular power (it's his biggest shortcoming). Some have power, others don't. Mental toughness - whoop-dee-doo, show me a sport that doesn't require that at the top level. What about catching a bomb knowing you're about to be smashed by 4 All Blacks? What about knowing 2 billion people are watching you and the last 4 years of your training comes down to what happens in the next 10 seconds? Compare a Decathlete on your criteria: ENDURANCE - tennis players catch their breath before their next point. They play for 1-2 hours normally, but have rests every 2 games. Decathletes run a 1500 but many don't take it that seriously. They also have to run a 400, do 3 Long Jumps, many High Jumps, then on the 2nd day, for the 8th event, summon the energy for a pole vault, the most physically demanding event of the lot. I'll award that one to the Decathletes. POWER - not even a contest. Tennis players blast serves, but anyone can smack a ball. The shot putt alone requires oodles more power than belting a serve (and I've done both a lot), plus Decathletes have to run a 100 and do a LJ, which require incredible leg power, and also throw a discus and a javelin. That one's a big win for the Decathletes. TECHNICAL ABILITY/SKILL - Yes the timing and hand-eye co-ordination are a big thing with tennis. Get it a bit wrong and you're all over the shop. Serving, backhand, top spin, slice, volley, tactics too - all crucial. However the technical precision of say pole vault is immense and takes much practice to master. Many co-ordinated people can pick up a tennis racket and play well straight off. There is also a lot of skill involved in the throwing events and High Jump. And sprinting involves more skill than people realise. SPEED - Obviously speed is the basis of any Decathlete's ability. It is the basis of your 100, 400, hurdles and Long Jump, and important with Pole Vault too. You need to be in the top 1% of the population for speed before you're even in the ball game. Tennis players can be slugs and still succeed, though obviously the quicker ones are at an advantage. be in the top 10% of the population and it's good enough. Chalk up another win for the Decathletes. MENTAL TOUGHNESS - the concentration over the 100, 3 LJs, 3 x shot putt, a HJ competition, the pain of a 400, then back up for the hurdles, concentrate for 3 discus throws, get through say 10-12 Pole Vault leaps, focus for the javelin then try to run a 1500 when your legs are burning - these guys know what mental toughness is every bit as much as a tennis player does. make a mistake in one of your events and you're out of the running. You can't get it back. Stuff up two crucial points in tennis and you can lose a set, but you can always come back and win the next one. The Lyndsay Davenport example (sorry to point out the bloody obvious) was to show you can be entirely unathletic and still succeed in tennis, but you sure as hell can't in athletics. And you're wrong about the League players with muffin tops - they aren't great athletes, but they might be great players. They're pussies because go and watch them train for a week, then go and watch a triathlete or an AFL player train for a week. Or a boxer. You'll see who the tough athletes are.
sledgeandhammer
Guest
James, sorry to point out the bloody obvious, but Lindsay Davenport is a woman, Usain is a man. Also, appearance counts for little in my opinion. A lot of 1st Grade rugby league players have muffin tops, doesn't mean they aren't great athletes. Also, being muscle bound can inhibit an athletes flexibility, speed and ability to generate power. Tennis to me is like non contact martial arts. It has a similar approach in terms of kinetics and mental preparation and requires absolute technical precision. You can take up footy as a teenager and become a champion, but tennis players need to start dedicated training from a young age in order to reach the top. The fact is that tennis players are fantastic athletes and while it's hard to compare sports, they certainly have a pretty amazing skillset - endurance, power, technical ability, skill, speed and incredible mental toughness. Let's not call these men and women pussies just cause they don't physically belt each other.
Jameswm
Guest
Tennis - bloody pussies. Lyndsay Davenport made it to world no.1 and she's entirely unathletic. Bever fever was closest to the mark - go for the top Decathlete in the world, and yes I'm biased. They have to do sprints, jumps, throws, pole vault and 1500, although most aren't great 1500 runners. So they have speed, stamina, strength, agility and gymnastic ability (ever tried pole vaulting?). No hand eye co-ordination needed, but all those field events require a huge amount of skill. After decathletes, I'd probably go for AFL players (the Paul Kelly type not the Barry Hall type), and I'm a rugby man. Skill, strength, speed and stamina all rolled into one. Rugby players don't have the same stamina - they don't have to run as far, though they match up and/or surpass on the others. Soccer is too far behind on strength and they don't do anything like the running an AFL player does in a match either. Pete's kidding himself - tennis wouldn't be close to up there. Boxing would be way ahead too - another good example. Even the sprinters - there is more skill in that than everyone realises, and they are just supremely fit as well. Lyndsay Davenport a better athlete than Usain Bolt - how could anyone argue that?
mushi
Roar Guru
I remember vaguely an article a few years back that had water polo coming out number one amongst sports at one of the Olympics after a battery of tests on endurance, speed, explosiveness, skill set etc. But the problem with this is what are the criteria and how to weigh them. For example an NFL player versus an AFL player, the NFL player is bigger, faster, more agile, stronger and excels in his chosen skill set whilst the AFL player has far more endurance and has a far more well rounded set of skills. Neither player could excel (with their current body types and physical attributes) in the other sport, they would need to change. So how can you say one is a better athlete than the other? Personally I’d lean towards an NBA player where the basic physical requirements for height, coordination, endurance and explosiveness are all in the freakish level whilst the skill set is also very technical. You need a base level of athletic and physical attributes to play the game. But then the argument can still be made that whilst they have great core body strength they lack the brute force of other sports and whilst highly skilled is hardly at the level of tennis or even soccer.
Chris Beck
Guest
Ice hockey comes before tennis, and before anything else I can think of. It has the physical contact, speed, and hand-eye coordination that other sports have, all while wearing ice skates.
True Tah
Guest
I would argue that boxers have to be the best athletes. They need supreme eye-hand co-ordination, amazing stamina, upper body strength, core strength, the agility to slip punches, courage as a single punch could knock you out and the fact is, there is no place to hide in the ring. Maybe its the gladiator in me.
mossy
Roar Rookie
Free Dictionary Online definition of athlete: A person possessing the natural or acquired traits, such as strength, agility, and endurance, that are necessary for physical exercise or sports, especially those performed in competitive contexts... Under this definition, a mobile field sport would have to get the nod as they have to possess all three. Field Hockey and Round Ball probably lack the body contact to sit at the table here. Union and League are more anaerobic than aerobic so lack endurance under a strict physiological definition. Triathlon lacks agility; while tennis misses out in strength. So perhaps Australian Football players would get the nod. No bias here, i am from NSW.
bever fever
Guest
Sampras has said this before its not new, singles tennis is very physically and mentally demanding - no doubt much more mentally demanding than team sports IMO. But as far as being supreme all round athletes i think he is wrong, that ideally should go to the gold medal decathelete,
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Someone show bias towards their own sport? Who could have imagined that that was possible. I think Korfballers are underestimated.
katzilla
Roar Guru
'I’m not being biased' ..............Now if Michael Jordan or Ali had come out and said 'Tennis players are blah blah blah' then that argument holds weight. What a muppet.
bever fever
Guest
What a surprise that a post from you had to somehow have a go at aussie rules, talk about paranoia, elbusto's twin.
westy
Guest
Pass pete's comments onto Usain Bolt and Asafa powell.
Robb
Guest
I don't think you can call them the "best" but they do have to do a lot of things. Speed, simply unbelievable hand eye co-ordination, power, endurance (to a point - not many sports let you sit down for a minute every 10). I don't think AFL has much of a claim though - and if it does so does RL (which requires a little less fitness, but a lot more power and just as good ball skills as AFL). As all round athletes tennis players are probably near the top. Soccer requires a good mix of speed and skills too - but then again any sport which requires no upper body strength whatsoever can't really claim to have the best athletes. Did anyone watch Australias greatest athlete (which to be honest didn't prove much except that Andrew Symonds and Billy Slater are better at AFL than Brett Deledio).
bever fever
Guest
Pete is obviously biased in his POV. Play quite a lot of tennis and trust me you dont have to be a supreme athlete to play doubles, you can play all day without raising a sweat, once you get angles down pat etc. What i will say is you can get the best athletes across a range of codes and still not come to any 100% conclusion.
Bay35Pablo
Roar Guru
Oohhhh. Good debate. Pete is onto a tough one here. My first thought was "pussies, try the Hawaiian Ironman ..." and that triathletes must whip everyone. But then I realised, they are "just" grinding it out on the swim, bike and run. It is pure fitness and mental strength. At no stage during that do they need to return a 150kmh serve back into an area smaller than some bathrooms. So tennis does need to grind it out for hours, often under the baking sun, with fine motor coordination and had eye skills. AFL might come close. I'll have to think about this one .....