The Globe and Mail
Monday, August 25, 2003
If there was a mantra to Pete Sampras's career, it was, "I just let my tennis do the talking."
He repeated that over and over in recent years when asked about his place in tennis history.
That place is certainly secure and probably supreme after he officially announced his retirement yesterday.
He won a record 14 Grand Slam titles and finished No. 1 in the computer rankings an unprecedented six (1993-98) years in a row.
There was only one thing missing to make his record immaculate � a French Open title.
Brought up on California hard courts, he never developed a knack for sliding on clay and never really learned to balance his natural first-strike shot-making with the greater patience required on clay.
Then there was the thalassemia, the anemia-like condition that caused him to struggle in hot, humid conditions.
In 1996, he had his best chance to win in Paris. After a dramatic run just weeks after his coach Tim Gullikson died of brain cancer, he faced eventual winner Yevgeny Kafelnikov in the semi-finals.
He had beaten former champions Sergi Bruguera and Jim Courier in dramatic five-set matches but suddenly couldn't deal with weather that turned steamy. After losing the first set to Kafelnikov in a tiebreak, he faded miserably, losing the second and third sets 6-0, 6-2.
When Andre Agassi won the French Open in 1999, making him only the fifth man to win each Grand Slam event during his career, some observers speculated his feat was greater than Sampras's larger total of Grand Slam titles.
But Sampras's achievements at Wimbledon (seven titles to one for Agassi) and at the U.S. Open (five compared to two for Agassi) quickly ends that argument.
Sampras finished 20-14 against his greatest rival and, perhaps most tellingly, won all four times they played at the U.S. Open, the last three being epic contests.
The most recent was his 6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4 triumph in last year's final. He seemed a spent force entering the event as the 17th seed and without a singles title in 33 events spanning more than two years.
Greg Rusedski, beaten in five sets in the third round, proclaimed Sampras was, "a half a step" slower.
Brad Gilbert, now Andy Roddick's coach, was with Agassi from 1994 until the end of 2001.
"The 2002 U.S. Open final was disappointing for me," Gilbert said. "Andre was playing 50 times better � his record, everything. But unfortunately when he plays Pete, everything gets thrown out the window. Pete is somehow able to raise his game to another level.
"But you've can't take anything away from Pete. He's had Andre's number in a few big matches."
Sampras's own explanation of his uncanny ability to play well in pressure situations was characteristically uncomplicated. "Muscle memory," he said more than once about how he was able to summon his best in the clutch.
His first Grand Slam title, the 1990 U.S. Open, was won when he was 19. He blitzed no less a trio than Ivan Lendl, John McEnroe and Agassi in his last three matches.
He now refers to that breakthrough as a "premature blip." But after he won his second big one � at Wimbledon in 1993 � he dominated for the rest of the decade.
His all-round game was a model of power and fluid ball-striking that made tennis purists appreciate not only its efficiency but also its aesthetics.
Frequently criticized for not being as "colourful" as predecessors Jimmy Connors and McEnroe � he did not waiver in being his own man, win or lose.
His inglorious final exit from Wimbledon last year � a five-set loss to lucky loser George Bastl of Switzerland � was not followed by a fit of pique or ducking out on his commitments. He arrived in the interview room obviously "gutted," as the Brits say, but ready to fulfill his obligations.
That was typical Sampras, as typical as the sublime tennis that made him the best player of his time, and very likely the best to play the sport.