Roger Federer and Pete Sampras are two of the best tennis players in history, with a total of 15 Wimbledon titles between them. There has always been a debate about who was better on grass in their prime, and even a former world number one like Jim Courier has shared his thoughts on what would happen if they faced each other at the All England Club.
In the podcast 'The Tennis Worthy,' Courier highlighted the quality of both players, stating, "We could have a 70-68, it could be a match like Isner vs Mahut if there wasn't a super tie-break, because it's hard to see much difference between them. Federer had a more complete game than Sampras since his sliced backhand was better, but both you and I experienced firsthand how decisive Pete was as a player. Looking at Pete's record in grand finals, he has 14 victories and 4 losses, but most of the finals he lost were towards the end of his career," he said.
Courier sees Federer as the favorite on other surfaces
What Courier is certain about is what would happen if they faced each other at their peak on a different surface. "Sampras was very good at finishing off opponents, and he played in an era with high-quality players, so I don't know if he would be able to point a compass in one direction or another at Wimbledon. I believe that on a slower surface, Roger would probably have a slight advantage because his backhand could have neutralized Sampras's more," he concluded.
The most curious thing is that the only time Federer and Sampras faced each other was precisely in the Wimbledon 2001 round of 16, with a victory for the Swiss player with a 7-6(7) 5-7 6-4 6-7(2) 7-5 scoreline. However, this encounter took place in the final stretch of Sampras's career, not during his prime, as Roger belongs to another generation.
This news is an automatic translation. You can read the original news, Courier se moja entre Federer y Sampras para ganar un partido en Wimbledon

