|
|
 |
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Cause for concern Sampras may lose at French, but he'll win at Wimbledon
Updated: Friday May 25, 2001 5:31 PM
Is Pete Sampras a spent force in the world of men's tennis? That is the question that's being raised in some circles at the moment, after the 13-time Grand Slam winner slumped to the second of two consecutive first-round losses, this time at the Hamburg Masters Series in Germany. Clay of course is Sampras' worst surface by far. Especially the European kind. The fact that in eleven visits to the premiere clay-court event, the French Open, the best he's managed is a semi-final appearance in 1996, suggesting, for once, that the statistics don't lie. But while Pistol Pete misfiring on the red-stuff is no big shocker, the fact that he hasn't won a title in eleven starts dating back to his historic 13th Grand Slam at last year's Wimbledon, perhaps is cause for concern. Not only that, but the hang-dog expression that characterizes the American's appearance, win or lose, seems to be getting more lugubrious by the tournament. Nothing in Pete's demeanor even suggests he believes in himself at the moment, and you get the impression that every player he faces on the tour fancies his chances of causing an upset.
So, is it all over for perhaps the greatest player ever to play the game? Well, let me state the obvious to begin with. Barring a dramatic about-face, Pete Sampras is never going to add the French Open Championship to his resume. When you've got players like '99 French Open Champion, Andre Agassi, admitting that the depth of clay-court talent is overwhelming, as he did after his first-round match in Hamburg, what must Sampras be feeling like?
With a game patently unsuited to clay in the first place, Sampras doesn't have Agassi's natural ability to slug it out from the baseline if he wanted to. And even Andre has only won one French Open. Sampras' serve-volley game is just too precarious on the slower surface, where patience is the virtue. Of course serve-volleyers have conjured up the odd miracle at Roland Garros, Michael Stich's charge to the '96 runners-up spot springs to mind. But Pete seems in no mood to show that kind of fortitude. Indeed, with the pressure of not having won the big clay prize weighing on his shoulders every time he steps on the terre batu, he doesn't seem mentally on his game at all. All of which points to the likelihood that Pete's stay in Paris will be a brief one. As to whether the French will be the beginning of the end for his Grand Slam title ambitions per se? Well, I doubt it. Despite the views of others, Sampras has always been a player who expects to win when he steps on court. Even if it is made of clay. So while another disappointment in France will doubtless bring him down, I believe the lure of his favorite tournament will quickly recharge is batteries. Fortunately for him, he'll only have a couple of weeks to wait before Wimbledon, where the odds tilt back in his favor. He'll be the defending-champion, the pre-eminent grass-court player of the last decade, and he'll be playing at a venue that he's made a home from home. As a result, Wimbledon is where I believe Pete will point the way to his future. He hasn't won the US Open since '96 and was embarrassed in last year's final by Marat Safin. He doesn't seem to relish the long trip to Australia, where he hasn't won since '97. And the French is a lost cause. So if he can't win at Wimbledon, I'd suggest he'll soon be calling it quits. I hope he's not forced into that decision, because the game will be all the poorer for not having Sampras around. In fact I hope he does win Wimbledon and has a Phoenix like revival like the one Agassi had after so many people, myself included, wrote him off back in 1997. If that's not to be the case though, I hope Pete retires with his dignity in tact. Because, to draw a parallel with boxing, there's nothing worse than a former champion who takes one fight too many.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
