Sampras has no answers on clay
by Charles Bricker
May 29. 2002
The most important question this week about Pete Sampras is not whether
he will ever learn to win on clay, but what he will decide about his future
at the end of this season.
He has poured so much into revitalizing his career in 2002, changing coaches
twice and redoubling his training schedule, and he has little to show for
it.
His loss to Andrea Gaudenzi (7-15 overall and 3-5 on clay coming to Paris)
in the first round is the latest in his failures here over the past six
years.
His other losses were to Galo Blanco (second round, 2001), Mark Philippoussis
(first round, 2000), Andrei Medvedev (second round, 1999), Ramon Delgado
(second round, 1998) and Magnus Norman (third round, 1997).
Sampras is 1-5 since he reached the final against Andy Roddick at Houston
(red clay) and only 15-12 overall. Twelve losses at the halfway point of
the season and 16 all last year. He hasn't won a tournament since the 2000
Wimbledon -- 28 events ago.
This is not the time for Sampras to contemplate retirement with the short
grass-court season coming up and Wimbledon looming. But what if he goes
out again at Wimbledon before the semifinals? What then? And what if he
fails at the U.S. Open, where he reached the final the past two years?
Would Sampras consider retirement if he fails to reach the final of any
Grand Slam for the first time since 1991? It's always difficult to get a
firm read on him after one of these French Open disasters because of his
dejection.
"It's a pretty empty feeling right now," Sampras said after losing
in four sets to Gaudenzi. "I've done everything I needed to do, you
know. Not doing well in Rome and Hamburg didn't help. I needed to do well
to get some confidence to come in here with a little momentum."
One thing was different, though. In past years, after early losses, Sampras
swore he would be back in Paris a year later to continue chasing the only
Slam he hasn't won. On Monday, looking particularly confused by this 13th
loss at Roland Garros, he said, "I'm not thinking much of next year.
Like to be back, and hoping to ... ," he began, never quite finishing
the thought.
"I'm not thinking about next year. I'm just thinking about all the
time and effort I put into this tournament. Once again, I came up with nothing
to show for it."
Back to Archives - 2002 | News
Joy on court good enough for Sampras
by Karen Crouse, Palm Beach Post
May 29, 2002
The first nickname the tennis crowd bestowed upon its moldy oldie Pete
Sampras? It was "Smiley" because back when he was an undersized
kid nobody could wipe the grin off Sampras' face when he was on Jack Kramer
Club courts in Rolling Hills Estates, Calif.
The court was a canvas upon which the third of Sam and Georgia's four children
could boldly express himself. Tennis coaxed the shy youngster out of his
shell. Sampras felt confident when he was on the court, not clumsy; emancipated,
not cuffed by his insecurities and anxieties.
More than the victories that are seen and celebrated, this is sports' most
worthwhile consequence. It provides the self-conscious or self-contained
person a means of self-expression, an avenue to outside acceptance, a strength
of conviction and confidence that he or she can flex forevermore.
Sports is a wonderful journey that can last a lifetime. It's a shame that
some people can't see the footpath for the finish line. You know the ones;
they go around suggesting -- usually very superciliously -- that if you
can't smell the victory bouquet, then get the heck out of the race.
They're easy to spot. Just look for the people wearing the T-shirts that
say "Second place is the first loser."
Sorry, but I'm not buying it. In the sea of sports, the message bobbing
around in the bottle is not, "If you can't win, don't bother to compete."
It takes a true sportsman to grasp this, which is why tennis should be
richly relieved that Sampras is sticking around despite a vocal minority's
best efforts to swaddle him in mothballs. I mean, nobody is talking much
these days about how tennis is being overrun by enlightened sportsmen.
Sampras, 30, has more Grand Slam titles than anybody in history, more money
than he can spend in his lifetime and nothing more to prove. If tennis for
him was simply a marriage of convenience -- a means of acquiring a place
in history, a place in the Hollywood Hills and status and riches galore
-- Sampras would have broken off the relationship at the end of the 2000
season, after capturing his 13th Grand Slam title at Wimbledon and nearly
corralling his 14th at the U.S. Open.
He didn't, of course. Nobody has called Sampras "Smiley" in years
but just looking at him you can see how strong his connection to the sport
remains. He's still around, after all, plugging away like a man in search
of his first pro singles title and not his 64th.
It can't be easy, persevering when the victories that once came so easily
are now harder to flag down than a cab in New York City. The only thing
harder, I would imagine, is sticking with a marriage for the next 50 years
after the honeymoon's over.
Training a few hours a day, every day is never less difficult than when
the victories are piling up like dirty sweat socks. It's not so hard to
love sports when sports is patting you on the back and padding your pockets.
Any Tom, Dick or Yevgeny can tear his body down when there's another competition
around the corner to build up his ego and bank account.
It takes a special player to continue to train diligently and compete unflinchingly
when his title drought stands at 28 tournaments and everybody seems to be
counting. When the going gets that tough, it's pure passion that keeps you
going.
After 25 years tennis still has a hold on Sampras. Is that so wrong?
Yevgeny Kafelnikov says Sampras is "disrespecting himself" by
playing on. It says here that Kafelnikov is disrespecting the broad view
of athletic participation with his narrow focus on results. If there was
any justice in the world of sports, Sampras would defeat Kafelnikov on his
way to an eighth Wimbledon title next month.
There often isn't any justice, of course (Red Sox fans will tell you that).
The one lesson that sports hammers home more than any other is that decisions
in the athletic arena -- just like in the corporate boardroom -- are not
always fair and just.
"I've done everything I needed to do, you know?" Sampras said
Monday after losing in four sets to Andrea Gaudenzi in the first round of
the French Open.
In sports as in life, it's sometimes as Sampras lamented: You put the time
and effort into something and you come away "with nothing to show for
it."
Nothing monetary or material, maybe, but all was not lost when Sampras
dropped the fourth-set tiebreaker to Gaudenzi. Sampras, a tortured superstar
in the prime of his career, has found in its autumn a sublime reason to
carry on:
He loves the game for what it is, not for anything more it can do for him.
Never mind those 93 unforced errors on Monday; Sampras has found the sweet
spot of this racket called professional sports.
Back to Archives - 2002 | News
Sampras not done yet
by Dan Patrick
May 29, 2002
Arguably the best men's singles player of all time, Pete Sampras doesn't
need a French Open title to validate his career. And it's a
good thing, too, after Monday's first-round loss. But there is honor in
his quest to win the one Grand Slam event missing from his resume.
As his seven Wimbledon victories atest, Sampras' game favors the high-speed
and low bounce of grass courts. The red clay of Roland Garros brings a slower,
higher-bounce game and has been the proverbial thorn in Sampras' side throughout
his career.
Sampras' best French Open finish came in 1996, when he reached the semifinals,
and his last four attempts have ended in first- or second-round losses.
He was seeded 12th this year, his lowest seeding since his 1989 debut.
This year, Sampras lost more than three of five sets to 69th-ranked Italian
Andrea Gaudenzi. The normally cool-headed Sampras also lost his composure.
Visibly rattled, Sampras had 93 unforced errors against Gaudenzi, whom he
had beaten in their last three meetings.
Uncharacteristic of Pete Sampras -- he beat himself.
But the loss wasn't due to lack of preparation. In addition to signing
on with new coach -- clay-court specialist Jose Higueras -- Sampras played
in a series of tune-up tournaments on clay. In early May, he was eliminated
in the first round of the Masters Series events in Rome.
Before that he showed promise at the U.S. Men's Clay Court Championships
in Houston despite losing in the semifinals.
Sampras also arrived in Paris two weeks early and practiced nearly three
hours per day.
But Sampras has struggled elsewhere, too, not just in Paris. Since breaking
Roy Emerson's record for titles in majors (12) with his Wimbledon win nearly
two years ago, Sampras hasn't won in 28 straight tournaments and has fallen
practically off the tennis map.
Unlike longtime nemesis Andre Agassi, chances are Sampras, who held the
No. 1 year-end ranking for six straight years, won't be reinventing himself.
He is 30, and the younger talent is coming in waves. Sampras used to be
able to surf these waves; now they are enveloping him.
While the odds are against a Sampras resurgence, knowing his tenacity,
I wouldn't count him out. Sampras has too much talent and determination
to not catch lightning in a bottle. There's enough savvy and experience
there to still win a tournament. But Sampras may have to come to terms with
the fact that he's not going to enter tournaments as the favorite -- we
no longer wonder who he's going to meet in the finals as much as if he's
going to make the finals.
At this point in his career, if Sampras logs another major it will perhaps
be his greatest accomplishment. In all likelihood, that would be Wimbledon.
Stay tuned. Look for Sampras in a few weeks as he heads to England. He's
not done yet.
Back to Archives - 2002 | News