SAMPRAS AND HIS FULL CIRCLE IN TENNIS

Separated by a year, Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras knew about each other's game when they faced they reached the 1990 US Open finals. They were picked by many to lead the American tennis in the 1990's along with Jim Courier and Michael Chang. 

Agassi, the senior of the two had already impressed many with some consistent performances and was playing in his second title clash coming into the finals. Sampras, on the contrary had a career marked with ups and downs - he had played his best tennis to reach his maiden grand slam finals by overcoming the legends like Ivan Lendl and John McEnroe in the quarterfinals and semi-finals respectively.

Two Americans facing each other in New York had been a rarity in men's tennis - in fact since 1953, there had been only one occasion when two American men played in the title clash (1979 finals between John McEnroe and Vitas Gerulaitis) before this finals. In 1990, this was a match between the hopefuls of the American men's tennis and both these players had never won a grand slam before. The winner would win the hearts of many and irrespective of what the stats were.

THE HARD WORK PAYS OFF

Agassi was stylish - long hair, a headband and backed up with performances on the court, there was no denying Agassi created quite a stir and had a lot of fan following by the time he faced Sampras in the finals. He was an American youth icon; fashion, glamour, fame and attitude, all these fitted well and it was an instant connect with the masses and the media. Agassi was seen as the 'exciting' guy.

On the other hand, Sampras had his ups and downs since the junior days; he resembled a shy guy who went about his business discreetly. No drama, no overtly display of emotions and surprised many with his presence at the finals.

Growing up, it was pretty hard to imagine, the weak link in Sampras game was his serve. That he was taught to practice his serves day in and out helped him a lot to make the transition to the senior level. The use of the same toss and his ability to disguise the serve all came to play on the day of the finals as Agassi found it hard to return. In straight sets, Sampras finished off the match to win his first title.

It is uncertain how he would have performed against an unknown opponent or another legend of the game. Probably, it was Agassi's presence, the known factor which might have helped to calm his nerves as Sampras knew the opponent and that played a huge role in the mental makeup of his preparations.

"The better guy won the match. When you can hit a serve 120 (miles/hour) on the line, there is not a lot you can do about it" - with these words Agassi summed up the match, after having collected the consolation prize of  $175,000.

For Sampras, all those hours of watching the 16mm tapes of Rod Laver had paid off as he took his first step towards stardom. No matter what he did, he knew, he would always remain a US Open champion as he collected the trophy as the youngest US Open champion from David Markin, the then President of the United States Tennis Association. He couldn't believe his eyes as he stared at the trophy, closely at his name inscribed alongside many champions... it had not sunk in.. he went ahead and held his trophy aloft, probably posing for the first time in front of so many cameramen.

THE THEATRICAL CLIMAX IN 2002

By the time these two athletes met at the 2002 US Open finals, they were at the far end of their careers and since that final twelve years ago, both had went on to achieve great things in tennis. Pete Sampras stood tall among all having won thirteen titles - a feat no one had managed to achieve in the open era, while Agassi was a career grand slam winner and had rejuvenated his tennis career yet again.

While records stayed that way, the personal form of Sampras was dipping rapidly while Agassi was more in control of the game. After years of dominating men's tennis, it all came down to Sampras and how motivated he was to go on playing. Sampras knew, he had it in him to win one more title if not many, but his record stated otherwise. Slowly, the media went after him, and since the triumph at 2000 Wimbledon, Sampras didn't have much to show in spite of reaching the finals at the US Open in 2000 and 2001.

The champions suffer a lot when they fail to live up to their standards; with each loss the glorious past appears to fade away and all that remain are 'memories'. The future looks uncertain - those memories remind us how great those years were, while media and a lot of experts speak about the present and remind constantly, those days are gone, and in some cases long gone.

Sampras at age 31, was branded old, slow and since his marriage to the actress Bridgette Wilson, soft. He was fed up after many people told him to retire, pointing to his game that had lost its edge. The two years leading up to the 2002 US Open final was an emotional ride for Sampras, whatever he did, it didn't work and unless he had his hands on a grand slam trophy, critics wouldn't shut up.

Like in the previous two years in 2000 and 2001, once again Sampras overcame much younger opponents to reach his eighth US Open finals and like in the years 1990 and in 1995, he faced Andre Agassi at the Flushing Meadows. Seventeenth seeded Sampras against the sixth seed Agassi - two American tennis legends competing for the trophy in front of the home crowd. The form didn't matter, the seeds didn't matter as Sampras knew Agassi's game and vice versa.

The crowd in anticipation of this titanic clash came in large numbers, they knew it might be the last time they would get to witness the two American tennis giants fighting it out on the courts of New York; like the first time they met in the 1990 finals to win the second oldest grand slam trophy in tennis. 

Irrespective of what Sampras had achieved (six more titles than Agassi at that point), the winner would take away all the glory. This match was a decider as to who was better and all the stats accumulated by those two players were put aside. It was the 'match'.

Many who had followed the game knew their preferences that night - but what about those newbies who were planting their first steps into watching tennis? How would they remember such a contest?

The great battles on the field remain etched in the memory of the fans for a long time - as those moments alone makes that significant impression when it comes down to determining favourites. As to words and numbers, they  convey the message unlike the images.

Four sets was all it took for the game to go in favour of Sampras; it didn't matter who the crowd was rooting for, as even the proudest of Agassi fans stood up acknowledging the 'true' champion of the day!

The Italian author and journalist Oriana Fallici once quoted - "Glory is a heavy burden, a murdering poison, and to bear it is an art. And to have that art is rare."

Sampras didn't rush into things and it took him over a year to come out in open and tell his fans and to everybody that he was 100% retired. "I'm at peace with it. It's time to call it a career."

When asked in an interview about how he felt winning his 14^th and final title, Sampras replied - "I had the last word, and that feels great!

GEORGE BASTL AND THE LAST OF SAMPRAS - 2002 WIMBLEDON

The end of an era - Pete Sampras just played his final Wimbledon game

Injuries, the single impediment for any athlete's progress comes unexpectedly - disrupting the plans, goals and in some cases one's career. Even with the latest technological aids and medical facilities available, the coping and recovery mechanisms are not formulated to suit everybody. While one recovers and continues to play their sport, others might have to look for alternatives beside sport.

This has been the case with George Bastl, the tall Swiss who emulated the feat of his fellow country man Roger Federer in 2002. Perhaps, the only common thing Federer and Bastl share in tennis happens to be 'Sampras' and defeating the champion on a territory which the American had made his own. If Roger Federer won a closely fought encounter in 2001 (4th round), George Bastl's triumph had the shades comparable to David overcoming Goliath. On a Wednesday, what people thought about being another opponent for Sampras progress - it came as a shock to see him ousted in a second round match to a lucky loser ranked 145 in the world.

GRAVEYARD OF CHAMPIONS

Oh yes, the superstitious and the infamous patterns keep coming no matter what. Not very often you find big names play outside of Court No. 1 or the centre court. The second round encounter between the seven-time Wimbledon champion Pete Sampras and the unknown George Bastl was scheduled at Court No.2 - also known as the 'graveyard of the champions'. As it turned out, the second round match was the last time Sampras played at the All England Club.

HOW IT UNFOLDED

The crowd could not believe what was happening as Bastl raced to a two-set lead. It appeared as though Sampras was not in his best frame of mind. He was seen reading notes between the games written by his wife Bridgette Wilson - "Remember, you're the greatest player who has ever held a racket in the hand". It did fire him up and the next two sets, he showed his aggressive game as Bastl found it difficult to break his serve or put any pressure on it. The American won 6-4, 6-3 to make it two sets all.

Those words from his wife kept Sampras going - only to a point

Enter fifth set and this is where the mental game of the players came into play as bodies started to worn out. Sampras had seen it all before and importantly he knew how to win from such situations  - whereas Bastl had never won a five-setter before after turning professional. He had nothing to lose and unless he won this encounter, he knew this would be just another match.

The games raced, one by one with each player holding his serve. In the eighth game with Bastl serving, Sampras had two break points while leading 4-3. From 15-40 down, Bastl served his way to level the scores and then remarkably broke the American's serve in the next game. Just when Sampras seemed like getting back to his ominous rhythm, Bastl played four perfect points to break his serve. The match was turned all of a sudden and so did the fortunes. Sampras, unless he had something else to showcase was staring at his worst exit at Wimbledon since 1991. He sat motionless, looked out of sorts and it took time to face the fact - he's out of the tournament.

LAST TIME AT WIMBLEDON

No matter what one's past records are, it is a challenge to remain at the top of the game consistently with time. If Sampras was outdone by one Swiss in 2001, the next year another Swiss knocked him out. "I have not lost the game, Bastl won it. At the end, he was mentally much stronger than I, and that you have to recognise". The drama, the disappointment and the pain of such a defeat only showed what a great champion Sampras was throughout his career, especially in Wimbledon. At the press conference after the defeat - "I plan on being back. I'm not going to end my time here with that loss. I really felt I could do it here and I feel really bummed out. I feel like I can win one major - I will continue to play."  It wasn't that Sampras played badly or was in poor form. Those 'two words' can be a dampener to give credit where it is due. Bastl played the game of his life and after all, Sampras did went on to win the US Open a few months later.

George Bastl played the game of his life to oust the seven-time champion 

A DECADE LATER

Unlike Roger Federer, George Bastl didn't even make it to the top 70 in his entire life. The win over Pete Sampras remained his only shining glory of his career. Ask any of the tennis fans, they remember Bastl for that reason - and for that alone. His life post that match changed and he was recognised by quite a few people on the circuit. While tennis career never took off, he had to focus on other avenue to sustain his livelihood. He earned a finance degree from a university in California and now works in the same industry. Over the years, any interview with Bastl is incomplete without being asked about 'that' match. Those wonderful memories remain just that - memories. 

Celebrating Twenty Years of Tennis in my Life

Raaghu was and will always remain the first person with whom I played tennis. This present year would be the time when we would have celebrated our 20^th year anniversary of playing tennis. The game of tennis was a short lived affair and if my memory serves right, we played for about 3-4 years. I continued with other friends for another four years into the early years of this millennium. I loved cricket and equally I enjoyed playing tennis, and Raaghu was equally excited about playing with me. He was my cousin alright; my tennis mate was apt at that time.

We watched a lot of cricket and tennis together but when it came to playing, he preferred tennis and I don’t know why. He resisted coming to play cricket with us and was always game to play one of our versions of Grand Slam tournaments. Soon this bug caught on with a lot of my friends and we had to draw the ties, have a proper line umpire and what not.

There were two courts bang opposite to our respective homes; both the court lines drawn manually by me and Raaghu. There were no different grades of hard courts, clay was nowhere to be seen and grass? Well, let’s just say it was meant for the cows to graze or to be adorned in the rectangular empty plots. After having drawn the boundaries with accuracy, the space inside those brick red lines became our playing world. We played Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and US Open – all on the same surface; the tarred roads of Bangalore and in our locality in particular.

This craze like I mentioned before caught on and attracted my peers like ants to sugar blocks. It was an amazing piece of entertainment and more importantly, an arena in which we felt we could play tennis with zero investment. Mind you, traffic was alien to us at that time and so except for few stares by pedestrians and fan gathering, the game went on regularly uninterrupted. Flood lights in the form of bright street lights were a boon and we played tennis under lights, just like Australian or the US Open.

There were three setters, five setters and doubles tournament – the frenzy went on for months and a few years. It was not a regular past time; it was seasonal which peaked with that of the professional tennis season, namely the Grand Slams. I felt for Mary Joe Fernandez losing the French Open to Steffi Graf in 1993 and immediately in the next tournament I can still recall the teary eyes of Jana Novotna (Navrathna, as I used to call her) on that Saturday evening of the Wimbledon finals. It is still etched in my memory. One of the reasons being, we started playing tennis during that time. 

When Sergei Brugera won a five set thriller against Jim Courier in the French Open finals, we also started to stretch our play and started playing five setters. The triumph of Jensen brothers in the men’s doubles and with growing popularity of our local tennis doubles game made its debut. We imitated many of the tennis players and the serve of Pete Sampras became my style, or atleast I tried hard to replicate. He won his first Wimbledon in that year and in the process went on to become my favourite player. It was Jim Courier again who lost the finals in consecutive tournaments.

I have won a Grand Slam; won many of the doubles matches and at the same time have lost too. Raaghu had his share of victories too. And that my dear friends, is how we consumed tennis outside of television - without racquets, without tennis overalls and most importantly without tennis courts. The only common equipment between the elite players and us were the use of tennis balls, and most of it was locally made.

Wilson was the biggest brand we aspired to have, and believe me twenty years ago if I were to be presented with a set of Wilson tennis balls, I would have kept it safely without letting air whistle through the vacuumed container and touch those precious tennis balls. However, there was no shortage of seriousness and we played till the last drop of sweat fell onto the ground. Yeah, there was no prize money, so what?

That was when I was nine years of age and I was hooked onto tennis just like I was crazy about playing cricket. The hero of Indian tennis back then was Leander Paes and Ramesh Krishnan. Krishnan retired few years later while Paes has continued and recently won his 14^th Grand Slam title in doubles.

I don’t quite know what me remember this phase of our childhood. Maybe it was a conversation I had in the morning which made me realise how deeply I love sports and the short work I did with tennis. I have not played a tennis match in a long time. It’s high time I played a game of tennis on a proper court, holding a racquet with a hope of winning a game, a set and probably a match. 

From the Scots and of the Brits - Murray's win at the Wimbledon 2013

I recall the last evening and wonder - Was this the greatest evening in the history of British tennis in the Open era? Andy Murray sheds off the monkey after 77 years to become the first British singles male player to win at Wimbledon. Fred Perry, a champion in Table Tennis and Tennis had many accolades as an athlete. He has remained the benchmark in British tennis for a long time and with Andy Murray winning yesterday, the best of the present has finally shook hands with the best of the past.

Andy Murray tasted his first real success at the 2012 London Olympics, when he won the gold medal against the odds vs. Federer. Though it was in Wimbledon, it was not quite the Wimbledon. Nevertheless, he united the kingdom of British Islands last year and gave a reason to celebrate. With that victory, he also gave them a real hope. 

A hope, which agonisingly and falsely haunted many fans who turned up each year in anticipation of watching their fellow Brit win the Wimbledon Championships. Though it must be noted, Virginia Wade is technically the last British player and the only British woman till date to win Wimbledon singles title (1977, the centenary year of Wimbledon championships).

Murray went on to win the US Open after the gold medal in 2012, thereby becoming the first singles male player from Isles of British to win a Grand Slam tournament since, you guessed it right, Fred Perry. Alright, now that he had arrived on the circuit, the expectations had only begun to swell and it reached new heights at this year’s finals. Personally, I prefer Djokovic style of playing tennis to Murray’s - I quite don’t know why it is this way, but it has been this way since a long time. I chose Sampras over Agassi, Federer over Nadal and now Djokovic over Murray.

However, credit must be given where it is due and yesterday, it was the Murray show. He is now the first British male to win any title in the open era, an era of shorts and with just 26 years of age, expect him to fight it out for more titles to come.

The men’s singles finals of 2013 Wimbledon also happened to be the first match this year where I sat to watch from start to finish. The finals started minutes after Sebastian Vettel had won his home Grand Prix for the first time - I wondered if history were to be made in tennis too.

Growing up, I always felt United Kingdom as a whole and the individual countries that make up the Great Britain were skewed in nature - especially and atleast to me in matters related to sports. Be it football, rugby or even cricket, you talk about England, Scotland and Wales (In cricket, England and Wales are combined). However, the Olympic traditions in this part of the world are maintained and continue to operate under one banner – Great Britain. Davis Cup tennis is included in this list too.

It is the sport that dictates where your feelings are and what outfits, paints and tattoos one has to flaunt.

Till date, I have not been able to get beyond the definitions of the island of Britain and the countries which give the definition of the same. David Cameroon, was seen cheering for Andy Murray and alongside him – Bradley Cooper, Gerard Butler, Mick Jagger, Sir Chris Hoy and the entire crowd, irrespective of which country they were from, all cheered for Britain’s sake and not necessarily as Scots. 

 David Cameron, PM of United Kingdom and First Minister Alex Salmond raising the Scottish flag
Image Courtesy: Sun

This is the uniqueness of type of Sport you play and Murray was indeed lucky that tennis is not divided by one’s country like other sports in United Kingdom.

He is by far the greatest Scottish tennis player ever. He now needs to win a career Grand Slam, which will put him on level with Fred Perry as the greatest British male tennis player ever. Tennis was not an Olympic sport at the time Perry was at his peak in tennis.

After years and many decades, the British tennis fans have finally got their true tennis hero. I always wondered why they haunted Tim Henman, who at his best was a semi-finals material. He was in semi-finals on four occasions at Wimbledon between 1998 and 2002 and that achievement alone deserved the status of having a hill named after him. Such was the state of British tennis.

The tennis in Britain has gone to a new level in the past year. Andy Murray, the Olympic gold medal winner, US Open champion and now Wimbledon has only raised the bar for fellow British men who wish to pursue tennis.

Who among the crowd yesterday had witnessed Fred Perry’s achievements too in 1936? It looks highly unlikely as 77 years is a huge gap. Since then, there have been a lot of changes in Britain, yet the name of Fred Perry remained constant in the annals of their tennis history. Make no mistake; it will continue to do so, however now, there is a new addition in Murray, which people will not forget either. Both their names will be taken in the same breath, till the time a new player reaches their level.

Will Murray be awarded with the knighthood? I don’t see any reason why he won’t have his chance at it soon, considering the merits that are taken into account for awarding the prefixed title of Sir to one’s name.

My love with tennis began watching my cousins adoring the plays of Sabatini, Graf and Seles. Though it must be said on a serious note, it was Wimbledon in 1993 watching Sampras take the title. He followed up with six more, before bidding a good bye to the sport in 2002.

Roger Federer, who by no means is finished (atleast by his admission), won his first Wimbledon in 2003. I am not sure, if he plays in the next year’s Wimbledon, but he can only improve his record at Wimbledon and at the worst will still remain in level with seven victories next only to Sampras and William Renshaw (in the 19^th century).

Now, in 2013 Andy Murray wins his first Wimbledon. Will he too move to the next level and join the elite company which is jointly held by Federer, Renshaw and Sampras? Or will he be just known as the next best player in Britain after Fred Perry? We just have to wait. To me, it doesn’t matter.

Like i said before, I don’t see myself rooting for Murray like I did for Sampras and Federer. 

Have I seen Federer one last time at Wimbledon? Deja-vu from 2002

My mind went to the memories of 2001 last year when I saw Andy Murray defeating Roger Federer to claim the gold medal at the 2012 Olympics at the Wimbledon. I was in my class 12 then in 2001 as I watched a young Swiss playing his heart out against a champion, a legend when it came to playing on the grass courts of Wimbledon.

Roger Federer met Pete Sampras for the first time at Wimbledon in 2001. The nineteen-year old from Switzerland had nothing to lose. His compatriot, Martina Hingis the top seed at that year’s Wimbledon was knocked out in the first round – so my hopes all rested on the American to defend his title yet again. He looked set to win his 8^th Wimbledon title.

Call it arrogance or simply blind faith at that time; I thought there was nobody who could beat Sampras at Wimbledon. It is true, the likes of Marat Safin had won against Sampras against all odds at 2000 US Open, but common on, we are talking about Wimbledon and with such thoughts occupied in my mind, parallely the game went on nervously, it affected me and to many who were present live watching the match. Finally, the nerves got the better of the person, who had expectations from almost everyone.

Tense is an understatement and all I could hope at that time was, the best shall prevail and the best to me was Sampras. No doubts about it. The few images I had of Federer were that of a Sportstar photographs with him next to Hingis and the one holding the Hopman Cup. I was a huge fan of Martina Hingis and I followed their exploits early that year when they ended up on the winning side at the Hopman Cup (2001) in Australia. Long hair, small eyes and a head band to go with, was all I had known of Federer before the match against Sampras.

My worst fears came true as I saw the return from Sampras hitting the net and the next moment Federer down on his knees. He had caught the big fish on the market and he didn’t quite know how to celebrate it. He was the talk of the town and though he didn’t went on to win the championship; the quality of his strokes and play was showcased in a grand way to the tennis audience across the globe. An era was about to come to an end, the domination, the long streak which Sampras enjoyed came to an abrupt halt.

The defeat of 2001, what do I make of it? All I said then was I need a good 18^th birthday present next time around when Sampras played Wimbledon in 2002. I was like that back then, and that's how I viewed sports. Sampras battled on for the rest of the season and had lost US Open finals towards the end of the year to another rookie Lleyton Hewitt. He was clearly not winning the titles, but consistently he was making it to the title clashes. Sampras was good, but nowhere near his peak form.

Next year Wimbledon, same hopes and this time Sampras played not as a defending champion anymore. The only time previously he played without defending the Wimbledon title was in 1997 and prior to that was in 1992. This was 2002 and he had lost just three matches in those last 10 years, he played at Wimbledon. He was two months shy of being 31, so there were no issues with ageing. I still had hopes on him to turn it around and win the oldest Grand Slam tournament for the 8^th time.

Then the news came as a shock. Pete Sampras knocked out of Wimbledon at the second round by George Bastl. Who the hell is this Bastl? A lucky loser from the qualifying tournament which enabled him to play in the main draw; and coincidentally he was a Swiss too.

I felt and I am sure a lot others felt too, then and there at that moment Sampras time was up. No regrets. Sometimes things do not go as we wish and so be it; he lost yet another five setter match, in consecutive years at Wimbledon and both the winners hailing from the same country. Why make a big deal and instead I chose to relish his 13 victories thus far.

All I hoped was a good farewell and that he got at the US Open, when he won his 14^th Grand Slam title in front of his home ground against his countrymen and a rival for many years, Andre Agassi.

I knew, he played his last match and the scene of his wife Bridgette Wilson, wearing a beige coloured outfit exchanging smiles and pleasantries with an emotionally drained Pete Sampras is still etched in my memory. In a span of few months, both my favourites at that time had faded away. First the Swiss Miss, Martina Hingis and now Pete Sampras. 

Image Courtesy: CBS.com

No matter how easy or difficult it is, or was – you just move on. Never in my life had I thought Federer would be the man I would choose to support once Sampras retired, even when he defeated Sampras in the 2001 encounter. Times change and as a sports lover, you gotta pick up someone or fancy someone to win, or else there is no fun. And so, it was Federer, the instinctive choice to support next.

To me, Federer was an ideal replacement for Sampras. Serve and volley at Wimbledon was all there to be seen. Federer won his first title the following year in 2003. Since then and more so from Wimbledon 2004, he has marched on reaching to new heights which yielded him 17 Grand Slam titles, a career Grand Slam, Olympic doubles gold medal and a silver medal. Amongst those conquests, he fought many fierce rivals of the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and since couple of years Andy Murray.

His record streak of reaching 36 quarterfinal appearances is now done and dusted. The last time he went out this early was in 2002 Wimbledon championships. I was talking and thinking about his first win in 2003 while I was cooking tonight and then few moments later I got to know of him crashing out of this year’s Wimbledon. No Maria Sharapova too in the current tournament, my other favourite and now Federer’s exit has made an unknown Ukrainian Sergiy Stakhovsky enter the limelight at this year’s Wimbledon. 

First it was Nadal’s exit, but he was never consistent barring at the French Open and now Federer’s exit is big news for the Fedex fans and to the media; his defeat is even bigger news for Staskovsky and his contingent of supporters.

Now my whole scribbling of memories of the past 10 years begs the question. Have I seen the last match of Roger Federer in Wimbledon? He will be 32 come this August 8^th and looks fit to carry on. It isn’t about how fit he is, it is more than that to remain in the peak form when it comes to playing tennis.

For now, I won’t say anything more and I shall wait for this year’s Flushing Meadows before asking the inevitable question which I asked about Sampras to myself eleven years ago at this time of the year.

There is nothing wrong in retiring; it takes a lot more than poor form or injury to give up the sport you love. Legacy is the last thing an athlete should worry and in this case, I am confident Federer knows when it is time to call it quits.