Who has made the bigger impact in terms of the history of tennis. Andre Agassi or Pete Sampras?

Question

has pete made more significant achievements in tennis than Andre? or has andre done more? or is it just about equal?

any opinions?

Answer 1

Here's the thing.

Agassi was the people's champion, he made 15 Slam finals, winning 8.

He made countless semifinals.

More importantly was his endurance and longevity, he holds the record for oldest #1 and most #1 ranking in his 30s, I believe he captured it 5 separate times.

He is one of the few players in tennis history, especially Open Era, to complete the Career Slam, and the only male tennis player ( albeit due to the time ) to achieve the Golden Career Slam, because he won the Gold Medal at the Olympics.

Sampras may have won the most Slams but, but he only made one semifinal appearance at the French Open and therefore wasn't a great overall player like Agassi, he didn't win Olympic Gold and didn't play on the pro tour for 20 years.

Answer 2

In terms of achievements, no doubt that Sampras has a bigger achievements compare to Agassi.  But let say if in terms of impact to the popularity of tennis in the world, Agassi had it compare to Sampras.  Agassi is an ambassador of tennis sports.  He makes tennis as one of the most popular sports in the world.  He is an icon of tennis.  He makes people watch tennis.  He makes a lot of tennis player intimidate him.  That's the achievement and impact that Sampras hardly can achieved other than the results.

Answer 3

I always liked watching Agassi. Sampras has little charisma. They both were great players.

Answer 4

I think the records show Pete has made more significant achievements - however Andre has been a great ambassador for the sport, and one of the most entertaining players ever to grace Centre Court.

Answer 5

I like both but Agassi is my hero.I would never been as big a fan of tennis only for Agassi and i really admire the way he came back from nothing after falling down the rankings.Agassi was definatly the most popular player and he won all 4 grand slams

Answer 6

Agassi`s style of play was, by far, the most attractive.  Watching Sampras was boring.

Answer 7

I would say Pete, because he currently holds the all time record for most Grandslams. However if and when Roger eclipses this feat, and as time passes by, I highly doubt the new generation would remember just how incredible Pete's accomplishment was, because Federer would be the man to beat now. People tend the forget the guy that comes in second. Unfortunately that's the world we live in.

Therefore Agassi contributions on and off the court has made him a great ambassador to the game and perhaps he will continue to be remembered for this for a long time to come.

Answer 8

Pistol Pete,though boring has won more grand slams then anyone else in tennis history making him the best player ever.Agassi is way behind but more watchable

Answer 9

Agassi definately made the biggest impact of the two, having won all 4 of the Grand Slams therefore being the only man in the open era to do so, and only the 5th man ever in the history of tennis to do it, especially when you consider all the great players that never achieved that feat.  Oh yeah and an Olympic Gold Medal to top it off.  He also holds the record for the most Masters Series wins at the present moment.  Its about quality not quantity.  Agassi never seems to receive the credit he deserves or gets mentioned as one of the true greats.

I wonder how many Wimbledons Sampras would give up for 1 French Open title?

Answer 10

Sampras obviously goes down as a candidate for all time great - 14 grandslams, 7 wimbledons.

Agassi was never as good as Pete, but more popular. Apart from the Career slam, the only other impact Andre had was to give short people hope that they too can be good in tennis.

Answer 11

sampras

Answer 12

I would have to say it's essentially a tossup.  True, as many have already noted, Sampras won more majors (14 to 8) than Agassi, but never won the French.  It's also true that many of Pete's biggest wins came against Andre thru the years.  

I would suggest, however, that neither was quite the player that Rod Laver was in his prime.  Laver won 11 slams, but, due to his turning pro in the early 1960's, was unable to compete for many others.  Had the game been open then, I think it is safe to say that Rod would have more than 20 Grand Slam singles titles on his record (as it was, he still won all four in the same year twice).

To somehow suggest that Sampras or Federer has had a better career even though they have each never won the French means they are incomplete (though at least Roger has been in the finals 4 times), whereas Andre Agassi has.  

This is an interesting question - but essentially I think both Agassi and Sampras must be taken together, as they seemed to drive each other to greater heights, and therefore had a similar, if not equal, impact on tennis history.