Points won by each set: | 36-38, 28-15, 44-45 |
Points won directly behind the serve:
34 % Sampras – 34 of 99
28 % Becker – 30 of 105
Very important match in terms of [3] Sampras’ pursuit to become the best player of the 90s. He was 1-3 in H2H against Becker at the time (1-4 including an exhibition match which Sampras lost despite leading 4:0* in the decider; Ede ’91 – Becker won 6-4, 1-6, 7-5). If Sampras had lost the Indianapolis semifinal serving at 6:5 in the 3rd set, it would have been a huge mental blow for him, manufacturing a potential Becker’s [9] complex in the years to come. Sampras led *3:1 in the opener, he was two points away from the set at 6:5. In the 3rd set he fought off a break point at 2:3 with an ace. Both tie-breaks: 7/3.
# Comparison of their back-to-back Indy matches: 1991 (F): Sampras d. Becker 7-6, 3-6, 6-3… 2 hours 46 minutes… Total points: 108-101 (aces: 11-12) 1992 (S): Sampras d. Becker 6-7, 6-2, 7-6… 2 hours 28 minutes… Total points: 106-98 (aces: 11-12)
Points won by each set: | 36-38, 28-15, 44-45 |
Points won directly behind the serve:
34 % Sampras – 34 of 99
28 % Becker – 30 of 105
Very important match in terms of [3] Sampras’ pursuit to become the best player of the 90s. He was 1-3 in H2H against Becker at the time (1-4 including an exhibition match which Sampras lost despite leading 4:0* in the decider; Ede ’91 – Becker won 6-4, 1-6, 7-5). If Sampras had lost the Indianapolis semifinal serving at 6:5 in the 3rd set, it would have been a huge mental blow for him, manufacturing a potential Becker’s [9] complex in the years to come. Sampras led *3:1 in the opener, he was two points away from the set at 6:5. In the 3rd set he fought off a break point at 2:3 with an ace. Both tie-breaks: 7/3.
# Comparison of their back-to-back Indy matches:
1991 (F): Sampras d. Becker 7-6, 3-6, 6-3… 2 hours 46 minutes… Total points: 108-101 (aces: 11-12)
1992 (S): Sampras d. Becker 6-7, 6-2, 7-6… 2 hours 28 minutes… Total points: 106-98 (aces: 11-12)