Points won by each set: | 24-29, 33-29, 46-47, 30-18 |
Points won directly behind the serve:
30 % Edberg – 37 of 121
30 % Sampras – 41 of 135
# Before the match it’d be reasonable to assume Edberg [2] could run out of gas after his titanic struggle to go through three consecutive matches. The quick 1st set confirmed it, nevertheless Sampras [3] also had a few five-setters in his bones and stomach problems he somehow survived in a bizarre semifinal vs Courier. Very strange that in the 1st game of the 3rd set both players threw their racquets because they usually didn’t do that. SamPe was serving at 5:4 to take a 2-sets-to-1 lead, but lost to ’30’ (three points away in that game and in the tie-break too)… Edberg had won their first two meetings, but another two clashes that preceded the US Open ’92 final, Sampras got easily: Cincinnati ’91: 6-3, 6-3 and Cincinnati ’92: 6-2, 6-3.
# Edberg saved:
– a double mini-match point at 4-all in the 5th set vs Krajicek (4:20 hrs)… earlier trailed 1:3
– another mini-match point at 4-all in the 5th set vs Lendl (4:03 hrs)
– and a double virtual match point at 0:3 (15/40) in the 5th set vs Chang!!! (5:26 hrs – the longest match in tournament’s history)
The fastest serves of the US Open ’92:
129 mph (207 kph) – Krajicek; 126 mph (202 kph) – Sampras, Rosset and Becker
Points won by each set: | 24-29, 33-29, 46-47, 30-18 |
Points won directly behind the serve:
30 % Edberg – 37 of 121
30 % Sampras – 41 of 135
# Before the match it’d be reasonable to assume Edberg [2] could run out of gas after his titanic struggle to go through three consecutive matches. The quick 1st set confirmed it, nevertheless Sampras [3] also had a few five-setters in his bones and stomach problems he somehow survived in a bizarre semifinal vs Courier. Very strange that in the 1st game of the 3rd set both players threw their racquets because they usually didn’t do that. SamPe was serving at 5:4 to take a 2-sets-to-1 lead, but lost to ’30’ (three points away in that game and in the tie-break too)… Edberg had won their first two meetings, but another two clashes that preceded the US Open ’92 final, Sampras got easily:
Cincinnati ’91: 6-3, 6-3 and Cincinnati ’92: 6-2, 6-3.
Edberg’s route to his 36th title (6th and last Grand Slam):
1 Luiz Mattar 7-5, 7-5, 6-2
2 Jakob Hlasek 7-5, 6-2, 6-1
3 Jonas Svensson 6-4, 6-2, 6-2
4 Richard Krajicek 6-4, 6-7(6), 6-3, 3-6, 6-4
Q Ivan Lendl 6-3, 6-3, 3-6, 5-7, 7-6(3)
S Michael Chang 6-7(3), 7-5, 7-6(3), 5-7, 6-4
W Pete Sampras 3-6, 6-4, 7-6(5), 6-2
# Edberg saved:
– a double mini-match point at 4-all in the 5th set vs Krajicek (4:20 hrs)… earlier trailed 1:3
– another mini-match point at 4-all in the 5th set vs Lendl (4:03 hrs)
– and a double virtual match point at 0:3 (15/40) in the 5th set vs Chang!!! (5:26 hrs – the longest match in tournament’s history)