Top 5 Miami Finals, No. 3: Pete Sampras d. Gustavo Kuerten, 2000

This week, we're counting down the Top 5 Miami finals (see our Top 5 Indian Wells finals here)

• No. 5: Andy Murray d. David Ferrer, 2013
• No. 4: Venus Williams d. Jennifer Capriati, 2001
• No. 3: Pete Sampras d. Gustavo Kuerten, 2000
• No. 2: COMING SOON
• No. 1: COMING SOON

Pistol Pete vs. Guga in Miami was a memorable final on more than one level.

It was a contrast in styles, personalities, and even equipment. It was an intensely fought match decided by just a couple of points, which left the loser as enraged as we had ever seen him. And it was the first of two matches the American and the Brazilian would play in 2000 that, taken together, can be seen as a bridge between tennis centuries. In Miami, the 20th century, as represented by Sampras, had its last hurrah. Later that year at the ATP Finals in Lisbon, the 21st century, as represented by Kuerten, took the reins for good.

You could see those eras collide in every point of this match. Sampras, who was schooled in serve and volley, attacked relentlessly, charging in behind his own first serves, and most of Kuerten’s second serves. Kuerten, schooled in the South American clay-court game, stands back and sends dipping returns and passes at Sampras’ feet—and a few perfectly measured lobs over his head.

It’s the kind of variation—net-rusher vs. baseliner, fast-courter vs. dirtballer—that was commonplace when the game had surface specialists. But the differences between Sampras and Kuerten were heightened by a new factor: their strings. Kuerten was using relatively newfangled Luxilon, a polyester that “snapped back” more quickly and allowed him to put an unprecedented amount of topspin on the ball. Sampras was using old school gut; he would never change to a poly, and he would regret it. Guga, it turned out, was a pioneer: 25 years later, virtually everyone uses a polyester, and virtually everyone hits with his brand of dive-bombing topspin.

All of which makes Sampras’ win in Miami look like the last stand of the net-rusher. Sampras was 28, and, like most 28-year-olds up to that point in tennis history, his career was on the downslope. His record streak of six straight seasons at No. 1 had been snapped the previous year, and that summer he would win the last of his seven Wimbledon titles. Kuerten, at 23, was on the rise. He would win the second of his three titles at Roland Garros a few months later, and become the first South American man to finish a season No. 1.

The renown of both of these men has faded a bit; Sampras’ grass-court prowess was eclipsed by Roger Federer, and Kuerten’s clay-court records were dwarfed by Rafael Nadal. But Sampras’ serve and forehand would be right at home on the ATP tour today, and Kuerten’s one-handed backhand was better than just about any of the single-handers left in 2024.

The quality and intensity of this match rose with each set. Sampras had his way early, but Kuerten started timing his returns and finding the range on his passes and lobs midway through the second set.

The fourth set had the feel of a horse-race homestretch: Sampras had the lead, but Kuerten was closing fast. Twice he reached set point, and once he had a good look at a pass, but Sampras guessed right and cut it off. Finally, on Sampras’ sixth match point, at 9-8 in the tiebreaker, a Kuerten pass clipped the tape and skipped over the baseline.

“I can definitely walk out of this tournament feeling really confident and real good about the way things went,” Sampras said.

Kuerten wasn’t quite as pleased. We remember the smiling Guga, but he had a temper, too, and he showed it by slamming his racquet at the end of this match. Apparently, he wasn’t any happier afterward.

“I was ready for a fifth set,” Kuerten said. “On one [set] point, 7-6, something like this, I had a very bad call on his backhand passing shot.”

“The ball went long and they didn’t call. I’m sure if it had been in Brazil we would be playing a fifth set right now.”

Unfortunately for Kuerten, the match was in Miami and Sampras was the winner. The 20th century had held off the 21st, one last time.