PDA

View Full Version : Wimbledon domination: Borg, Sampras or Federer?


War, Safin!
05-15-2007, 02:45 AM
Whose victories are more impressive?
1 - Bjorn Borg, a clay-court specialist, playing on fast-playing grass, employing baselining.
2 - Pete Sampras, a hard-court specialist, on fast-playing grass, employing serve-and-volley.
3 - Roger Federer, an all-court specialist, playing on medium-fast playing grass, employing all-court game?

(please disregard no. of titles won for now!)

thu_huong
05-15-2007, 02:46 AM
me: federer:)

War, Safin!
05-15-2007, 02:48 AM
me: federer:)
Reason(s)?

thu_huong
05-15-2007, 02:50 AM
Reason(s)?

please don't laugh at me but as you know Roger is very well now, and he will play more tournaments---> get better and more impressive result. and another reason is that I like him

War, Safin!
05-15-2007, 05:26 AM
please don't laugh at me but as you know Roger is very well now, and he will play more tournaments---> get better and more impressive result. and another reason is that I like him
I'm not laughing but your reasoning or English doesn't make any sense at all.

Buuurnz
05-15-2007, 07:02 AM
I dunno, all three of them were so dominant, but I'll take Federer too cuz he, even the grass slowed down a lot went through wimbledon so easily last years(and that it slowed down is a disadvantage for him and advantage for most other e.g. nadal)!

noeledmonds
05-15-2007, 09:08 AM
I am not sure how to disregard the number of titles won completely, but here is my take on it.

Sampras- The most impressive in terms of Wimbledon dominance alone, 7 Wimbledon titles in 8 years is a remarkable record.

Borg- The most suprising and unbelievable achivement that will be hardest to match. Winning back to back French Open-Wimbledon titles 3 years running and 6 French Open titles and 5 Wimbledon titles in all is an achivement that I doubt will be matched for decades.

Federer- Too early to tell. So far he is positioned nicely to match or exeed Sampras's 7 Wimbledons, however with grass playing like a hard court Federer will be unlikely to continue his domination on grass once his domination on hard court ends as Sampras did.

War, Safin!
05-15-2007, 10:28 AM
I dunno, all three of them were so dominant, but I'll take Federer too cuz he, even the grass slowed down a lot went through wimbledon so easily last years(and that it slowed down is a disadvantage for him and advantage for most other e.g. nadal)!
Yeah, but not slowed down to clay-court speed....no way. And the bounce is still pretty low....

Andres
05-15-2007, 11:33 AM
Whose victories are more impressive?
1 - Bjorn Borg, a clay-court specialist, playing on fast-playing grass, employing baselining.
2 - Pete Sampras, a hard-court specialist, on fast-playing grass, employing serve-and-volley.
3 - Roger Federer, an all-court specialist, playing on medium-fast playing grass, employing all-court game?

(please disregard no. of titles won for now!)Borg served and volleyed his way to win Wimbledon. He did baseline, but he S&Ved much more than he baselined ;)

fastdunn
05-15-2007, 11:57 AM
Whose victories are more impressive?
1 - Bjorn Borg, a clay-court specialist, playing on fast-playing grass, employing baselining.
2 - Pete Sampras, a hard-court specialist, on fast-playing grass, employing serve-and-volley.
3 - Roger Federer, an all-court specialist, playing on medium-fast playing grass, employing all-court game?

(please disregard no. of titles won for now!)

Borg serve and volleyed much and much more than Federer.

How does one conclude Fed is an all courter and Borg is a baseliner ?

hoosierbr
05-15-2007, 12:13 PM
Borg. I doubt that Fed will equal the five Wimbledons in a row mark. I smell an upset early on.

War, Safin!
05-15-2007, 12:54 PM
Borg served and volleyed his way to win Wimbledon. He did baseline, but he S&Ved much more than he baselined ;)

Borg serve and volleyed much and much more than Federer.
How does one conclude Fed is an all courter and Borg is a baseliner ?

1 - Borg was, first-and-foremost, a baseliner, through-and-through.
He employed serve-and volley to degree, yeah, but not that much.

2 - See #1

McEnroe's came along in 1980 with the pure serve-and-volley style to combat Borg.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
05-15-2007, 12:56 PM
i say federer, i mean, he really leaves his opponents to dust in wimbeldon.

War, Safin!
05-15-2007, 12:56 PM
And before you start with any comebacks, I'm watching Borg at Wimbledon on am official DVD now.....yes, I'm actually watching it as I type: he's baselining.

Thank you. :D

CyBorg
05-15-2007, 01:05 PM
i say federer, i mean, he really leaves his opponents to dust in wimbeldon.

Borg won Wimbledon without dropping a set. Federer hasn't.

CyBorg
05-15-2007, 01:09 PM
And before you start with any comebacks, I'm watching Borg at Wimbledon on am official DVD now.....yes, I'm actually watching it as I type: he's baselining.

Thank you. :D

It depends on which Wimbledon you watch. Borg serve and volleyed on every first serve in his first few Wimbledons and then gradually employed a more baseline style with every year, as he became more comfortable with his tactics.

That being said, even in his final two Wimbledon efforts he still volleyed many more times than Federer does today.

CyBorg
05-15-2007, 01:10 PM
1 - Borg was, first-and-foremost, a baseliner, through-and-through.
He employed serve-and volley to degree, yeah, but not that much.

This post reeks of a lack of research.

fastdunn
05-15-2007, 02:29 PM
1 - Borg was, first-and-foremost, a baseliner, through-and-through.
He employed serve-and volley to degree, yeah, but not that much.
.

What are you saying ?

Borg used net much more than Federer of last few years.
How can I categorize Federer as all courter while I say Borg is a hard core
baseliner ?????

roundiesee
05-15-2007, 09:11 PM
Depends on how you look at it.
Borg- because he was able to win back-to-back French and Wimby titles on several occasions. A truly remarkable achievement.
Sampras- because he won the most Wimbledon titles (so far), and because he did so with superb attacking tennis, hitting breath-taking winners, not only at the net but with his serve and running passes.
Federer- because he makes winning on grass look so easy, with his smooth strokes and beautiful balance and footwork, and the wonderful range of shots that he can hit, more so than the other two.

CEvertFan
05-16-2007, 01:09 AM
Depends on how you look at it.
Borg- because he was able to win back-to-back French and Wimby titles on several occasions. A truly remarkable achievement.
Sampras- because he won the most Wimbledon titles (so far), and because he did so with superb attacking tennis, hitting breath-taking winners, not only at the net but with his serve and running passes.
Federer- because he makes winning on grass look so easy, with his smooth strokes and beautiful balance and footwork, and the wonderful range of shots that he can hit, more so than the other two.

Sampras is tied with William Renshaw with 7 Wimbledons. He doesn't own the record by himself.

Phil
05-16-2007, 01:24 AM
Whose victories are more impressive?
1 - Bjorn Borg, a clay-court specialist and baseliner, playing on fast-playing grass, employing an all-court game.
2 - Pete Sampras, a hard-court specialist, on fast-playing grass, employing serve-and-volley.
3 - Roger Federer, an all-court specialist, playing on medium-fast playing grass, employing a baseliner's game?

(please disregard no. of titles won for now!)

I fixed your playing descriptions for you. I think Pete was most dominant of the three-just based on the competition he faced. Though the Wimbledon records and performances of the other two guys are amazing too.

chiru
05-16-2007, 01:57 AM
Sampras is tied with William Renshaw with 7 Wimbledons. He doesn't own the record by himself.

Wow good argument, using a record from the era of the challenge round.

CEvertFan
05-16-2007, 03:28 AM
Wow good argument, using a record from the era of the challenge round.


It's still legitimate however much you may not want it to be.

Gizo
05-16-2007, 03:45 AM
Sampras comes top for me. 7 titles in 8 years was just amazing.