PDA

View Full Version : Sampras played like crap and got away with it?


plain jane
08-17-2007, 11:28 AM
When Fed is playing crap against anyone not in the top 5 (excluding Roddick) he still manages to win. People are always comparing Fed to Sampras (I am new to the sport so i only watch clips of sampras, never saw a live match), but did sampras win matches playing crap too? Is is true the competition is lacking now versus then?

drakulie
08-17-2007, 11:37 AM
No, the competition is not lacking, and no Sampras did not win playing like crap.

flash9
08-17-2007, 11:54 AM
When Pete's serve was clicking there were times he would pull out a win even when he was not playing his best tennis. But, playing like crap is a whole different matter. That would imply he was not doing anything well including serving which was his biggest weapon. :D

DashaandSafin
08-17-2007, 11:54 AM
Troll alert..

plain jane
08-17-2007, 12:04 PM
Troll alert..

Fed is one of the few players i have seen so far that is actually like to watch play. But i also like to watch a good match. If fed is playing crap and wins then that means that the other guy is playing worse and the match cant be that great. i hate to see a match where someone chokes away a win. i was just wondering if people did that with sampras too.

DashaandSafin
08-17-2007, 12:09 PM
Um...people are saying that Sampras's competition was actually better than Federer's. Which I disagree with.

Anyway, Sampras had plently of close matches and losses. Just look at his win-loss record.

plain jane
08-17-2007, 12:15 PM
Please, i am not trying to dispute who faced better or worst competition, just if players had mental blocks against sampras like they seem to have against federer that they cant seem to beat a less than stellar federer.

VGP
08-17-2007, 12:15 PM
When Fed is playing crap against anyone not in the top 5 (excluding Roddick) he still manages to win. People are always comparing Fed to Sampras (I am new to the sport so i only watch clips of sampras, never saw a live match), but did sampras win matches playing crap too? Is is true the competition is lacking now versus then?

That's from where your opinion stems.

I suggest you "educate" yourself with full-length classic matches.

Sampras and pre-Sampras.

Maybe you'll even gain an appreciation for wood-era tennis too.

anointedone
08-17-2007, 12:23 PM
Sure he did vs much lesser players. Federer can do the same, and has done so in some recent matches.

When either Sampras or Federer play in a bigger match late in a tournament and dont play well they probably lose, like Federer did when he didnt play well against Djokovic in Canada last week, like Sampras has in some big matches he didnt play well. So no real difference I see.

plain jane
08-17-2007, 12:25 PM
Sure he did vs much lesser players. Federer can do the same, and has done so in some recent matches.

When either Sampras or Federer play in a bigger match late in a tournament and dont play well they probably lose, like Federer did when he didnt play well against Djokovic in Canada last week, like Sampras has in some big matches he didnt play well. So no real difference I see.

Thanks, was just wondering

Chadwixx
08-17-2007, 02:27 PM
Safin said it best, 10 years ago you could win tournaments with only a serve.

VGP
08-17-2007, 02:48 PM
Safin said it best, 10 years ago you could win tournaments with only a serve.

.....and ten years ago, grass was fast and tennis was played on indoor carpet.

fastdunn
08-17-2007, 02:56 PM
yes, many times. he would still win. that's one of many characteristics
of champions.

drpepper4590
08-17-2007, 03:02 PM
are they ever going back to the old wimbledon grass where it's actually faster than the US or just play to the players desire's rather than create a newe surface. Teh only really different surface left in the grand slams is the french. Also should we take safin's word...he's one of the best talents ever and has 2 majors because of the space between his ears. oh and is there a thread comparing the difficulty of era's because there should be

daddy
08-17-2007, 06:30 PM
Um...people are saying that Sampras's competition was actually better than Federer's. Which I disagree with.

Anyway, Sampras had plently of close matches and losses. Just look at his win-loss record.


Who are the players - which fed faces now and pose a threat to him ? 2 or 3 guys ? Roddick maybe ? I am not sure yuo are right because when sampras played there were many many players, most notably Aggasy and Courier, but there were also old guns Becker and Edberg and after that many many others like ivanisevic ( had a serve, why didnt he win so many titles ? ) , krajcek and rafter was a hell of a player. He had like 5 to 6 people whom he played and never knew if hed beat them or not.

Fed does not have nearly that many good players to face.


Btw - sampras lost alot of close matches from weaker oponents. Aggasi was more consistant in this department.

coloskier
08-17-2007, 09:37 PM
Fed is one of the few players i have seen so far that is actually like to watch play. But i also like to watch a good match. If fed is playing crap and wins then that means that the other guy is playing worse and the match cant be that great. i hate to see a match where someone chokes away a win. i was just wondering if people did that with sampras too.

What it means is that even when Fed is playing like crap, he is better than all but the top 3 players.

coloskier
08-17-2007, 09:40 PM
As long as Sampras had his serve going, everything else could go into the toilet and he still had a chance to win. If his serve wasn't going (rare, but it happened on occasion) and everything else was going, he would still occasionally lose to people he shouldn't lose to. But I think you can say that about almost all of the non-baseliner pros.

tennispro11
08-17-2007, 10:10 PM
What it means is that even when Fed is playing like crap, he is better than all but the top 3 players.

Completely agree. He can play like crap and still win. I think that if he found the right coach he could win against the top three if he has a game plan. When he isn't playing well it seems like he forgets the game plan and just tries to outhit his opponent. I don't understand why he does this. :sad:

Mad iX
08-18-2007, 01:10 AM
Couldn't always tell with Sampras. A lot of the time he didn't look like he wanted to be there and still won.

Zets147
08-18-2007, 01:15 AM
Fed sometime plays like crap, but that is comparing it to his "standard level of play"

His "Standard Level" is far greater than the other pros' level of play, that is why he still wins matches while playing not up to par.

squints
08-18-2007, 01:29 AM
I think many would argue that is not just the level of competition, but that the game itself is different from years past. The game of tennis has evolved and changed in the manner in which it is played as well as the styles in which it is played. With surfaces being re-done and experimented with, racquets changing, customization, and paintjobs, strings, etc.. There are so many contributing factors that just to simplify it to this degree, doesn't give it give either player, nor any of the pros, past or present, due respect.

superman1
08-18-2007, 07:54 AM
Yes, he could win playing like crap. Just look at that USO match against Corretja. He was barely moving and he still won.

Sampras and Federer do share this trait in common. They can zone in and play the best tennis you've ever seen, but more often than not they are laid back and will make a few lazy errors that most other guys wouldn't make. They knew how to pace themselves and win the important points.

Jack Romeo
08-19-2007, 06:38 AM
sampras doesn't win as much as fed when playing like crap but he can win when he is barfing on court... :)

anointedone
08-20-2007, 09:22 AM
I saw Sampras play a pretty horrific looking match and still crush the British hearts by fighting past Henman in 4 sets in the 1999 semi. Of course Tim crumbled under the pressure and opportunity he sensed too. It was a far cry from their outstanding 4 set semifinal the previous year.

daddy
08-20-2007, 09:47 AM
I saw Sampras play a pretty horrific looking match and still crush the British hearts by fighting past Henman in 4 sets in the 1999 semi. Of course Tim crumbled under the pressure and opportunity he sensed too. It was a far cry from their outstanding 4 set semifinal the previous year.

I understand people like tim, hes a great guy and everything, but his style of play was just overrun by age. He was a potential 80s player with the chip and charge, slice aproach technique, 90s and after, they were not so great for those players.

caulcano
08-20-2007, 10:10 AM
IMHO, Sampras doesn't return aswell as Federer. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Federer is harder to beat. Federer creates more chances and applies more pressure to the server than Sampras did/could. Federer bagel count possibly reflects this.

daddy
08-20-2007, 10:13 AM
IMHO, Sampras doesn't return aswell as Federer. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Federer is harder to beat. Federer creates more chances and applies more pressure to the server than Sampras did/could. Federer bagel count possibly reflects this.


Has to be said this is as of late, before he was chipping the ball back mostly, now he is more adept to return the ball at higher speed. He is def improving in this bepartment, so I do think this is the most improved part of his game,

NadalForever
08-20-2007, 10:27 AM
That's a bunch of crap. Sampras returned just as good as Federer. But his competition was 100 times tougher so he could not win as many bagels as Federer. Overall Sampras was a much better player than Federer but Federer's competition is such a laughable joke.

scineram
08-20-2007, 10:29 AM
Yeah, especially Nadal.

NadalForever
08-20-2007, 10:32 AM
Yeah, especially Nadal.

I agree Nadal is a joke on hardcourts but thank God there is Djokovic to embarass Federer on hardcourts.

daddy
08-20-2007, 11:29 AM
That's a bunch of crap. Sampras returned just as good as Federer. But his competition was 100 times tougher so he could not win as many bagels as Federer. Overall Sampras was a much better player than Federer but Federer's competition is such a laughable joke.

Im not sure this is correct. If you look at the long term you will say where is federers nemesis, like agassi was for sampras ? But remember agassis off court behaviour and his slip ups to 100+ place at the rankings etc. Courier ? Never the same after brain surgery ? Right? Anyone else ? Who are those guys, who were at the top at the same time ? Rafter ? Just steady pass down the line and there he goes ... Ivanisevic ? Does he know how to hold the racquet if its not a serve ?

Competition can only get better with many more people playing and so on .. I would say you are wrong on this one my friend.