PDA

View Full Version : A question for sampras fans...


falcon12
03-05-2009, 05:27 AM
OK,first of all I do like sampras but this topic is about some points I don't really understand.Here it goes:
What does make some hardcore sampras fans think without a doubt that sampras would destroy on fast surfaces players like nadal,federer or djokovic if players like chang or corretja give sampras always a run for his money on fast surfaces?
I mean all of these players were really good and the match should be played,I'm not so sure Nadal canno't win sampras on the us open for example,sure it would be tough,but I don't get that 'he would destroy him' point,players with relatively few waepons like chang(don't get me wrong)won sampras on carpet and took sets from him at the us open,and sampras has never been so unbeatable I mean,that point is weak ...(It goes also the other way around,sampras or agassi could have had some unexpected win on clay against these players who mostly play from the back of the court)Anyway just my opinion,have a good day.

miyagi
03-05-2009, 07:20 AM
you can't really judge by what a "fan" says as they are not likely to be objective....Sampras WAS a great player and I think would fair well against players like Fed and Nadal whilst in his prime.....

But we will never know and can only speculate....based on what we have seen.

Golden Retriever
03-05-2009, 07:37 AM
Many people here still live in the 90's. According to these people Sampras should be No.1 forever.

I, for one, don't feel sorry for Sampras not being able to be No. 1 forever. He already has made enough money to last him for a few life time living in luxury. Why would I even care if he was/is the best or not?

In this world, many people have far more talent than he had and worked much harder but never got the break than he got.

coloskier
03-05-2009, 08:14 AM
Yes, Chang and Corretja gave Sampras a hard time on fast courts, but hardly ever in a best of 5 match. Chang's quads would always blow up, and nothing needs to be said about Corretja in a 5 set match. His record in 5 set matches speaks for itself. Yes, Nadal and Djokovic might give Sampras a good match in a 3 set match, but in a 5 set, not a chance. Djokovic's lungs would collapse, along with Nadal's knees, digging for low putaway volleys. Let's also consider what the courts, rackets, strings and balls were like in the 90's, not in present day terms. Without the present conditions, most players nowadays would be ranked much lower. Remember, we are comparing what players now would do in Sampras's era, not the other way around.

woodrow1029
03-05-2009, 08:24 AM
OK,first of all I do like sampras but this topic is about some points I don't really understand.Here it goes:
What does make some hardcore sampras fans think without a doubt that sampras would destroy on fast surfaces players like nadal,federer or djokovic if players like chang or corretja give sampras always a run for his money on fast surfaces?
I mean all of these players were really good and the match should be played,I'm not so sure Nadal canno't win sampras on the us open for example,sure it would be tough,but I don't get that 'he would destroy him' point,players with relatively few waepons like chang(don't get me wrong)won sampras on carpet and took sets from him at the us open,and sampras has never been so unbeatable I mean,that point is weak ...(It goes also the other way around,sampras or agassi could have had some unexpected win on clay against these players who mostly play from the back of the court)Anyway just my opinion,have a good day.
I am a Sampras fan, and I believe that if Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, or pretty much anyone in the top 20 played Sampras, and REALLY played, it would be 3 quick sets (in a best of 5 set match) for the current top 20 player. I mean if they REALLY played, not playing around like Haas in San Jose, Hewitt in Memphis or Federer in Asia.

wangs78
03-05-2009, 04:47 PM
Sampras in his prime would have been competitive against any of today's top players (in their respectives primes as well). He has the best serve in history (esp the 2nd), and plays S&V which will unbalance any of today's players. I do think that the average serve today is slightly better than during Sampras' era, so it's possible that Sampras won't be quite as dominant with the serve as he was during his own era. But he would still be pretty damn good (top 3 for sure).

380pistol
03-05-2009, 11:55 PM
OK,first of all I do like sampras but this topic is about some points I don't really understand.Here it goes:

Let's go....


What does make some hardcore sampras fans think without a doubt that sampras would destroy on fast surfaces players like nadal,federer or djokovic

"Without a doubt"?!? Which Sampras fans are these???


if players like chang or corretja give sampras always a run for his money on fast surfaces?

So Corretja gave Sampras a money when he vomitted twice and the other when he played for 6 straight weeks. And Chang who Pete was 12-3 against after his 19th b-day


I mean all of these players were really good and the match should be played,I'm not so sure Nadal canno't win sampras on the us open for example,sure it would be tough,but I don't get that 'he would destroy him' point,players with relatively few waepons like chang(don't get me wrong)won sampras on carpet and took sets from him at the us open,and sampras has never been so unbeatable I mean,that point is weak ...(It goes also the other way around,sampras or agassi could have had some unexpected win on clay against these players who mostly play from the back of the court)Anyway just my opinion,have a good day.

Nadal would hard pressed to defeat Sampras in flushing or a myriad of reasons. Deco Turf II one of Pete's best surfaces and up to this point one of Rafa's worst. Stylistically Sampras would be a bad matchup for Nadal, and that's why I see outside of clay Nadal fighting an uphill battle. And Chang took 1 of 7 sets from Pete in Flushing.

You might wanna ask all these guys who claim Sampras had no forehand, a bcakhand that was worse than that, and a baseline game that was non exhistant.

380pistol
03-05-2009, 11:57 PM
Many people here still live in the 90's. According to these people Sampras should be No.1 forever.

I, for one, don't feel sorry for Sampras not being able to be No. 1 forever. He already has made enough money to last him for a few life time living in luxury. Why would I even care if he was/is the best or not?

In this world, many people have far more talent than he had and worked much harder but never got the break than he got.

So Pete was talentless and didn't work hard?!? I don't get you at all.

blue12
03-06-2009, 12:15 AM
Since you're talking about 90's players I'd like to say that Edburg rules!