PDA

View Full Version : 'd Sampras trade 2 Wimby for 1 French Open?


Dutch-Guy
05-18-2009, 09:57 AM
'd Sampras trade 2 Wimby for 1 French Open?
-Yes: why
-No: why

The gate is open for Sampras and Fed fans.
Rafa and other player's fans can jump in too.

Post away.

svijk
05-18-2009, 10:14 AM
Good question.

Five years ago,without hesitation, when he would have thought no one could get to 13 Slams.

Today, not so sure, since I think he's like to be the #1 Slam winner of all time and there are doubts if Fed can equal/ beat him.

On an off note, since I couldn't think of where to say it, Caroline Wozniaki looked pretty cute yesterday in the presentation ceremony, never saw her face before with the hat on:)

Dutch-Guy
05-18-2009, 10:20 AM
Good question.

Five years ago,without hesitation, when he would have thought no one could get to 13 Slams.

Today, not so sure, since I think he's like to be the #1 Slam winner of all time and there are doubts if Fed can equal/ beat him.
I think he 'd,especially if Fed wins the FO.About the record,Fed will tie and/or break it for sure.No question about it.

On an off note, since I couldn't think of where to say it, Caroline Wozniaki looked pretty cute yesterday in the presentation ceremony, never saw her face before with the hat on:)
Yeah she looked great.Did she have a hat on? I didn't see that.

svijk
05-18-2009, 10:27 AM
.
I think he 'd,especially if Fed wins the FO.About the record,Fed will tie and/or break it for sure.No question about it.


Yeah she looked great.Did she have a hat on? I didn't see that.

I meant i'd never seen her face before during matches when she wears a hat or cap or whatever its called....she should get rid of it asap

mzzmuaa
05-18-2009, 10:39 AM
People trade two FOs for one wimbledon, not the other way around.
Sampras is a person.

Chris De Tone
05-18-2009, 10:59 AM
Why would he have to trade Wimbledon for a Roland Garros title? Roland Garros is the 3rd most prestigious major title. He could trade an Australian Open and a Philadelphia title for it. :) OK, I am ready for my annihilation from the clay court tennis fans!:) I am kidding, by the way...

Cenc
05-19-2009, 02:52 AM
he wouldnt trade one wimby for fo lol
in fact i think if he could choose his 15th slam it would be 8th wimby rather than 1st fo, in fact im 99% sure

prosealster
05-19-2009, 02:55 AM
i dont think he is too disappointed about not winning FO....he place sw19 higher than any other major....i think he would trade any of his us open for another sw19

Andres
05-19-2009, 05:17 AM
I wouldn't trade a Wimby for anything.

tintin
05-19-2009, 06:47 AM
I'm sure he'd rather give one of his Australian Open or maybe 1 of his US trophies for just 1 Coupe des Mousquetaires

Wimbledon
RG
USO


Australian Open

Sampras is no GOAT in my book

helloworld
05-19-2009, 07:33 AM
Wimbledon title is far more prestigious than Roland Garros. Why would he trade something more valuable to obtain something less valuable? :confused:

svijk
05-19-2009, 07:45 AM
Wimbledon title is far more prestigious than Roland Garros. Why would he trade something more valuable to obtain something less valuable? :confused:

Because he has 7 of one and none of the other and he would be considered a more complete player if he had a GS on clay as well, thats the point the OP is making here.

Everyone understands the prestige asociated with Wimbledon but most of the posters are missing the point here

helloworld
05-19-2009, 07:47 AM
Because he has 7 of one and none of the other and he would be considered a more complete player if he had a GS on clay as well, thats the point the OP is making here.

Everyone understands the prestige asociated with Wimbledon but most of the posters are missing the point here

Still, 2 Wimbledon for 1 FO is a very very bad trade. :-|

thejoe
05-19-2009, 07:55 AM
Still, 2 Wimbledon for 1 FO is a very very bad trade. :-|

No it isn't. Think about what it would do for his legacy. He would gain more by losing 2 Wimbys but winning a FO than he would by winning an eighth Wimby. Obvious he wouldn't gain numerically, but he would be seen as a more complete player.

Cenc
05-19-2009, 08:05 AM
just by deluded fedfans, not by people who understand that wimby>roland garros in every aspect

thejoe
05-19-2009, 08:06 AM
just by deluded fedfans, not by people who understand that wimby>roland garros in every aspect

Or by deluded Sampras fans that think FO doesn't matter.

Cenc
05-19-2009, 08:07 AM
Or by deluded Sampras fans that think FO doesn't matter.

it matters, of course it does
however i think everybody (except those i mentioned before) would rather win 4 wimbys than one of each (AO,FO,Wimby,USO)

svijk
05-19-2009, 08:12 AM
it matters, of course it does
however i think everybody (except those i mentioned before) would rather win 4 wimbys than one of each (AO,FO,Wimby,USO)

Oh of course, being from Croatia may have something to do with your opinion (remember a ceratin Ivanisevic)

However i seriously doubt anyone picking 4 W instead of 1 of each. Maybe a poll can decide that or simply ask Agassi

JoshDragon
05-19-2009, 08:14 AM
it matters, of course it does
however i think everybody (except those i mentioned before) would rather win 4 wimbys than one of each (AO,FO,Wimby,USO)

I would much rather have one of each. Especially in the same year. :)

Cenc
05-19-2009, 09:01 AM
I would much rather have one of each. Especially in the same year. :)

different years

however, wimbledon has longest tradition (from 1877 i think) and is the temple of tennis so win there counts more than any other imo
most of the players would agree with that i believe

Cesc Fabregas
05-19-2009, 10:18 AM
No it isn't. Think about what it would do for his legacy. He would gain more by losing 2 Wimbys but winning a FO than he would by winning an eighth Wimby. Obvious he wouldn't gain numerically, but he would be seen as a more complete player.

Sampras has the record number of Wimbledon titles at 7 why would he trade that record for 1 French Open:confused:.

380pistol
05-19-2009, 10:31 AM
It depends. I don't think anyone (incl. Pete) would trade a Wimbledon for a French Open. I doubt Sampras (an many others) would not give up a US Open for a French.

But in the sense that's the only slam he's missing, would Sampras make that trade off: 2 of his Wimbledon titles to to fill that missing hole. I don't know. Sampras probably feels he would like his chances on grass, carpet and hard, and that's 75% of the game, right there.

JoshDragon
05-19-2009, 10:38 AM
different years

however, wimbledon has longest tradition (from 1877 i think) and is the temple of tennis so win there counts more than any other imo
most of the players would agree with that i believe

I have to disagree with you on this. Was Pete's four straight Wimbledons more impressive than Rafa's four French Opens? No. They are just different. What about a player like Borg who dominated both Wimbledon and the French. Are his Wimbledon wins more impressive?

I think what's most important is to be able to win all of the majors. Sampras, was never able to win the French and IMO that prevents him from ever being the GOAT. He, was easily the best of his generation on the fast surfaces and one of the best on medium speed but he failed miserably on clay. If he really was the GOAT he should have been able to win at least one French.

Jim Courier fan
05-19-2009, 11:43 AM
nope ten ch

TheNatural
05-19-2009, 11:46 AM
he'd trade none and stay the king of Wimbledon with his undefeated 7-0 Wimbledon finals record long after Nadal breaks his slam record.

All-rounder
05-19-2009, 12:55 PM
Why would you trade 2 Wimbledon's for a french open Id do the opposite