PDA

View Full Version : Patrick Rafter: I can see Pete Sampras coming back


TheNatural
06-20-2009, 09:16 PM
Sampras would have a good chance of winning it if he played Wimbledon now.With his new bigger racket he does some things even better than he used to in his prime. No one else playing now is a natural on the grass the way Sampras is even at his current age.

Patrick Rafter: I can see Pete Sampras coming back (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/wimbledon/article-23709772-details/Patrick+Rafter:+I+can+see+Pete+Sampras+coming+back/article.do)
19.06.09

Patrick Rafter has revealed that 14-times grand slam champion Pete Sampras believes he could still compete on the ATP Tour.

The Australian, who lost successive Wimbledon finals in 2000 and 2001 and now plays on the seniors tour, claims 37-year-old Sampras has pondered a return.

Rafter said: “I was in the locker room talking to Pete and he would love to come back and play at Wimbledon. People talk about the game moving on but there is definitely a part of Pete who thinks he could still compete at that level.

“I said to him, What about the power of the top players?' He said, Well, they have got strength but it doesn't mean much if they can't return my serve'.

“Serve-volleyers may have gone out of fashion as the courts have slowed down but they are still quick enough to play to his strengths — and trust me, he can still hit the ball hard.”

* You can watch Patrick Rafter play at The Masters Tennis at the Royal Albert Hall 1-6 December. For tickets, call 0208 233 5882, or visit the website www.themasterstennis.com

luckyboy1300
06-20-2009, 09:20 PM
only 1 word i can say: "COME!"

VivalaVida
06-20-2009, 09:21 PM
He can come, only to lose in the first round....

Nadal_Freak
06-20-2009, 09:21 PM
Pete would lose in the first round. Talk is cheap. I want to see it happen.

Matt H.
06-20-2009, 09:22 PM
well the draw is already out.

2010 is a long ways away

35ft6
06-20-2009, 09:25 PM
Pete would lose in the first round. Talk is cheap.No kidding. He's delusional. But that kind of uncompromising self belief is what made him a champion. Except now, he doesn't have the gas, young legs, and the timing that comes from hitting a lot to back it up.

OTMPut
06-20-2009, 09:25 PM
Give him center court. He will make it to at least R16.

Mick
06-20-2009, 09:27 PM
sampras would teach the young guns how to play serve-and-volley on a grass court OR maybe the young guns would prove to sampras that serve-and-volley is dead and buried :)

Matt H.
06-20-2009, 09:31 PM
if martina navratilova can play main draw singles in her late 40's and win a set, i think Pete could at least win a match at 37.

Afterall, Connors made that run to the semi's at the age of 39. Pete has the advantage over all these old guys because his serve is still a nuclear weapon.

forehand_dude
06-20-2009, 09:31 PM
No kidding. He's delusional.

Really? After he beat Federer in that exhibition, I don't see how people can say he's delusional. His serve is still there. The biggest issue would be the fitness to last through two weeks of five set matches.

tudwell
06-20-2009, 09:37 PM
Where's Edberg505 with his facepalm gifs?

Nadal_Freak
06-20-2009, 09:39 PM
if martina navratilova can play main draw singles in her late 40's and win a set, i think Pete could at least win a match at 37.

Afterall, Connors made that run to the semi's at the age of 39. Pete has the advantage over all these old guys because his serve is still a nuclear weapon.
This is the men's tour. Much stronger than the women's and it is much stronger than it was 18 years ago.

onehandbh
06-20-2009, 09:41 PM
He doesn't have the court coverage or groundstrokes to be able to
compete anymore. Breaking serve would be REALLY hard for him.
The grass courts would have to get a lot faster to give him a chance.

120mphBodyServe
06-20-2009, 09:42 PM
This is the men's tour. Much stronger than the women's and it is much stronger than it was 18 years ago.

Don't you mean, 9yrs ago.. When Pete won his last Wimby title?
You really hate Sampras, don't you???

Nadal_Freak
06-20-2009, 09:44 PM
Don't you mean, 9yrs ago.. When Pete won his last Wimby title?
You really hate Sampras, don't you???
I was talking about when Connors won it at 39. You can't get to the Semis in this days field close to that age.

Tennis_Bum
06-20-2009, 09:46 PM
I really hope Pete will come back and play on ATP, even small events in California, well, Indian Wells, yes I know it's s master. I really want to see him matched up against current players so he can prove to us he still got it.

At least do it then you know Pete. Either put up or shut up. We would like to see if you can do it too. I don't think he can compete at this level, but again I would like to see him prove me wrong too. So at least I know for sure if he can or he can't.

If Pete is going to play on the ATP, then I wish he would shut the fvck up and let the current players have their moments in the sun, he certainly did.

OTMPut
06-20-2009, 09:47 PM
I do not understand. This guy won 13 majors. He has been into tennis at a very high level for a long time. I would assume he knows much better than anyone where he stands now in terms of his abilities vis a vis what he sees in the tour.
Show the man some respect.

I saw Santoro play in a warm up tournament the other day. The guys was in Semis with his game.

Matt H.
06-20-2009, 09:48 PM
i would compare sampras playing at wimbledon now to basically Ivo Karlovic in terms of how the matches would play out.

Sampras serving big, ground game would be average. A lot of unforced errors as well as a good share of winners due to trying to end points early.

Blinkism
06-20-2009, 09:56 PM
It'd be interesting to see it happen and Sampras losing to some random punk in the first 2 rounds, I suspect a lot of Sampras fans would STFU or make more excuses than Nadal fans allegedly do.

World Beater
06-20-2009, 09:58 PM
i hope he comes.

seriously. the guy lost to bastl his last yr.

give me a break.

sampras the original ego king.

IvanAndreevich
06-20-2009, 10:01 PM
i hope he comes.

seriously. the guy lost to bastl his last yr.

give me a break.

sampras the original ego king.

Sampras didn't say this. Rafter did.

TheNatural
06-20-2009, 10:04 PM
Don't you mean, 9yrs ago.. When Pete won his last Wimby title?
You really hate Sampras, don't you???

And even more relevant is that its only 7 years since he won the US Open in a dominant performance and hes been crushing people with his new bigger racket when he gets a bit of practice in. Federer knows all about it!

tudwell
06-20-2009, 10:08 PM
I think old man Sampras and crippled Nadal should have an exhibition on Center Court at Wimbledon.

Who would you put money on?

Blinkism
06-20-2009, 10:14 PM
I think old man Sampras and crippled Nadal should have an exhibition on Center Court at Wimbledon.

Who would you put money on?

old man Sampras... only because Nadal's knee problem is gonna make it way too difficult if Sampras is S&V'ing.

Hate to say it, though.

I still think a prime Nadal can beat a prime Sampras at LEAST half the time, if not more, at Wimbledon (I know I'm going to get flamed for this comment/slow surface/pusher/make Nadal look like a fool/can't touch his serves/Petey owns Wimbledon!!!!/serve and volleying pwns everything/weak era, etc, etc, etc...)

IvanAndreevich
06-20-2009, 10:17 PM
old man Sampras... only because Nadal's knee problem is gonna make it way too difficult if Sampras is S&V'ing.

Hate to say it, though.

I still think a prime Nadal can beat a prime Sampras at LEAST half the time, if not more, at Wimbledon (I know I'm going to get flamed for this comment/slow surface/pusher/make Nadal look like a fool/can't touch his serves/Petey owns Wimbledon!!!!/serve and volleying pwns everything/weak era, etc, etc, etc...)

On this slow grass MAYBE. On the old grass not a chance in hell.

TheNatural
06-20-2009, 10:19 PM
Sampras beat Federer, Ginepri, Fish, Stepanek, Haas, Roddick and others in exhibitions so has already shown that he has the skill to beat them all. Grass would play to his strengths even more.

World Beater
06-20-2009, 10:23 PM
Sampras didn't say this. Rafter did.

read the article carefullly.

rafter is saying this is what sampras thinks...

ive followed enough of pete to know he is very capable of saying such stuff.

zagor
06-20-2009, 10:27 PM
i hope he comes.

seriously. the guy lost to bastl his last yr.

give me a break.

sampras the original ego king.

Of course he is,that's why he was so succesfull.

On topic,actions speak louder than words.Talk is cheap Pete,I'm sure every tournament in the world be ecstatic to give you the wildcard so there's nothing stoping you from coming back.

BreakPoint
06-20-2009, 10:35 PM
I do not understand. This guy won 13 majors.
14 Majors.

Defcon
06-20-2009, 10:39 PM
I pity the fools who think Sampras would lose 1st round (maybe if he drew a top 5 seed) - there's very little chance of that.

Sampras had the best serve in history, his volleys weren't far behind Edberg and he had a much more lethal ground game. If the grass played like the 90's, he'd blow people like Nadal away.

And the only reason he lost to George freakin Bastl was the damn graveyard court ;)

Polaris
06-20-2009, 10:41 PM
Sampras beat Federer, Ginepri, Fish, Stepanek, Haas, Roddick and others in exhibitions so has already shown that he has the skill to beat them all. Grass would play to his strengths even more.

E-x-h-i-b-i-t-i-o-n. Enough said.

Blinkism
06-20-2009, 10:52 PM
On this slow grass MAYBE. On the old grass not a chance in hell.

For the sake of getting into a big discussion and hijacking this thread, I'll refer you to a thread I made before where I discuss that issue.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=262632&page=1 (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=262632&page=3)

And since you discussed the issue on that thread, also, it saves us the time of debating Wimbledon's grass speed. Just refer to the thread.

Anyways, I'm saying that Nadal would have a chance to beat Sampras at Wimbledon, regardless of what the date is.

But, I'm being fair and saying that the H2H would most likely be 50-50. I really believe Nadal is a freak of nature who could beat a good S&V'er and stop the bombardment of serves by wearing down his opponent physically and mentally. However, Nadal in a S&V era would have to play long, tight, matches and would probably have a significantly shorter prime. So in that hypothetical prime, I think he'd beat Sampras half the time.

To be fair, I am a Nadal fan so I have my biases. But I refuse to live up to the hype that Sampras would beat guys consistently these days if he was still around in his prime. He'd be either #3 or #4 right now, IMO. Fed could beat him consistently and Nadal too, most likely.

Cenc
06-20-2009, 10:55 PM
I was talking about when Connors won it at 39. You can't get to the Semis in this days field close to that age.

something tells me sampras at 37>bjorkman at 34(or 35 not sure)...
and bjorkman played semis...
however i doubt sampras is fit enough at the moment
and stop such threads, he is not coming back

Cenc
06-20-2009, 10:57 PM
It'd be interesting to see it happen and Sampras losing to some random punk in the first 2 rounds, I suspect a lot of Sampras fans would STFU or make more excuses than Nadal fans allegedly do.

right, if he lost to someone in a best of 5 match at age of nearly 38 it would be a real proof how weak he was on grass
dont get it wrong but i dont see fed winning titles 10 years from now :D

NamRanger
06-20-2009, 11:11 PM
For the sake of getting into a big discussion and hijacking this thread, I'll refer you to a thread I made before where I discuss that issue.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=262632&page=1 (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=262632&page=3)

And since you discussed the issue on that thread, also, it saves us the time of debating Wimbledon's grass speed. Just refer to the thread.

Anyways, I'm saying that Nadal would have a chance to beat Sampras at Wimbledon, regardless of what the date is.

But, I'm being fair and saying that the H2H would most likely be 50-50. I really believe Nadal is a freak of nature who could beat a good S&V'er and stop the bombardment of serves by wearing down his opponent physically and mentally. However, Nadal in a S&V era would have to play long, tight, matches and would probably have a significantly shorter prime. So in that hypothetical prime, I think he'd beat Sampras half the time.

To be fair, I am a Nadal fan so I have my biases. But I refuse to live up to the hype that Sampras would beat guys consistently these days if he was still around in his prime. He'd be either #3 or #4 right now, IMO. Fed could beat him consistently and Nadal too, most likely.



Prime Sampras vs Prime Nadal on any fast surface such as old grass, carpet, indoor hardcourt, or American hardcourts is a total slaughter fest. 94-95 Sampras destroys Nadal 99/100 times on any fast hardcourt. There is no way Nadal tires out Sampras on a fast court; Sampras simply makes everything a 1-2 stroke ralley.


Nadal simply

A. Does not return well enough to bother Sampras
B. Does not serve well enough to keep up with Sampras; he will be broken.

jamesblakefan#1
06-20-2009, 11:17 PM
right, if he lost to someone in a best of 5 match at age of nearly 38 it would be a real proof how weak he was on grass
dont get it wrong but i dont see fed winning titles 10 years from now :D

I compare Pete Sampras coming back to Michael Jordan coming back for the Wizards. Could he still be a good player? Of course, because of the natural talents he has and will always have. But could he still be "Pete Sampras"? Of course not. Yeah, maybe lightning would strike every once in a while, and he'd knock off a DelPotro here or Djokovic there. Just like Jordan had a 40 pt outburst every once in a while during his comeback. But would he still be a top 10, top 20 player? No, of course not. Top 30, top 35 maybe. But there'd be a lot more of old man Pete getting passed by the likes of Albert Montanes and Frederico Gil's of the world while S&Ving than I think Sampras fans, or Pete himself should even stand for. A Sampras comeback would do more harm than good and ultimatly do nothing to advance his legacy.

LanceStern
06-20-2009, 11:34 PM
Sampras beat Federer, Ginepri, Fish, Stepanek, Haas, Roddick and others in exhibitions so has already shown that he has the skill to beat them all. Grass would play to his strengths even more.

I don't know about the others, but the one with Federer was played jsut like an exhibition (i.e. Federer holding back)

certifiedjatt
06-20-2009, 11:38 PM
people talk of the game having changed so much. it hasn't. the only mildly interesting addition since sampras retired has been nadal and his extreme topspins. even that is really nothing unique (re: courier).

the game has not changed much. the only thing that would prevent sampras from playing at the top of his game is simply his physical fitness and his mentality.

just because meatheads are hitting hard and bashing the ball from every corner of the court, does not mean it hasn't been done before.

obviously, in terms of talent, sampras would probably have to try everythign to beat nadal and federer. but there is no way a guy with 14 majors, with the last one being in 2002, would lose to guys like sam friggin querry or del friggin potro. gimme a friggin break.

there's also the issue of confusion he would impose on most players with his 2-3 stroke points. sure he would get passed. but the sheer relentlessness of his attacking game would put a lot of pressure on most players. i'm a big nadal fan. but i don't think nadal would be able to beat sampras on a non-clay surface. as someone said, his serve game is not threatening, and his return game is not offensive. i imagine a couple of "sampras sets" (all is well and slow until 4-3, at which point sampras breaks to take the set 6-4).

federer would obviously pose the biggest threat. but it isn't because the game has changed and he's doing something revolutionary. it's because he's simply incomparably talented and can execute shots more consistently than almost everyone else in the world.

the game has not changed much, if at all. yes, more players are hitting hard. but you don't play against 7 guys at once.

OTMPut
06-20-2009, 11:41 PM
14 Majors.

Too much fed following!

jamesblakefan#1
06-20-2009, 11:45 PM
people talk of the game having changed so much. it hasn't. the only mildly interesting addition since sampras retired has been nadal and his extreme topspins. even that is really nothing unique (re: courier).

the game has not changed much. the only thing that would prevent sampras from playing at the top of his game is simply his physical fitness and his mentality.

just because meatheads are hitting hard and bashing the ball from every corner of the court, does not mean it hasn't been done before.

obviously, in terms of talent, sampras would probably have to try everythign to beat nadal and federer. but there is no way a guy with 14 majors, with the last one being in 2002, would lose to guys like sam friggin querry or del friggin potro. gimme a friggin break.

Well here are some of the guys he lost to in 2002:
Nicolas friggin Kiefer
Paul Henri friggin Mathieu
George friggin Bastl
Andreas friggin Gaudenzi
Wayne friggin Arthurs
Max friggin Mirnyi
Felix friggin Mantilla
Andy friggin Roddick
Fernando friggin Gonzalez
Wayne friggin Ferreira

So yes, he could lose to "del friggin potro" if he lost to some of these guys in 2002.

DoubleDeuce
06-20-2009, 11:47 PM
Elvis is alive.

BreakPoint
06-21-2009, 12:08 AM
Too much fed following!
Um...Federer also has 14 Majors.

joeri888
06-21-2009, 12:18 AM
Hmm.. I would like Pete Sampras to play with a wildcard once more, and see him make third or fourth round, but I don't want him to be all talk about how he can still compete. If he plays it should be because of his desire to play tennis, not because he wants to show that he's still the best, because he isn't and it will only do him harm if he tries.

jelle v
06-21-2009, 12:30 AM
Sampras would not stand a chance of getting far.. Maybe a 3 round or so, but no way is he getting far in the tournament.

I would love to see it happen though. So please people of Wimbledon, give Sampras a wildcard next year :)

joeri888
06-21-2009, 12:32 AM
Sampras would not stand a chance of getting far.. Maybe a 3 round or so, but no way is he getting far in the tournament.

I would love to see it happen though. So please people of Wimbledon, give Sampras a wildcard next year :)

If Sampras wants a wildcard, he can get five I'm sure

MT319
06-21-2009, 12:34 AM
Pete could not take Roger in a serious match nowadays...exhibition is just that...exhibition...it's not even close to the same level of intensity or tenacity that goes into a match when your the one who's favored to win like in Roger's case. As a result it makes a world of difference in terms of how close the match can be because it lowers the overall level of "competitiveness" from the player who's favored to win, particularly in a sport like Tennis, where an individual's level of performance is so heavily tied into their active mental state.

forehand_dude
06-21-2009, 12:37 AM
Another argument against Sampras coming back -- soon after beating Federer, he lost to old man McEnroe! Shows the exhibitions and legends matches may not be too serious.

http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/tennis/articles/2008/05/03/mcenroe_finally_beats_sampras/

Slayer
06-21-2009, 12:51 AM
Let me get this straight. We're actually arguing about what one retired guy said to another retired guy in a locker room?

120mphBodyServe
06-21-2009, 12:55 AM
Let me get this straight. We're actually arguing about what one retired guy said to another retired guy in a locker room?
The crap that online newspapers will put on their websites...
Come on people, lets put an end to this stupid debate...
SAMPRAS IS NOT COMING BACK. THE END.

DNShade
06-21-2009, 01:41 AM
I was talking about when Connors won it at 39. You can't get to the Semis in this days field close to that age.

Fabrice Santoro what? Still playing at 36 and doing fine - and he's nowhere near the level of a Sampras. I don't get people out here. Are all of you like twelve years old out here? 38 isn't that old - even in sports. Tennis players just burn out these days by their late 20's because of the wear and tear on their bodies and minds of being on the tour since age 16 or so. There is no reason unless someone is injured or just not there mentally - that they can't compete well into their 30's.

Could Pete win W now? I kinda doubt it. But would he be a factor? If he trained and took it seriously - sure. And you never know if he got in a grove and his body didn't betray him, it could get real interesting.

Cenc
06-21-2009, 01:44 AM
I compare Pete Sampras coming back to Michael Jordan coming back for the Wizards. Could he still be a good player? Of course, because of the natural talents he has and will always have. But could he still be "Pete Sampras"? Of course not. Yeah, maybe lightning would strike every once in a while, and he'd knock off a DelPotro here or Djokovic there. Just like Jordan had a 40 pt outburst every once in a while during his comeback. But would he still be a top 10, top 20 player? No, of course not. Top 30, top 35 maybe. But there'd be a lot more of old man Pete getting passed by the likes of Albert Montanes and Frederico Gil's of the world while S&Ving than I think Sampras fans, or Pete himself should even stand for. A Sampras comeback would do more harm than good and ultimatly do nothing to advance his legacy.

montanes? gil?

jamesblakefan#1
06-21-2009, 01:54 AM
I was giving those as examples. To say that, if Sampras came back full time on tour right now, he'd probably lose to a lot of guys that Sampras fans couldn't imagine "the great Sampras" losing to. On hard courts, with the field as deep as it is, he'd be a sitting duck. I can name 50 guys that'd beat Pete on hard courts, half of those would do it fairly easily. We're talking about 38 yr old, hasn't played competitive tour level tennis since 2002, even back then was struggling physically, Pete Sampras. He'd catch magic every once in a while, but get embarassed more often than not.

DNShade
06-21-2009, 02:01 AM
I was giving those as examples. To say that, if Sampras came back full time on tour right now, he'd probably lose to a lot of guys that Sampras fans couldn't imagine "the great Sampras" losing to. On hard courts, with the field as deep as it is, he'd be a sitting duck. I can name 50 guys that'd beat Pete on hard courts, half of those would do it fairly easily. We're talking about 38 yr old, hasn't played competitive tour level tennis since 2002, even back then was struggling physically, Pete Sampras. He'd catch magic every once in a while, but get embarassed more often than not.

This would be the same Pete Sampras who beat some guy named James Blake just in December? Just checking.

Sorry...just had to. I'm not some crazy Pete fanatic either...just had to post that.

"I think one match at a time he can hang with anyone, especially on a quicker court," Blake said. "He still serves huge, hits a forehand huge and takes you out of your rhythm on your service game.
"I think you put him in a one-match situation like here today, and he can hang with the big boys. It doesn't look like too much has gone from his game."

jamesblakefan#1
06-21-2009, 02:04 AM
Yeah, one match at a time, that's the lightning in a bottle I was eluding to. But back on regular tour? No way he'd be beating the Blake, Roddick's, Federer's and Nadal's of the world on a regular basis. He would never hold up physically.

TheNatural
06-21-2009, 02:12 AM
This would be the same Pete Sampras who beat some guy named James Blake just in December? Just checking.

Sorry...just had to. I'm not some crazy Pete fanatic either...just had to post that.

"I think one match at a time he can hang with anyone, especially on a quicker court," Blake said. "He still serves huge, hits a forehand huge and takes you out of your rhythm on your service game.
"I think you put him in a one-match situation like here today, and he can hang with the big boys. It doesn't look like too much has gone from his game."


That sums it all up.

DNShade
06-21-2009, 02:14 AM
Yeah, one match at a time, that's the lightning in a bottle I was eluding to. But back on regular tour? No way he'd be beating the Blake, Roddick's, Federer's and Nadal's of the world on a regular basis. He would never hold up physically.

I know. Was just a little poke. Having a little fun. I agree with you by the way. It's one thing to come back for a couple of matches - and maybe even one full event - but full time on the tour - no.

jamesblakefan#1
06-21-2009, 02:18 AM
Hey, I'm not an overly sensitive Blake ****-unlike the fans of some other player's on here, who take every thing bad said about their guy as a personal attack on their character and cry all the time. That's not me, DNShade. :)

That sums it all up.

Explain this. Just wondering if you think Pete would still be a top 10 player if he played full time on the tour today.

35ft6
06-21-2009, 02:27 AM
Really? After he beat Federer in that exhibition, I don't see how people can say he's delusional. His serve is still there. The biggest issue would be the fitness to last through two weeks of five set matches.It's an exhibition. In exhibitions, Elton John gets to play against ATP pros. Exhibition matches mean very little. Every exhibition match I've seen was utterly predictable. They're choreographed. Saw the one with Graf and Clijsters recently and I could predict when Kim would miss.

But my bad, he still could compete at a high level in special circumstances. So he's not delusional in that respect. On a fast indoor carpet, in a best of three, if he's having a great day, he could hang and even beat a top 50 pro. I think. Grand Slam, best of 5 format, a different story. He could win a round at Wimbledon at best IMO, and I consider him the best grass court player of the Open era still. Fed is best overall player, but I give the edge to Sampras on grass for now. It's not that he suddenly sucks, but I don't see how he would be better now that he's heavier, older, slower, and rustier than his last few years of pro competition. Connors did well in his later years, but he NEVER STOPPED PLAYING.

OrangeOne
06-21-2009, 03:00 AM
Well here are some of the guys he lost to in 2002:
Nicolas friggin Kiefer
Paul Henri friggin Mathieu
George friggin Bastl
Andreas friggin Gaudenzi
Wayne friggin Arthurs
Max friggin Mirnyi
Felix friggin Mantilla
Andy friggin Roddick
Fernando friggin Gonzalez
Wayne friggin Ferreira

So yes, he could lose to "del friggin potro" if he lost to some of these guys in 2002.

^ Good post. People forget the 'fading years'....

Rhino
06-21-2009, 03:06 AM
Sampras would have NO CHANCE. Are you guys kidding me?
N-O C-H-A-N-C-E.

He even lost to Cedric Pioline in December last year. Cedric Pioline!
Pioline is 40 years old and retired in 2002.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/tennis/12/06/sampras.loses.ap/index.html

How do you expect a guy that gets beaten in '08 by Pioline and McEnroe to compete on the 2009 ATP tour at 38 years old?

TheNatural
06-21-2009, 03:07 AM
Federer said Sampras would be top 5 easy or was it top 3 if he joined the tour now. That seems about right. Little Santoro is still ranked 41 at age 36 1/2.

jamesblakefan#1
06-21-2009, 03:11 AM
Top 5 easy? Top 5 easy? If you wanna belive that, I've got some swamp land to sell to you. Surely even you, the Natural, know that Pete doesn't have the physical capability to hang around on tour long enough to make top 5, let alone beat the guys necessary to make top 5. Keep all them Pete comeback dreams in your head, b/c it ain't happenin.

Mafia13
06-21-2009, 03:24 AM
Federer said Sampras would be top 5 easy or was it top 3 if he joined the tour now. That seems about right. Little Santoro is still ranked 41 at age 36 1/2.

''Little Santoro'' as you called him has been a consistent worker during his whole career and that's why he can still play at the top level. Like all the top atp pros he trains very hard consistently and he is still in great shape. Sampras may still be able to grab a few wins here and there, but I seriously doubt he could string a few wins at a minor tournament, let alone a slam. Top 5?? I would seriously be shocked if he got back in the top 30-40 after 6 years of not playing competitive tennis. And he would receive quite a few defeats to some lower ranked players which would only hurt his legacy. Even if fed said all those things, he was only trying to be nice. And do you really think that those wins at an exhibition match are that relevant??

vive le beau jeu !
06-21-2009, 04:08 AM
It's an exhibition. In exhibitions, Elton John gets to play against ATP pros. Exhibition matches mean very little. Every exhibition match I've seen was utterly predictable. They're choreographed. Saw the one with Graf and Clijsters recently and I could predict when Kim would miss.
yet another post full of hatred to Elton (who would easily kick nadal's butt) from another pathetic hater.

;)

zagor
06-21-2009, 04:22 AM
Top 5 easy? Top 5 easy? If you wanna belive that, I've got some swamp land to sell to you. Surely even you, the Natural, know that Pete doesn't have the physical capability to hang around on tour long enough to make top 5, let alone beat the guys necessary to make top 5. Keep all them Pete comeback dreams in your head, b/c it ain't happenin.

No I agree with TheNatural,we should take everything pros say(even after exhibitions)as the undisputable truth.So Sampras would be top 5 today but also Fed is the GOAT,cause Sampras said so,he can't deny it.

Rhino
06-21-2009, 04:53 AM
No I agree with TheNatural,we should take everything pros say(even after exhibitions)as the undisputable truth.So Sampras would be top 5 today but also Fed is the GOAT,cause Sampras said so,he can't deny it.

Yes but the former pros only say things to compliment each other.
Rafter compliments Sampras. Sampras compliments Federer.

Although the Federer=GOAT argument is different anyway because that is virtually unanimous amongst former or current pros.

We need to get quotes from less polite former pros like Rios or Rusedski :)

If Cedric Pioline can beat Sampras in 08 in a competitive match, then he wouldn't have a chance against current pros in serious tournaments. He might be able to beat Bogdanovic if he's lucky.

thalivest
06-21-2009, 05:32 AM
Federer said Sampras would be top 5 easy or was it top 3 if he joined the tour now. That seems about right. Little Santoro is still ranked 41 at age 36 1/2.

Is that why Sampras wasnt even ranked in the top 10 at only 31 and 32 years old when he was leaving the tour! You guys need to give it a rest. Pete is a legend of tennis of course but everyone gets old, it is a part of sport.

Al Czervik
06-21-2009, 05:44 AM
I can't believe there are people who think Pete at this age, seven years off the tour, could sniff Rafa at Wimby.

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 06:18 AM
if martina navratilova can play main draw singles in her late 40's and win a set, i think Pete could at least win a match at 37.


Don't agree there. Navratilova is an exceptional athlete. She is one of the players who revolutionized fitness as did Lendl. She was extremly fit, in shape, and still is. Her body actually looked the same throughout her career. Look at Sampras when they were young and now. There is a whole lot of difference. His mobility and stamina will be a big problem.


Afterall, Connors made that run to the semi's at the age of 39. Pete has the advantage over all these old guys because his serve is still a nuclear weapon.

That's true. However, Connors played throughout until 39 (professional tourneys not senior events), Pete stopped playing professionally. Had he kept on going, who knows. But it seems to me that at the end of his career he had reached the bottom of his tank. That's why he retired. I am pretty sure he never expected that someone would equal his GS record so soon hence his thoughts about coming back. Probably.

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 06:25 AM
Sampras would have a good chance of winning it if he played Wimbledon now.With his new bigger racket he does some things even better than he used to in his prime. No one else playing now is a natural on the grass the way Sampras is even at his current age.
[/url]

What happened to Federer? Federer holds the all-time consecutive wins on grass. He beat Sampras when he was NOT retired at Wimbledon. A few facts:

1.Sampras played awesome tennis
2.Federer just played better that day
3.Both were NOT in their primes.
4.Federer served and volleyed but also mixed it up with baseline bashing/passing

Given the above, since Fed beat Sampras on his favorite surface (tight 5 sets), how do you expect Sampras to compete at Wimbledon or any other tourney, AFTER retirement and being out of professional tennis for so long?

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 06:30 AM
Well here are some of the guys he lost to in 2002:
Nicolas friggin Kiefer
Paul Henri friggin Mathieu
George friggin Bastl
Andreas friggin Gaudenzi
Wayne friggin Arthurs
Max friggin Mirnyi
Felix friggin Mantilla
Andy friggin Roddick
Fernando friggin Gonzalez
Wayne friggin Ferreira

So yes, he could lose to "del friggin potro" if he lost to some of these guys in 2002.

Yup, that pretty much says it all. People have this illusion that he will be a top player if he comes back. This is sports. Not the type of sports like golf where the aerobic side of the equation is at a low rate. This sport involves, like soccer/football, a lot of running and extreme sprinting.

egn
06-21-2009, 06:30 AM
Sampras beat Federer, Ginepri, Fish, Stepanek, Haas, Roddick and others in exhibitions so has already shown that he has the skill to beat them all. Grass would play to his strengths even more.

Statement 1 ehh exhibtions. Though I think Ginerpi, Fish,Haas at their best in those exos couldn't be old Sampras, but at points you could tell Federer was holding back in the match, but then a good portion of Fed's exos with Sampras was during his "mono" spell and his rough patches. However I do agree on the skill part, I do believe at this day Sampras could score a win off Fed, sure Fed would score like 10 but the most greats at 38 can still come out an play amazing. Connors did it, Agassi did it at 35 etc. Like even if it was reversed and Fed was 38 and Sampras was 28 I could see Fed scoring a win or two off Sampras while Sampras scores like 10, great players don't lose their talent they just lose their youth.

Federer said Sampras would be top 5 easy or was it top 3 if he joined the tour now. That seems about right. Little Santoro is still ranked 41 at age 36 1/2.

Once again a bit unreal where was Sampras in his last year..ranked 13 or so. Sampras has not gotten better. I could picture Sampras being top 20 but not top 5 or top 3.

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 06:31 AM
I can't believe there are people who think Pete at this age, seven years off the tour, could sniff Rafa at Wimby.

I don't think that will be likely. Very unlikely at best. But first Sampras would have to get that far to have a glimpse at Rafa. He would most likely be eliminated early on.

Rafter4ever
06-21-2009, 06:34 AM
Rafter played Pete 2 months ago in the Seniors Tour and Pete beat Rafter, 7-6(8), 6-4. Rafter had 2 set points in the first set up 5-4. Pete hit about 8-10 aces, and if I remember correctly, no second serve aces. I really doubt Pete will be an impact if he makes a comeback 'caus fitness has always been Pete's demon.

Pete also beat McEnroe with the same score line in Boston back in February, a tight match. What do you think the score will be if one of the big 4 play against McEnore? Point is, if Pete is in top form, he would have handled McEnore and Rafter with relative ease, granted Pete is not a great returner and both are SV players.

navratilovafan
06-21-2009, 06:35 AM
Statement 1 ehh exhibtions. Though I think Ginerpi, Fish,Haas at their best in those exos couldn't be old Sampras

ROTFL! Haas has beaten Djokovic and nearly beaten Federer in the last year alone, has wins over a much less old Sampras in both 2001 and 2002 yet you dont think he could beat a nearly 40 year old Sampras at his best? Please. Even 31 year old Haas would wipe the floor with 38 year old Sampras if he really tried. Fish probably would win if he went all out to. Only the washed up now challenger player Ginepri would the current Pete have a hope vs in a serious match.

egn
06-21-2009, 06:46 AM
ROTFL! Haas has beaten Djokovic and nearly beaten Federer in the last year alone, has wins over a much less old Sampras in both 2001 and 2002 yet you dont think he could beat a nearly 40 year old Sampras at his best? Please. Even 31 year old Haas would wipe the floor with 38 year old Sampras if he really tried. Fish probably would win if he went all out to. Only the washed up now challenger player Ginepri would the current Pete have a hope vs in a serious match.

True but I do think they would need to put their best into it to beat him, I don't think 31 year old Haas would wipe the floor with 38 year old Sampras.

Claudius
06-21-2009, 06:48 AM
No. Not gonna happen. The game has changed. Classic, flat strokes along with a big serve is unfortunately not gonna cut it against some heavy topspin hitter who may even be outside the top 100.

navratilovafan
06-21-2009, 06:49 AM
True but I do think they would need to put their best into it to beat him, I don't think 31 year old Haas would wipe the floor with 38 year old Sampras.

Well I do. Haas is playing top 15 caliber tennis now. Sampras was barely a top 15 player who lost most of their meetings back in 2001-2002 when he himself was barely over 30 and is now an almost 40 year old man.

bruce38
06-21-2009, 06:51 AM
I don't think Pete would lose in the first round on grass. But I doubt he could compete with the top players either. Maybe 2nd or 3rd round.

Andres
06-21-2009, 06:54 AM
No. Not gonna happen. The game has changed. Classic, flat strokes along with a big serve is unfortunately not gonna cut it against some heavy topspin hitter who may even be outside the top 100.
Tell that to Söderling at the FRENCH OPEN.

Claudius
06-21-2009, 07:16 AM
Tell that to Söderling at the FRENCH OPEN.

Soderling is an absolute ball crusher, and so he can overpower his opponents. Sampras does have strong strokes, but they're not massive and also, his movement has declined a bit.

Everyone thinks Soderling hits extremely flat, but I've watched him court level at RG and his balls do have a lot of movement. It seems to me his balls are heavy with topspin but have a low trajectory.

Winners or Errors
06-21-2009, 07:45 AM
Rafter played Pete 2 months ago in the Seniors Tour and Pete beat Rafter, 7-6(8), 6-4. Rafter had 2 set points in the first set up 5-4. Pete hit about 8-10 aces, and if I remember correctly, no second serve aces. I really doubt Pete will be an impact if he makes a comeback 'caus fitness has always been Pete's demon.

Pete also beat McEnroe with the same score line in Boston back in February, a tight match. What do you think the score will be if one of the big 4 play against McEnore? Point is, if Pete is in top form, he would have handled McEnore and Rafter with relative ease, granted Pete is not a great returner and both are SV players.

+1

After watching Todd Martin demolish John McEnroe in a seniors match not too long ago, I think it's a bit silly to say anything about Sampras, McEnroe, Rafter, or any of these old guys. They're just old. I'm old. When I play against guys in their 20s, I know they will be less likely to get injured, more likely to go longer because they don't get as sore, and if everything is equal that I better darned well get them off the court fast, because the third set is usually theirs....

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 08:14 AM
Well I do. Haas is playing top 15 caliber tennis now. Sampras was barely a top 15 player who lost most of their meetings back in 2001-2002 when he himself was barely over 30 and is now an almost 40 year old man.

I agree. If Haas and Sampras played 10 matches in a real professional setting (rankings, points, lots of money), the majority would be won by Haas.

Cyan
06-21-2009, 08:15 AM
Sampras would have a good chance of winning it if he played Wimbledon now.With his new bigger racket he does some things even better than he used to in his prime. No one else playing now is a natural on the grass the way Sampras is even at his current age.

Patrick Rafter: I can see Pete Sampras coming back (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/wimbledon/article-23709772-details/Patrick+Rafter:+I+can+see+Pete+Sampras+coming+back/article.do)
19.06.09

Patrick Rafter has revealed that 14-times grand slam champion Pete Sampras believes he could still compete on the ATP Tour.

The Australian, who lost successive Wimbledon finals in 2000 and 2001 and now plays on the seniors tour, claims 37-year-old Sampras has pondered a return.

Rafter said: “I was in the locker room talking to Pete and he would love to come back and play at Wimbledon. People talk about the game moving on but there is definitely a part of Pete who thinks he could still compete at that level.

“I said to him, What about the power of the top players?' He said, Well, they have got strength but it doesn't mean much if they can't return my serve'.

“Serve-volleyers may have gone out of fashion as the courts have slowed down but they are still quick enough to play to his strengths — and trust me, he can still hit the ball hard.”

* You can watch Patrick Rafter play at The Masters Tennis at the Royal Albert Hall 1-6 December. For tickets, call 0208 233 5882, or visit the website www.themasterstennis.com

Pete thinks this current era is such a mug era that even a 38 year old ex supergreat would win Wimbledon :shock:

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 08:23 AM
Why not bring Borg back? Well, we know what happened when Borg came back when he was 36 years old in 1992. Here are some facts:

0.He played for a full year
1.He did not win a SINGLE match.
2.He did not wing a single SET.
3.The highest ranked player he could challenge due to his 1st round losses was no. 22.
4.He was bagled left and right and got some breadsticks by players as low as 196.

Something similar will happen to Sampras if comes back. He knows this. That is why he is not going to embarrass himself. Smart.

Fearsome Forehand
06-21-2009, 08:26 AM
As a Sampras fan who suffered watching him lose regularly in the last two years of his career, I hope he doesn't come back. Pete was very fortunate to be able to go out on a high note by winning the 2002 US Open (which was the first tournament he had won in two years.) That seemed a fitting end to his great career.

Men's pro tennis is very much a young man's game. Pete should not attempt a comeback. He should confine himself to the Old Fart/Hit and Giggle Tour and the occasional exhibition match against a top player.

Besides, if Pete announces he will play at Wimbledon, George Bastl may decide to mount a comeback, too.

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 08:38 AM
As a Sampras fan who suffered watching him lose regularly in the last two years of his career, I hope he doesn't come back. Pete was very fortunate to be able to go out on a high note by winning the 2002 US Open (which was the first tournament he had won in two years.) That seemed a fitting end to his great career.

Men's pro tennis is very much a young man's game. Pete should not attempt a comeback. He should confine himself to the Old Fart/Hit and Giggle Tour and the occasional exhibition match against a top player.

Besides, if Pete announces he will play at Wimbledon, George Bastl may decide to mount a comeback, too.

Good post. He is not stupid and knows this. Media is trying to make it interesting. I like your Bastl comment. Heck, might as well bring back all those players (not too many) who have a winning record against Pete while we're at it.

zagor
06-21-2009, 08:41 AM
Why not bring Borg back? Well, we know what happened when Borg came back when he was 36 years old in 1992. Here are some facts:

0.He played for a full year
1.He did not win a SINGLE match.
2.He did not wing a single SET.
3.The highest ranked player he could challenge due to his 1st round losses was no. 22.
4.He was bagled left and right and got some breadsticks by players as low as 196.

Something similar will happen to Sampras if comes back. He knows this. That is why he is not going to embarrass himself. Smart.

Not the same exactly as Borg cameback with a wooden racquet but in general I agree with you.Pete retired 6-7 years ago,coming back now especially with all slow surfaces today,he would probably not do good.

thalivest
06-21-2009, 08:46 AM
One thing that is predictable is people will always hype comebacks to end up going better than they will. I remember before Hingis came back the dumb hype she would return to winning slams now that the Williams were not at their best anymore, and citing ridiculous examples like her head to heads with Mauresmo, Clijsters, and Henin when they were not anywhere near their 2006 levels and when Hingis was at her peak. As it turned out not only did she get owned by Mauresmo, Clijsters, Henin, and Sharapova, something like 1-10 vs that foursome who her comeback boosters predicted her to do well against, but she was even regularly beaten by players like Patty Schynder whom in her prime she owned. Such stupidity that people were predicting her to fare better than when she left the game in 2002, when she was already past her peak by that time.

I remember before Davenport came back some predicted she could win slams vs the current field. How inaccurate that turned out to be to.

A cold hard rule, aging or players clearly past their primes already when they last retired will never do better upon their return than they did then. They will in fact do worse, gauranted.

8PAQ
06-21-2009, 08:46 AM
Give him center court. He will make it to at least R16.

If he plays WTA draw.

8PAQ
06-21-2009, 08:48 AM
As a Sampras fan who suffered watching him lose regularly in the last two years of his career, I hope he doesn't come back. Pete was very fortunate to be able to go out on a high note by winning the 2002 US Open (which was the first tournament he had won in two years.) That seemed a fitting end to his great career.

Men's pro tennis is very much a young man's game. Pete should not attempt a comeback. He should confine himself to the Old Fart/Hit and Giggle Tour and the occasional exhibition match against a top player.

Besides, if Pete announces he will play at Wimbledon, George Bastl may decide to mount a comeback, too.

Good one :)

thor's hammer
06-21-2009, 09:06 AM
No. Not gonna happen. The game has changed. Classic, flat strokes along with a big serve is unfortunately not gonna cut it against some heavy topspin hitter who may even be outside the top 100.

Did you see the Nadal/Soderling match at this year's French? That's is *exactly* how to beat a topspin baseliner!

Also...

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=S402&oId=M099

skip1969
06-21-2009, 09:13 AM
pete . . . stay home with your kids. please.

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 09:17 AM
Not the same exactly as Borg cameback with a wooden racquet but in general I agree with you.Pete retired 6-7 years ago,coming back now especially with all slow surfaces today,he would probably not do good.

Yes, they are very different players but basically the best in their era for sure. Pete went out on a high note and should keep it that way even if Fed is challenging his records. If they are broken then they were meant to be broken. Does not mean that one should come out of retirement in one's late 30s and hope for the best in an illusionist personal world. That is naive. Pete does not strike me as a naive individual. Fans can be naive. But they are allowed to dream ...

aceroberts13
06-21-2009, 09:26 AM
Sampras may make it to the 2nd round, if there's going to be a Disney movie dose of magic involved, the 3rd round. Beyond that I think players would have to start laying down for him.

Devilito
06-21-2009, 09:36 AM
if anyone could have made a Jimmy Connors type run at Wimbledon it would have to be Pete.... 2 years ago. He's waiting to long to make any sort of comeback, even for fun at 1 or 2 tournaments. It would be cool to see him one last time at the big show. I think he still has the tools to beat some players on gras, but he'd need a pretty sweet draw.

Cenc
06-21-2009, 10:00 AM
No. Not gonna happen. The game has changed. Classic, flat strokes along with a big serve is unfortunately not gonna cut it against some heavy topspin hitter who may even be outside the top 100.

if this is true that heavy hitting cannot beat top spin hitting of guys outside top 100
which obviously means prime sampras wouldnt be anywhere near top 100 today???

Cenc
06-21-2009, 10:01 AM
pete . . . stay home with your kids. dont embarrass fed any more please.

sry, just couldnt help myself :D

zagor
06-21-2009, 10:04 AM
Yes, they are very different players but basically the best in their era for sure. Pete went out on a high note and should keep it that way even if Fed is challenging his records. If they are broken then they were meant to be broken. Does not mean that one should come out of retirement in one's late 30s and hope for the best in an illusionist personal world. That is naive. Pete does not strike me as a naive individual. Fans can be naive. But they are allowed to dream ...

I agree with your sentiment in general.Just saying that Borg came back with a wooden racquet in a graphite era,that was suicide.I think Sampras would have done better than Borg but probably very bad as well.

Cesc Fabregas
06-21-2009, 10:11 AM
sry, just couldnt help myself :D

Lol. :-D

10 char

swedechris
06-21-2009, 10:14 AM
Pat can ,i cant.

marosmith
06-21-2009, 10:32 AM
i think he could make the semis depending on draw

rwn
06-21-2009, 12:36 PM
i think he could make the semis depending on draw

He couldn't even beat Bastl the last time he played. Get real :?

cuddles26
06-21-2009, 12:56 PM
i think he could make the semis depending on draw

I too think if he were allowed to enter the womens event at Wimbledon right now he could make the semis if he avoids the Williams sisters and Sharapova until that round.

swedechris
06-21-2009, 01:19 PM
Either that or maybe winner of the balding players tourny( Mac, Bob Hewitt, etc ..) ..:) just kidding.

onehandbh
06-21-2009, 01:29 PM
Either that or maybe winner of the balding players tourny( Mac, Bob Hewitt, etc ..) ..:) just kidding.

dayvadenko would win.

swedechris
06-21-2009, 01:34 PM
But does Davy even play on grass.. cant recall .. Andre would be tough fun vs. Pete

LetFirstServe
06-21-2009, 02:44 PM
I hope he doesnt come back....it would be painful seeing him lose against some nobody. I dont think it would be like Jordan....it would be more like a late Tyson match...he would just look like an old man getting kicked around.

T. H. Park
06-21-2009, 03:22 PM
I agree with your sentiment in general.Just saying that Borg came back with a wooden racquet in a graphite era,that was suicide.I think Sampras would have done better than Borg but probably very bad as well.

True regarding the technology aspect. However, I don't think a graphite stick would've done that much more. More yes, but not much.

I also agree that Sampras has a better game style (serve and volley with insane serve and insane cross-court running forehand) that will probably allow him better results. But then again, players in the year post 2000 are stronger, faster, and better trained than from early 1990s - we just know about the science of sports via technology (including slow-motion video at incredible frame rates). So, in general, if Sampras steps back on the court, he will be get a good pounding in the early rounds and will with all likelihood be packing his bags early on. That would truly be a shame and dent to his insane legacy. Were it a couple of years back, things would have been different. Not now.

jimbo333
06-21-2009, 04:11 PM
I was talking about when Connors won it at 39. You can't get to the Semis in this days field close to that age.

Connors was unique:)

Even 20 years ago nobody anywhere near his age was getting to Semis of Grand Slams!!!

Sampras would have absolutely no chance now.

kabrac
06-21-2009, 04:13 PM
Let me just say Rocky IV. Bring it on Drago(A.K.A. Roger Federer). And I don't mean he would get pounded like Apollo. He would be Rocky...a man on an impossible mission. Oh, well, would make a great story though.

Aces09
06-22-2009, 04:43 PM
As much as i'd love to see Pete come back and play Wimby and the hard court season, I don't think he'd have a ton of success. The fact is, players stand very far back and can take huge rips at returns. Pete coming back would be a publicity stunt, don't get me wrong, I'd love that, still he'd only win a few rounds per tournament. He wouldn't be a legit contender.

thalivest
06-22-2009, 04:45 PM
Connors was unique:)

Even 20 years ago nobody anywhere near his age was getting to Semis of Grand Slams!!!

Sampras would have absolutely no chance now.

True, that was amazing to achieve that at 39 in a pretty modern time, start of the 90s, when players are not lasting nearly as long as the 60s and 70s. He sort of go a bit of a good draw (eg- Krickstein and Haarhuis in the round of 16 and quarters) but hey you can only beat what is across the other side of the net.

!Tym
06-22-2009, 06:28 PM
True regarding the technology aspect. However, I don't think a graphite stick would've done that much more. More yes, but not much.

I also agree that Sampras has a better game style (serve and volley with insane serve and insane cross-court running forehand) that will probably allow him better results. But then again, players in the year post 2000 are stronger, faster, and better trained than from early 1990s - we just know about the science of sports via technology (including slow-motion video at incredible frame rates). So, in general, if Sampras steps back on the court, he will be get a good pounding in the early rounds and will with all likelihood be packing his bags early on. That would truly be a shame and dent to his insane legacy. Were it a couple of years back, things would have been different. Not now.

Aye-yay-yay...not this myth again. Guys like Courier and Muster were as on the bleeding edge fitness as we've EVER had in tennis during their peaks. Players didn't just magically start taking their training seriously now. Sampras was training with the reigning Heisman trophy winner in the 90s and holding his own head to head athletically.

The 80s era, yeah, you can maybe make that case, but the modern era started in the *1990s* as far as I'm concerned.

If all this revolutionary training mythology were true, HOW ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH does a relative tub of lard like David Nalbandian manage to be one of the few guys who's given BOTH Federer and Nadal hell?

Sampras could win a match here and there today, but he'd never be able to sustain unless he were on the juice.

!Tym
06-22-2009, 06:35 PM
True, that was amazing to achieve that at 39 in a pretty modern time, start of the 90s, when players are not lasting nearly as long as the 60s and 70s. He sort of go a bit of a good draw (eg- Krickstein and Haarhuis in the round of 16 and quarters) but hey you can only beat what is across the other side of the net.

Guys like Krickstein, Harhuis, and Patrick McEnroe are a bit underrated. Patrick McEnroe gave Becker fits, and beat him at the Australian Open. There was a time in the early 90s before the injuries decimated him that he was building momentum and starting to step out of his brother's shadows. He was never going to be a world beater, but he really was no joke as a player either. He was building steam, and had he stayed healthy, would have been a consistent top 20 to 40 level player imo.

Krickstein also is underrated. He wasn't a legend of anything, but he'd proven he could hang with the top guys and has had some decent results in his career.

Harhuis is the most underrated. This guy beat Sampras several times on tour, and it's shocking how many big names he's beaten. You kind of have to scratch your head as to why he did so well against the big names, but could never mount a serious attack on the rankings. Maybe he was just a big match player or something, but not so good against the ordinary guys, but it's still amazing to me how well he really did do against the big names. It's funny, because on the seniors tour, he's continued that trend and then some, just DOMINATING the year ending championships three years in a row and then smoking Courier in his OWN seniors tour championship final...the nerve! I guess he's just a guy who plays better when he's not the favorite, shrugs.

he beat both McEnroe and Becker at the Open from what I remember.

Brned
06-22-2009, 09:50 PM
He should play mixed doubles :) If he loses he can always blame the woman!

T. H. Park
06-23-2009, 06:57 AM
Aye-yay-yay...not this myth again. Guys like Courier and Muster were as on the bleeding edge fitness as we've EVER had in tennis during their peaks. Players didn't just magically start taking their training seriously now. Sampras was training with the reigning Heisman trophy winner in the 90s and holding his own head to head athletically.

The 80s era, yeah, you can maybe make that case, but the modern era started in the *1990s* as far as I'm concerned.

If all this revolutionary training mythology were true, HOW ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH does a relative tub of lard like David Nalbandian manage to be one of the few guys who's given BOTH Federer and Nadal hell?

Sampras could win a match here and there today, but he'd never be able to sustain unless he were on the juice.

Are you talking about the revolutionary training program Agassi was on - McDonalds burgers? Just go to the Olympics website where you have records and see how many records are shattered as time goes on:1980s, 1990s, and 2000+. That's evidence alone w.r.t. athletics. Unless you think people MAGICALLY get faster, stronger, and become better athletes a la David Copperfield.

As far as Nalbandian is concerned, because his tennis skills are so high, he can and does win against the very best form time to time. The key word is time to time. You don't have to be physically fit "100%" to do that in a 3-setter, especially. It just shows that it's a shame that Nalbandian is not fitter as he would really have been a much better player. No?

As to your last sentence I agree.

woodrow1029
06-23-2009, 08:00 AM
I don't think Pete would lose in the first round on grass. But I doubt he could compete with the top players either. Maybe 2nd or 3rd round.
You gotta remember that if Pete were to play Wimbledon, he would be unseeded. Still a chance he could draw Federer, Roddick, Nadal, Murray or Djokovic in the first round. Pete would win a round if he drew a wildcard, or MAYBE a qualifier, but that is about it.

woodrow1029
06-23-2009, 08:02 AM
I was talking about when Connors won it at 39. You can't get to the Semis in this days field close to that age.
When Connors won what at 39?

Leublu tennis
06-23-2009, 11:51 PM
deleted
10chars4

Cesc Fabregas
06-24-2009, 12:15 AM
It would be the greatest thing ever if Pete got a WC for the USO and knocked Federer out in the 1st round. :D

Cenc
06-24-2009, 12:17 AM
He couldn't even beat Bastl the last time he played. Get real :?

federer couldnt even beat volandri in rome
does it mean he should have retired from tennis immediately?
of course sampras wouldnt be able to win match after match (best of 5) due to fitness but he is still much better player than several top 20 guys

Cenc
06-24-2009, 12:21 AM
He should play mixed doubles :) If he loses he can always blame the woman!

federer is the king of excuses
- wind
- light
- blisters
- mono
- temperature
what else?

Cenc
06-24-2009, 12:22 AM
It would be the greatest thing ever if Pete got a WC for the USO and knocked Federer out in the 1st round. :D

:D yeah

10 char

MAX PLY
06-24-2009, 04:44 AM
federer is the king of excuses
- wind
- light
- blisters
- mono
- temperature
what else?

You forgot one . . . the glare from my 14 GS trophies got in my eyes. Sheesh! Amazing how Federer can overcome all of those "obsticles" and still be the king of excuses!

AAAA
06-24-2009, 05:40 AM
In an era of 'clowns' or 'chokers' according to the words of people who say they know about tennis, fitness wouldn't even figure in the match. 5 Sets? Sampras with his superior skillset easily wins in 3 sets. Fitness would not be a factor in this 'weak' era;-). I'd love to see Sampras make a comeback, some of his fans need it far more than he does.

grafrules
06-24-2009, 06:25 AM
federer couldnt even beat volandri in rome


Rome isnt a grand slam. Wimbledon is. When is the last time Federer lost to a Volandri type in Rome. Mind you when it comes to Sampras even in his prime he has lost to Volandri types in slams- Yzaga, Schaller, Delgado, Kucera, so perhaps you are right for Pete it isnt that big a deal like it would be for Roger. :)

pudelko
06-24-2009, 07:19 AM
How is Pete doing on the old man's tour? Is he destroying everyone in sight?

If so, then he might win a few matches depending on the draw. If not, then there is obviously no chance he could compete with fresh players.

35ft6
06-24-2009, 11:38 AM
How is Pete doing on the old man's tour? Is he destroying everyone in sight?

If so, then he might win a few matches depending on the draw. If not, then there is obviously no chance he could compete with fresh players.Do any of the "Pete can win" people care to address this?

orangettecoleman
06-24-2009, 11:26 PM
Rafter's projecting. Wishful thinking among old guys. Pete would get killed by anyone in the top 50, people are better at handling big serves now and Pete's movement isn't what it was in his playing days.

the green god
06-25-2009, 09:40 AM
I guess if Bird, Magic, and Jordan were 24 playing today they would just be minor role players. You are delusional if you think someone like Del Porto is a better athlete than a prime 90's Sampras. You guys must believe everyone playing today is some genetic, evolutionary mutant.

zagor
06-25-2009, 09:44 AM
I guess if Bird, Magic, and Jordan were 24 playing today they would just be minor role players. You are delusional if you think someone like Del Porto is a better athlete than a prime 90's Sampras. You guys must believe everyone playing today is some genetic, evolutionary mutant.

Yes but this isn't prime Sampras we're talking about but rather a 38 year old guy who has been retired from the game since the beginning of 2003.If he comes back I really don't see him doing much damage at all.

And yes prime Sampras is a better athlete than anyone playing today,he's one of the best athletes in tennis ever IMO.

thalivest
06-25-2009, 12:26 PM
I guess if Bird, Magic, and Jordan were 24 playing today they would just be minor role players. You are delusional if you think someone like Del Porto is a better athlete than a prime 90's Sampras. You guys must believe everyone playing today is some genetic, evolutionary mutant.

ROTFL what does 90s Sampras have to do with 2010 or whatever Sampras if he were to return. You ae the one delusional if you dont get the difference.

Dark Victory
06-29-2009, 06:59 PM
We all know Pete had a testy pro relationship with Rafter for while and that they've made up since then.

But anyway, I remember that one quip Pete made on what's the difference between him and Pat Rafter.

Can you imagine if Fed won 24 slams and got asked that question with Pete on the comparative end?

If Fed didn't have class, he'd know exactly what to say. Haha. :lol:

Tagg
12-13-2012, 06:15 PM
rafter is being naughty

sampras isn't coming back

he achieved all he set out to achieve and has a comfortable life now

end of

superdave3
12-17-2012, 09:05 AM
I would love to see him come back for just one more Wimbly, but honestly I doubt he could compete. I saw the tape of the recent senor's final in Chicago, and he lost to Mac for the first time ever, 8-7 in a pro set that Mac won in a tiebreak 7-4. Sampras looked good at times but missed so many easy shots that pros now just don't miss, like hitting a 2nd serve of Mac's into the net on match point. I think after he retired after the US Open final in 2002 he could have come back just for Wimbly in 2003 and would have had a good chance, but not now.

kabrac
12-17-2012, 04:14 PM
by the way, know why sampras didn't play much on the senior tour this year is because he was giving the other guys a fare chance at competing. He only played like 2-3 events and tied for 3rd I think. He won the champions tour easily last year and could have done so this year. And on another note, most of those 1 night champions tour matches are all rigged. I bet they talk in the locker room about "give him a few games to make things competitive", "ok, here's who needs to win tonight, and here's how tommorrow night will pan out". He could come back if he wanted to. The minute federer won #15, I would have been like, "ok time for a comeback". I mean really, if you could still play well, wouldn't you come back if someone else was trying to take everything you worked so hard for and the title GOAT?

NadalDramaQueen
12-17-2012, 10:29 PM
by the way, know why sampras didn't play much on the senior tour this year is because he was giving the other guys a fare chance at competing. He only played like 2-3 events and tied for 3rd I think. He won the champions tour easily last year and could have done so this year. And on another note, most of those 1 night champions tour matches are all rigged. I bet they talk in the locker room about "give him a few games to make things competitive", "ok, here's who needs to win tonight, and here's how tommorrow night will pan out". He could come back if he wanted to. The minute federer won #15, I would have been like, "ok time for a comeback". I mean really, if you could still play well, wouldn't you come back if someone else was trying to take everything you worked so hard for and the title GOAT?

He could come back, but he isn't going to be in the position to deny Federer (or any of the top four) any titles. It would be the same mistake that many great champions have made, which is to mount a comeback, fail, and potentially tarnish your legacy. In all honesty, the comebacks are usually forgiven and the legacies go untarnished, but it is a bit disappointing to see your idol look ordinary against lesser players.

hoodjem
12-18-2012, 04:24 AM
federer is the king of excuses
- wind
- light
- blisters
- mono
- temperature
what else?
"my talent"

My talent just wasn't there today.

treblings
12-18-2012, 04:58 AM
rafter is being naughty

sampras isn't coming back

he achieved all he set out to achieve and has a comfortable life now

end of

it´s been the ´end of´ three years ago:)
why resurrect a thread that´s dead a long time now? Sampras hasn´t become younger in the meantime and what was maybe possible then is impossible now