PDA

View Full Version : Sampras/Agassi rivalry better than Federer/Nadal


FeVer
06-19-2011, 02:29 PM
I honestly believe that Sampras and Agassi produced the more interesting three-dimensional tennis. In terms of gamestyles, it was maybe an even better match up than Fedal. You had the flashy big server, fearlessly approaching the net at any opportunity, and then you had the nuggety returner finding a way to pass him at every turn. It was explosive and it was unpredictable.

Sure, Federer and Nadal have fewer weaknesses than either Sampras or Agassi and their shots a more finely tuned and well-drilled, and they've produced even more memorable and climactic moments than Sampras Agassi, but the tennis just isn't quite so exciting. Rafa drills Fed's backhand x100000 and that's about it. It's a great tactic because it works but that's not why Sampras approached the net. He came in to volley because it was a necessity for him to win, it was his only option. It was a huge risk against the best returner who's ever played the game, but he had to back himself because he couldn't match Andre at the baseline. Similarly, there was huge pressure on Agassi to put the return right at Pete's feet virtually every ball otherwise, chances were, he'd lose. In this sense, there was a more interesting dynamic to the points they played that is somewhat lacking in the current rivalry.

Federer and Nadal are undoubtedly the better players, there's no real arguing with that, but their tennis just doesn't invoke the natural excitement and entertainment that their predecessor's seemed so effortlessly able to produce. I think it's something to do with the fact that their games seem to be built on ruthless common sense and prudence and vigilance where Pete and Andre's were founded on flair and instinct and panache.

What do you guys think? How do these two rivalries, arguably the best in tennis history, square up?

PS Don't just turn this into another **** **** thread. What I'm asking is, which rivalry produced THE MORE EXCITING BRAND OF TENNIS?

jackson vile
06-19-2011, 02:32 PM
Well with AA and PS you had hope rutting for Federer, with RF and RN the outcome is rather certain.

It gets really difficult rooting for Federer against Nadal because he loses all the time.

NadalAgassi
06-19-2011, 03:46 PM
Yeah I agree. Federer is Nadals lapdog which makes the rivalry boring.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
06-19-2011, 03:50 PM
Nadal had to juice up before winning the USO 2010 or else he would never have completed the career slam

viduka0101
06-19-2011, 03:53 PM
Nadal had to juice up before winning the USO 2010 or else he would never have completed the career slam

proof? source?
or are you just talking out of your *****?

Mustard
06-19-2011, 03:54 PM
Sorry OP, but Nadal vs. Federer is a better rivalry than Sampras vs. Agassi.

Sid_Vicious
06-19-2011, 03:55 PM
proof? source?
or are you just talking out of your *****?

Obviously the latter.

yemenmocha
06-19-2011, 03:56 PM
Sampras/Agassi was far more enjoyable to watch.

NadalAgassi
06-19-2011, 03:57 PM
Sorry OP, but Nadal vs. Federer is a better rivalry than Sampras vs. Agassi.

You are thinking selfishly, just since your favorite player wins all the time that makes it better. As far as competitiveness, drama, unpredictability, contrasting styles, and overall quality of matches between the two, Sampras and Agassi was far superior.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
06-19-2011, 03:59 PM
proof? source?
or are you just talking out of your *****?

Nike and Babolat have paid millions of dollars to keep the ATP shut you fool.

pvaudio
06-19-2011, 04:01 PM
I agree with this thread. Their matches were far more interesting.

viduka0101
06-19-2011, 04:07 PM
Nike and Babolat have paid millions of dollars to keep the ATP shut you fool.

proof? source?
or are you just talking out of your *****?

bolo
06-19-2011, 04:07 PM
I honestly believe that Sampras and Agassi produced the more interesting three-dimensional tennis. In terms of gamestyles, it was maybe an even better match up than Fedal. You had the flashy big server, fearlessly approaching the net at any opportunity, and then you had the nuggety returner finding a way to pass him at every turn. It was explosive and it was unpredictable.

Sure, Federer and Nadal have fewer weaknesses than either Sampras or Agassi and their shots a more finely tuned and well-drilled, and they've produced even more memorable moments than Sampras Agassi, but the tennis just isn't quite so fascinating. Rafa drills Fed's backhand x100000 and that's about it. It's a great tactic because it works but that's not why Sampras approached the net. He came in to volley because it was a necessity for him to win, it was his only option. It was a huge risk against the best returner who's ever played the game, but he had to back himself because he couldn't match Andre at the baseline. Similarly, there was huge pressure on Agassi to put the return right at Pete's feet virtually every ball otherwise, chances were, he'd lose. In this sense, there was a more interesting dynamic to the points they played that is somewhat lacking in the current rivalry.

Federer and Nadal are undoubtedly the better players, there's no real arguing with that, but their tennis just doesn't invoke the natural excitement and entertainment that their predecessor's seemed so effortlessly able to produce. I think it's something to do with the fact that their games seem to be built on ruthless common sense and prudence and vigilance where Pete and Andre's were founded on flair and instinct and panache.

What do you guys think? How do these two rivalries, arguably the best in tennis history, square up?

Sampras and Agassi really only went head to head on hard courts and those matchups had some of the dynamics that you mention in your post. I agree with your point about their being more flair in their matches than in the nadal/federer matches.

But nadal and federer have their own dynamics which are interesting. Their dynamics are usually based on the steady high level of play of nadal vs. the up and downs of federer. Federer tries to pull away but nadal manages to reign federer back in, that's his superpower. :) We have seen it many times, within and across sets, one of the 1st times being their dubai match. Fed. smoked nadal in the 1st set, but nadal claws his way back into the match in the 2nd and pulls ahead in the 3rd.

Yes, nadal goes after fed's bh relentlessly, but the effectiveness of this play varies by surface. Their matches on grass, FO and even the AO also use a lot of the court (more wimbledon than FO and AO) and have incredible displays of athleticism and ball striking from both guys. You can't say that about the agassi and sampras matches, because no one considers agassi a great athlete. IIRC there was a great long point from the baseline in their 95 open match that sampras finally won, where each looked like like they hit a winner five times. At the end the crowd went wild. Nadal and federer have like 10 of those in each of their matches.

powerangle
06-19-2011, 04:13 PM
Sampras and Agassi were pretty predictable in terms of their results too, imo. You knew in slams and on fast surfaces, Sampras was going to come through. In tour level events, it was more unpredictable, I agree.

With Fedal, unless they're playing indoors, you almost always favor Nadal.

As for displays of brilliance on court, Fedal have produced more, by the sheer nature of how they play. They both play more of a baseline style, so points usually stay longer and more protracted...and therefore you see more brilliance within a point. With Sampras and Agassi, the points overall are shorter and therefore there is less chance of drama to build up within a point (due to fewer-shot rallies).

jukka1970
06-19-2011, 04:15 PM
I honestly believe that Sampras and Agassi produced the more interesting three-dimensional tennis. In terms of gamestyles, it was maybe an even better match up than Fedal. You had the flashy big server, fearlessly approaching the net at any opportunity, and then you had the nuggety returner finding a way to pass him at every turn. It was explosive and it was unpredictable.

Sure, Federer and Nadal have fewer weaknesses than either Sampras or Agassi and their shots a more finely tuned and well-drilled, and they've produced even more memorable moments than Sampras Agassi, but the tennis just isn't quite so fascinating. Rafa drills Fed's backhand x100000 and that's about it. It's a great tactic because it works but that's not why Sampras approached the net. He came in to volley because it was a necessity for him to win, it was his only option. It was a huge risk against the best returner who's ever played the game, but he had to back himself because he couldn't match Andre at the baseline. Similarly, there was huge pressure on Agassi to put the return right at Pete's feet virtually every ball otherwise, chances were, he'd lose. In this sense, there was a more interesting dynamic to the points they played that is somewhat lacking in the current rivalry.

Federer and Nadal are undoubtedly the better players, there's no real arguing with that, but their tennis just doesn't invoke the natural excitement and entertainment that their predecessor's seemed so effortlessly able to produce. I think it's something to do with the fact that their games seem to be built on ruthless common sense and prudence and vigilance where Pete and Andre's were founded on flair and instinct and panache.

What do you guys think? How do these two rivalries, arguably the best in tennis history, square up?

Well I hated Sampras, and couldn't stand watching him, so that makes my choice easy. But as someone else also talked about the fact that they've met on each surface has added to it as well. And since Sampras sucked on clay, as opposed to Agassi who could play on all 4 surfaces, I think that adds to choosing Federer/Nadal

marc45
06-19-2011, 04:17 PM
sampras did much better against agassi from the baseline than people might remember

pjonesy
06-19-2011, 04:23 PM
Sorry OP, but Nadal vs. Federer is a better rivalry than Sampras vs. Agassi.

Federer/Nadal is more intense and obviously their matches are still big draws. There is still so much motivation for both guys. I think it is also important to identify this rivalry as one that has a strong psychological component. Just the observation that Federer completely outplayed Nadal for 80% the 1st set of the French Final this year, only to lose it. Devastating, considering Nadal's tenacious mentality and Federer's disappointment.

I enjoyed the contrasting game styles of Sampras and Agassi more than the intense physicality of the Federer/Nadal matches. But, I would say that Sampras and Nadal both had the ability to impose their will and make the match favor their game style.

Overall, the Federer/Nadal rivalry is better. Mainly because its still active and I believe it is just more intense on the court.

clayman2000
06-19-2011, 04:29 PM
Their AO final was like nothing I had never seen. Rafa covered more distance on a hardcourt than maybe ever before, and ever shot was clicking. His BH had at least 10 clean winners, volleys were clutch and amazing defence. Fed was on a roll, destroying Del Po and beating an in-form Roddick. He served well and his FH was just killing Rafa.

Their 2007 and 2008 Wimby finals were both classics. Without out a doubt the best passing shots I have ever seen. Rafa's DTL forhand was killer in both, and Federer again served incredible.

Outside of those 3 finals, the 06 FO final was high quality, and up to the last couple points, you really believed Fed still had a fighters chance.

Then you have Miami 05, Rome 06, and Shanghai 06 as classics in non-slam events.

What made this rivalry cool was that we also had blowouts. Rafa's 08 FO is the staple for this, but Fed also had one in Hamburg in 07. Those last two sets were maybe two of the best sets ever played by a tennis player.... no joke

Mustard
06-19-2011, 04:35 PM
Here are all the matches of these rivalries on the main tour:

Pete Sampras 20-14 Andre Agassi
1989 Rome R32: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-2, 6-1)
1990 Philadelphia R16: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (5-7, 7-5 ret.)
1990 US Open F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 6-3, 6-2)
1990 World Championships RR: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 6-2)
1991 World Championships RR: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 1-6, 6-3)
1992 Atlanta F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-5, 6-4)
1992 French Open QF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 6-2, 6-1)
1993 Wimbledon QF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-2, 6-2, 3-6, 3-6, 6-4)
1994 Miami F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (5-7, 6-3, 6-3)
1994 Osaka SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 6-1)
1994 Paris Indoor QF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 7-5)
1994 World Championships SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (4-6, 7-6, 6-3)
1995 Australian Open F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (4-6, 6-1, 7-6, 6-4)
1995 Indian Wells F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (7-5, 6-3, 7-5)
1995 Miami F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (3-6, 6-2, 7-6)
1995 Montreal F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (3-6, 6-2, 6-3)
1995 US Open F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 6-3, 4-6, 7-5)
1996 San Jose F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-2, 6-3)
1996 Stuttgart Indoor QF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 6-1)
1996 World Championships RR: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-2, 6-1)
1998 San Jose F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-2, 6-4)
1998 Monte Carlo R32: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 7-5)
1998 Toronto QF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-7, 6-1, 6-2)
1999 Wimbledon F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 6-4, 7-5)
1999 Los Angeles F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (7-6, 7-6)
1999 Cincinnati SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (7-6, 6-4)
1999 World Championships RR: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-2, 6-2)
1999 World Championships F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-1, 7-5, 6-4)
2000 Australian Open SF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 6-1)
2001 Indian Wells F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 7-5, 6-1)
2001 Los Angeles F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 6-2)
2001 US Open QF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-7, 7-6, 7-6, 7-6)
2002 Houston SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-1, 7-5)
2002 US Open F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4)

Hardcourt: 11-9 to Sampras
Clay: 3-2 to Agassi
Grass: 2-0 to Sampras
Carpet: 5-2 to Sampras
In Slams: 6-3 to Sampras


Rafael Nadal 17-8 Roger Federer
2004 Miami R32: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 6-3)
2005 Miami F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (2-6, 6-7, 7-6, 6-3, 6-1)
2005 French Open SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3)
2006 Dubai F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (2-6, 6-4, 6-4)
2006 Monte Carlo F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6)
2006 Rome F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 2-6, 7-6)
2006 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6)
2006 Wimbledon F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-0, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3)
2006 Masters Cup SF: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-4, 7-5)
2007 Monte Carlo F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-4, 6-4)
2007 Hamburg F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (2-6, 6-2, 6-0)
2007 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4)
2007 Wimbledon F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (7-6, 4-6, 7-6, 2-6, 6-2)
2007 Masters Cup SF: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-4, 6-1)
2008 Monte Carlo F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 7-5)
2008 Hamburg F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 6-7, 6-3)
2008 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)
2008 Wimbledon F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 6-7, 9-7)
2009 Australian Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 3-6, 7-6, 3-6, 6-2)
2009 Madrid F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-4, 6-4)
2010 Madrid F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-4, 7-6)
2010 World Tour Finals F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-3, 3-6, 6-1)
2011 Miami SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 6-2)
2011 Madrid SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (5-7, 6-1, 6-3)
2011 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 7-6, 5-7, 6-1)

Hardcourt: 4-4
Clay: 12-2 to Nadal
Grass: 2-1 to Federer
Carpet: 0-0
In Slams: 7-2 to Nadal

fps
06-19-2011, 04:42 PM
sampras did much better against agassi from the baseline than people might remember

I was gonna say...!

As for Nadal-Federer, I really want Federer to win one in a slam. Just for the balance of things, it is, well, embarrassing isn't the right word, it's just extraordinary! Every other player slapped aside, one man standing right up to him. Neither is at as high a level as they have been before, both men peaking around 23-24, perhaps Fed has more of a chance this year.

I don't buy the idea that he's favourite, all other things being even, in a match against Rafa at Wimbledon now (though I do believe his peak level on grass was untouchable).

NadalAgassi
06-19-2011, 05:07 PM
Here are all the matches of these rivalries on the main tour:

Pete Sampras 20-14 Andre Agassi
1989 Rome R32: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-2, 6-1)
1990 Philadelphia R16: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (5-7, 7-5 ret.)
1990 US Open F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 6-3, 6-2)
1990 World Championships RR: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 6-2)
1991 World Championships RR: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 1-6, 6-3)
1992 Atlanta F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-5, 6-4)
1992 French Open QF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 6-2, 6-1)
1993 Wimbledon QF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-2, 6-2, 3-6, 3-6, 6-4)
1994 Miami F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (5-7, 6-3, 6-3)
1994 Osaka SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 6-1)
1994 Paris Indoor QF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 7-5)
1994 World Championships SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (4-6, 7-6, 6-3)
1995 Australian Open F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (4-6, 6-1, 7-6, 6-4)
1995 Indian Wells F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (7-5, 6-3, 7-5)
1995 Miami F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (3-6, 6-2, 7-6)
1995 Montreal F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (3-6, 6-2, 6-3)
1995 US Open F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 6-3, 4-6, 7-5)
1996 San Jose F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-2, 6-3)
1996 Stuttgart Indoor QF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 6-1)
1996 World Championships RR: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-2, 6-1)
1998 San Jose F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-2, 6-4)
1998 Monte Carlo R32: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-4, 7-5)
1998 Toronto QF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-7, 6-1, 6-2)
1999 Wimbledon F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 6-4, 7-5)
1999 Los Angeles F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (7-6, 7-6)
1999 Cincinnati SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (7-6, 6-4)
1999 World Championships RR: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-2, 6-2)
1999 World Championships F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-1, 7-5, 6-4)
2000 Australian Open SF: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 6-1)
2001 Indian Wells F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 7-5, 6-1)
2001 Los Angeles F: Andre Agassi def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 6-2)
2001 US Open QF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-7, 7-6, 7-6, 7-6)
2002 Houston SF: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-1, 7-5)
2002 US Open F: Pete Sampras def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4)

Hardcourt: 11-9 to Sampras
Clay: 3-2 to Agassi
Grass: 2-0 to Sampras
Carpet: 5-2 to Sampras
In Slams: 6-3 to Sampras


Rafael Nadal 17-8 Roger Federer
2004 Miami R32: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 6-3)
2005 Miami F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (2-6, 6-7, 7-6, 6-3, 6-1)
2005 French Open SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3)
2006 Dubai F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (2-6, 6-4, 6-4)
2006 Monte Carlo F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6)
2006 Rome F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 2-6, 7-6)
2006 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6)
2006 Wimbledon F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-0, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3)
2006 Masters Cup SF: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-4, 7-5)
2007 Monte Carlo F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-4, 6-4)
2007 Hamburg F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (2-6, 6-2, 6-0)
2007 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4)
2007 Wimbledon F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (7-6, 4-6, 7-6, 2-6, 6-2)
2007 Masters Cup SF: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-4, 6-1)
2008 Monte Carlo F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 7-5)
2008 Hamburg F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 6-7, 6-3)
2008 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)
2008 Wimbledon F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 6-7, 9-7)
2009 Australian Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 3-6, 7-6, 3-6, 6-2)
2009 Madrid F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-4, 6-4)
2010 Madrid F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-4, 7-6)
2010 World Tour Finals F: Roger Federer def. Rafael Nadal (6-3, 3-6, 6-1)
2011 Miami SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 6-2)
2011 Madrid SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (5-7, 6-1, 6-3)
2011 French Open F: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 7-6, 5-7, 6-1)

Hardcourt: 4-4
Clay: 12-2 to Nadal
Grass: 2-1 to Federer
Carpet: 0-0
In Slams: 7-2 to Nadal

Thanks for proving Sampras-Agassi was by far the better rivalry.

Mustard
06-19-2011, 05:23 PM
Thanks for proving Sampras-Agassi was by far the better rivalry.

It really isn't. Nadal and Federer have met in countless amounts of slam finals and masters series finals and have provided lots of thrilling and intense matches, certainly more so than Sampras and Agassi.

1970CRBase
06-19-2011, 05:27 PM
Fed/Nad have had some great matches in the past but theirs I can't consider to be a rivalry anymore. More like a tired record played too much.

The real rivalry, for me, will be Djok/Nad, one entering his prime, the other still in his.

drakulie
06-19-2011, 05:29 PM
sampras did much better against agassi from the baseline than people might remember

what I remember is him not doing very well in baseline rallies against AA (even in matches he won).

TheNatural
06-19-2011, 06:53 PM
Well with AA and PS you had hope rutting for Federer, with RF and RN the outcome is rather certain.

It gets really difficult rooting for Federer against Nadal because he loses all the time.

what happened to you avatar and signature.Did the bet expire in 2 weeks!:confused:

This rivalry is spectacular because of how often they get to play in huge finals.

NadalAgassi
06-19-2011, 06:59 PM
It really isn't. Nadal and Federer have met in countless amounts of slam finals and masters series finals and have provided lots of thrilling and intense matches, certainly more so than Sampras and Agassi.

Please. First off nearly all their matches on clay suck. They have played 5 times at the French Open, 4 finals and 1 semis. None have been classics, maybe 2 at a stretch have been decent at best. Federer cant even force Nadal to produce the brilliance he is capable of on clay which Djokovic has done in many of their matches (even in defeat), and to a lesser degree Davydenko, Ferrer, Coria, and others have done. Federer may be the 2nd best clay courter of the Fedal era, but he is a horrible matchup with Nadal on clay. It is just Nadal hitting alot of high balls to the Federer backhand and Federer making 100 errors per match. They had one truly great match on clay ever- Rome 2006. 2 other decent ones out of the 14, Madrid 2010 and Monte Carlo 2006. That is pretty much it. And in Federers 2 wins Nadal was clearly well below par physically.

They dont play that often on hard courts. The indoor matches are mostly bad since just the opposite of clay, Nadal cant compete with Federer indoors. Only the last one was kind of decent but despite going 3 sets Nadal was badly outclassed in that one too, and it was a miracle he somehow managed to win the 2nd set.

Outdoor hard court matches sometimes produce a good match. The Australian Open and Dubai finals were their best ones by far. Miami 2005 was also decent. The other two were duds.

Their grass matches are the best matches of the rivalry.


Nadal and Agassi have had amazing matches at the Australian Open, Wimbledon, U.S Open, and WTF all. Their U.S Open matches in 2001 and 2002, and to a lesser degree 1995, were outstanding. Their Australian Open match in 2000 and to a lesser degree 1995. Their WTF semifinal in 1994. Their WTF final in 1999 despite it being one sided in score. Their Wimbledon matches in 1993 and 1999, again despite the latter being straight sets. Many of their matches at Miami, Indian Wells, and other hard court events. I dont recall any memorable clay court matches but there werent many of them, and none of them were that important, so who cares really.

On the whole Agassi-Sampras easily trumps Nadal-Federer. Just admit it, the reason you love the Nadal-Federer rivalry since you are a Nadal fan and Federer is his pigeon. It is just like how the over the top Graftards like Joe Pike and LDVtennis love the Graf-Seles rivalry and would claim it is better than Graf-Navratilova just since Seles is so much easier for Graf than Navratilova and that is all they care about. Just look at how much they love to brag about Graf never losing to Seles on a medium or faster court, or having a winning record with Seles even while Seles was dominant #1, yet how burned and upset they get when I point out Navratilova having a 4-1 record vs Graf at the neutral meeting round of the U.S Open despite Martina being aged 29-34 and Graf 17-21 at the time of 4 of thoe 5 matches. That is what ***** care about most, not the actual quality and competiveness of the rivalry.

kishnabe
06-19-2011, 07:56 PM
Sampras and Agassi rivarly was much more sad as an Agassi ****. Though the Federer-Nadal rivalry is much more entertaining as a *******.

Evn though both Agassi and Federer aren't getting the best chunk out of the main rival.....they did win some significant ones. Though with Agassi....You can allways seeing Sampras feel mentally confident against him....and that huge serve taking away Agassi 30-40 chances.


With Federer and Nadal....it is mostly Federer stupid ploy that loses the 30-40 chacnes though coupled with Nadal aggresive behavior when down. At least with Federer.....a fan can hope not with Sampagassi rivalry. That rivalry gave me bad childhood temper tantrums.

NadalAgassi
06-19-2011, 08:10 PM
Agassi has never lost to Sampras at the Australian or French Opens. The only slam Federer has never lost to Nadal is a slam they have never played, the U.S Open.

pjonesy
06-19-2011, 08:33 PM
Please. First off nearly all their matches on clay suck. They have played 5 times at the French Open, 4 finals and 1 semis. None have been classics, maybe 2 at a stretch have been decent at best. Federer cant even force Nadal to produce the brilliance he is capable of on clay which Djokovic has done in many of their matches (even in defeat), and to a lesser degree Davydenko, Ferrer, Coria, and others have done. Federer may be the 2nd best clay courter of the Fedal era, but he is a horrible matchup with Nadal on clay. It is just Nadal hitting alot of high balls to the Federer backhand and Federer making 100 errors per match. They had one truly great match on clay ever- Rome 2006. 2 other decent ones out of the 14, Madrid 2010 and Monte Carlo 2006. That is pretty much it. And in Federers 2 wins Nadal was clearly well below par physically.

They dont play that often on hard courts. The indoor matches are mostly bad since just the opposite of clay, Nadal cant compete with Federer indoors. Only the last one was kind of decent but despite going 3 sets Nadal was badly outclassed in that one too, and it was a miracle he somehow managed to win the 2nd set.

Outdoor hard court matches sometimes produce a good match. The Australian Open and Dubai finals were their best ones by far. Miami 2005 was also decent. The other two were duds.

Their grass matches are the best matches of the rivalry.


Nadal and Agassi have had amazing matches at the Australian Open, Wimbledon, U.S Open, and WTF all. Their U.S Open matches in 2001 and 2002, and to a lesser degree 1995, were outstanding. Their Australian Open match in 2000 and to a lesser degree 1995. Their WTF semifinal in 1994. Their WTF final in 1999 despite it being one sided in score. Their Wimbledon matches in 1993 and 1999, again despite the latter being straight sets. Many of their matches at Miami, Indian Wells, and other hard court events. I dont recall any memorable clay court matches but there werent many of them, and none of them were that important, so who cares really.

On the whole Agassi-Sampras easily trumps Nadal-Federer. Just admit it, the reason you love the Nadal-Federer rivalry since you are a Nadal fan and Federer is his pigeon. It is just like how the over the top Graftards like Joe Pike and LDVtennis love the Graf-Seles rivalry and would claim it is better than Graf-Navratilova just since Seles is so much easier for Graf than Navratilova and that is all they care about. Just look at how much they love to brag about Graf never losing to Seles on a medium or faster court, or having a winning record with Seles even while Seles was dominant #1, yet how burned and upset they get when I point out Navratilova having a 4-1 record vs Graf at the neutral meeting round of the U.S Open despite Martina being aged 29-34 and Graf 17-21 at the time of 4 of thoe 5 matches. That is what ***** care about most, not the actual quality and competiveness of the rivalry.

You make some very good points. But let's consider the context of the Nada/Federer rivalry. Nadal is in Federer's head, forces Roger to press, sticks to a winning strategy that is tailor made to attack Fed's weaknesses and has the advantage in H to H matchups. No matter how many times we see it, we all still wonder if Fed might be able to get over the hump this time and on some level, turn the tide. It is compelling because there is so much pressure on Fed to play up to his potential against Nadal. Nadal senses that and forces the issue. Federer really needed that victory at the French Open this year. I believe he continues to need that victory in order to answer all the questions regarding his stature in the game.

However, I prefer the contrasting styles of play that Agassi and Sampras exhibited in their matches. Same reason that the Borg/McEnroe rivalry was more interesting than the McEnroe/Connors rivalry on the court.

I understand that the baseline play w Fed and Nadal is very exciting and the shotmaking is nothing short of amazing. But, I agree with you. From the pure tennis perspective, i believe the Agassi/Sampras rivalry has the edge on court and the Federer/Nadal rivalry is probably more epic and dramatic.

Overall I go with Federer/Nadal rivalry. They seem more connected than Sampras/Agassi. Just like you can't think of Navratilova without thinking of Evert, a few years down the road we will be linking Nadal and Federer in the same way.

1970CRBase
06-19-2011, 09:29 PM
The three way rivalry between Lendl/Edberg/Becker in the late 80's and early 90's was better, imo. Eventually, of course, it was Pete and Andre who supplanted that.

cc0509
06-19-2011, 09:35 PM
The three way rivalry between Lendl/Edberg/Becker in the late 80's and early 90's was better, imo. Eventually, of course, it was Pete and Andre who supplanted that.

I think even better still was the Borg/McEnroe rivalry or even Connors/Borg/McEnroe. To me that was probably the best of all.

Magnus
06-19-2011, 09:36 PM
Sorry OP, but Nadal vs. Federer is a better rivalry than Sampras vs. Agassi.

If you're a Nadal fan and want to watch your hero win, its the best "rivalry" ever. But if you are a fan of good matches with an unpredictable outcome, its a very boring rivalry. Fedal matches go like this:

1) Match starts, Fed aggressive, usually gets a lead in 1st set.
2) Nadal kills Fed's BH with his CC FH, Fed chokes, gets broken back, loses set.
3)Fed continues to fight but eventually loses motivation and focus.
4) Nadal wins last set with barely any opposition.

Fed speech: "I had a great tournament, congrats to Rafa for a great win"
Rafa speech: "Roger is the best in history, no?"

The end.

roysid
06-20-2011, 12:48 AM
If you're a Nadal fan and want to watch your hero win, its the best "rivalry" ever. But if you are a fan of good matches with an unpredictable outcome, its a very boring rivalry. Fedal matches go like this:

1) Match starts, Fed aggressive, usually gets a lead in 1st set.
2) Nadal kills Fed's BH with his CC FH, Fed chokes, gets broken back, loses set.
3)Fed continues to fight but eventually loses motivation and focus.
4) Nadal wins last set with barely any opposition.

Fed speech: "I had a great tournament, congrats to Rafa for a great win"
Rafa speech: "Roger is the best in history, no?"

The end.
well said, but there's more to point 2.

Nadal starts playing better and Fed starts making mistakes

FeVer
06-20-2011, 12:51 AM
You are thinking selfishly, just since your favorite player wins all the time that makes it better. As far as competitiveness, drama, unpredictability, contrasting styles, and overall quality of matches between the two, Sampras and Agassi was far superior.

At least someone's got enough of a brain to understand the question. Thanks.

zagor
06-20-2011, 02:44 AM
If you're a Nadal fan and want to watch your hero win, its the best "rivalry" ever. But if you are a fan of good matches with an unpredictable outcome, its a very boring rivalry. Fedal matches go like this:

1) Match starts, Fed aggressive, usually gets a lead in 1st set.
2) Nadal kills Fed's BH with his CC FH, Fed chokes, gets broken back, loses set.
3)Fed continues to fight but eventually loses motivation and focus.
4) Nadal wins last set with barely any opposition.

Fed speech: "I had a great tournament, congrats to Rafa for a great win"
Rafa speech: "Roger is the best in history, no?"

The end.

LOL! Yeah I think Agassi-Pete matched-up better,contrasting styles of play(as much as I like Fed's game he's still mostly a baseliner),not to mention that they were both the same age(more or less)which is an important factor in any rivalry IMO.

Hitman
06-20-2011, 02:57 AM
Sampras V Agassi for me was far better, no doubt about it. Loved the contrasting styles, every shot in the book. Federer V Nadal is good, no doubt, but for me it is no where near as exciting as when I used to watch Sampras V Agassi especially at the US Open.

Two contrasting styles, plus the best server v best returner.

Maybe Djokovic V Nadal can equal that for me someday. It has potential. Just have to wait and see.

Satch
06-20-2011, 02:58 AM
LOL! Yeah I think Agassi-Pete matched-up better,contrasting styles of play(as much as I like Fed's game he's still mostly a baseliner),not to mention that they were both the same age(more or less)which is an important factor in any rivalry IMO.

so we can expect in next lets say 3 years the "real" rivalry - Novak - Rafa? Or maybe Muzza - Novak..

Hitman
06-20-2011, 03:00 AM
so we can expect in next lets say 3 years the "real" rivalry - Novak - Rafa? Or maybe Muzza - Novak..

You never know if Del Potro may catch fire. He is bonafide top 5 player at his best.

Satch
06-20-2011, 03:01 AM
You never know if Del Potro may catch fire. He is bonafide top 5 player at his best.

injuries...

zagor
06-20-2011, 04:06 AM
so we can expect in next lets say 3 years the "real" rivalry - Novak - Rafa? Or maybe Muzza - Novak..

Nadal-Novak are terrific baseline duels with some of the most spectacular defense I've ever seen,it has a potential to be a great rivalry(I don't think it is yet,until Novak beats Nadal in a slam or plays a 5 setter with him)but it still wouldn't be as entertaining(for me)as Sampras-Agassi or say Rafter-Agassi,contrasting style of play makes for best match-ups IMO.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-20-2011, 04:32 AM
Interesting that the best W-L pct for pete came on carpet. Whereas Fedal have never met on carpet. I wonder whom the pct would favour on carpet? I imagine it would be indoors.

ksbh
06-20-2011, 05:10 AM
Sampras' game was a joy to watch but as far as the rivarly goes, Nadal-Federer blows the Sampras-Agassi matches right out of the water!

I can't remember one match that Sampras-Agassi played that for sheer drama rivals many of the Nadal-Federer matches. The best I can think of is the USO 2001 match between them but that comes nowhere close to Wimbledon 2008 or AO 2009.

Hitman
06-20-2011, 05:25 AM
Sampras' game was a joy to watch but as far as the rivarly goes, Nadal-Federer blows the Sampras-Agassi matches right out of the water!

I can't remember one match that Sampras-Agassi played that for sheer drama rivals many of the Nadal-Federer matches. The best I can think of is the USO 2001 match between them but that comes nowhere close to Wimbledon 2008 or AO 2009.

I will disagree with one. IMO W08 was almost a blow out after the first two and half sets. It almost looked like it was going to be anti climax until Federer finally started to match Nadal.

AO09 was great for the first four sets, and had the potential. But that fifth set was a non event.

USO 2001 was end to end perfection. The only thing it was missing was a fifth set. But quality wise, there was no lull in the action.

fps
06-20-2011, 05:37 AM
I will disagree with one. IMO W08 was almost a blow out after the first two and half sets. It almost looked like it was going to be anti climax until Federer finally started to match Nadal.

AO09 was great for the first four sets, and had the potential. But that fifth set was a non event.

USO 2001 was end to end perfection. The only thing it was missing was a fifth set. But quality wise, there was no lull in the action.

I think the way Federer picked himself off the floor after losing those two sets, after the rain, was one of the most epic and heroic things about the Wimbledon final of 2008. It was almost a blow-out, but who has any time for almosts? It wasn't a blow-out, it was one of the best matches ever.

AO2009 was an incredible match for the quality of tennis, absolutely, so if you're just looking for the quality of tennis, as you seem to be since you don't like the first 2 1/2 sets of Wim, then just take the 4 sets from the AO final, they're probably just as long as the 4 from the USO final 2001!

ksbh
06-21-2011, 06:34 AM
You could say the same thing about USO 2001 as well. If Sampras had taken the first set tie-break, it would have been a straight sets victory! :)

I will disagree with one. IMO W08 was almost a blow out after the first two and half sets. It almost looked like it was going to be anti climax until Federer finally started to match Nadal.

AO09 was great for the first four sets, and had the potential. But that fifth set was a non event.

USO 2001 was end to end perfection. The only thing it was missing was a fifth set. But quality wise, there was no lull in the action.

heninfan99
06-28-2011, 04:58 AM
Sampras had no fear of Andre...

ViscaB
06-28-2011, 05:00 AM
Neither of them are rivalries. Domination is the word.