A billion Reasons why Sampras is the GOAT.

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by samprasvsfederer123, Nov 18, 2009.

  1. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Sampras is one of the all-time greats. His great strength is his dominance on the fast surfaces and mental toughness/clutch play. The weakness he has, relative to the other all-time greats such as Laver, Borg, and Federer is his play on clay, the slowest surface.

    So, he does have a little less versatility than all of those other three players, but he counterbalances that by being accomplished on the fast surfaces. Plus, if you want to pick one tournament to win a bunch of big titles, Wimbledon is the first place to choose.
     
    #51
  2. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    keep this in mind, Quest never watched tennis in the 90's. he started playing a couple years ago. He has no clue of some of the players you mentioned. He is utterly, without a clue.
     
    #52
  3. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    1. you are a thief
    2. you committed credit card fraud
    3. stick to your MAC thread
     
    #53
  4. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    That is EXACTLY what happens. How did you miss that??:shock:
     
    #54
  5. pame

    pame Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,421
    Seems to me these billion reasons all begin with "woulda, coulda, shoulda, and maybe-a" LOL
     
    #55
  6. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    1. you still cant read
    2. you still cant read
    3. i suggest you learn how to read and go back to that thread so you realize how stupid you are
     
    #56
  7. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    i am still waiting for pete fans to step up and list accomplishments in column A, and roger's in column B and see whose list is longer. Azzurri? anyone else?

    will be ignored i bet.
     
    #57
  8. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    1. EVERYONE on that thread knows you are a thief
    2. You committed a felony. Credit Card fraud.
    3. Again, go play with your boyfriends on the MAC thread.
     
    #58
  9. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    LOL as i have done in the past and YOU refused to do. i invite EVERYONE to read the entire thread and decide who did what. you on the other hand merely hijacks the thread where i am and continues to accuse me of things. HMMM interesting.

    oh yea and what about responding to the column list of accomplishments? oh yea you are too scared because you know the result.
     
    #59
  10. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    here you go everyone. Zapvor has proven himself to be a con-man himself.

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=239715
     
    #60
  11. JoelDali

    JoelDali G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    10,511
    Where is this thread?

    :)

    I'm bored.

    :(
     
    #61
  12. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    oh cool -you actually had the courage. warning-its a long read, but its all there.

    still no response to the column of accmoplishments though. hahah
     
    #62
  13. JoelDali

    JoelDali G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    10,511
    Dude, Zap, if you are a dude....you're a big chunk of fail.

    How could you send $ to a kid that claims hes confined to his room and can't snap a pic of the stick with his iPhone?

    Gullible and mighty large fail.

    Sorry, and no offense, but wow. All that to buy a used racquet?

    [​IMG]
     
    #63
  14. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    why don't you do it? no one cares what you think anyways. go play your fairy games on the MAC thread.
     
    #64
  15. quest01

    quest01 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,611
    Sampras was a great player but the fact is Federer is an even better player. The facts done lie, Federer won more grand slams, he won every grand slam including the French Open, he played in a stronger era that consisted of Nadal, Murray, and Djokovic which are better quality players then what Sampras faced in the 90's. Also if Sampras played in this era, he probably wouldn't have won over 7 grand slams due to the slower court conditions. He wouldn't be able to use his signature serve and volley game and whenever he plays from the baseline he feels vulnerable and uncomfortable.
     
    #65
  16. JoelDali

    JoelDali G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    10,511
    You're right quest...and, Bikini jeans are in this year...just wait and see...


    [​IMG]
     
    #66
  17. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    yea you are right. i dont know what i was thinking.
     
    #67
  18. JoelDali

    JoelDali G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    10,511
    Just callin' um like I sees 'um...

    You should buy my head. 9/10. Lolsies.

    [​IMG]
     
    #68
  19. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    how much
    gwerghw
     
    #69
  20. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    ha ha ha ha...you tool! You are a thief, liar and scammer. Joe is as level headed a poster there is. He always provides trustworthy posts and he had no problem seeing what a rat you are. you and your MAC girlfriends sticking up for you won't change the fact you are a thief, liar and a scammer.
     
    #70
  21. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    you would have to pay him cash.
     
    #71
  22. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    ah forget it. you know what life is too short for this. azzurri you win, whatever you say is the ultimate truth. if you say sampras is goat its fact. if you say teh sky is purple and ornage its fact. anything you say is the absolute truth.

    and someone have pity on him besides me, he needs help.

    this is my last post to you. i wish you well. serious.
     
    #72
  23. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    if you would just be a man and admit you were just pi$$ed off at the idiot that sold you a crap racquet and wanted revenge..fine with me. But you just kept denying the obvious and then had your cronies (morons) chime in and made you look worse. You should have sent that kid his racquet back and trust me, all would have been forgotten. we were all on your side until you decided to keep the racquet. you wanna make amends..send the racquet back, keep us posted. serious.
     
    #73
  24. shakes1975

    shakes1975 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    741
    Not so surprising, coming from the Sampras fans. All they blow is empty hot air of coulda-woulda. They know that Sampras has very little on Federer as far as the objective criteria of achievements are considered, and so they try to blow up Sampras in hypothetical situations of playing against Federer.

    Meanwhile, the objective results show (which is what the world will remember, years from now, long after the fed-fans and sampras-fans have departed):

    Sampras:

    AO - 2 W, 1 F, 2 SF
    FO - 1 SF, 3 QF, and god knows how many 1st,2nd, and 3rd rd losses
    Wim - 7 W, 1 SF, 1 QF
    USO - 5 W, 3 F, 1 SF
    6 yrs finishing #1, with his max. continuous at 82 weeks

    Federer:

    AO - 3 W, 1 F, 2 SF
    FO - 1 W, 3 F, 1 SF
    Wim - 6 W, 1 F
    USO - 5 W, 1 F

    5 yrs finishing as #1 with over 200 weeks continuously.

    I leave it to everyone to see whose numbers are superior.

    Now, the Sampras fans can rant all they want about weak era, Sampras being a "better" player than Federer etc.
     
    #74
  25. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    odd, but besides the FO (we all know he was not good on clay), his #'s are better than Fed's (according to your stupid list). By the way, Pete has 6 STRAIGHT years at #1 (Fed had 4). So how dillusional the Fed fans have become to think this list is superior in any way.
     
    #75
  26. Netspirit

    Netspirit Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,229
    Location:
    Snoqualmie, WA
    Rog is not done yet and probably has 2 more years in top 3, likely with a few Slams. Pete, however, is history.
     
    #76
  27. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    yea. and also this list only deals with the Grand Slams and #1 ranking. It doesn't include titles, consecutive semi final apperances, time to achieve such accomplishments, etc. and He's still going. sampras is done.

    and the fact that you can proclaim GOAT statusu without winning all Slams is so laughable I can't believe tennis fans actually have to argue about this. It's not even about Federer as GOAT. its the definition itself.
     
    #77
  28. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,353
    I think that the requirement that one has to win all four grand slams to be even CONSIDERED a GOAT candidate is a bit much. A GOAT candidate I believe is a player who was dominant in his or her day and has proven themselves to be excellent on all surfaces. Ken Rosewall for example did not win Wimbledon but he was super on all surfaces and if he wasn't banned as a pro probably would have won Wimbledon several times. Bjorn Borg did not win the US Open but he proved himself to be a strong player on grass, har tru and hard court in winning many tournaments on those surfaces over the years. Borg played in an era in which the US Open was on three differents surfaces.

    No one ever stated that the definition of the GOAT is to win all the slams. It's the player who was the best at his or her peak and had the best overall career.
     
    #78
  29. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    hmm...i disagree. GOAT= greatest of all time right?

    not greatest. not greatest in his time. not greatest in the past. not greatest in his era on some surfaces. it's ALL TIME. i think to be considered something akinto GOAT you gotta be ....GOAT. not to take away from Ken and Borg who are absolutely phenomenal players. in fact i am a huge Borg fan. but the fact remains GOAT is for the elite few.

    Thats like saying MIchael Jordan could be GOAT of basketball if he didnt win championships, or if some player didnt win a world series of baseball....right?
     
    #79
  30. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,353
    But tennis is different. Borg was number one and World Champion as was Rosewall and not only were they number one they were dominant number ones for a number of years. Same with Pancho Gonzalez.

    All of these players proved themselves as great players on all surfaces.

    Can anyone really say that Borg wouldn't have won the US Open if it remained on grass or har tru? If he continued to play he had a great change to win it on hard court.

    Gonzalez never won Wimbledon because he was in the pros but he probably would have won it many times if there was Open Tennis in his day. Gonzalez was great on every surface.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2009
    #80
  31. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,090
    Location:
    tennis courts
    right. i see where you are coming from. i love all the guys you mentioned as tennis players. they are absolutely amazing. but the fact remains you cant base it on what-ifs. sure Borg and Pancho and others may have the titles like the ones you mentioned, but the fact remains they do not. whether they retired, blah blah for whatever reason the fact stands that they did not achieve it. sure they may have, but so could someone else. if you start doing what-ifs, where does it end? agassi may have ended up with 14,15slams? what about rafter? hewitt? courier? you have to go by the facts unfortunately i think.

    edit-there are many players, like the ones you metnoned who i would consider pretty close to GOAT ,but to really achieve that status is what i am talking about.
     
    #81
  32. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    you forgot to mention Nadal. Nadal owns Fed. has beaten Fed in 5 major finals (never happened to any other player since open tennis began), has a 7-13 h2h against Nadal and cries when he loses to him. you forgot these little details.

    Pete never lost 5 majors, let alone to ONE player, NO ONE owned him in his era. but I guess its OK for Fed fans to overlook that Fed is NOT the best player in his generation...odd, but how would he be GOAT is he is not goat in his era??
     
    #82
  33. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    oh god, then no one is GOAT. you can't compare anyone to anyone else that did not play in each others era. you can't get a true goat no matter what. odd that you think you actually can...laughable actually. there really is NO goat, but yes you can GOAT a surface and an era (foolish to think you cant do this).
     
    #83
  34. MY top 5 GOAT:s LEVEL-wise would be:
    1. Federer on grass or USO-HC
    2. Sampras on the Wimby 90`s grass or USO-HC
    3. Agassi on rebound-ace
    4. Becker/Edberg on lightening-fast carpet
    5. Nadal on clay
     
    #84
  35. dman72

    dman72 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,995
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    I do think that Sampras faced more consistently strong competition..don't forget he had to play people like Goran on grass, Muster on clay, and then he had a rival who stuck with him for a good number of years in Agassi who himself one all 4 slams.

    For all we know Nadal is on a permanent downturn because of the self destructive style of his game. He went through a 2 year period where he was dominant, but is it over?

    That being said, I still think that Federer has to get the call as the GOAT. The French open win and his success there (you can't just cast aside finals appearances, Sampras was pathetic in many FO's) and the slam record..that's it, I don't see how it can be argued with.
     
    #85
  36. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,672
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I think you just did:
     
    #86
  37. obsessedtennisfandisorder

    obsessedtennisfandisorder Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    korea but NZer
    These kinda threads are gettign tired...
    but anyway...I just want to make it clear my point that wasn't
    (is it ever) properly understood on the general board is that the game has changed a lot in the past ten years it's extremely difficult to compare.
    No s&vers..less clay specialists etc..
    Look at surface speeds today compared to ten years ago etc...
    GOAT is a lotta fun to discuss but just like most other sports impossilbe.
     
    #87
  38. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    This to me implies your defination of GOAT values h2h records more than Major titles won. The media coverage, prize money and ranking points disagree. It that's your definition fine, I don't agree.
     
    #88
  39. akv89

    akv89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,587
    Sure he did. Pete played 52 majors and won 14. Math tells me he lost 38 majors.
     
    #89
  40. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    idiot, 5 major finals.
     
    #90
  41. Polaris

    Polaris Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,306
    Can you count? :)
     
    #91
  42. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    1. Sampras only had Agassi to stop him. Face it, the greats like Edberg, Becker, Lendl, Wilander, McEnroe, etc had passed their best or retired by the time Pete came to prominence. The guys he faced, like Rafter, Kuerten, Courier, Chang, etc were only, at best, second-tier players. Infinitely tougher than Federer has had it but no-where near as difficult as in the 50's, 60's or 80's and doesn't come close to the Borg-Connors, Borg-Connors-McEnroe or Connors-McEnroe-Lendl rivalries. Pete and Roger got off lightly compared to previous generations and they were able to stockpile majors.

    2. No, Sampras had and easier time because the court surfaces were, generally, faster. He could just blow through other players whereas Federer is often held back because the slower courts demand greater patience (the biggest test for any player who has powerful shots).

    3. No might about it, Federer is the better overall player. As to which is the better match player, I don't know but I'd rate Connors, Gonzalez, Laver, Borg and Hoad above either of them.

    4. On a slow-medium hard court, Pete would lose more often than not. Very simply, he built his game around holding easily and getting the occasional break. Take away the easy hold and you've got a game style that we never saw him deal with (except on clay - and we know how he fared there).

    5. Agreed. Sampras didn't need to serve-volley. Huge serve and big forehand has always been a winning strategy. If he were playing today, I'd almost guarantee that's how he'd play. Who knows, he might never have switched from a two-handed backhand.
     
    #92
  43. AM95

    AM95 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,245
    you SampTards never cease to amaze. Different eras, different games, you cant compare. But to end this little battle: SAMPRAS ADMITED THAT FEDERER IS THE GOAT AND BETTER THEN HIM!

    end of discussion.
     
    #93
  44. akv89

    akv89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,587
    Go look up "tongue-in-cheek"

    Your said Pete never lost 5 majors. And he did. I don't care for losses in major finals. A loss before the final is at least as bad as one during the final.
     
    #94
  45. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    LOL, not when you compare the greats. most never even make it to a final, so your assessment is bogus.
     
    #95
  46. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    umm, you missed how Sampras says he would beat Fed in his prime and that Fed cannot be goat until he fixes the Nadal situation. He stated this after Wimbledon. so your comments are not entirely updated.
     
    #96
  47. Polaris

    Polaris Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,306
    Sampras says he would beat Federer in his prime.
    Therefore, Sampras would beat Federer in his prime.

    Nice. I like your reasoning.
     
    #97
  48. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Why is it bogus? He makes a very good point, even though Fed's losses to Nadal don't work in his favour.

    Then again when did Pete have a contemporary as good as Nadal? Never.
     
    #98
  49. akv89

    akv89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,587
    There's no need for a different metric when looking at the great players in this respect. A loss before the final is not more impressive than one in the final, despite what you may think.
     
    #99
  50. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,726
    Location:
    U.S
    that's "azzurism" for ya :)
     

Share This Page