Greatest Grass Court Player of All Time.

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Talker, Nov 24, 2012.

  1. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,552
    This is actually quite debatable. Bjorkman has a huge advantage in this--he played both, while Becker obviously hasn't.

    So you might easily say that, on this particular matter, Bjorkman's opinion >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Becker's (it's in a totally different league, actually, as Bjorkman *was* there on court against them both, Becker just watched Federer on TV while eating popcorn).
     
  2. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,552
    You are totally kidding, right?

    Krajicek got Sampras 6 times out of their 8 first meetings, which was like total ownage (on Sampras' favourite surfaces, no less). Had they met at Wimbledon again, odds are that it would have been a more contested fight (I doubt Sampras would have gone down that easily the second time around, but you never know, as he never was really able to return Krajicek's serve). Thinking Sampras would have easily won shows you are clearly wearing blinkers in this one.
     
  3. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    yet, he was only 2-6 vs krajicek in their first 8 matches, only managed to get two more wins with krajicek well past his best ...

    yes, saying RF would beat sampras 19 times out of 20 times is absurd , just as absurd/dumb as this :


    also , federer during his glory years @ wimbledon, from 2003-09, lost only to one player, nadal, 7-9 in the 5th ....

    sampras OTOH, got crushed by krajicek right in the middle of his peak years ....

    yes, this is what happens ...

    agassi beat federer the first 3 times, lost to him the next 8 times

    nalbandian beat federer the first 5 times, in their next 13 matches, it was 10-3 to federer

    hewitt was something like 8-2 vs federer, lost the next 15 times to him

    djoker beat federer quite a few times in b/w 2011 & 2012, yet federer beat him twice in slams , RG and wimbledon , also dished out a bagel @ cincy..... mind you, this is past his prime federer

    at one stage, he was 2-6 vs murray, he narrowed it down to 9-10

    yes, we all see what happens when someone beats federer a few times ...


    See above ...Either you are trolling or you are dumb. Sampras the aggressor, couldn't even muster enough courage/skill/patience to even give himself a real shot even once at RG ... and lost plenty of times to journeymen on clay ...

    RK was clearly well past his best @ USO in 2000, yet sampras had to make dramatic escape in the 2nd set TB, otherwise there was a pretty good chance, he'd have lost that one as well ....
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  4. Blocker

    Blocker Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2012
    Messages:
    532
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Not a troll and I'm not dumb. Sampras never lost to the same player at W twice. I don't think Federer has either but I'm tipping if Nadal had been at W the year after he beat Fed in the final, Fed would have. Fed had the benefit of winning a W title when his threat was out injured. At W, Pete had no threats. He was it. Yes he lost to RK at W once but that was sandwiched in between 7 titles. What, you expect him to win W 8 times in a row?

    And let's keep it to slams shall we. I mean that's why Fed is considered the GOAT by most on here isn't it? Because of slams? It's 1-1 between RK and PS in slams. When Sampras beat RK at the USO, he was getting past it too.

    As for all the other H2H records you quoted, you know perfectly well what I mean. Can't believe you even bothered to mention some of the names you did. Hewitt, lol. Hewitt racked up his lead when Fed was still in nappies. I'm talking the real threats to Fed, ie Nadal and Djok. I mean Fed even lost to Djok when he held match point on his own serve. Do you think Sampras, with his serve, agression and mental toughness, would lose after holding match point on serve? Never in a zillion years. Once he had you, he had you. There's no coming back.
     
  5. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    25,781
    Location:
    Weak era
    It's possible but you sure aren't making a great case of proving that.

    Not that such hand picked stat matters but neither did Fed.

    And I'm tipping if Krajicek got past Goran in 1998 Wimbledon SF Sampras would have (lost to the same player twice), your point being what exactly? We can go coulda, woulda, shoulda all day long.

    Like Sampras didn't benefit from Krajicek being injury ridden and vastly inconsistent.

    Not to mention that Fed met Nadal 3 times at Wimbledon and Sampras lucked out and met Richard only once (and got blown off court in straights).

    And Fed lost to Nadal once but that was sandwiched between 7 titles. What, do you expect him to win Wimbledon 7 times in a row (when your hero managed to do it "only" 4 in a row)?

    And once again, Krajicek routined Sampras during Pete's absolute peak and Sampras lucked out facing him only once. Fed on the other hand lost once (during his grasscourt prime) 9-7 in the 5th and faced Nadal 3 times at Wimbledon.

    Fed is considered to be a GOAT candidate for his # of slam titles, versatility across different surfaces, overall dominance over the field not because some cherry picked H2H records so...

    No, his response and examples to your asinine statement were perfectly valid.

    Oh I definitely do not think 29 & 30 year old Sampras would lose USO matches against Novak after holding MP(s), he would get blitzed like he did against Hewitt and Safin in 2000 and 2001 USO finals.

    Nor do I see Sampras revenging said losses at Wimbledon at the age of 31 like Fed did because he would be too busy fighting for his dear life life against Bastl type players.

    BTW. Sampras has a losing H2H against his "real" threats like Hewitt, Safin and Roddick, I guess that means he's mentally weak.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  6. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    as far as 2009 is concerned, nadal would still have to avoid an early upset, maybe even avoid roddick to even reach federer in the final ( match vs roddick would be a close one ) and even if he managed to reach the final, with the way federer was serving ( and before the finals, he was not just serving, but playing very well overall ), anything less than his best , nadal probably would have lost ....

    if nadal , federer's main threat at wimbedon in 2009 was out injured, what about sampras' threats ?

    goran, the headcase, krajicek - injured/inconsistent , stich - headcase, agassi - inconsistent , even more so @ wimbledon, becker - well past his best on grass by mid-90s, that lone match vs agassi in 95 notwithstanding ....rafter, only a force @ the end ........

    Also I'm not saying, I expected sampras to win W 8 times in a row, just that he should've put up more of a fight vs krajicek ...

    you fail and fail big time ...

    it isn't just about the slams, that's just plain simplistic for those who don't understand the nuances of the game ... there's also the domination at peak ( only 24 losses in 4 years ) , surface versatility etc etc ...

    so agassi, hewitt, murray, nalbandian are nothing players, really ? LOL .......

    going 8-0 vs an agassi still very much in the top 5/10 for all those matches is no small feat ...

    and beating a tough competitor like hewitt 15 times in a row is nothing to be sneezed at either ...

    nalbandian at that stage had federer's number completely and to turn that around wasn't easy ....

    yes, I know perfectly well what you mean ..... Your agenda is only just to exaggerate federer's weak points ....all I did was to brutally expose your fail at that ...

    just changing it to nadal, djok to suit you argument now ? LOL .... just because that's the only argument you have , isn't it ? :)

    Fact is except for nadal in his later years ( after 2007 ) , whenever federer has had a string of losses to anyone , he's hit back ....

    and he did go 5-2 vs nadal after being 1-6 vs him initially ...

    I'd take losing to a great player ( or for that matter, any great spell of play from a decent player ) when compared to losing to plain mugs at a slam like sampras did vs schallar or delgado @ RG ....... now that's pathetic mental toughness, not even able to get past players like that at a slam ....

    even after that loss @ USO 2011, federer went on a tear in the indoor season, and even after losing @ RG, he did defeat novak @ wimbledon ...
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  7. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    lol, brutal ownage, zagor :)


    indeed, there are some clueless or some who pretend to be deliberately so, who forget that federer completely turned the tables around when he started dominating vs those who had troubled him (hewitt, nalbandian, agassi and even henman )
     
  8. SQA333

    SQA333 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,343
    Roger Federer

    - most # of grass titles
    - tied for most # of Wimbledon titles
    - most Wimbledon finals (total number + consecutively)
    - tied for most consecutive Wimbledon titles
    - higher average ranking of opponents

    I don't think there's any argument against this.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  9. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    25,781
    Location:
    Weak era
    Hehe, thanks :)

    Yup, the turning point especially was 2003 TMC and 2004 AO.

    I still regard 2004 AO as one of Fed's most impressive slam title, especially beating Hewitt and Nalbo back-to-back. Shame that Safin was burned out by the time he reached the final otherwise it could have been a classic.
     
  10. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    agree on all counts there ...:)
     
  11. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    25,781
    Location:
    Weak era
    Going by stats probably (although even there they're neck and neck) but there's always a subjective factor, I have no problem with anyone saying he/she simply thinks Sampras was a better grasscourt player/had a superior grasscourt game. Heck irregardless of stats I considered Sampras to be a better grasscourt player than Fed until this year in which Fed really impressed me with his win.

    However, coming up with nonsense like "It's better to lose in QF in straights than 9-7 in the 5th in the final" is just silly.
     
  12. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,430
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    The bolded part is a gem, lolz, hehe
     
  13. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,688
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and żeberka
    This. /thread

    Sampras has absolutely nothing on Federer when comparing achievements. Obviously, some sentimental Petetards will claim that Pete had tougher opposition like Henman, Philippoussis and Ivanisevic. Oh and Edberg whom he never faced and Rafter whom he faced once (who choked a virtual 2 set lead btw) and Becker who was half a decade past his prime. Did I miss someone? Heck I did! The grass monster Pioline.
     
  14. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    I wasn't all that impressive since Murray or Djokovic aint exactly indoor fast grass surface type dynamos.. Hell, Nole isn't all that great on grass regardless. If Fed drew say Tsonga with the roof closed he probably would have had more issues there then he did with Pusher Murray because Tsonga knows how to attack. Serve BIG and put some pressure on the opponent. Murray just plugs and plugs away from the baseline until his opponent hits an error. Thats target practice for Roger indoors (as it kind of showed when they closed the roof) who can do what he wants vs. Murray under faster grass conditions.

    Murray and Djokovic are SLOW COURT players.. They aren't faster condition type players like we have at wimbledon with the roof closed. Fed should be able to beat Djokovic and Murray under faster grass indoors playing at 50 percent.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  15. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    murray has beaten tsonga not once , but twice at wimbledon , djoker has beaten him once at wimbledon .... both murray/djoker can play on fast courts

    after fed lost to tsonga in wimbledon 2011 ( an impressive performance no doubt ), he beat him straights @ the USO and then thrice towards the end of the season, all on indoor courts ......

    To anyone who actually watched the wimbledon 2012 final and didn't have his head messed up or up someone else's you know what ....... murray played very impressively in the wimbledon final ......balancing defense with attack very well ...... his returning was downright insane as well ....

    djoker of course was the defending champion and federer's one-two punches took him out of his comfort zone on grass ...

    this performance for sure beats the hell out of losing to freaking bastl or the cakewalk draws that pete had in wimbledon 97 ( a lackusture pioline in the finals , LOL ) and wimbledon 2000 ( no player of note till the finals, and an excellent choke and massive dip in level from rafter in the finals )
     
  16. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224

    They beat Tsonga on outdoor grass surface which is slower then an indoor grass surface. But Tsonga on his game should be able to beat both indoors under the fast conditions that suit him. Federer's 1-2 punches took Djoker out his comfort zone INDOORS on a faster grass which again is not necessarily a comfort zone period for Djokovic. The guy is a slow court player though and through.. Heck the only reason he won the YEC is because they have even turned those indoors slow courts at the end of the year into slow clay-like monte carlo conditions ( in fact, wasn't Fed complaining about how slow the courts were at the WTF?)

    If Fed was to have drawn Tsonga indoors on grass they would have been a bigger hill to climb then Murray and Nole indoors
     
  17. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    again, like I said, federer beat tsonga in straights @ the USO and not once, not twice, but thrice indoors in 2011 ..

    tsonga can be tougher than murray/djoker indoors, but if and only if he is very good form and has his head screwed on ....

    djoker also won the YEC in shanghai in 2008 and shanghai was a fast court ...

    djoker can play darn well on fast courts as well .......he's reached atleast the semi of every US Open since 2007 ( hell, he's been more consistent there than @ the AO where he lost twice in the quarters - once to roddick and once to tsonga ) , won two YECs, has multiple indoor titles and has done more than decently at wimbledon .....

    If you think djoker is a slow court player through and through, what you would call corretja who beat sampras @ the YEC in 98 and nearly beat him @ the USO in 96 ??????? :twisted:

    if djoker is categorized as a slow court player, ( which is plain dumb btw ), corretja is a mega slow court player , LOL !!!!!

    that's like saying sampras is a fast court player through and through ( in turn implying he couldn't much at all on slower courts )
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  18. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224


    Murray and Djoker thrive under slow like conditions.. Not to say they can't PLAY on faster conditions but their main strengths are taken away under faster conditions (ball retrieval, grinding etc.). The USO has also continually slowed down since 2007. (which I think is a big reason why he hasn't seem the same success there as he did a few years ago). Would he have won wimbledon without the roof? I dont think so. The conditions (once the roof closed) suited his game to the upteenth degree when they put it on
     
  19. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,060
    Federer is greater at the AO, RG, SW19 and WTF(indoor). The only place where you can argue for Sampras is at the USO, and that's a tough call.
     
  20. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    Fed is greater or "better" at the AO and French.

    The other 3 places are up in the air (Wimbledon, USO, and Indoors). You can make a case for both at all 3

    Personally, Prime for prime I think Fed's better on the surfaces the first half of the year, and Sampras better on the surfaces the 2nd half of the year
     
  21. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,202
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Federer has own cincy 5 times USO 5 times Basel 5 times and WTF 6 times. how exactly is Sampras better in the second half?
     
  22. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    Its subjective.. An opinion.. Different eras, obviously. So you can't compare the two by "numbers"

    The big tournaments (wimbledon, USO, YEC) to me Pete was better.. Thats all.

    Sampras has won the USO 5 times as well ( and reached more finals then Fed) and managed 7 wimbledons in an 8 year period (more domination at wimbledon then Fed in that regard). Fed with one more YEC but to me means zilch, since indoors isn't true indoors anymore.. ANd we barely have ANY good true indoor players anymore
     
  23. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    the USO slowdown was done in 2002, after that it didn't change that much till 2011 , ... it was quite fast till 2010 .... you are just putting 2007 to suit your convenience ...

    yes, he would have won wimbledon , with or without the roof ....

    the turnaround in the murray match was happening before the roof closed .... when federer snatched the 2nd set away from murray with a brilliant final game ......

    in fact the roof nearly cost him the match vs benneateau, he thrashed benneateau outdoors at the olympics outdoors


    again, your boy sampras was losing bastl, freaking bastl at the same age ......and facing murray and djoker at wimbledon >>>>>>>>>>> joke of a draw that sampras got in wimbledon 97, joke of a draw till the finals in 2000 ( & then a choke from rafter ) .........should I go on ?????

    maybe a little more .... :)

    sampras @ his freaking peak in 96 had to survive a MP against corretja at the USO ............. he'd have gone slamless in a peak year if he'd lost - 3R @ AO, SF @ FO, QF @ wimbledon, QF @ USO !

    and then he actually lost to korda in 97 USO

    either of djoker/murray on grass are a zillion times tougher than corretja on a fast court ..... and tougher than korda on a fast court ......

    and this is competition for past his prime federer vs a peak sampras ....... LMAO !!!!!!!
     
  24. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224

    Your boy almost lost to Benneateau which really isn't much better then losing to Bastl. ROFL.


    I guess Sampras is the only player thats had "joke draws" huh? Fed's never had any:shock: Pete suffered from a blood disorder which caused him to fatigue faster then most.

    How would Fed do with a fatigue causing blood disorder? 14 slams with Thalassemia Minor in a sport that REQUIRES great fitness is amazing (In fact many all say its what cost him a French Open title or two which I agree with)
     
  25. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    wimbledon and USO it is close .... but YEC, nope, I don't think so ... federer has the clear edge there IMO ...

    federer has one more YEC, he won it 5 times without losing a match .... also has 2 finals to one for sampras

    guess how many times sampras won YEC without losing a match ? zero, zilch , nada ....

    federer is 42-9 there ( 82.35%)
    sampras is 35-14 there (71.42% )

    and before you say that was because there were more fast court specialists back in the day, sampras also lost to the likes of corretja, moya, chang @ the YEC ...
     
  26. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224

    But he also beat Great fast court players as well.. What's Fed main indoor competition the majority of his career (Nadal? Sucks indoors, Djoker and Murray among others.. More slow court players). Sampras had to deal with more quality indoor opponents through most of his career (Rafter, Agassi, Becker etc.. among others.

    If Sampras only had to deal with Nadal indoors (one of the weakest all time greats Ive ever seen indoors). That's a major cakewalk. It certainly not like playing Rafter, Becker or Agassi indoors
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  27. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    fact is he didn't lose, he won ...... and JB is atleast a top 100 player and can play decent tennis when in form ...

    bastl was a lucky loser outside of the top 100 ...


    I'm just saying getting through murray/djoker @ wimbledon even at peak is much much tougher than some of the joke draws your boy sampras had at his peak ...... the fact that fed did it when he was not at his peak shows how good he is .... face it .... :)

    no, it didn't. What cost him a French Open was he wasn't good enough to win 7 best of 5 matches on clay, not enough patience / good enough footwork on clay ............
     
  28. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    He had enough "patience" to beat Bruguera and Courier back to back and win the Davis Cup and win Rome etc. .. But if you remember correctly (in 1996) the heat got up to record highs at the French which wreaked havoc on his already tough draw and blood disorder.
     
  29. World Beater

    World Beater Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,745
    Genetics are part of the game, part of the total package.

    If sampras wasn't fit enough, too bad.
     
  30. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    but fact is nadal wasn't the only one federer dealt with indoors,

    he dealt with :

    agassi, safin, hewitt, nalbandian, davydenko, djokovic, murray, soderling, tsonga .......

    all of them better than the likes of moya, corretja,ferreira and most, if not all better than chang indoors .......

    nadal in YEC 2006,10 ,07 was for most part in better form than these guys as well

    sampras didn't face rafter at the YEC .....the one point truly in favour of sampras is boris becker ... but that's about it ...
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  31. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    Rome 94 was a weak win, with the other finalist being becker , no tough competition there at all ....

    davis cup, like I said individual wins, occasional flashes of brilliance, but not enough for 7 best of 5 set matches

    RG 96,

    bruguera was just coming back from a long injury layoff and in terrible form ....

    courier was past his best by then .....

    the heat you are talking about actually caused the courts @ RG to speed up and helped sampras ....

    he didn't help himself by going 5 sets vs todd martin on clay !
     
  32. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224

    Oh so we want to diminish Pete's conquests over guys like Muster, Bruguera, Courier on clay.

    Should we post some of Fed's draws to the French Open finals over the years? :) We can play this game both ways. If Pete some of the draws Fed had over the years at the French, Pete makes a few french open finals himself.

    Thats not even to mention during Pete's time, the French was Monte Carlo Slow.. While its faster now
     
  33. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,688
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and żeberka
    Don't worry, Sampras would find a way to lose before the FO final if he played against nobodies only.
     
  34. Razoredge

    Razoredge Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2012
    Messages:
    269
    I'd pay good money to see prime Rafa demolish prime Sampras at the FO.
     
  35. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,060
    Muster wasn't at Ferrer's clay level in 1991. The chance of Sampras making the final in this era is even less than Ferrer. Too many players can beat him, and it doesn't necessary has to be the top 10 players.
     
  36. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    Prime Rafa can demolish anyone on clay (Hell Fed was bageled by Rafa).. That points kind of moot.
     
  37. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    in any generation, pete wouldn't have made more than one final @ RG ...

    Fact is none of sampras so called conquests @ RG were when the CCs were in good form, muster was in terrible shape in 91 after his accident in 90 , just to add ....... next round, sampras would lose to thiery champion , the same guy bruguera triple bagelled in 93 RG

    these are the guys that federer beat at RG since 2005, all much better or better than freaking delgado or schallar whom sampras lost @ his prime @ RG

    djokovic
    del potro
    moya
    soderling
    nabandian
    davydenko
    gonzalez
    monfils
    wawrinka
    haas
    robredo

    the top 7 among them have better RG/CC records when compared to sampras and the other 4 are pretty much capable of beating him there
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  38. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    Who of those guys (barring Djokovic) is on par with Muster, Bruguera, and Courier on clay?
     
  39. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    I agree >> why bring in rafa .... there are plenty of other players who can demolish sampras on clay .....:twisted:
     
  40. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,688
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and żeberka
    Which was evened out by Federer bageling Nadal on clay in Hamburg a few years back. Every meeting (bar the 2008 FO final) between the 2 on clay has been pretty close with Nadal prevailing most of the times obviously.
     
  41. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    from what I remember seeing, going purely by form, both djoker 2011 and delpo 2009 sure as hell beat the hell out of 91 muster/96 bruguera/96 courier .... courier 96 is/was the only one close to decent form ....

    nalbandian 2006/ davydenko 2007/ soderling 2009 were playing some real fine tennis as well ..........

    if sampras can lose to schallar/delgado on clay @ RG , he stands a good chance of losing to any one of those I mentioned ...
     
  42. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,301
    I absolutely love this.

    You completely do a switch-aroo. At the US Open, Federer is more dominant, but Pete reached more finals, so you favour Pete. At Wimbledon, Pete is supposedly more dominant, but Fed has more finals, so you favour Pete.


    Do you realize how inconsistent that is? You contradict yourself in the same sentence.
     
  43. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,723
    Location:
    U.S
    His arguments ensure his boy sampras wins at all costs, everywhere ... so they must be right ! :)
     
  44. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,301
    Haha I know man, he seems completely oblivious to it too. He uses a different criteria in the same sentence, it's an awesome sight to behold.
     
  45. Goosehead

    Goosehead Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,446
    Location:
    A bloke in Brighton, England.
    you are mental :)federer almost lost to benneateau ?? no, he actually won :)

    and benneateau was world rank in the 30s... when popgun pete almost lost..erm actually completely lost to the mighty geoprge bastl, he was ranked world no 145.

    what an embarrassing disaster for sampras..having his knickers pulled down by mr world no 145 on court two. :twisted:
     
  46. MTF07

    MTF07 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    781
    Sampras didn't have the game or mentality to win the Roland Garros title, and he never got close to winning it either, and you say he could have won "1 or 2" titles if he didn't have that blood disorder? You sure do love to romanticize.
     
  47. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,350
    If I counted correctly I have Laver at 51 grass court tournament victories. I have Rosewall at one more than Laver at 52 and Gonzalez at 13.

    Problem with Emerson is that he played only against the amateurs for most of his career unlike Laver, Rosewall and Gonzalez.

    There's been a lot of great grasscourt players before Borg. Subjectively I would think Kramer, Gonzalez, Laver, Rosewall, Tilden, Sedgman, Newcombe, Hoad would come to mind.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2012
  48. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,060
    The top 10 greatest grass court tennis players are:

    1. Roger Federer
    2. Pete Sampras
    3. Björn Borg
    4. John McEnroe
    5. Boris Becker
    6. Rod Laver
    7. Jimmy Connors
    8. Stefan Edberg
    9. Rafael Nadal
    10. William Renshaw

    You got Rosewall with 52 titles, but he doesn't make the top 25.
    Best grass-court tennis player ever (male)
     
  49. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,350
    You're amazing. You pull up these lists and act like these rankings are set in stone. Is there any surface besides clay you don't rank Federer by far number one?
     
  50. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,355
    Ha, Ha, Ha. Especially Ilie on place 25.
     

Share This Page