how sampras would have dealt with Nadal

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by The Gorilla, Jul 28, 2007.

  1. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    #1
  2. psamp14

    psamp14 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,301
    that was great stuff....sampras in his prime was physically stronger than federer, and was able to handle the higher bouncing ball to his backhand from left handers....

    but i wouldnt compare muster to nadal in terms of their looping forehands...nadal hits heavier and higher bouncing forehands than muster did
     
    #2
  3. bank5

    bank5 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    360
    Those were two great points. I'd love to see Sampras play Nadal.

    Couple things to consider about the YouTube video:
    -I don't the guy is hitting with the amount of heavy topspin that Nadal hits
    -Most of his shots aren't that deep, landing somewhere around the service line
    -They're not playing on red clay
     
    #3
  4. Zets147

    Zets147 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,744
    "Between the ball boy and the netpost Backhand" That is great lol
     
    #4
  5. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I doubt Sampras could take a set off Nadal on clay.

    That's a selective clip. I can find you dozens of instances of Federer hitting great backhands in spite of high bounces, but many of them are offset by really bad points on his behalf. Pete's backhand was even more inconsistent on bouncy surfaces.
     
    #5
  6. West Coast Ace

    West Coast Ace G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    13,503
    Location:
    So Cal
    Why isn't this on the geenzer board? :)

    How about a separate 'Sampras Jock Sniffer' Board?
     
    #6
  7. z-money

    z-money Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    461
    Location:
    Kansas
    pete wouldnt have played nadal on clay. he either would play the clay tournament or wouldnt have lasted to meet him at the french. On grass he would kill nadal. on hard court he would do the same
     
    #7
  8. iamke55

    iamke55 Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,084
    If Federer has trouble with Nadal, Sampras wouldn't take a set on any court that still exists today.
     
    #8
  9. Warriorroger

    Warriorroger Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,603
    Nadal would beat Pete.
     
    #9
  10. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    In the clip Pete's hits no backhands much above his waist let alone above his shoulder. Sampras had more trouble hitting a ball that bounced high to his backhand more than Federer does. Nadal would serve to Pete's backhand 98% of the time so Pete would not hurt him at all there. Pete's only hope would be to serve big and get to a TB and get lucky. On clay Pete would get absolutely killed.
     
    #10
  11. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    all the backhands bar one are shoulder high.
     
    #11
  12. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    no, they aren't...
     
    #12
  13. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    umm, yes they are
     
    #13
  14. saram

    saram Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,371
    Didn't see Rafa, didn't see any clay.....Saw Muster on hard courts and not all were above shoulder height....
     
    #14
  15. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    Sampras sucks on bouncy surfaces. Nadal would own Sampras.
     
    #15
  16. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    #16
  17. fgzhu88

    fgzhu88 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    545
    yeah those lefty forehands were nothing!!! even nadal's forehand on grass would've jumped higher (granted today's wimbledon grass is a disgrace)
     
    #17
  18. Mad iX

    Mad iX Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    710
    Location:
    Australia 3195
    Muster was fodder to Sampras on hardcourt. Same goes the other way around on clay. Nadal would have owned Pete on clay any day.
     
    #18
  19. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Nadal would own Sampras on clay and slow-medium hard courts. Sampras would own Nadal on medium-fast hard courts, carpet, and real grass. Although the grass of today Nadal might give Sampras some trouble even there.
     
    #19
  20. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    This is how sampras would have dealt with him

    [​IMG]
     
    #20
  21. Mick

    Mick Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,363
    Federer only has problem against Nadal on the clay courts and he's a much better clay court player than Sampras ever was. So, I don't think Sampras could teach Federer anything.
     
    #21
  22. avmoghe

    avmoghe Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    584
    More of the same highlights = representation of normal skill mentality....

    Sampras' backhand is far inferior to Federer. It was nothing but a mediocre shot to keep the rally going or to approach the net. It was not an actual weapon like Federer's backhand is (against most players.. Nadal is an exception of course)

    See the Krajicek vs Sampras match in Wimbledon 1996 to see how utterly helpless Sampras could get with the high-kicking Krajicek serve out to the backhand. (I'm not claiming this single match was an accurate description of Sampras' normal backhand ability either... but just pointing to it as an example of how bad it could become)

    Either way, the Federer backhand is one of the best in the game. The Sampras backhand was mediocre. Federer has nothing to learn from Sampras on the backhand.. (or any other part of the game aside from the serve and volley, for that matter)
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2007
    #22
  23. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    forehand ?
     
    #23
  24. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    I think Federer has a much better return of serve, and much better groundstrokes off both sides then Sampras. Sampras had the better serve, and was better at the net. If Federer is having trouble with Nadal from the baseline, Sampras would have had even more then, so no there is absolutely nothing Sampras could teach him in that regard.
     
    #24
  25. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    There is one thing Sampras could teach Federer and this is crucial: to slow down between clutch points.

    I saw troubling things from Roger in the Nadal matches. When things get tight Roger speeds up, instead of slowing down.

    Nadal is smart to slow down, calm himself and generate his own pace - take control of the match rather than relinquish momentum. Pete knew how to do this as well.

    Roger doesn't. It's amazing really, because he still dominates in spite of not having this innate sense. When he gets nervous you could see him having panic attacks, even though he's not animated.
     
    #25
  26. laurie

    laurie Guest

    There is one play Sampras did use which Federer doesn't (which I think would work if Federer tried it), that's the American slice as they call it. It's the high to low, he takes the ball high on the backhand, brings it down with slice keeping it low, and come to the net. That was a play Sampras was very good at, he did it a lot against Kuerten and others. Sampras beat players like Corretja on clay. I suppose on the return of serve they call it chip and charge but I'm also talking about open play as well. Corretja was one of those guys who got as much topspin on his shots as players like Nadal do today, he got an incredible amount of action on his shots.
    So that's the challenge for players like Sampras and Federer.

    I agree that players who don't have as much action on the ball (topspin) are meat and drink for players like Federer and Sampras.

    Whether Federer was off form or not, Canas' topspin forehand inside out did pose Federer some issues.
     
    #26
  27. rod99

    rod99 Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,197
    sampras wouldn't hang out at the baseline against nadal which federer continues to do. he would be attacking the net and not having to hit high backhands. sampras had the greatest serve of all time and the weakest part of nadal's game is his return. on a fast surface nadal would struggle very much to break sampras' serve. he would still be able to win his serve most of the time on clay which would keep the sets close.
     
    #27
  28. Mad iX

    Mad iX Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    710
    Location:
    Australia 3195
    Nadal is one of the best at passing shots, but I definitely agree that Sampras would not be as stubborn as Fed trying to beat Nadal's forehand with his backhand. In the end, it doesn't matter whether Fed or Pete had the better backhand, because Nadal's forehand trumps them both. Why Fed continues to use this 'tactic' I have no clue.
     
    #28
  29. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    Here we go again........

    Muster isn't nadal

    muster doesn't get the same degree of action on his topspin shots as nadal

    muster doesn't hit the same acute angles as nadal

    muster has a losing record against sampras whilst Nadal has a winning record against Federer so no mental advantage for Federer against Nadal but Sampras had the mental advantage against muster

    Despite all these differences monsoon still thinks it a good example.


    N.B.

    All these clips on youtube glorifying Sampras are hardly ever against Wayne Ferreria, Stich or Krajicek and also not on clay. In fact I don't remember the last time I saw a Sampras highlights reel against Wayne, Michael, or Richard being posted.
     
    #29
  30. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    If that's right it a good observation. If true then it could mean Federer reckons that by speeding up he might 'hurry' Nadal to his own advantage. however it could be more harmful for him than Nadal to speed up play on key points.
     
    #30
  31. laurie

    laurie Guest

    I've put Sampras v Krajicek clips on my website and plan to put some on Youtube. Also Krajicek v Henman and Becker v Krajicek.

    Don't worry AAAA, it's quite normal for Sampras and other players to have losing records to a few players. The great West Indies cricket team beat everyone but had problems against New Zealand, Real Madrid always has problems against Barcelona. When Liverpool were the top side in England they had problems against Manchester Utd even when Utd were struggling, it's quite normal.

    Krajicek was one of my favourite players - I like his sister Micahela too, saw her at Wimbledon and she has promise and a big serve.
     
    #31
  32. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    Is that clip a match Sampras won or lost?
     
    #32
  33. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    No worries 'mate', just wondering if all the you tube clips collectively presented a gilded impression of Sampras or if there were many clips of when he didn't play so well.

    Federer's losses to Nadal are plain for all to see, but I don't think you tube has many clips of Sampras's numerous FO 1st, 2nd and 3 rd losses. For fairness Sampras fans should post Sampras's bad matches on you tube as well .
     
    #33
  34. laurie

    laurie Guest

    AAAA, it was the 2000 US Open quarterfinal. I put that on my site last year.

    But I've seen on Youtube clips of the 1996 quarterfinal which Sampras lost in straight sets. Krajicek was brilliant in that match on his serve.

    I've also put many clips on my site of matches which Sampras lost. In fact, right now on my site, I have 13 clips of the 1998 Cincinatti final which Sampras lost to Rafter, in fact, Sampras blew his top big time at the end. I've also put 16 clips on my site of the 1996 Stuttgart final which Sampras lost to Becker last year which I will bring back later this year. I've also put clips of the 2001 Wimbledon match which Sampras lost to Federer. I enjoy putting good clips on my site whether Sampras won or lost, as long as it was a great match and I have the match in my collection.

    I also put clips of my other favourites, Seles, Kuznetsova and Mauresmo and I have many clips of matches where they have lost to other players.

    So in my case, it's not some sort of conspiracy.

    I can't speak for others.
     
    #34
  35. alizad89

    alizad89 New User

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    I think as far as wimbledon goes, Sampras would have easy straight set victories over Nadal (much easier than federer), not to mention the Masters RR tournamnets (on carpet). However the tide would turn for Nadal on clay, where I wouldnt be suprised if he bagles Sampras everytime; hard is a grey area, but I would give the advantage of the hard courts to nadal; however it all depends on the sampras serve....
     
    #35
  36. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    I do think Sampras would have beaten Nadal easily on the old grass, however I am not sure if he would have an easy time with Nadal on the new grass, which isnt the same grass anymore. I also think Federer would have a very easy time with Nadal on the grass of old as well though.
     
    #36
  37. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    you are british?
     
    #37
  38. alizad89

    alizad89 New User

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    65
    No I'm persian, and no not the ones from 300.

    Plus watching sampras play is 10 times more interesting than watching nadal and fed go at it any day.

    Whew I always wanted to say that....
     
    #38
  39. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    I just wondere3d because a lot of brits have only seen him play on grass at queens and wimbledon.You really think nadal could beat sampras on hard?Sampras had a big flat forehand, like blake, except far more powerful, and was an alround better player.Nadal has shown himself to be vulnerable to big, flat hitters.
     
    #39
  40. laurie

    laurie Guest

    Giving advantage to Nadal on hardcourts is an interesting concept considering the troubles Nadal has on hardcourts against guys like Gonzalez, Youzny and Blake.

    I can imagine what Sampras would do to Nadal on hardcourts, one thing is he would be able to play more rallies before attacking the net because he seemed much more comfortable from the backcourt on the various speeds of hardcourts as opposed to clay (reasons now well documented so I won't bother to go into them).
     
    #40
  41. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    I hate threads like this. They are so stupid and obviously posted by SAMPRAS worshippers. Nadal would kill Sampras easily. Do you remember a guy name Hewitt? He whipped Sampras easily. Sampras was not as invincible as Fed is now. Fed has his bad days, but Sampras, please, can't be compared with Fed. Fed killed Hewitt.
     
    #41
  42. NadalandFedererfan

    NadalandFedererfan Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    930
    You are only looking at the negative side, by pointing out how he does vs Gonzalez, Youzhny, and Blake on hard courts. I could point out the very positive side like how extremely well he does vs Federer on hard courts.

    Remember he has beaten Federer on 2 of their 3 matches on outdoor hard courts, and the one he lost he was 2 points from a straight set win in a best 3-of-5. So he was that close to being 3-0 vs Federer on outdoor had courts, which is amazing. Also how he dismantled Roddick in the Pacific Life semis this year.

    Pointing out only the bad of his showings vs a few much lesser players on hard courts would be like someone pointing out Sampras having such a hard time with Wayne Ferreira and Paul Haarhuis, which would not be fair. Or it would be like pointing out Federer's struggles with Guillermo Canas and Olivier Rochus, as a reflection of his ability.

    Also the way he ripped Youzhny apart in the last 3 sets of Wimbledon, and then convincingly beat Berdych in the next round, I would not be surprised if he starts dominating players like that on hard courts. It could be argued, although we will have a better idea in hindsight, that Nadal was in a slump from after Wimbledon last year to the Pacific Life this year. 2 of his 3 losses to Berdych on hard courts, his 1 and only match with Gonzalez not on clay, his 2 losses to Youzhny on hard courts, were all during this period. The way he played vs Berdych and Youzhny at Wimbledon, I think that period looks over, and given that the 2 of them had only 1 of their 5 wins outside that long stretch of Nadal reaching no tournament finals, it could be attributed to his own personal slump more then anything. Blake is the one exception, but I dont think you will see much more of Blake from now on. Gonzalez was just playing tennis of his life in Australia, and I would not be sure he would do well vs Nadal on hard courts if he had played him on other occasions.
     
    #42
  43. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    Yeah, a high backhand that you hit at waist level.

    Sampras would play Nadal the same way he played everyone else. He'd be entirely reliant on his serve. If that wasn't doing the job, he'd lose.
     
    #43
  44. laurie

    laurie Guest

    You make interesting points. The only I would add in sincerity is the likes of Berdych and blake don't play efficient Tennis, they don't have the killer instinct - they don't take the initiative. Sampras knew the right shots at the right times, when to come in and when to stay back. I think he would have gave Nadal a lot of toruble, but of course Nadal would have posed interesting challenges too.

    They always go on about Federer and Sampras but I've been saying for 6 months that a Sampras Nadal rivalry would have been awsome because of the contrast in style of play whilst both been power players.
     
    #44
  45. Jonny S&V

    Jonny S&V Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    4,892
    Location:
    Northern MO
    Not to mention that Berdych is one of the most streaky players on tour, and he can beat most anyone on any given day (except on clay).
     
    #45
  46. rod99

    rod99 Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,197
    b/f ANYBODY claims that nadal could beat sampras on a hard court, maybe nadal should at least make a semi-final at either the us open or australian open first. there is no comparison there.
     
    #46
  47. Jonny S&V

    Jonny S&V Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    4,892
    Location:
    Northern MO
    Good point.
     
    #47
  48. rwn

    rwn Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    417
    It's widely known, that Muster couldn't handle serve-and-volley players. He had mediocre passing shots. Nadal OTOH has great passing shots. It's much better to compare Nadal with Bruguera who played with extreme topspin and had excellent passing shots. Sampras has a losing h2h against him.
     
    #48
  49. rwn

    rwn Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    417
    This is complete nonsense. Sampras constantly panicked against Krajicek. It's so stupid to take one matchup with one player to make a point about Federer's (or Sampras') mental state.
     
    #49
  50. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    Well remembered and some good points. Muster is 0-10 against Edberg, 4 of those 10 losses were on clay and Edberg is not a renowned player on clay. Muster is 2-9 against sampras.
     
    #50

Share This Page