Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by samprasvsfederer123, Jun 22, 2009.
which one owuld you buy and why
Ivanisevic-Rafter no contest. Why waste money on a straight set beatdown?
Why not go and download both for free?
thats exactly what i did
of course i prefer ivanisevics win because of a very simple reason
these were 2 possibly best finals (talking about game quality) although ivanisevic vs rafter was also one of the most dramatic finals so if i could have just one of these, choice is simple
Agassi v Sampras match, grass court tennis at its best.
Better yet, get the Federer-Sampras 2001 4th round match DVD.
Federer shows Sampras who's the REAL King of Grass.
7 Wimbledons > 5 Wimbledons, Sampras is the undisputed grass court GOAT.
H2H: Federer > Sampras
Just like you Nadaltards use the H2H argument to claim that Nadal > Federer. OK, I'll play your game. That means that Federer > Sampras. That is indisputable. It's in the books.
BTW, 8 Wimbledons > 7 Wimbledons because that's how many Federer will have, at least, by the time he's done.
And Federer already has more consecutive grass court wins than Sampras ever had.
Yeah, because 1 Match is the same as 20 Matches including 7 Grand Slam finals (the most between any two men).
Im not a ******* my favourite player is Sampras and prime Sampras would take Federer to the cleaners on grass.
i was going to answer ivanisevic-rafter... but i still have the tape !
so maybe sampras-agassi then... even if i personnaly prefered the masters final (still 1999) between those 2 players.
How about buying all 7 of Sampras' Wimbledon finals.
Sampras will always be the king of Wimbledon/Grass because no one else will win that many Wimbledons AND be undefeated in Wimbledon finals.
And you know no one will win so many Wimbledons because? Say, if Fed wins 4 more Wimbys, bringing his totall tally up to 9, but loses another final, making him having lost 2 finals... I'd say he's better than Sampras on grass. 9W2L > 7W0L. There's no argument. Now of course, whether Fed can win so many more Wimbys is the real question.
well, if you don't make it to the final, that's what happens...
murray is also undefeated in wimbledon finals...
You're saying Fed will reach, at least, 5 more Wimbledon finals?
Uhmmm... unlikely, my friend.
Probably down to genuinely weak competition. Nadal has an overall winning record against Federer. I can't remember Sampras ever playing a Wimbledon final against someone with a winning h2h against him. Maybe you can.
thats because sampras was dominating his main rivals
remind me of feds h2h with nadal and murray or even djoko in the last 2 years (when djoko became a top player)
This is where Sampras fans contradict themselves. First they say Sampras had tougher competition than Federer then they say he dominated his main rivals. Which is it? Maybe Sampras fans don't understand the meaning of 'tougher competition'.
Ivanisevic-Rafter IMO,still remains the best match ever for me.
Ivanisevic vs Rafter is my fave Wimbledon match of all time.
Hello? It's MUCH worse to lose in the 4th round than it is to lose in the final. Just ask anyone who has never made it past the 4th round. Ask Federer if he would have rather lost in the 4th round last year.
I still start shouting at the tv when I watch Rafter-Ivanisevic. It kills me how many chances Rafter had but couldn't take.
Sampras-Agassi is a great match to have if you want to see one of the most dominating performances of all time.
If you like the best quality tennis than it it Sampras vs Agassi 1999 final. Not to take anything away from Ivanisevic and Rafter in the 2001 final, as both played at an exceptional level of tennis. However Sampras in the 1999 final was so outstanding he was clearly a cut above any of Agassi in the 99 final, Ivanisevic in the 01 final, or Rafter in the 01 final. Meanwhile Agassi in the 99 final was about equal to the level produced by both Ivanisevic in the 01 final and Rafter in the 01 final.
Now if it is for the combination of sheer drama, competitiveness, emotion- especialy with 2 sentimenal favorites to win Wimbledon, along with quality of play, then it would be the 2001 final.
So it all depends what you value most. You cant really go wrong either way. Both were awesome matches.
get both, for sure
Separate names with a comma.