Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by pj80, Jun 4, 2007.
It's funny that people don't think Sampras was that good off the baseline, backhhand in particular. This vid puts that idea to rest. I have a dvd of the Wimbledon final against Agassi. His baseline game was wet. He just absolutely blew one of the great baseliners ever off the court with those wet groundstrokes, including the backhand.
Highlights show players at their best>> not their worst.
sampras is awesome.
Can you imagine in 10 years looking back at Federer highlights from some of his matches? The times he's demolished Roddick, Hewitt in the US Open final, Agassi in the Masters Cup etc. etc. You would think the guy was super human and the GOAT by a country mile, and i'll tell you what, you might not be too far from the truth.
Having said that though these Sampras highlights are amazing to watch. It's great to bring out the old matches on tape every now and then and I do miss him, more than Agassi which is something I didn't think i'd be saying.
Some have more highlights than others. Nobody else has that overhead smash. I'm still waiting to see another player pull that one.
drak, very true, for all players....
i second you heavy metal tennis star....
looking back upon tape from 10 years ago every once in a while make some of the best times while studying a player's game...i always watch old matches during winter break when its cold and rainy out and nothing to do...
Federer's smash return against Roddick ranks way higher than any jumping overhead sampras has ever done.
Yes, his overhead was somthing else. Your point is what? again, highlights usually "highlight" a player. You don't see "highlights" on ESPN of crappy shots>>> they show the best shots.
Oh, and his backhand was not that great >>> it was his weakness.
Yeah absolutely. He seems to have a match for every type of mood, if you want to see some real drama then you've got the Corretja match or the Becker one from the end of year championships, or you could take your pick from any of the ones where he destroyed an opponent.
With Wimbledon coming up i'll have to dig some of his grass court matches out to watch.
My point is his overhead was something else. The weak backhand was relative only to his unmatched forehand.
Yeah, he hit some unbelievable winners with his forehand, and aside from his serve it was possibly the most powerful shot in the game when he was in his prime. However, it was an inconsistent shot. It's not like he hit a running forehand down the line winner on every shot. As for his backhand, it was a rally shot at best that at times he would hit some amazing shots with.
A much better forehand in that time was Couriers. >>> way better than Pete's.
No, his weak backhand was relative to those of his contemporaries.
unfortunately most of the matches i have are his grand slam finals and bigger matches against top level players, becker, agassi, ivanisevic, edberg, courier, etc...
i wish i had his match against corretja....a pity i had to settle for watching it entirely on youtube
Sampras has some of the best highlights. Leaping overhead smash, running forehand, puking and crying on the court.
I also remember some frustrating matches, where he just didnt seem to care and losing to much lesser opponents.
I think people really underrate just how great his forehand was, i'd say easily best of the 90s, maybe a tie with agassi, and in the running for all time best forehands with lendl, agassi, roger, and borg, those guys had some crazy forehands.
He crushed his contemporaries
with his s&v, not forehand or backhand.
The Sampras forehand was a big bazooka & heavy....it was like hitting a bowling ball & the back hand was not as bad many would have us think. Pete had an excellent all around game until he switched to being a pure S&V player (post Gully - 98ish or so).
If one wants to watch the match in its entirety, it's all there on YoutTube to see. It was a dominating match by Pete who dominated one of that eras better players in one Patrick Rafter. Yeah, the 07 AO SF & Finals highlights work fine (if I want to get a quick snap shot of the match) as the final score & highlights all reflect a strong performance by Roger. One is just a condensed version (most fans understand this).
Pete was the dominant player in his era & when he was on it was something special to watch as he made HOF players look pedestrian. At 6 years # 1 & 14 Slams it's safe & accurate to say that the Sampras game was pretty solid all around.
Been watching some old matches lately. I don't think Sampras' game was that bad off the ground, but it wasn't really reliable. He played a lot of hit & miss tennis. Especially in that Semi at the Aus Open in 2000. And I think his game overall was much improved at that time. I am comparing that to the Wimbledon '93 QF, where his game doesn't seem so big. His return of serve looks pretty poor compared to later years when he would attack a lot of serves rather than floating the return in.
It's not that people don't think he was good off the baseline, it's when people say he was just as good as Federer from the baseline which is honestly ridiculous!
that guy (pete sampras) in the match looked like he got (the serve and volley and forehand return dtl pass) it down to a science.
the serve and volley to rafter is executed so effortlessly.
It looks heavy because of his straight wrist with an eastern forehand and a classic swing style. You don't see that type of forehand much in pro circles now.
Doesnt matter its the pro tour, all the guys can put away overheads, if not they wouldnt be there. I just wonder why he expended so much energy hitting such an easy shot when he had fitness issues.
Never heard anybody diss Sampras' leaping overhead before. Wasn't Sampras supposed to be "boring" anyway? Now he has too much flash? You or I might expend energy in hitting a slam overhead; Sampras, on the other hand, could dunk any ball besides a basketball. The shot also helped the crowd get on his side.
Pete can (could) dunk a basketball & the overhead smash was more for effect on many fronts: 1) intimidation 2) juice himself up 3) crowd reaction.
The acoustics on Pete's shots were something special to hear.
Weakness can be both accurate and inaccurate in Sampras's case. Sure you would rather face his backhand vs. other aspects of his game, but the same can be said about most great players.
Edberg and now Haas are exceptions off the top of my head where the backhand was/is better, but it is hard to say their forehands are weakness's unless you put it in context of their exceptional other shots.
one of his better matches.....
I thought, was the 91 US open against Chang. The first two sets were highly competitive, they split the tiebreakers in the first two. Then, Pistol Pete went into a zone, which was not duplicated often, the Agassi Wimbledon kind of come into play. But Pete was simply unbeatable against Chang, despite how hard we all know that Chang tries. Pete smoke Mikey off the court 1 and 1 in 3rd and 4th set. One of the better display of his matches. And he was consistent on his backhand that day, Chang kept trying to exploit it, and Pete was just consistent, and actually hit his BH with a lot of topspin, and kept it deep, kind of reminds me how Rafa operates on the spins. And Chang just cannot compete, and I think Pete also had some spectacular FH in the match, to boot. That was Pete, in his "early" prime, but "In the zone".
Separate names with a comma.