Sampras Comeback - Very Probable If ...

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by Tennis Dude, Nov 1, 2007.

  1. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Baby Brianna is doing good. She's hanging out with Grandma today.

    I saw Sampras play Martin at the Palisades on the Tennis Channel. He looked good, even a step above, but not ready for the tour.
     
    #51
  2. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga

    Why would you assume that sampras has 2-3 years left? You act like getting in pro quality shape is a cakewalk, it would take long enough just to get his game sharp enough, and after this layoff, who are you to say that his body would be able to handle it. No one is saying that pete's talent has left the building. But his body is not pro quality anymore and he is too old. Tell me why he "reasonably" has two to three years left?


    Max Mirnyi isn't a "good" serve and volleyer? Neither was Tim Henman (until recently)? The reason they don't look "good" and aren't ranked highly isnt because they aren't "good" serve and volleyers, but because basing one's whole game on that strategy isn't effective given the conditions of the game these days. It isnt an issue of not having serve volleyers, its an issue of people adapting to more of a baseline game because thats the state of the game today, thats what is successful. Sampras, if he tried, couldnt get back to his days of peak performance, and it would require a return to that sort of form for him to be successful today. His body isn't in the shape it would need to be in, and by the time it was in shape for that style of play, he would be too old to keep up, and his skills aren't as sharp as they once were. Are you seriously telling me that the guy who had to save match points against an also retired Todd Martin on the Champions tour could get in enough shape to contend with Nadal?
     
    #52
  3. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Arm wrestling is different from tennis. Joints start to ache. Muscles that aren't used dont just snap back into action. You can't go from high caliber athletics to nothing and right back to high caliber athletics, the body doesnt work that way.

    Santoro is still around because his game isn't very tough on his body. But even though he is around, he's not a major threat unless a top player is having an off day. Andre was in much better shape through the end of his career than Pete was, til his back gave out in the last couple of years. You're right. Pete is not Andre. and if they played right now, Andre would probably take him out.
     
    #53
  4. Cenc

    Cenc Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Messages:
    2,267
    Location:
    Croatia
    well im quite new on this forum although i know quite a lot about tennis. let me tell u several things:
    1) do u people know that sampras defeated roddick last year on carpet in streight sets???
    2) do u people know that sampras lost very very tough to ginepri and querry?
    3) sampras from 95-98. eats federer alive. few days ago i saw some of samprass videos from these years and he is far from actual level of tennis that is getting worse and worse
    4) at the moment i doubt sampras would be able to beat federer except on REAL WIMBLEDON GRASS (not green clay as it is now)
    5) he will never come back becasue he retired as the LEGEND winning 14th slam and really proving that hes the best player ever
    6) this discussion got useless
     
    #54
  5. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    Actually, he only lost in that first match on clay. He was probably 30 pounds heavier then than he is now. He's played Ginepri a bunch of other times since then and beaten him. I guess playing Ginepri is good for his confidence.
     
    #55
  6. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    The Ginepri matches were part of a traveling exhibition series. I seriously doubt Ginepri played at his highest level, I would imagine that they were planned out to an extent. I mean would you really sell out of tickets every time if you knew Ginepri was consistently beating him 2 and 3? Same with Roddick, that was at world team tennis, and I really dont think it was serious. It might have been serious from sampras' end in both the Roddick and Ginepri matches, but I can't imagine that he seriously beat them in an honest to God match that played at the highest level by both players.
     
    #56
  7. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    If Agassi played Roddick and Ginepri today he'd probably lose, and Agassi hasn't been gone long at all compared to Sampras.

    It's not a matter of talent. It's a matter of fitness and tour toughness.
     
    #57
  8. chiapants226

    chiapants226 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    789
    Location:
    melbourne, australia
    lol. someone is up himself.
     
    #58
  9. FedForGOAT

    FedForGOAT Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    921
    Have you EVER seen a Federer backhand volley????
    Untalented at the net??!!?!??
     
    #59
  10. AlexP

    AlexP Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Messages:
    157
    Yeah, maybe in a movie.
     
    #60
  11. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    955
    hey tennis dude... i see u are racking up posts really fast... once u reach 50, you are entitled to an avatar... i have found one for you to use... cheers
    [​IMG]
     
    #61
  12. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    Agassi did play Blake in an extremely high level exo and he lost 7-6 in the third. Blake was shaking his head afterwards wondering how a retired guy could be so good. http://youtube.com/watch?v=PcIC_uugNos

    Roddick would beat Agassi today (Agassi's return isn't as good now, his back would probably come loose), but Ginepri wouldn't stand a chance. Ginepri is far below that level he reached in 2005.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2007
    #62
  13. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    Ginepri looked pretty decent against Federer when I saw him last. But that might have been for only one set.
     
    #63
  14. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Agassi playing Ginepri is completely different than Pete playing Ginepri. Aside from his back, Agassi is in tremendous shape. From what I've heard, Pete barely picked up a racquet before hitting the WTT circuit, whereas from what I've read, Agassi stays in playing shape. Agassi could go on court and possibly play top 100 level tennis right now against current pros. Pete is in nowhere near as good shape.
     
    #64
  15. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Don't Compare Sampras to Agassi

    Don't compare Sampras to Agassi. They did have a rivalry, but when truly pitted against each, Sampras prevails.

    This one post earlier said Sampras beat Roddick. Well, there you have it. And don't tell me about exhibitions. Was Roddick merciful to Sampras? I'm not sure. If so, I'm not sure if mercy is the best way to play exhibs.

    Y'all compare Agassi with this and that. And speak here with lots of respect with Agassi, because he is pretty much my favorite player. But just because he's one of my favorite players doesn't mean I can't speak the truth about or against him when one compares Sampras to Agassi.

    Did you guys see what just happened with Nalby and Fed? It just shows that Fed is simply another good player enjoying the absence of a good serve & volleyer.

    But please don't compare Sampras with Agassi as we speak about since Agassi would lose to Fed, Sampras would lose to Fed. That Samp beat Roddick makes the statement. Samp lost to Ginepri in Texas (clay), and that is understandable. It's clay. Samp beat Roddick on carpet. Sometimes, carpet is a great equalizer. I think, in my opinion, that carpet brings out the true skill and talent of a player. This is why MacEnroe was so so good on carpet. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, Mac's favorite surface was carpet.

    So Samp beating Roddick on carpet, pretty much showed us who won on an equalized plane.

    But please, don't compare Fed's tet-a-tet with Agassi, with Fed's would-be tet-a-tet with Sampras.

    Again, Samp need not prove to us that he can sustain #1 on the ATP Tour. If desired, I believe (2-3 year window of opportunity) that if he continued to chase some more Grand Slams, he could do it, especially, if he started looking behind his back, and seeing that a guy like Roger is catching up to him.

    Still possible. 2-3 years left of total, intense, mental, and physical training, could get Samp 1 or 2 more Slams.
     
    #65
  16. chiapants226

    chiapants226 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    789
    Location:
    melbourne, australia
    i seriously doubt sampras would ever be able to win a grand slam if he came back. sure, he might win a few rounds, but he would not be fit enough at 36 years old to go through the whole 2 weeks of play.
     
    #66
  17. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Mercy may not be the best way to play exos, but I'm quite sure it happens. What would Roddick look like if he went out and blew pete off the court. as much flak as the guy gets around here without doing anything like that, I can't imagine what it would be like if he did. I truly believe, and I am pretty confident that many others here do as well, that if you put pete and andy on a court right now, and andy wanted to, he could beat him 3 and 2.

    Lets say, if for no other reason to give you a bit of satisfaction, that andy came out and played and pete actually won. I'll tell a story and relate it. My junior year of high school a blind student came to our school and joined the wrestling team (I was also on the wrestling team). The blind kid was a state champ. in his blind division school before coming to GA. Our best wrestler in his weight class got on the mat with him to feel him out, and the blind student beat him. We were shocked, just as the wrestler was. 10 minutes later, our guy came back and pinned him with relative ease. The first match, our guy did not expect to have much of a match. He was shocked to find out that the guy had game. He came back without that shock, went out and wrestled at full potential, and won as if he were wrestling anyone else. He had to get over the shock, then just do what he knew he could do.
    So andy goes on court against Pete. He doesnt expect him to have much firepower. Andy goes out, not hitting as hard as he can, not hitting the angles he can, trying to keep Pete in the match, and Pete surprises him by actually having some game. Lo and behold, a set goes by with pete winning. Andy keeps up his work, planning on getting into it in the second set, and closing it out in a third. By this point sampras is playing the best tennis he can for his age and shape, which (while not top pro level) doesnt suck, while andy is all of a sudden trying to raise his slouched level to a normal level, and ends up losing. If it happened today, Andy would simply know what he had to do: go out and play his game at its normal level. He'd take pete out swiftly. Pete's game isn't bad, but its not in reality up to Andy's level. I actually do think Andy lost on purpose and wanted to give pete a good showing, but if he didnt, I feel that the second scenario happened.

    PS on the topic of Andre V Pete, no one is comparing them in their past selves at their peaks in the rivalry! What we're trying to say to you is that right now Andre is closer to his level of play when he retired, which is strong top 50 modern play, than pete is to his peak years. If you took Andre as he is right now and put him against pete as he is right now, I'm confident that Andre would work him over. The point is not whether andre or pete is historically the better player, but that andre is, right now, more in tune with the modern game and in better shape to play it than pete is. We're not talking about a Pete that is at his peak either. If pete still had the capacity to play at his peak, then sure, there is a possibility that he'd take a couple more slams. But you're talking about subjecting a 36 year old who has played leisurely over the last year or so after a 3 year complete layoff to a training regimen that would attempt to put him into shape equivalent to the 25 year old top players of today. You can't do that. The two to three year window you have talked about would put him at 38 or 39 years old. A 39 year old who has been a lifelong player may beat a 25 year old on the rec court, but when you're talking about athletes at the top of their game, you can't take a 39 year old and expect the same. The reason agassi was able to go so long was that for the years past 98 or so he took excellent care of his body and forced himself to be physically as close to people ten years younger than him. Pete retired at 33, did not have the same training regimen as when he was playing, and would have to amplify his training to have any hope of being as fit as top touring pros. Starting hardcore, amplified training at 36 in hopes of a comeback would probably do more harm to his body than good.
    whew! good night :)
     
    #67
  18. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    Why can't you just enjoy the career he had? Why can't you let it go?
     
    #68
  19. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,225
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    Hyogen... you have read my mind!
    while not believing it at all, i would say that andre's comeback would be more likely to happen and more likely to be sucessfull than pete's. just imo...
     
    #69
  20. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Sorry, but Exhibitions and World Team Tennis don't mean jack!

    Didn't Andy beat Fed in an exhibition? So what does that mean? Nothing as you can see when you look to thier head-to-head records on tour.

    By this same twisted logic, I guess people would say that Todd Martin is almost ready for a come-back based on play against Pete (no mercy in exhibitions Pete!).

    Look, Todd is #1 on the Seniors tour and has had some close games with Sampras - I mean a 6-1 second set over Sampras in Greece? He's definitely ATP ready.

    As for Nalbandian and Fed, that proves nothing when it comes to the abscence of a good serve and volley player as.......... neither of those two play serve and volley. If a serve and voller player could tear it up on the tour right now, you can be sure that there would be someone doing that right now. In fact, if serve and volley was a good tactic right now, you would probably see a mix of serve and volley players along with the other styles in the top 20 - but you don't.
     
    #70
  21. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Are you sure about that? Did you see the problems with Agassi's back at the U.S. Open, if not here' a taste....

    ""It was a physical issue that grew to be a real physical concern," Agassi says of the degenerative disc disease spondylolisthesis, which caused one of the vertebrae in his lower back to slip out of place. As the disease progressed, the disc began pinching his sciatic nerve, a condition called sciaticasciatica that causes low back painback pain that shoots down the leg. By the end of the Open, even the injections of cortisone and other anti-inflammatories that he'd been taking since March could no longer help."

    http://www.webmd.com/back-pain/features/andre-agassi-battle-with-back-pain

    "So for the third time in five days, Agassi braced himself as a doctor plunged a needle in his back to ease the inflammation that triggers the debilitating pain."
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090201034.html

    With a problem with degenerative disk disease, Agassi's come back is even less likely.

    Man, what are people on? You'd think Elvis was coming back too.
     
    #71
  22. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Interesting

    interesting post on tennisanalyst.blogspot.com re Shanghai.

    speaks of the players.

    Talks about Fed, too.

    quite quite interesting
     
    #72
  23. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,225
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....

    Was my post directed to you? did i ask for your opinion? NO, then please refrain you rampage as i am not in the mood to take up with a-holeness...

    Did you actually read what i wrote? let me report it to you:" while not believing it at all..."

    ps: when you spend time with your head stuck in the sand... people only see a "..."
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2007
    #73
  24. Joeyg

    Joeyg Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    748
    Location:
    Sarcasm, USA
    This is getting to be one of the more moronic posts ever.
     
    #74
  25. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    From tennis dude's website:
    "Murray's level of play may be catching up, and may begin surpassing Djokovic, however, since he is not going to play in Shanghai, there is not much to discuss for the purposes of Shanghai. He may be the next up & comer, but if he is to win Wimbledon, he may need to work on his volleys, and if possible, even a 1-handed backhand. He's young, and such change may help him, although it may take 1 or 2 years to adjust. However, the fact that he is young, gives him this reasonable opportunity to make such changes."
    I stopped taking it seriously right there. To suggest that a player who is already established in his strokes should stop and start using a different one is something an "Analyst" should laugh at. Pete went from two handed to one handed in his formative years, as did Djokovic, but Murray is not in his formative years.
    "Nalbandian's ability to consistently prevail over Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal is good evidence that the current world #1 is enjoying a time of a temporary extinction of a talented and gifted serve & volley tennis player. Nalbandian's style of play is one of consistency, over and over again, which prevails over the #1 Roger Federer."

    Consistently? He's beaten him twice in a row in consecutive weeks. It is hardly consistency to be beaten by someone who is in a short hot streak. I think one thing we're not considering with Nalbandian is that people haven't run up against him much this season. He's missed alot of it, so the Djokers, Nadals, and Feds out there haven't been regularly going toe to toe with him. Now that he's back and healthy, it is a bit of a shock to play him. Think about Fed/Canas-Fed hadnt played him in forever, then they ran up against each other in consecutive tournaments, Fed didnt have the experience of regularly playing him, and he got beat two in a row. What did fed do in Basel? Destroyed Canas. I'm not saying he could do the same for Nalby, because Nalbandian's game is a solid match for feds, so when nalbandian comes out of the shadows and is healthy, its dangerous to all top players who haven't seen much of him this season. I think he could make a good run at the beginning of the season but once top players play him regularly you wont see the same hot streak as you're seeing now.
     
    #75
  26. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    You are joking, right? You give credit to FEd or better yet, you deny credit to Nalby, because Fed hasn't had enough tries at Nalby? Or Nadal at Nalby?!

    C'mon, that's too bad if Fed hadn't had enough tries. Tennis doesn't line up players just for 1 player to see if he's good or not.

    Nalby beat Fed twice. Period. End of story. No need for excuses of explanations. Nalby beat Nadal, twice. Period.

    That Nadal was injured, that Fed was not having a good day, that Nalby was simply 'on a streak' are absurd excuses. If Nalby won, and as some may claim, that FED HAD A BAD DAY or FED DIDN'T PLAY NALBY ENOUGH or WHATEVER, Nalby could've simply said, "Yes, though I've won, it really wasn't my best day; in fact, I wasn't even trying; I had a hair split; my right toe was not feeling 100%; perhaps 99%, but not 100%; also, my serve could've been better today; my return was not the best ever, but it was decent; i should've beat Nadal 6-0 in the first set; i shouldn't have given Fed any games, but i just wasn't there mentally during that 2nd set tie-break ... oh well, i came through anyway by the skin of my teeth at least this time; at least next time, i'll try a little harder"

    yes, this is what nalby could've said, but he didn't.

    Serve & volley will prevail.
     
    #76
  27. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    So sure?

    Also, why are y'all guys so sure that blog thang you guys are talking about is mine?

    Is it yours?
     
    #77
  28. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    I'm not taking anything from Nalbandian. he and Fed have had historically close matches, what I'm saying is that Fed hasn't had to worry about Nalbandian pretty much all year. Neither has any other top player for that matter. Next year, providing Nalbandian is at full health, he could be a consistent top ten player, but the more he is actually in contention with top players, the more even the matches will get. I seriously doubt he'll be bageling Nadal and constantly beating fed if they play each other more. He'll win his share and hopefully be a contender, but he wont blow through the top three seeds regularly. he's come back in full force at the end of a season and surprised folks like Fed, Nadal, and Djoker, because they haven't been on court with him for most of the season.

    And people think its your blog because you reference it on here like its the Gospel. You appear to be promoting it through controversy, and whether it is yours or not, you make it look like yours by pimping it constantly on here.

    Lastly, what does Nalbandian have to do with serve and volley coming back?
     
    #78
  29. SempreSami

    SempreSami Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,627
    Location:
    UK
    I can't wait for Fred Perry's comeback into dominance.
     
    #79
  30. Steve132

    Steve132 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    840
    Um.... are you aware that Sampras actually played Federer at Wimbledon when Sampras was the defending champion? Federer is a much better player now than he was in 2001, and Sampras is six years older. Can you provide any reason why the result would be different if they were to meet in a serious competitive match now?
     
    #80
  31. Fee

    Fee Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    7,308
    Location:
    In front of my computer, obviously
    Bah ha hahahahahahahahahaha. Of course it's yours, or it's your sister's. If you were just a fan of tennis blogs you would mention other blogs or articles, not just yours. You've mentioned it in almost every post you've made on this forum. No one does that unless they have a vested interest in it. I'm not ever going to look at it until you admit it, and I'm putting you on my ignore list until you do (I'm sure someone will tell me).

    Spoke to Justin on Saturday, the day after he played Pete in an exo in Beaumont, Texas. Part of the conversation went like this (they split sets, Pete won the match TB):

    me: Justin, is Pete in better shape now than last year when he started playing again?
    JG: yeah, he's lost weight, almost looks like his old self
    me: Do you think he's coming back on tour?
    JG: (Spit take type of laugh) No. People need to get over that idea, its not happening.

    Even if he did come back, he would probably get killed in real matches. Why? Because every player would want that win on their resume. These exhibition matches tell us nothing except that Pete is willing to get out of the house for a few hours to play some tennis in public. That's all.

    Prosealster and SempreSami, you both rock. :)
     
    #81
  32. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Not out of spite

    C'mon, Fee, don't act out of spite. Let's me nice, now.

    It's just someone's blog. Be kind.
     
    #82
  33. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    To answer you question

    To answer your question, there are many players who are at the top and then start descending and then quit.

    You say that pete was in his prime and fed beat him @ 19 yrs old? well, that 1 win doesn't do anything or say anything. it's not as if fed beat him in straight sets.

    if you look at the veins of the leaf and not the entire forest, you will not be able to get perspective.

    take some perspective here.

    fed v. samp was a 5-setter, and a close one.

    based on your logic, that means that when fed lost to that 1000th ranked(?) suzuki guy, that means that suzuki also the next up &comer.

    as we speak, who is suzuki? some motorbike manufacturer?

    you see? that 1 match with samp v. fed says only that fed is a pretty good player.

    still, look at the forest. samp could be fed. this logic does not mean that fed can't beat samp.

    allow me to clarify and repeat: SAMPRAS COULD BE FEDERER. BUT FEDERER, TOO, COULD BE SAMPRAS.

    Question: Who is a better player?
    Answer: Sampras (Federer has yet to prove it... and until then, Federer is still trying to break Sampras' record). Until then, Fed is still in the realm of 'hype', and have not broken Samp's record.
     
    #83
  34. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    typo

    sorry;

    when i said: SAMPRAS COULD 'BE' FEDERER, I MEANT 'BEAT' FEDERER. and FEDERER COULD 'BEAT' SAMPRAS.
     
    #84
  35. Jackie T. Stephens

    Jackie T. Stephens Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    841
    Agree, that old man is to old to play with the young guys now.
     
    #85
  36. Steve132

    Steve132 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    840
    Can you tell me when "fed lost to that 1000th ranked(?) suzuki guy?" As far as I know he has not lost to anyone ranked that low since he became the world No. 1. The lowest ranked players to beat him in this period have been Gasquet (101) and Berdych (79), who have both since shown that they are much better players than those rankings suggested.

    As a matter of interest, what does Federer have to do to show that he is a better player than Sampras? He certainly has achievements that Sampras has not matched, such as:

    • Winning 11 Slams in 4 years
    • Reaching 10 consecutive Slam finals
    • Reaching the finals of the French Open
    • Holding the No. 1 ranking for 196 consecutive weeks

    The only Sampras achievements that Federer has not equaled are lifetime ones such as the number of Slams won or weeks at No. 1. That is not too surprising, since Federer is only 26 years old and his career has a long way to go.
     
    #86
  37. Chopin

    Chopin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,103
    Location:
    St. John, USVI
    I think everyone is getting sucked into this thread--is it really worth arguing with this guy? I'm out.
     
    #87
  38. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    But What About Shanghai

    If fed is as good as you all think he is, then what are your predictions for SHANGHAI?

    i think fed may take it, only if the other players play very well, but not spectacularly.

    i think, most will play very well, and that is why fed may not take it. if anyone, it may go to nadal or djokovic.

    if nalby plays, he may take the whole tourney again.

    i believe this is a reasonable comment on shanghai
     
    #88
  39. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    I still have to think that fed is a good bet, aside from his matches with Nalbandian lately, he's played solid tennis. And really, he played solid tennis in those matches. I don't see Djoker making it to the semis, but I'd be happy if he did. Nadal could be poised to take it, except for the Nalby match he's looked ok. I would really love to see someone like gasquet make a major run. I think if Roddick plays he wont be serious as he has Davis Cup to worry about. Davy is a bit washed at the moment in his scandal. I dont think Gonzo will be much of a contender, unless he comes back to form like in Australia. I think it would be cool if Ferrer made a run though.
     
    #89
  40. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Whoa man, my rampage? Sorry about your mood... but man it's a chat board, you don't have to ask for my opinion. If I missed the point of you post, then my bad... usual way of handling that is to say something like - adjust your sarcasim detector.
     
    #90
  41. SempreSami

    SempreSami Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,627
    Location:
    UK
    Cheers Fee :D I can tell you with information from a blog at tennisbull.com that the man Perry did not in fact die in 1995, but disappeared to train in preparation for the emergence of Federer. It's only a matter of time before he returns.
     
    #91
  42. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,225
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    I did react a bit arsh. i am sorry for my reaction anyway, but im kinda tired of being assaulted by people who dont even bother to read the whole post and it's meaning. what can i say... european thinking running in my blood. are we cool?
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2007
    #92
  43. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    In Sampras' words - Does anyone have that Article?

    I just read some articles that mentioned Sampras 'licking his chops' or something that effect whenever he saw baseliners at Wimbledon.

    I recall that the article seemed to hint, based on what Samp himself said, that he has completely 101% ruled out a comeback.

    This tells us that a return or comeback is in his thoughts.

    Sure, reasonably speaking, he probably doesn't think he can win. But after playing some senior tennis, and some exhibitions, if he feels and sense that there is a silver lining there, and a reasonable window of opportunity, we may take his training very very seriously.

    It may be very posssible that the Asian exhibs he's training for are not simply being played to exhibit his old talents. He may be doing it to gauge his ability with the top. If things look positive, he may make the comeback.... but only if things look and feel positive.

    But there must be a WINDOW OF OPPTY to capitalize on just like Hingis did, and the Williams sisters were on their descent: Hingis capitalize and took advantage of the events.

    If nalby starts to re-emerge and beats fed and nadal and djoker, then pete may come back, since pete may be the type of player that nalby may not be able to handle.

    this, my friends, is the world of tennis: multi-dimensional competition.
     
    #93
  44. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    well no S---, he obviously had to think about a comeback to rule it out. Are you completely ignoring the fact that he, as you JUST STATED, has ruled out a comeback? You act like you know sampras and have some inside scoop. THE GUY HAS SAID HE'S NOT COMING BACK! HE WON'T COME BACK!
     
    #94
  45. ckthegreek

    ckthegreek Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    380
    I'm Sampras' biggest fan but let's have a bit of perspective here. Borg, Wilander, Kuerten, Hingis all tried to come back without much success.

    The game moves on every 3 years or so. The Sampras of 89 who beat Wilander at the US Open was half as good as the Sampras who beat Agassi in the 99 Wimbledon. Equally the Federer of 2001 was half as good as the Federer of today. And so on.

    If Sampras came back would he be able to win some matches? Sure, but not many. But then again Federer at 36 wouldn't either.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2007
    #95
  46. Meanmachine22

    Meanmachine22 New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    40
    Pere Sampras would clearly damage his legacy if he would return.
    He knows it and everybody with a little know about Tennis does.
     
    #96
  47. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Meaning of "Comeback"

    But what's the actual meaning of 'comeback'? does it mean that samp has to come back with a sustained level of play with tourney after tourney, like hingis tried?

    samp's 'comeback' can simply mean showing the world and he's still 'got it'; and 'got it' could mean to beat nadal, nalby, fed, wimby, us open.
     
    #97
  48. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    He's shown the world as much "it" as he still has. We've all been impressed with his level of play since coming back and hitting the exo and champ. circuit. but that does not mean it could in any way carry his old body to a wimbledon and us open crown. By the second week his body would be given out. And he doesnt have the 2-3 year window of fitness you're talking about, you are talking about a 38-39 year old man going best of three sets for two weeks on the way to a title at two different grand slams. And the players you listed can beat just about any current top ten pro, and would shrug off a 36 year old not named Agassi. I mean come on dude.
     
    #98
  49. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    allow me to settle this

    Q: Did anyone ever think that Samp would hit 14 Slams?
    A: No.
    Result = He did

    Q: DId anyone ever think that Fed would be records as he is doing today?
    A: No.
    Result = He did .. and counting.

    Q: Did anyone ever think that Agassi could win Wimbledon?
    A: No.
    Result = He did.

    Q: Does anyone think Samp can come back with a storm?
    A: No.
    Result = He can.
     
    #99
  50. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    We're cool.

    I messed up on my part too. I misread your post.
     

Share This Page