Sampras would have beaten Fed at their primes

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Wondertoy, Sep 17, 2009.

  1. Wondertoy

    Wondertoy Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
    Messages:
    869
    If the best returner in the game, Agassi, couldn't break Sampras at Wimbledon and the US Open, how is Fed going to break Sampras in his prime and those surfaces? Ergo, Sampras would have beaten Fed in their primes although Federer is the GOAT due to his accomplishment against his peers in his era.
     
    #1
  2. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    #2
  3. wyutani

    wyutani Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,760
    Location:
    hong kong
    uhh...no. fed beat sampras in wimbly 2001. so no.
     
    #3
  4. akv89

    akv89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,587
    Sampras isn't going to be serving every game.
     
    #4
  5. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,409
    So Federer, who's won 15 grand slams, 6 Wimbledons, and 65 consecutive matches on grass, could not do what one-slam-wonder Krajicek did in 1996?

    Right.
     
    #5
  6. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    Wayne Ferreira has a better record against Sampras than Agassi so there's no need to be the better or best returner to have better success against Sampras.
     
    #6
  7. warreng

    warreng New User

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    59
    What silly logic.

    If we were thinking this way, Andre owned Pete at the French and Aussie opens. By your thinking then Federer would wipe the floor with Pete on those surfaces...
     
    #7
  8. DrpShot!

    DrpShot! Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Messages:
    537
    Neither of them would hold as many slams as they do now if they were playing at the same time.
     
    #8
  9. wyutani

    wyutani Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,760
    Location:
    hong kong
    nadal will beat both + agassi easily.
     
    #9
  10. ASL

    ASL Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    162
    Of course Prime Sampras would of beaten Federer. Just look at the exhibition match they played in Macau where a RETIRED Pete wionagainst a Fed who was in his PRIME.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2009
    #10
  11. rocket

    rocket Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,538
    Exhibition... where they giggled after each point?
     
    #11
  12. rocket

    rocket Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,538
    Fed possesses many more weapons than Agassi.
     
    #12
  13. wyutani

    wyutani Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,760
    Location:
    hong kong
    lol, this is hilarious....you really thought sampras won for real? man, get out from that box of urs. see the world. its not all black and white, win or lose. :)

    hilarious.
     
    #13
  14. Wondertoy

    Wondertoy Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
    Messages:
    869
    Pete was past his prime.
     
    #14
  15. Wondertoy

    Wondertoy Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
    Messages:
    869
    It's harder to break Krajicek on grass than it is to break Fed. Pete in his prime would S&V Fed's back hand to death.
     
    #15
  16. ASL

    ASL Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    162
    Point to me where there is ANY giggling.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuIvlyvWAoI

    Federer played as well as he did back in 07. Excuses are pointless.
     
    #16
  17. All-rounder

    All-rounder Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    6,223
    Location:
    Transitional era
    Ok whatever :roll: shoulda woulda coulda doesn't change anything
     
    #17
  18. All-rounder

    All-rounder Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    6,223
    Location:
    Transitional era
    It's an EXHIBTION MATCH!! for flip sake. It's not like federer was playing as if a top 10 player was on the other side of the net
     
    #18
  19. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    Fact is, Sampras had a higher serving percentage in that match, than he did in any of his 7 wimbledon finals. Perhaps he should have served like this more often and he would have had even more titles (during his "prime").
     
    #19
  20. Breaker

    Breaker Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    7,721
    Not if Jaime Yzaga got to him first.
     
    #20
  21. rocket

    rocket Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,538
    1st point from your clip. Sampras smiled walking back, looked at Fed, shook his head in relief, smiled some more. Fed also smiled. They were having a good time playing & earning millions in meaningless matches.

    Fed would have ripped Sampras apart if he played seriously, sorry to say. Sampras still has all the shots, but now is a bit slow and wouldn't be competitive enough.

    Try again. ;)
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2009
    #21
  22. ASL

    ASL Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    162
    Yeah, We all know Federer's mentality when he loses (USO Final). He obviously wanted to win that match too. Or did he just let Pete win? :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2009
    #22
  23. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    yes, he did.
     
    #23
  24. Cesc Fabregas

    Cesc Fabregas Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    8,316
    Regardless of the 1 more major, Sampras is the better player. He has more weapons, more powerful forehand, greater serve and superior volleys. Also Pete was the better match player, with a better win/loss ratio in major finals and a winning record over his nearest rival.
     
    #24
  25. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    In their primes this is what I see:

    At Wimbledon: Sampras wins 4 out of 5
    At U.S Open: Sampras wins 4 out of 5
    At French Open: Federer wins the 1 or 2 out of 1 or 2 (but they are tougher than people expect)
    At Australian Open: they split 2 out 4 each

    Given that the gravy place for slams titles are Wimbledon and the U.S Open for both Sampras clearly has the advantage.
     
    #25
  26. ArrowSmith

    ArrowSmith Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    What a pointless discussion. Would you make Federer play with the same raquet(no Luxilon strings) and make him use the same training techniques as circa 1993 Sampras? There are so many variables that go into this prime vs prime nonsense, that's no use even trying.
     
    #26
  27. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    Did he lose 6-0 or 6-1 like the mental giant pete did? Did pete even win a set off safin or hewitt?

    Hard to claim a greater mental game when one lost in 5 sets and the other lost in 3.
     
    #27
  28. ArrowSmith

    ArrowSmith Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    If the net game mattered more, Federer would have superior volleys. But we live in a baseline bashing age, and Fed does well in that. You make absolute no sense. "More powerful forehand"? Please.
     
    #28
  29. ArrowSmith

    ArrowSmith Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    Yeah I remember when PRIME Sampras got bageled by Kafelnikov at the 1996 French semis....
     
    #29
  30. fed_rulz

    fed_rulz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,614
    LOL, so many epic fails in this post, i don't know where to begin.

    >> He has more weapons, more powerful forehand, greater serve and superior volleys

    Yet, he has 3 majors less than Federer at the same age. No FO either. What's the use of all those "weapons" if it does not win him majors?

    >>Also Pete was the better match player, with a better win/loss ratio in major finals

    Now suddenly, losing in R1 is better than losing in a slam final. Sorry, epic fail again. Fed has played in more major finals/SF than Pete, and has won more.

    >> a winning record over his nearest rival
    which is skewed, because Pete chickened out of meeting Agassi on Agassi's strongest surfaces; whereas Agassi was man enough to meet Sampras on Pete's favorite surfaces. Same with Fed/Nadal; Having said that, the Fedal rivalry is at a much higher level than the Pete-dre one.

    Let me give you an analogy:
    We have two guys, P & A, who are both great champions in eating competitions. P loves hot-dogs, but is not fond of burritos. A loves burritos, and hot-dogs came second.

    In a given year, there were 10 each of hot-dog and burrito competitions. P & A both participated in the hot-dog competitions. P won every time. Fearing the nasty aftermath of eating burritos, P never participated in any of the burrito eating competitions. A won every one of them.

    End result: h2h between P & A : 10-0 in P's favor.

    go figure!
     
    #30
  31. DownTheLine

    DownTheLine Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,406
    Federer was also very young and inexpierenced..
     
    #31
  32. ASL

    ASL Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    162
    It's hilarious how overated Federer is on clay. I mean, had a joke of draw en route to the final. Not to mention almost losing to Haas the clay court specialist.
     
    #32
  33. truthorbust

    truthorbust Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    88
    That makes little sense. You have forgotten that tiebreaks are tricky territory and that Fed serves alot better than Andre did and that his game is much more well rounded and varied. That would have caused Pete big concern adn IMO most likely defeat.For Pete.
     
    #33
  34. flying24

    flying24 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,924
    Right as if Sampras is better on clay, ROTFL!!!
     
    #34
  35. wilkinru

    wilkinru Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    995
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Yeah, he ONLY makes it to the finals EVERY YEAR.

    Damn he is a joke!

    The dude made it to the finals of EVERY MAJOR this year and won 2 of them. Who are you kidding?
     
    #35
  36. flying24

    flying24 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,924
    Yeah he should have instead lost to Gilbert Schaller, Roman Delgado, and a pre prime then nobody Magnus Norman (who himself would lose to Filip Dewful in that years semifinalist) at the French Open during his prime like the clay court legend Pete Sampras.
     
    #36
  37. Agassifan

    Agassifan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,508
    LOL. Prime Fed > Prime Sampras > Prime Agassi
     
    #37
  38. akv89

    akv89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,587
    Del Potro is now a 20 year old major winner. Federer's draw at the FO can no longer be considered a joke :p
     
    #38
  39. flying24

    flying24 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,924
    Pretty desperate straw grasping too to mock Federer for having a 5 setter with Haas. Prime Kuerten was 1 point from a straight sets loss to Russell. Everyone has their off days.
     
    #39
  40. luishcorreia

    luishcorreia Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,367
    Location:
    Lisbon - Portugal
    Do we really need another "Sampras would defeat Federer" thread???

    Come on!!
     
    #40
  41. Agassifan

    Agassifan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,508
    He beat the second best player on THAT surface in the final.
     
    #41
  42. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    Kinda like pete's 1999 wimbledon where the avgerage ranking of his opponenet was #141, LOL.
     
    #42
  43. flying24

    flying24 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,924
    or Petes draw in 1997 where in the quarters he played a retiring washed up Becker who had lost to Kafelnikov on grass the event before, in the semis played Todd Woodbridge a doubles specialist, and in the final the great Cedric Pioline. His lone test being in the 4th round form Petr Korda who took him to 5 sets.
     
    #43
  44. Net47

    Net47 New User

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    Location:
    Northern Florida
    To the OP, there's no reasoning with the Federer fanatics on this board. (Or the snobby Borgians, who think the guy could have competed with his loopy topsin groundstrokes and meek serve in any era other than his own). I will say this for Sampras: he could step on the court today and blow his serve consistently by anyone on the tour...including Federer. He did exactly that in the exos. And exos or not, that was embarrassing for Federer. No one likes to get smoked time after time on the serve.
     
    #44
  45. Lion King

    Lion King Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Messages:
    460
    Location:
    Land of OZ
    Buddy, you're forgetting one thing: hitting aces in an exo is not the same as hitting aces in the fifth set of a tough match. If Pete's serve was that great, why did he ever lose to anyone? He was supposed to ace all of them to death :)
     
    #45
  46. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    uhh, prime Sampras. While Fed was not at his prime either the match means NOTHING. So if Aurnaud Clement played Sampras once he is better? One match means NOTHING, has no bearing on anything.
     
    #46
  47. doom

    doom Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    268
    They were giggling after the very first point.
     
    #47
  48. IvanAndreevich

    IvanAndreevich Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,493
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    It does mean something. It doesn't mean that Federer would own Sampras all the way, but it illustrates that there is no match-up problem for Fed.
     
    #48
  49. Net47

    Net47 New User

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    Location:
    Northern Florida
    Lol. "If Pete's serve was that great..." Many, many people outside of this board think it may have been the greatest ever when both first and second serve are taken into account. YOU'RE forgetting that his serve was good enough to win 14 slams. All hail Roger, fine. He's done a great job of beating Andy Roddick time after time. (Not so great at beating Nadal.) But the dismissive view that so many here have of Sampras is impossible to fathom.
     
    #49
  50. jamesblakefan#1

    jamesblakefan#1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    15,709
    Location:
    VA Beach
    What's up GameSampras? :lol:
     
    #50

Share This Page