something fed can't handle.....the pete sampras st. vincent ps 85 to 14 grand slams!

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Young Pete, Jul 13, 2007.

  1. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    904
    Location:
    nor cal
    i cannot believe sampras can swing a st. vincent to 14 grand slams the ps 85 sv is so small, heavy, powerless, and unforgiving thats something fed cannot do i guarantee it.

    only sampras can handle such a racquet. SIMPLY AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2007
    #1
  2. InvisibleSoul

    InvisibleSoul Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,929
    Not you or anyone else is going to be able to prove it, so the point is moot.
     
    #2
  3. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    As InvisibleSoul pointed out, you can't prove it. Additionally, he used an 85 (leaded up) to beat Sampras at Wimbledon. Bye, bye.
     
    #3
  4. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    904
    Location:
    nor cal
    that waz just once and it was close, and didn't henman spank fed after that win. what i really mean is 14 grand slams with a ps 85!!!
     
    #4
  5. lolsmash

    lolsmash Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    224
    And i bet Sampras can't win 11 slams with whatever racket Federer is using now. You think he can? Prove it.
     
    #5
  6. laurie

    laurie Guest

    Don't you chaps get fed up of silly schoolboy threads?
     
    #6
  7. pow

    pow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,439
    I'd like to see Sampras try to play with the APD. lol
     
    #7
  8. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Could Pete win 14 majors with a woodie? Consult your illegal drugs to find out.
     
    #8
  9. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,879
    Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how many titles Federer won with the ps 85?
     
    #9
  10. TheHuntor

    TheHuntor New User

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    48
    ha nice pun.
     
    #10
  11. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    904
    Location:
    nor cal
    GREAT POINT. they (fed fans) refuse to answer that question.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2007
    #11
  12. pro_staff

    pro_staff Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    463
    The racket itself does not matter. Sampras played with whatever he played best with and Federer plays with whatever he plays best with.
     
    #12
  13. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    904
    Location:
    nor cal
    my point is sampras had to have superior talent to play with such a demanding racquet that even fed does not play with anymore. that my friends is what its all about.


     
    #13
  14. Richie Rich

    Richie Rich Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,274
    probably around 7. but what do i know.
     
    #14
  15. Chang

    Chang Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    389
    It's not the racquet. It's how you use it. Any decent racquet used to its potential can be a very powerful weapon.
     
    #15
  16. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    How many of those are french open victories? Or better yet, how many times did he reach the final there with the 85??
     
    #16
  17. NadalForever

    NadalForever Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Sampras won 14 slams by serve and volley. Federer won 0 slams by serve and volley. Playing tennis from back of the court is for kids and is extremely easy to do. I can hit forehand and backand winners easily from back of the court but no matter how hard I try in playing serve and volley I immediately loose. It puzzles me how Sampras was able to accomplish so much by playing serve and volley his whole career. Just ask Henman, no matter how hard he tries he just can't reach the slam final.
     
    #17
  18. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    962
    Different raquet suits different style... that StV is demanding for some, but not for others...it was well suited to Pete's strokes and serve... he would have less success if he didnt lead up or use a 'less demanding' racquet like an APD...he would have won 0 slams..
     
    #18
  19. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    962
    great post...you just showed us that this is a no brainer....S&V does take longer to mature.. hence you dont see it at kiddies level, which I imagine thats the level you are in... but once you get pass that..it's a very successful strategy...trust me... Given your example... Goran won 1 slam by S&V and Fed won 0...so does that mean he is greater than Fed???
     
    #19
  20. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,032
    I do not think Pete played with a certain racquet because of the fact that it was demanding...or despite the fact that it was demanding.

    Wilson Pro Staff....a very powerful, asskicking frame. Good for you, Pete.

    I think he played with it because he felt most excellent with it. It was not some liability or disadvantage or handicap or anything. In fact, it was an asset for him. Why else would he play with it?
     
    #20
  21. VGP

    VGP Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,311
    Location:
    Location: Location
    I think it's funny that Henman beating ("spanking") Federer after the Sampras match is the immediate follow-up. It can be used several ways.

    - Federer was young and couldn't keep it up
    - Federer got beat by a serve and volleyer
    - Federer's not a pure serve and volleyer
    - It was the old grass
    - It was the old balls

    ....on and on.

    The fact is that Federer suffered a groin injury during practice before the Henman match. Who knows what would have happened, especially with Sampras out of the draw.

    In a way, I'm glad that Federer lost if not for being able to witness the Ivanisevic-Rafter final. A 128th ranked wild-card winning the title......priceless.
     
    #21
  22. isuk@tennis

    isuk@tennis Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    334
    Location:
    across the street
    seriously right?

    there is a reason why he refused to play with any other frame throughout his career. it's not so it's harder for him to win but for him to continue to be able to win.
     
    #22
  23. dave333

    dave333 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,018
    I guess nadal is an infant.
     
    #23
  24. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    Do they come naturally?

    Another excellent thread... ;)
     
    #24
  25. poplar

    poplar Guest

    once again it shows that federer hater/nadal lover camp has a lot of sampras fans. but when u try to downplay federer, you downplay nadal ever more.

    federer-all courter with ps90

    nadal - baseliner with big racquet
     
    #25
  26. poplar

    poplar Guest

    you'll never hear the end of it as federer is approaching pete's record slam titles.
     
    #26
  27. quest01

    quest01 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,616
    This is why Pistol Pete never won Roland Garros

    Pistol Pete would have won more majors if he ditched the ps 85 for a larger head size. Not just this but if Pete used a larger head size he may have won at least 1 French Open.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2007
    #27
  28. Zimbo

    Zimbo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    422
    I see your point but if Pete was playing now he wouldn't be using a PS 85.
     
    #28
  29. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    Let me see, I have seen the threads where his slams were not an actual slam because he received a walkover; there is no competition in his era, his inability to hit with a ps 85.

    What’s next?

    Federer was/is on steroids?
     
    #29
  30. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    That is a bold statement...
     
    #30
  31. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    Is it amazing that Pete accomplished so much with his racquet? The answer is yes, but it is no more amazing than Connors winning all those tourneys with a tiny head T-2000, or Laver winning two Grand Slams with wood. Today Roger plays with an unforgiving racquet that many other pros would have trouble adjusting to, so it shows his immense talent as well.
     
    #31
  32. Hot Sauce

    Hot Sauce Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,890
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    This is a thread where all the Nadal trolls and Sampras trolls come to form a coalition to troll against Federer. How very sad indeed.
     
    #32
  33. NadalForever

    NadalForever Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Well last time I checked you gotta play 7 matches to win a slam. So Federer's Wimbledon win this year as well as his 2004 US Open wins definitely do not count. In fact I should stop even using the word win when refering to those slams. We should all be saying Federer's participation in those slams does not count.
     
    #33
  34. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    904
    Location:
    nor cal
    an even better point. pete could have won 20-25 grand slams if he ditched the ps 85 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO PETE!!!!!YOU ARE THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!
     
    #34
  35. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    Tell that to Jim Courier, Pierce, Evert who all won it with the same frame. he didn't win the French because his game was not built for baseline bashing.
     
    #35
  36. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    .... and since nadal beat a "loser like Fed" on the way to his 3 FO victories those shouldn't count either.
     
    #36
  37. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    I am sure Federer agree with you 1000%.....:roll:

    Will you be saying the same thing if Nadal encounters the same thing?
     
    #37
  38. NadalForever

    NadalForever Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Definitely. If Nadal has a walkover in the next slam that he wins then I will definitely not count that as a win. Slams are supposed to be an endurance test and being able to survive playing 7 matches. Anything playing less then 7 matches should not be counted.
     
    #38
  39. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    Alright, to each his own...

    End of discussion.
     
    #39
  40. Hot Sauce

    Hot Sauce Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,890
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Last time anyone checked, Nadal has never won Wimbledon, Australian Open, or US Open and he is ranked 2nd, next to yours truly, Mr. Federer. Please do us all a favor and spare your completely biased trolling, and leave these forums permanently. Thanks.
     
    #40
  41. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    :roll:

    [​IMG]
     
    #41
  42. tHotGates

    tHotGates Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    227
    Actually, Pete has made recent comments to that effect ... almost lamenting of what could have been if he had instead used a larger head size for the FO.
     
    #42
  43. War Safin!

    War Safin! Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,247
    You forget Sampras has a very flexible arm.
    Strength is secondary.
     
    #43
  44. kabob

    kabob Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    879
    Location:
    Dallas
    You obviously weren't watching very closely. Federer won his first Wimbledon playing mostly serve & volley.
     
    #44
  45. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    Ummm,

    What is your ATP ranking?
     
    #45
  46. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

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

    I agree. Let's not forget slams are also "supposed to be" 5 sets per match. So anything less then playing 35 sets should not be counted. Additionally, every set has to go to a tie break in order to be counted. :roll:
     
    #46
  47. rwn

    rwn Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    417
    He hasn't even watched Sampras closely. Sampras won 4 US Opens and 2 Australian Opens playing from the baseline. Peak Sampras (93-97) only served & volleyed on superfast grass and superfast carpet courts.
    Sampras wouldn't serve & volley in the current slow conditions IMO.
     
    #47

Share This Page