The Forseeable Battle Between Sampras & Federer

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by Tennis Dude, Nov 12, 2007.

  1. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    okay, guys, as some or all of you know now, fed lost to gonzalez, something none of us (not even me) thought is possible. but as that blog that just listed its weekly article today says, it may be a confidence issue.

    i don't know. i think not only can it be a confidence issue, but his actual decline in play. but then again, we don't know since he's only gone into this kind of phase for only a month or 2? and as that blog says, we can't just make a judgment by 2 or 3 mere losses.

    i would be inclined to believe that fed still has the game; maybe it's just an asian orientation, and he's simply getting used to the air and the food.

    anyway, if it is true that fed is on a decline, samp may be 'licking his chops' even more. sure, if samp were to play gonzo or roddick, or whomever, such a match would not be easy, but samp can adjust.

    adjustment is the name of the game; samp has it; fed has it.

    especially now, having lost to gonzo, i don't think fed is going to want to lose to pete in the exhibitions. not only that, if fed truly feels that he's on a decline, and he starts to lose Shanghai pretty badly, then the asian exhibs w/samp may be taken very very seriously.

    the question is not whether samp takes it seriously, because in my opinion, he will; and believe me, i really think samp wants to show the world; if samp wants to see if he can still play with the best, and if he wants to take fed to a tiebreaker, then what's stopping him from wanting to win the tiebreaker? nothing.

    it's fed. if fed loses this exhib badly, then the asian exhibs are going to be huge; how can fed lose an exhib to a former great (and this samp guy is pretty much a decade older than fed!) after losing to atp player after atp player.

    the asian exhibs may be more than a mere exhib. it may be for real.

    it is foreseeable and sampras is mentally (perhaps not physically training 101%), but mentally preparing to take on fed.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2007
    #1
  2. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    He lost a pretty tight natch to gonzo at the end of a long season. A decline in play doesnt get you three grandslams in a season. Sampras can lick whatever he wants as much as he wants, but losing a tight match to gonzales has nothing to do with playing an out of shape, past his prime Sampras. And of course Sampras is preparing 100% to play fed. He's going to go out and play as hard as he can, because he doesnt want to lose 0 and 1. But if Federer really wants to take control of the asian exos, he wont have much trouble, regardless of the Gonzo match.
     
    #2
  3. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Fed's Decline? Or Gonzo's Ascent? And Sampras' Oppty?

    This is a question of whether it is Fed's true decline or if it's Gonzo's ascent into the upper echelons of the game.

    In the alternative, this may be Sampras' opportunity.

    If this is Fed's descent, watch out, for Sampras' may be lurking to pounce on this opportunity.

    There is a reason why 3 successive tournaments have been planned. An exhibition is just a 1-time exhibition ... in my opinion. But a series of pre-planned exhibitions says something about what may be happening: Sampras wants to check out the ATP playing field & Federer is saying 'Welcome'.

    If Sampras returns, then this will truly open giant floodgates: Safin, Hewitt, maybe even Kuerten.

    They will see if Sampras can do it, so can they. Sampras' re-entry into the ATP may create a brand new sort of tennis, and raise a new level of the game.

    But Sampras MUST find a new form of serve & volleying or else he's toast. He can only find this 'new' form and technique of serve & volleying during these exhibitions and other events.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2007
    #3
  4. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Are you still ignoring the fact that Sampras has said he will not come back?
     
    #4
  5. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Saying is NOT Believing

    Just because Sampras says he won't come back, doesn't mean he won't
     
    #5
  6. laurie

    laurie Guest

    As we say in London, you're a Nutter!!

    If Sampras knew you were touting his name like this on a daily basis with these absolute ridicoulous suggestions, he would be embarrased. I don't think Pete Sampras wants fans who are deluded.
     
    #6
  7. Shaolin

    Shaolin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,035
    Location:
    Kansas
    ^^Laurie just curious, have you ever met Pete in person? Hope you have, I think youre his biggest fan.
     
    #7
  8. laurie

    laurie Guest

    Well Shaolin I've seen him play over here in London but never met him. But of course I'm not the only Pete fan, I'm lucky enough to have many of his great matches and put them out on youtube for people to check out, especially younger ones who hadn't seen his game pre 2000.

    I like many players, I did meet Svetlana Kuznetsova in Madrid on Friday, we had a nice chat.
     
    #8
  9. Hooooon

    Hooooon Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    367
    as if we didn't know tennis dude is clueless... how can you say anything more than fed had an off day. it's a damn round robin, he had no pressure on him and gonzo treated the match like a grand slam. if fed misses the semis it's a minor disappointment, the loss to gonzo is MEANINGLESS. djokovic barely showed up this year and federer has no reason to do any differently. sampras didn't show up every week (federer does), so you should understand the insignificance of a single match.
     
    #9
  10. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    But unless you know him personally and he's told you otherwise, all you can go on is his word.
     
    #10
  11. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Federer is like Lendl

    Like some of you have impliedly stated, Fed is like Lendl. Big Forehand and Big Serve.

    But like someone earlier said, Fed's serve is fast, not 'heavy'. Pete's serve is heavy.

    And that's why Pete 'had' an edge, and would 'still' HAVE the edge over Fed.

    Fed is pretty good, no doubt about it. He's a strong strong baseliner, and an arguably all-court player. But he's not as fast as Pete. Pete is quick, fast, and possesses a 'heavy' serve.

    I give great credit to Fed. Fed is an awesome player. A player who is currently #1 on the ATP tour.

    However, Pete may still edge out Fed; not a demolition, but probably by a small margin. But so far, it's still a big margin since 2 more GS's are waiting to be conquered by the Fed, and even winning 1 more GS is going to be tough for Fed.
     
    #11
  12. Hooooon

    Hooooon Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    367
    NOT AS FAST AS PETE???!!! FED MAY BE THE BEST MOVER IN THE HISTORY OF TENNIS, DEFINITELY THE QUICKEST 1ST STEP TODAY! actually you have to be joking... injuries/disinterest are all that can stop fed from winning 5+ more majors.
     
    #12
  13. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    No Joke - Pete is Quicker & Faster than Fed

    Seriously. No Joke.

    I think Pete is quicker and faster than Fed. Fed simply has better eyes than Pete. There's a difference.

    Pete has excellent eyes, and that's why Pete has an excellent form of preparation at the baseline. But I think Fed's eyes are better than Pete's.

    There's a difference between actual physical quickness and reaction speed VS. eye quickness.

    Fed's got quick eyes and can see the ball very well. So can Pete. But Fed's eyes, in my opinion are more responsive.

    On the flipside, Pete's physical reflexes are quicker than Fed. For this reason, Pete is better than Fed at net, and I think an overall better player. Fed seems a bit lethargic at net.

    When a player is at the baseline, good eyes (like Agassi) is crucial. That's why Agassi & Fed are great baseliners. Thus, Fed can be more compared and 'better' compared to Agassi than Sampras. Sampras is in a field of his own. You can't really compare with honesty and dignity, the games of Roger Federer and Pete Sampras.

    But no doubt about it, Roger Federer probably edges out Andre Agassi.

    But compare Fed to Sampras: No contest. Sampras wins.

    Both Pete & Sampras has great eyes at the baseline, and that's why they 'appear' and 'seem' to get the to ball earlier, and it 'looks' like they are very fit, when inactuality, it's deceptive. It's just that they have good eyes. But, I must concede that I think Fed's eyes are quicker than Pete's, while Pete's reflexes and physical fitness edges out over Federer's.

    In Agassi's prime vs. Federer's prime? ..... that's a tough one.
     
    #13
  14. Hooooon

    Hooooon Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    367
    you simply don't know tennis, have you ever played?
     
    #14
  15. onehandbh

    onehandbh Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,029
    Tennis Dude,

    Rumor has it that Fed is trying to tank so that he won't make it
    out of the round robin. This way he'll have more time to prepare
    for his upcoming matches against pete. The biggest challenge for
    Fed will be trying to find someone with a big and heavy enough serve
    to practice against. Nobody on tour currently has a serve as heavy
    as Pete's, but Fed is leaving no stone unturned in his quest to find
    a heavy serve to practice against. He's sent some scouts to the
    3.5 USTA leagues since legend has it that there are some freakish
    guys with heavy 130+ mph serves (and no other strokes above 2.0).
    Some other scouts are searching the TW boards since there appears
    to be an unusually high concentration of posters with 100+ mph
    second serves that have a 8 foot kick and pinpoint placement --
    many of them juniors. The last place his scouts have been looking has
    been the 3.0 mens USTA nationals, where supposedly there are some
    self-rated sandbaggers that have been displaying some of the best
    shots in tennis history...
     
    #15
  16. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    I'm with Tennis Dude side on this one. Federer is an exellent mover and he reads his opponent like he has an extra set of eyes somewhere on his body but I think the splinting speed of Sampras was actually faster than Federer.

    In terms of sheer splinting speed, I am not even sure if Federer is in top 5 among current pros. Nadal, Ferrer, Blake, Hewitt, Coria ....

    I actually think foot speed of Federer is a relatively weak point of Federer's game compared to his other part of games which are "best in history" good.

    Nadal and Nalbandian takes full advantage of it and turns the match into "running game', left and right, left and right..

    Look at the early footage of Federer in late 90's. His footwork is not so good. He did not bend his knees and tended to stand up..
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2007
    #16
  17. tricky

    tricky Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,305
    I think Tennis Dude is saying that current Pete is faster than Federer. But, then, I'd have to read his blog to make sure. ;)
     
    #17
  18. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    That's Right, fastdunn; Sampras > Federer (Quickness)

    That's right, fastdunn. You actually read my mind. Nadal, Chang, Hewitt, and the like, including Agassi are much quicker and faster than Federer. It's very evident.

    But that's okay if many public viewers 'think' Fed is faster and quicker than anyone else, even Sampras, because it can be quite deceiving. That's understandable. Since if a guy wins all the time, analyzing his tennis from top-down by first looking at how many wins he has, and then reviewing his game, it's easy to say that the #1 player in the world is extremely fit and quick.

    But as you note, fastdunn (and as others may concur), Nadal appears a lot lot lot quicker and faster than Federer. Sampras too seems faster than Federer.

    Fed's footwork or speed or whatever you call it not only 'looks' lethargic, but in fact, may very well be lethargic. Not only does it seem and 'appear' as if he doesn't GO-FOR-IT at times when his opponent dropshots him or makes him run, Fed may very well not have the capacity of desire to GO-FOR-IT on the run.

    But the gift of Fed seems to be his eyes. He sees the ball very very well, and that's why he can prepare so early.

    Preparation. That's the name of the game. Not only in tennis, but in almost all facets of life: business, school, sports.

    If you watch Pete Sampras play, he STILL seems to make tennis look easy by his 'cool' strides. Pete STILL lets the ball drop before he hits a forehand; this makes me wonder how he's so good. The answer is that Pete prepares very very early. He, too, has amazing eyes. He's at the baseline, and sees the ball IMMEDIATELY after it's hit from his opponent and reacts immediately. Same as Fed. This is why they get to balls so much earlier.

    Serve & Volleyer's (my opinion) such as Edberg and Becker are geared to have quick reflexes (including MacEnroe) at the net, and very very quick reflexes. It may be that they're trained to see the ball faster than anyone else WHEN THEY'RE AT NET; but when they're on the baseline, it seems like they're a split second slower to seeing the ball than a good baseliner, and that's why, you might see guys like Edberg or MacEnroe appear to be running more.

    But the difference with Sampras was that his baseline game was just awesome. First he had the ability to prepare with his keen sense of eyesight as a baseliner. On top of that, he worked on his volleys and almost perfected the quick reflexes to take on anyone, even on the likes of the McEnroes and Beckers. Fed, on the other hand seems to have an eyesight of the ball, far superior than many others out there, even better than Sampras'.

    Federer can prepare very early as a baseline player, and that's why he has an advantage. This is why, if you see him get run around by someone who mixes up the shots, you almost see Fed not wanting to give it his all--well, it so seems.

    It's Fed's preparation (early preparation) that makes him look so cool. And his ability to see the ball, I think, makes him the #1 player in the world. I must give him that. Who can contend it?

    But it's Sampras' quickness and speed that may be superior than Fed's and as a consequence, this may be the reason why Sampras can still take out Fed in a real match. Again, I'm not talking about making a statement to the world that Sampras is better than Fed RIGHT NOW; I'm saying that Sampras can make a statement to the world that he can beat the #1 ATP player RIGHT NOW. And by sheer virtue of Sampras' ability to BEAT Fed right now, may show that Sampras IS BETTER than Fed even now (but for only a short amount of time).
     
    #18
  19. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    What makes you think that he can get the same speed back that he had when he was in his prime at 36, 37, or 38 years old? He simply does not have that same speed right now. And you speak of Sampras having the ability to beat fed RIGHT NOW based on several things: Speed (he's slower now), Serve (Less potent now than when he played, though great compared to the other seniors on the champions tour), and serve and volley ability (serve is slower and less potent, speed is slower getting to net. While his volleys may be fine, if he's even a step below his prime and tries to S&V against fed, he'll get passed). To me, this says he can't beat fed right now. No exhibitions are going to change that, as we all know how they work.
     
    #19
  20. Cyan

    Cyan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,372
    Fed will beat Pete.
     
    #20
  21. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    Oh, that's nearly impossible at the age of 36(?).

    By the way, in terms of center of gravity when moving, Sampras keeps it much lower than Federer.

    Federer tends to be upright (except forehand). Sampras stands 6'1' but when he is playing/moving he looks like a 5'9" person. Sampras was pretty nimble, smooth cat like mover.

    Federer's astute mover with lots of anticipation. In fact, the whole game of Federer is same way, athleticism + lots of black magic(intangibles, game intellegence etc....).

    I actually think Federer is Sampras + Santoro. very hairy game.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2007
    #21
  22. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    Agassi quicker then Federer. :lol: :lol: What do you call your blog "the Blog of Tennis for Retards."
     
    #22
  23. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,654
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I believe that this would be Borg.
     
    #23
  24. Matt Riordan

    Matt Riordan New User

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    74
    No, kidding, Laurie... you must be Laurie1414 on youtube then. Giving jsnapple a run for his money :)
     
    #24
  25. downdaline

    downdaline Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    916
    This thread makes tennis sound like DragonBall... like some old master is gonna suddenly unleash his hidden potential and all, then start bulldozing the current world #1. Really ridiculous...
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2007
    #25
  26. Hooooon

    Hooooon Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    367
    if you define movement in tennis as the ability to run down balls then federer is not among the greats. if the fact that he reacts to serves and big groundies faster/better than anyone in the last 10 years means more to you (it should if you can play the game or understand it) federer is the best mover in recent eras. he hits offensive shots from infinite positions that sampras never could. whoever mentioned borg may be right on all counts, but hearing sampras mentioned as the quickest (fast and quick are different, sorry thick-skulled ones) really made me think the guy was joking.....
     
    #26
  27. theProdigy

    theProdigy Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Messages:
    189
    sampras doesn't need to beat federer to prove anything. all i know i sampras wins in the girlfriend/wife category.
     
    #27
  28. teneighty

    teneighty New User

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Umm.. Federer has arguably one of the best backhands on tour (not to mention 100x better than Sampras's). If you watched the 2007 Australian Open at all, you would know that. Federer is hardly, "big serve, big forehand.")

    Second, Pete's serve may be "heavy," but Ivo Karlovic, Roddick, and Isner all have heavier serves than Sampras, and Federer dismisses all of them pretty easily.
     
    #28
  29. tricky

    tricky Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,305
    See, that's the thing. I think Tennis Dude truly believes a 36-year old, retired Sampras is faster than current Federer.

    Much, much lower. No doubt.

    Absolutely. Sampras's FH stroke power came from his feet. He might actually be faster North-South than Nadal. Federer's fast too; his lateral speed is up there.
     
    #29
  30. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    Sampras was very, very fast. It was one of his biggest strengths. I think catlike would be the best way to describe it.

    He's aged horribly.
     
    #30
  31. tricky

    tricky Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,305
    To me, Sampras applied a basketball player mentality to the court. He was a "baller" out there, who kinda sprung onto you.
     
    #31

Share This Page