The 'Real' Reason why Sampras can STILL win Wimby and/or US Open

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by Tennis Dude, Nov 6, 2007.

  1. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    I dont think Sampras himself has said many/any controversial things about technology, era, etc, its mainly his crazy fans like Tennis Dude.
     
    #51
  2. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    He actually mentioned things about technology and weak era for real and also made reference to serve and volley game. If you watch his interviews on ESPN, you will see that he referred those things. His fans just blindly followed. No one every heard great/good (it depends on your opinion) wooden racket players say they could win more GS if they had better shoes, better rackets, strings, etc. Only Sampras!

    If he was so great, then why was he dismissed in 2nd round in 2002 Wimbledon. The tournament that he was so famous known. He went out in disgrace. Ask him yourself if that did eat him up til this day. At least Becker went down to a champ. He fought hard. Sampras went down to George Bastl. Check the record for yourself. How come Sampras' fanatics don't ever mention about that disgrace way of leaving Wimbledon? Of course he knew he was done that why he never returned.

    So just shut up and enjoy the ride Sampras.
     
    #52
  3. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
     
    #53
  4. Ferrari1190

    Ferrari1190 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    Alright Tennis Bum, calm down, Sampras is not the Greatest and i am a huge fan of his game, but Federer isn't the greatest either, no one can really be called the greastest because they each played in a differnet era. all you can say is federer is one of the greastest of all time and definetly the greatest of his era, same goes with sampras and players before him. Who knows if Borg played in today's era or if Laver player today. no one knows. But anyway Tennis Dude's thread was useless and full of wrong assumptions, but you cant just say that Sampras sucked, he won 14 slams.
     
    #54
  5. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    I agree with most of what you wrote. I never claimed Fed greatest ever either. I just pointed out what Sampras said and what his fans used to defend him. I never said Sampras sucked. You couldn't be sucked and won 14 GS. I would appreciate Sampras more if he just be content but of course, that would asking for too much from Sampras and his fans.
     
    #55
  6. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Compare Sampras & Karlovic

    karlovic can beat fed; until recently, almost, if not every match they played previously were very close; their most recent match gave karlovic a set off of fed.

    now, ask yourself, who's serve is better, karlovic's or samp's? or are they equally lethal? i'm talking about the serve only and nothing else.

    if samp's serve is as good (even now) or if not better than karlovic's serve, what does karlovic have that samp doesn't? anyone?

    it's all about POTENTIAL. karlovic may have hit his potential (may have); sampras may not have; fed may not have either.

    but someone spoke about how during some 2002 wimby tourney some player named 'sam' or someone like that beat sampras; and with this one instance, the guy who posted the thread said that sampras is done, finished, or something to that effect. that's a bunch of bologne.

    think about it. sampras simply continued doing what he was doing; while he's playing, how is he to know precisely how the game has changed?

    now that he's rested and thought things through, he can now adapt to the change and still maintain that s&v game, but this time with a lot more selectivity.
     
    #56
  7. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    Useless, speculative thread

    Of course, anyone can beat anyone on a given day. George Bastl beat Sampras in 2nd round at Wimbledon on Sampras's best surface. Can Karlovic beat Fed? Sure, why not. But until he does it; he has not beaten him yet. Taking a set of a person does not mean you can beat that person. Did George Bastl beat Sampras? YES! How? George Bastl took 3 sets off Sampras at his best surface. Look it up! Was Sampras done? YES, that's why he never returned to his beloved surface.
     
    #57
  8. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    that was 2001

    but that proves that samp was on the decline or was unaware of the technology change--that's not really his fault.

    fed beat samp in 2001; then george beat samp in 2002. get the drift? when fed beat samp in 2001, samp was on the decline; thus, no surprises that samp lost that one; samp took it to 5 sets EVEN WHILE on his descent

    had samp had some window of rest or time to figure out the technology, he couldn've beaten others; he didn't have that rest time;

    now that he's had that rest time to think things through, he has had time to experiment with the technology,and if he WANTS to, he can come back.
     
    #58
  9. justineheninhoogenbandfan

    justineheninhoogenbandfan Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    898
    Yeah like Federer was anywhere close to his prime for that one, LOL! Federer was ranked #15 in the World, would end the year ranked #13 in the World, and would lose in the 1st or 4th round of every slam he played for almost another 2 years. Federer was not a teen phenom like Nadal. So Federer less then half the player he would later be still beat Sampras in that one.

    Sampras was old and past his prime? Yeah well he is much more old and would be much more past his prime if he tried to comeback 7 years later, and Federer isnt some kid losing in the 1st or 4th round of all the slams anymore when Sampras still couldnt beat him.
     
    #59
  10. justineheninhoogenbandfan

    justineheninhoogenbandfan Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    898
    Back to reality.... Federer vs Karlovic, Federer leads 5-0. Sets won, Karlovic 2, Federer 10. 1 meeting at a grand slam, Federer wins 3 sets to 0.
     
    #60
  11. Feder

    Feder New User

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Nice one lol
     
    #61
  12. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Figure out the technology? Its not that different, he's using a bigger racquet and luxilon. Not alot to figure out. Will you please address, by saying something more than "he's the GREATEST", why you feel that a 36 year old who is nowhere near top level shape can get back into touring level shape? And its not a "rest"...he retired! he had a three year layoff without touching a racquet. He's only practiced enough to stay competitive in exo matches, though he's probably picked it up a little bit for the upcoming fed. Its still not enough to put him up against the top. What you consider a rest is really a period of decline from top level play to no play, to minimal play. Not a rest, a decline.
     
    #62
  13. saram

    saram Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,371
    I'd have to agree with that. Not that Pete isn't good. But, some people just use the forums to promote and advertise their own blogs and what not....
     
    #63
  14. Ferrari1190

    Ferrari1190 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    he wasn't unaware of technology he just didnt want to change because he didn't want anything to disrupt his game that was really his choice, i think everyone should leave Sampras alone, he shown he is undoubtably one the greatest players of all time
     
    #64
  15. Ferrari1190

    Ferrari1190 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    don't get me wrong Sampras is my idol, his playing is what got me into tennis, but i know theres no way he can be fit enough to play on the tour today
     
    #65
  16. saram

    saram Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,371
    Are you serious? If a plump Baghdatis (did you see him earlier this year?) can play on tour...then a fit Pete could. He is not THAT old! Johnny Mac won a doubles ATP title last year at 47.
     
    #66
  17. Fries-N-Gravy

    Fries-N-Gravy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    the sampras serve doesn't always work as good as it is. when safin beat him at the US he was definitely not serving poorly. or when he lost to fed. i will agree that it'll still give just about everyone a headache.

    i dont think he's trying to reaffirm his greatness. maybe he just thinks if he still has the ability why let it go to waste?
     
    #67
  18. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Doubles is a different story though, less running around. And while Bagman isnt the fittest guy on tour, he is still young and doesnt have the miles on him that pete does. by the time pete got into the right shape he'd be 37 nearing 38, and thats really just too old for top level singles play.
     
    #68
  19. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    agreed

    oh yes. agreed. pet can get in shape. mac was over 40, and not only competed in an atp tourney, he actually WON it! what d'y'all have to say about that.

    sampras is still young; perhaps not a teenager, but still can do it.

    he's too old to sustain a #1 ranking for some time; but he may still have it to show the world and he can play with and beat the best; that he can still win a us open or a wimbledon; it's not like i'm saying he's going to win gs after gs; i know that!

    what i'm saying is that he can win 1 or 2 more
     
    #69
  20. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    again...doubles is much different than singles. If pete trained a bit, he still could be a good doubles player, but singles shape and doubles shape are very different. Two weeks is a long time, and seven matches doesnt make for an easy road to victory. Plus you're looking at Pete playing against top 20 players from the rd. of 16 on, and having to beat them in the rd of 16, qfs, sfs, and finally the final. If he even went five sets with them, he wouldnt be ready for the next match, and theres no way he would win in three easy sets against anyone in the top 20 (maybe top 50 or 100). Its just simply impossible. and 36 is not young for a tennis player, especially after a layoff and having to endure the type of training he would have to get involved in to get in top competing shape.
    Serious question...why will you not accept that he is retired and isn't planning on coming back (his words!)? The man is a legend and always will be, why isnt that enough for you?
     
    #70
  21. World Beater

    World Beater Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,751
    LMAO at the sampras troll tennis dude.

    sampras lost to so many journeymen even in his prime and had to play so many mickey mouse tournies during the indoor season to preserve his #1 rank.

    And this guy thinks a past his prime pete sampras can win NOW?
     
    #71
  22. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    Amen. Are we talking about rocket science here? What? Sampras needed time to figure things out? Is he stupid or something? I credit him with good play and great PR skills for brainwashing his fans but please, figure out technology? He must be one stupid person when he's not playing tennis.

    You got to be kidding me. Fed and Sampras both used the same racket at the time they played. Fed still uses that racket, only the paint is different. They both used gut at that time. If you want to defend Sampras, then please use concrete evidence to back him. Don't use speculative matchup, what-if scenarios like Fed vs. Karlovic to make your point. Those are not relevant because they are not factual.

    Charles Barkley said that, I am not quoting him, an athlete retires simply because he has nothing left, simply because he can't play the game anymore. Michael Jordan was an exception. But tennis is an individual sport. As for Pete to get fit to play single on ATP, never happens. He's done. Playing double on ATP is not the same as playing singles. Everyone knows that. You have only to cover half the court and the point doesn't last more than four rallies or so. Pete would never last more than a set on ATP match. His serve is not the same as it was. Ask Sam Warburg, he even selected an ad court when they played on team tennis. Team tennis doesn't have duece. They play similar to college. Sam Warburg picked Pete's serve apart. Actually, I really hope and pray that Sampras really return to ATP for real so to prove to the realists that he can't play and finally shut up his fanatics about how great he is.
     
    #72
  23. rosenstar

    rosenstar Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    not just the serve, Ivo Karlavic has the biggest serve around right now (at least top 3). He's never gotten past the 4th round at wimbledon.

    this makes no sense; what does volleying have to do with a cluch serve? And btw, Federer's serve is amazing under pressure. if you think otherwise you're brain dead.

    first of all, for the most part, fed doesn't get in trouble at wimbledon. He's gotten in trouble once in 5 years, and that was this years final. and again, Fed's serve is definitely a go to shot.

    you're completely ignoring the slower courts, larger balls, and new strings of today's wimbledon.

    Sampras' serve is still there isn't it? If so, he may still have his chances, and capitalize on really licking his chops.

    AND I F***ING HATE THIS BLOG!!! why do you always reference it? is it your blog? I don't like it at all. It's incredibley biased towards serve and volleyers. If player (players under 6'5") could win singles matches serving and volleying, don't you think they'd do it more often?

    and sampras is not coming back. why tarnish his reputation as possible GOAT? (not saying that he is, but many feel this way). come on, lets be serious here. the man is in his late 30's and balding. he's no longer in his prime. While he's still a truly amazing player, his body is not in PLAYING shape. He's said it himself, He knows he couldn't go out there and play a 5 set match.
     
    #73
  24. rosenstar

    rosenstar Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    I'm sure pete sampras could win a doubles tourni if he played doubles with jonas bjorkman, no doubt in my mind, but he could stay inside the top 50, just not possible.
     
    #74
  25. rosenstar

    rosenstar Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    oh and by the way, what's sampras going to do when he serves and volleys like you said, and players like nadal, davydinko, federer, ferrer, ferrerro, blake, gonzo and others rip passing shot after passing shot right by him? Surely you don't seriously believe that he can rally with these guys from the baseline at his age?
     
    #75
  26. Steve132

    Steve132 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    842

    Rosenstar: Excellent points, but don't forget that you are dealing with a True Believer here. You're unlikely to make much headway by using rational arguments.
     
    #76
  27. Fries-N-Gravy

    Fries-N-Gravy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    the game is much more complicated than serves and strokes and volleys.
     
    #77
  28. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    there you have it... you said it

    it's really quiet interesting how y'all sound like mere spectators of the sport of tennis, not real players who have actually competed. i may be wrong. but it sounds like these comments that attack me and sampras are those who are gung-ho over fed, and that's it. sounds like simple club players to me who think they know what they're talking about based on what they read and see, and not what they know.

    by the way, you, above, just said michael jordan was an exception.

    so samp is not an exception? of course he could be. in fact, he could be a higher exception in tennis than jordan was to basketball.

    more expletives, and more criticism make y'all sound naive, and almost bovine. well, i'm sure you're not, but it just sounds like it.

    answer this question: how tough is it to win 1 grand slam?

    .....







    ............................




    ...............................................................




    .....................pretty tough, .........................














    ..............................












    .....................................................................







    ......................... ............eh?













    .............................. so,

    if it's pretty tough, who says that fed can win even 1 more gs?

    you!?!?

    and who are you to say this?

    please give a bit better of analysis for tennis' sake.

    learn from the tennisanalyst.blogspot.com
     
    #78
  29. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,945
    Sampras was fatigued by the time the 2000 US open final came vs Safin, coz the semi and final were on consecutive days. Would have been tough on him with his thalassemia minor, which is probably why he didnt focus on the French as much and why he's not coming back. In a one off mathc he can take out anyone in the world right now. Skillwise, Federer is the only guy in the top 10 who can come close.

    This is what happened the next year at the 2001 US open when Sampras played Safin:

    September 8, 2001, US.Open
    P. SAMPRAS/M. Safin 6-3, 7-6, 6-3
    An interview with: MARAT SAFIN

    Q. There are many big servers. The question has been asked many times. What makes Sampras' serve special? He hasn't lost 86 serves in a row. Why is he more difficult than all the others?
    MARAT SAFIN: Because, of course, it's Pete Sampras. You see Pete Sampras, of course it's not only serve, you almost start to remember in the match how many Grand Slams he won, how many finals he won, you know. He has also great volley. If you don't return very well, you don't have any chance. So he has a big serve, then you have also Pete Sampras, which is huge. So at the net, he's unbelievable. To pass him, you have to play unbelievable. It's too much pressure, I think. Is not only serve, is pressure all the time. It's mental, of course. He has very good volley. So every time you not returning well, he will put the volley, and the point is over.



     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2007
    #79
  30. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,945
    He just chose to focus on the big ones, so losing the smaller ones didnt worry him so much. I guess he was great at pacing himself and looking at the big picture as he says. I think this sum sit up well:

    August 21, 2002, Long Island
    P. H. Mathieu/P. Sampras 6-3, 6-7, 6-4

    Pete Sampras: "You have to remember who I am and where I'm playing next week. I know I've had a pretty disappointing year, [but] this is the U.S. Open, that's where I shine, and that's where I hope I shine... I'm a little discouraged, but you've got to look at the big picture."



    September, 2003, Ace Tennis Magazine, UK

    Tim Henman: "Sampras and I practised a lot together and seven out of 10 times we played practice sets I'd beat him. But when it came to big matches there was a gear change in him. On big occasions there's no one more determined than Sampras. He's the heaviest server I've ever played. It's important to differentiate between fast servers and heavy servers. Heavy serves come into you the whole time or they're placed exactly in the wrong spot. Your opponent can serve fast, but if you get a racket to it it's easier to get back than a heavy serve. Especially on Grass. This is what I think marked Sampras out as a great player."


    And this sums up why hes better than all the other servers like Roddick(and the rest of Sampras' game is better thanA-rod, and a-rod still manages #5):

    August 25, 2003, US.Open
    M. FISH/J. Johansson 6-3, 6-2, 6-4
    An interview with: MARDY FISH

    Q. What is the one aspect of Pete's game or demeanor that maybe is lost on people that aren't so knowledgeable about tennis but that you really admire and appreciate?
    MARDY FISH: You know, I loved watching him. He would always get that one break in a set. I mean, obviously he wouldn't every time. But, you know, you rarely ever saw Pete get like a second break in a set. He just had so much confidence on his serve games to hold serve that, you know, he knew that all he needed was one break. Especially at Wimbledon, all he needed was one break, and he'd pretty much win the set every time. It was amazing to see somebody just with so much confidence. You know, he didn't have a serve that was like Roddick's or Rusedski's. Actually, Rusedski is a bad example. But like Andy's, just blows it by you. He could hit it if he wanted to, but he took a lot of pace off it and he placed it. There's nobody better, ever. I mean, I remember watching him at Saddle Brook when I trained when I was there when I was younger. He trained there. They'd put cones up for the serves. He would knock down the cones in 10 serves. It was amazing.

    June 25, 2004
    L. HEWITT/G. Ivanisevic 6-2, 6-3, 6-4
    An interview with: GORAN IVANISEVIC

    Q. The single toughest player that you faced over your career and the toughest stroke that you've had to deal with?
    GORAN IVANISEVIC: Maybe toughest player I ever play is Pete, you know, because is guy that gives you only one, two chances per match, and if you don't take those chances, you finish. Usually with all these guys, I play lot of matches, but usually you get more chances. With him, two, three if he's generous, you know. I think with him it was the toughest for me to play.

    Q. Does he [Federer] have a greater range of talents than Pete? How would you explain?
    GORAN IVANISEVIC: Some things he does better than Pete. I mean, on the court he's like magician. Pete was destroying. Pete was serving. Nobody talked ever about Pete's serve. They were only talking about my serve. But when you play Pete, you couldn't touch his serve, you know. Even when you returned, then he hits forehand winner and the point is finish. But Federer, the way he plays, he's back, he comes in. When you look him, you think tennis is very easy sport, but it's not.


     
    #80
  31. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    If its pretty tough for anyone to win a grandslam, even those at the top of the game, why can't you see that it would be nearly impossible for sampras, who is out of shape and out of practice (he's no slouch by our standards in either case, but is compared to the top pros). I've given you analysis and not cursed you at all, nor have I moo'ed (are you sure you know what bovine means?). I've given you analysis based on pete's age, his fitness level at this point, and his ability to compete with the top pros in today's game. And thus far you haven't said whether the blog is yours or not, but you promote it like it is the Gospel. Have you considered that it might be incorrect, or seriously considered the criticism people on here have given it? We're asking you to think logically; a 36 year old who spends three years completely apart from his sport, then picks it up very lightly, loses in some exhibitions (WTT) to players who are low ranked, plays well against other retired players, and is no longer at world class fitness levels for his sport will not be physically able to retrain and remold his body to be like athletes ten years younger than him. Ten years is not a short amount of time. In a sport where players burn out around 29 on average, pete played til he was 32 or so. Then he "rested" as you put it (declined, realistically) for three years and is playing lower level tennis in world team and champions tour. There's no way pete of right now, who had to save match points against Todd Martin, could truly challenge top players in a 3 of 5 set match. If he wasn't injured in the training it would take to get to top level, he would be 38 by the time it took to get into about as good of playing shape as he could get. Excellent playing shape for a 38 year old is much different from excellent playing shape for a 26-28 year old. If he did extensive training, it would do nothing more than solidify his position as best player in the champions series, it wouldnt make him competitive with current pros. He is not superman, he is Pete Sampras. Just because he was incredibly great (maybe the greatest ever, maybe not) does not mean that he has the ability to come back and be #1 on tour or win a grand slam. Surely you can understand that his position in history doesn't make him able to do the impossible.
     
    #81
  32. rosenstar

    rosenstar Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    Unfortunately this seems to be the truth...

    this is what I was trying to say. caesar66 is blessed with the patience and understanding required to explain this to you.

    Tennis Dude:
    I don't understand why you really think all of these things. Sampras cannot realistically come back. He was, still is, and always will be an amazing player, but it's just not physically possible for him to compete with any of the top 100 players in the world.
     
    #82
  33. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    Correction

    Actually, Michael Jordan did not retire the first time. He was bored. I wrongly wrote that he retired. I don't know why you can't understand simple facts but keep insisting that Sampras can do superhuman things. You may worship him, but at least use some common sense. He was a good player but he was no god. He did loose to very low ranked players in his prime and recently he had less than stellar record against high ranked players in WTT. World team tennis if for those who desire to play on ATP or WTA but couldn't make a living doing so. If they could play regularly on those tours, don't you think they would play instead of playing WTT?
     
    #83
  34. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    wow, quite naive

    wow, y'all including tennis bum sound like you're really defending some point .. as if my point has true rings and really hits a nerve of truth among many of you. look at this thread. the extent of it already proves to me, to you and everyone else, that the assertion that pete can return can be a real assertion. it's different if i were to say that arantxa sanchez tried to comeback, and this time become #1 on the atp tour on the MEN's side, this time. such is an absolute absurity. this is the sort of assertion to which you all are responding, it seems.

    it seems like you take me as saying that a guy named jimmy arias, or david pate (of any of you know who he is) wants to now come back and become the world #1 atp singles. c'mon, my analysis here is different: it's sampras, not some by-gone dude.

    your vigorous vehement defensive tone of your words, to the extent that you actually malign and criticize, and try even to demean my assertion, and perhaps even personal character attacks on me, personally, seem to really hit a nerve among many of you, such to a point this possibility that sampras can return and beat the best is offensive to you.

    it's just what i think.

    and i think, many others may think the same.
     
    #84
  35. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    You are brain dead beyond help. What? We have made "personal character attacks" on you? You have some kind of ego. We don't care about your character, we are more or less concerned about your mental state right now. But if you think your character is so precious, then by all mean do think that way. You could be prince of a country or a beggar in a street, we wouldn't care. But at least use whatever left of your grey cells, if you have any to think things out before prolonging your ignorance about the current state of tennis. Yes, we all know who Jimmy Arias and David Pate are.

    You are beyond help. I just wish that Sampras really as brain dead as you and decides to make a come back so that shortly afterwards you both can reach enlightment about the current ATP tour.
     
    #85
  36. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    alliteration aside, its not that we're offended by what you're saying or are taking it personally, we're just trying to figure out why you think Sampras is superman and can do the improbable. You have not really addressed our reasons for disagreeing, instead saying "its sampras, he's the greatest (your words), so naturally he alone can defy his age and condition and come back to the real tour in force." And then you usually pimp that blog.
     
    #86
  37. downdaline

    downdaline Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    917
    It's your blog. And no, Sampras can't win another GS.
     
    #87
  38. AlpineCadet

    AlpineCadet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,628
    I'm not sure why, but I really enjoyed this joke. Thank you very much! ;)
     
    #88
  39. AlpineCadet

    AlpineCadet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,628
    I almost vomited when I read this...

    "Either a player is a serve & volleyer, or a baseliner. A player is not the jack of all trades. He is known to be a 1-dimensional player. Sampras was a serve & volleyer. McEnroe was a serve & volleyer. Federer is a baseliner. But in all of them, they each have a back-up arsenal. Sampras had it with his baseline game, and so did McEnroe. Federer has it with his volley game, but it is not as prevalent as McEnroe or Sampras with their presentation of their baseline game."

    Taken from the website which was suggested by:

     
    #89
  40. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Just for the heck of it I took a look. What a crummy sorry excuse of a blog you are pimping off to people. Pretty much the most pathetic looking and pointless blog I ever saw. Also yeah it very obvious it is your blog, sorry dude it stinks big time.
     
    #90
  41. ninman

    ninman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2007
    Messages:
    3,898
    Why can't people just let him enjoy retirement.
     
    #91
  42. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    huh? which one of you said i'm brain dead?


    huh? what blog?

    just think about it. i'm saying that samp can come back. and i receive a barrage of comments personally attacking me, and then sampras whom you've never met, and he's not even on this thread!

    your actions speak for themselves; you attack me and the subject matter i discuss--that's truly a pathetic act. i'm not saying you are pathetic, but it's a pathetic response. but then again, one may consider what gump said: stupid is; stupid does.

    and about this brain dead comment. huh? what in the world are you talking about?

    it appears to me that whenever a comment is made, anyone and i mean practically anyone on this thread want to bring out the easiest, worst thing to say, and that is to say that the person writing this thread is brain dead.

    well, to you who said this, i must tell you that you're not brain dead, but i know trying. and you're trying hard. i understanding. but your attempts to do everything you can to change what may happen is not working; why don't you give simply, non-irate, intelligent comments, rather than condescending ones which only show your own character.

    stupid is; stupid does (but i'm not saying you are stupid; i'm just saying, that if you want to comment on someone's thread, at least speak intelligently.

    thanks, guys.

    i think that blog is coming up with its weekly comment. check it out.

    tennisanalyst.blogspot.com
     
    #92
  43. caesar66

    caesar66 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    834
    Location:
    Athens, Ga
    Why did you quote me? I havent called you braindead or attacked you, just refuted your claims. And I've spoken intelligently while doing so. And whoever writes that blog is not reading sampras' comments about not coming back. You can't make him come back. Regardless of whether he would or would not do well, if he says he isn't coming back, the only thing you really know is that he isn't. Don't try to read into the fact that he's playing an exo series with fed.
     
    #93
  44. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    now. seriously

    but now, seriously, about the exhibs w/fed & samp; check out the blog now. it's got a new article.

    very very intriguing.

    it's called tennisanalyst.blogspot.com

    seriously, it's quite interesting
     
    #94
  45. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,540
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    This is sad...
     
    #95
  46. ninman

    ninman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2007
    Messages:
    3,898
    It sure is.
     
    #96
  47. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,540
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    Ahh, btw! I found a new blog, very insightful, very well written, and dead on accurate! :D

    The URL is tennisanalyst.blogspot.com

    Andrés












    Ps: Yes, TD is paying me for advertising!
     
    #97
  48. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    Well, I don't know. I have watched Sampras from about 1989. I think Sampras' true color was a baseliner. He did S&V at Wimbledon because he had to. He made a transition more to S&V in 2nd half of his career because he needed it (he was getting old and losing groundies..) This happens to amateurs like us too.

    But his true color is closer to baseliner. His volley was never a truely offensive weapon like McEnroe's or Edbergs. His volley was a 10% finisher of a point that he already won 90%.

    He opened up the court with his serve and forehand and he did placement/blocking volleys to finish the point.

    For 1st half of his career, he always resorted to baseline at those critical points of a match. That's why Mary Carrillo said he is a baseliner in early days of Sampras' career.

    To me, he is the best player I've ever seen in doing both S&V and baseline.
    These two are fundamentally different. He mastered both at the deepest level.

    But I think his true color is baseliner and his S&V was one helluva acting job at Wimbledon. It was a Dustin Hoffman or Robert Deniro kind of acting job...
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2007
    #98
  49. Tennis Dude

    Tennis Dude Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    114
    Very interesting

    That's a very interesting point. I never thought about that. Did Mary really say that?

    Well, if Pete was really a baseliner to begin with, I may need to re-assess my perspective on various players.
     
    #99
  50. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    Mary did say that in early days of Pete's career. I think Pete was a true all courter and never a pure S&Ver like McEnroe or Edberg.
     

Share This Page