The reason we can use W 2001 as proof of Fed's greatness!

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by jg153040, Apr 5, 2014.

  1. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Because Sampras was actually playing at a very high level. He was the defending champion and was still nr.1 on grass at the time. He also won USO a bit after.

    It's not as Pete was washed out. So, this speaks volumes of Fed's ability. Also his net game and his return game. So, he would do great in the 90s.

    Also Pete himself said he was playing at a high level. If Pete's level sucked, I would agree, that this match doesn't mean a lot, but it didn't.

    Just saying!
     
    #1
  2. Ramesh848

    Ramesh848 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    423
    man there is no need to give anymore evidences of his greatness. you're looking insecure!

    numbers tells the true story-

    17
    6
    302
    21
    237
    23
    34
    10
    3*3

    a truly endless list..... undisputed goat!
     
    #2
  3. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    But some people say, Fed doesn't have great net game and all-court game and he wouldn't do great in the past.

    I still think Fed is underrated on this boards.
     
    #3
  4. Ramesh848

    Ramesh848 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    423
    ^^ Its fact or opinion ?
     
    #4
  5. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    20,039
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Federer wins almost every poll the board has going. This board considers Federer to be a better basketball player than LeBron James.
     
    #5
  6. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,721
    This match against Rafter in 2001 shows what a great serve and volleyer Federer was:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la0ON7Xh4og
     
    #6
  7. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Not true. There was a poll if him and Rafa both win 17 majors, and the poll was 50 vs 50 %.

    And I don't see Fed winning polls as greatest net game of all time. Or backhand polls. Or mental tougness polls.

    Also he lost polls him vs Borg on clay. Or vs Pete on carpet or fast grass.

    And for the most beautiful wife/girlfriend, Fed doesn't win polls.

    So, you are wrong.
     
    #7
  8. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Ok, I will bring a match with Rafa vs Zeballos of how a great clay courter Rafa was.

    Have some sense, people.
     
    #8
  9. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    It's a fact that it is an opinion.
     
    #9
  10. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,721
    Huh? Federer played awesome in that match. Had Rafter down match point. 2 weeks later, he beat Sampras on Centre Court at Wimbledon. This match against Rafter really displayed what a great serve and great volleys Federer had. He was a natural serve and volleyer.
     
    #10
  11. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Sorry, my bad. Because people here bring Rafter and his h2h with Fed as an example actually how Fed sucks at the net.

    I didn't see you meant it as a positive.
     
    #11
  12. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    20,039
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Way to take me so literally. Let's get down to the real point, Roger is popular on this forum. That's really all I was saying.
     
    #12
  13. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Not as popular as he once was. He is getting much more disrespect here in last years.
     
    #13
  14. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,721
    Federer should have won that match. Federer had Rafter down match point in the 2nd set when Rafter went for broke and hit the most ridiculous kick serve I have ever seen to save himself. Federer was also unlucky in the 3rd set TB when his half-volley just clipped the tape and that was the difference between winner and loser. I actually thought Federer played better than Rafter but Rafter just won a couple of more critical points. Pretty incredible considering Federer was only 19 and Rafter was a multiple Slam champion and one of the best serve and volleyers and best grass court players of that era.
     
    #14
  15. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    20,039
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    I guess the Nadal fan-base got bigger plus the bitter Sampras fans started crawling out of the woodwork. ;)
     
    #15
  16. chjtennis

    chjtennis Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    Messages:
    5,044
    Federer would've been a serve and volleyer with sick ground strokes if he was playing in 90s. It's no secret he built his game using Sampras as the model. The new era and new technology pushed him back to the baseline but he has very good feel at the net and he is a natural there.
     
    #16
  17. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Yeah. Fed really is the master of all trades and more people need to realize this.

    Didn't Connors say that in an era of specialists there are specialists and there is Roger Federer.

    Becker said Fed would be the only one from this era who would do great in the 90s.

    And some all-time great said, can't remember who. He said that he watched guys who have some top shots and wondered is Fed as good as them? Is Fed at the top in all areas? Watching best returners saying, could be be right there? Watching best serves saying Fed is right there. Watching best movers or forehand saying Fed is right there.
     
    #17
  18. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Also some old timers pop here from time to time.
     
    #18
  19. Blocker

    Blocker Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2012
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Actually, if you look at it from the other side of the fence, how good was old man Sampras to take a 7 time W winner in the making, with much fresher legs, and who would have had much more to prove, to 5 sets? When you get to a 5th, it's as much about fitness as it is ability. I think Sampras did remarkably well to go the distance with a guy over 10 years younger and who was much hungrier. In fact, to see retired Sampras acing Federer in those exos makes you realise just how good Sampras was.
     
    #19
  20. Dedans Penthouse

    Dedans Penthouse Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,159
    Location:
    Antarctica
    Connect the dots: it's not so much Fed (why would anyone want to diss him?) so much as it's the childish obnoxiousness of the Fedfanboy trolls (see the fanboy douchebaggery below) vvv


     
    #20
  21. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    20,039
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    You dream of me being a dou***. Dream on.
     
    #21
  22. Chico

    Chico Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2013
    Messages:
    9,197
    Federer is the greatest and we all know it. No need to repeat it all the time.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2014
    #22
  23. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    11,161
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    He's right though. The Nadal fanbase probably got bigger as he won more, and there are some bitter Sampras fans here mostly because Federer broke the slam record. Only a fool would deny it.

    NN is the last person I would accuse of being a fanboy.
     
    #23
  24. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Also true.
     
    #24
  25. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Federer is the greatest :).
     
    #25
  26. noball

    noball Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Messages:
    123
    The fact that Fed beat Pete at HIS own game indicates Fed's greatness for me.
     
    #26
  27. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Yeah, that was my point.
     
    #27
  28. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,721
    Federer served and volleyed on every first and every second serve in that match against Rafter, and he was darn good at it and was very rarely ever broken. Rafter was very fortunate to get out of that match alive.
     
    #28
  29. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,547
    Yea... Sampras 35-16 for the year with ZERO titles, and needed 5 sets before Federer to beat some bum I never even heard of. (Barry Cowen? Huh?)


    Unbelievable Level:shock::shock::shock: Peak Sampras for sure.


    Delusional Fed Fanatics as always. Don't be stupid
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2014
    #29
  30. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Didn't Sampras win 0 tournament in 2001? I mean is it really fair to use this match as a sample when Sampras was already wayy past his prime?
     
    #30
  31. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,547
    Yep he didn't win anything. Hell outside of the USO I don't think he played well anywheres that year. 2001-2002 was clearly Pete's last hurrah with remininse of his prime level only played at Flushing
     
    #31
  32. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    13,714
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Poor Barry will be very hurt to hear you say that. He now commentates on tennis for Sky Sports and taking Pete to 5 at Wimbledon was the highlight of his tennis career! :)
     
    #32
  33. Blocker

    Blocker Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2012
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Don't go stating the truth too much you may be labelled as 'bitter'.
     
    #33
  34. Vcore89

    Vcore89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    2,054
    Location:
    The synapse
    Fed is a better serve and volleyer than Sampras ever was, they just never had the chance to meet in their respective primes. A one-off doesn't do justice to either Sampras or Federer.
     
    #34
  35. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,367
    We are talking about grass, not clay. And Sampras had plenty of 5 sets during his younger years. Sampras was the best grass court player in 2001 and heavily the favorite to win Wimbledon. He was going for his 5th straight title. Had the young Federer wasn't in his way, he's very likely to have won that year.

    To discredit Federer's win is like taking away JMac's win over Borg in 1981 Wimbledon.
     
    #35
  36. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,367
    Again, it's about grass, who cares about other tournaments outside of grass. Sampras was 29 who was closer to his prime than a young 19 years old Federer. Plus, Sampras was well experienced, played many years on center court(his backyard), but for Federer, everything was new to him.
     
    #36
  37. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,547


    Even worse for Sampras and makes my argument even more valid. Grass was always Pete's best surface yet needed 5 sets to beat Barry Cowen before Fed in 2001?

    Yet Fed fans have tried to recreate history over the years to suit their agenda sighting claims like "Pete's level was great at wimbledon that year, he was the defending champ etc."

    Even the commentators said Pete was due for an upset at Wimbledon that year because his level was AWFUL compared to years prior at Wimbledon.

    Pete last solid year on grass was 2000. His last GREAT year on grass was 1999. His level sucked after that.

    If he didn't lose to Fed he would have lost to Rafter, Henman, Safin, Roddick or peaking Goran that year if he played any of them
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2014
    #37
  38. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,189
    This..........
     
    #38
  39. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,212
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    I know, that it is a futile excercise, but nevertheless.

    Could you possibly tell me, which of the weapons, Sampras was known for on grass didn't click well in that particular match?

    Please stay with the question, as I am not keen on reading how poor or good Sampras was at the time. I am asking about that particular match. Thank You.
     
    #39
  40. fighting123

    fighting123 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Messages:
    282
    That match serves as a historical landmark rather than an evidence to compare the two greats.
     
    #40
  41. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Sampras did serve well in that match, but his return and reflexes were just completely poor by his standards. Pete never had to worry about his so called GOAT serve. It is his return and reflexes that he needed to worry about. If Pete was half as good at returning as he once was in his peak years, Federer would have been wiped out in straight sets. Federer was not ready to face peak Sampras that year, but he was ready to face the old Sampras.
     
    #41
  42. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    I'm not so sure if Pete would lose to those guys. If Pete were to beat Federer that year, he would have gone on to face Henman, Goran and Rafter. These guys have and always have been his favorite pigeons. It is very likely, in my opinion, that Pete would have gotten his 8th Wimbledon if not for the young Federer.
     
    #42
  43. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,212
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    Sampras's return was not what he was known for.

    Besides, they had similar return stats (slightly favouring Federer), but guess what, Federer had 12 clean service return winners against 8 for Sampras. That single stat shows clearly, that Federer was reading the serve of the serving out of his mind Sampras better, than Sampras was reading Federer's. Don't get delusional about a debate over that match. I have looked very carefully into it.

    I am curious about the reflexes thing.

    Have you got anything to prove it or you are just going to speculate based on the fact, that Sampras was not 24 anymore?
     
    #43
  44. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,367
    Great players are due for an upset. JMac snapped Borg's 5 straight Wimbledon, Soderling shocked the world by beating Nadal at the FO who was going for his 5th straight FO title. Recently Wawrinka stop Nole from winning 4 straight AO. These players including Federer will always be remember as the one who upset the great one on their best surface.

    Sampras has never loss to Henman and Goran at Wimbledon. Goran barely edged Rafter in the final so I see Pete is likely to beat him. If Roger didn't play, Sampras would have won 2001 Wimbledon.
     
    #44
  45. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,367
    It's ranks in the top 10 greatest slam match of all time.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2014
    #45
  46. dudeski

    dudeski Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Messages:
    4,255
    So you are saying that we also shouldn't count any of Fed's loses at the same age as Sampras was 2001+ i.e. we should never ever take into account any Fed loses past 2010? For once I completely agree with you.
     
    #46
  47. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,137
    Neither player was in their prime; it was a great match to watch and a great match in general; and it was only one match.

    It doesn't prove anything other than that a 19-year old Federer demonstrated himself capable of beating a 29-year old Sampras.

    On average, Sampras is probably highly under-rated here. Federer is probably rated fairly on average. Of course for both there are those who over- and under-rate them.

    Had they played in their primes, they would have split matches for the most part, except on clay (dominated by Federer, but not completely) and fast carpet (more wins to Sampras, but not dominating imo).
     
    #47
  48. Backspin1183

    Backspin1183 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,619
    Location:
    Vevey
    Pete's 2001 = Fed's 2013

    Federer in 2001 was as good against Pete as Delbonis was against Fed in 2013.
     
    #48
  49. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,367
    You are a funny man. Comparing clay event(Hamburg) to Wimbledon is a joke.

    Let me know when that hamburg match is rank in the top 10 greatest match of all time. OTOH, Sampras/Federer match is one of the greatest match which many people have owned this DVD.
     
    #49
  50. Backspin1183

    Backspin1183 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    8,619
    Location:
    Vevey
    If you want a Wimbledon match, you got a 4 set epic between R Federer and S Stakhovsky in Rd2 of Wimby '13.
     
    #50

Share This Page