Why do you think Sampras is so underappreciated?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by laurie, Mar 3, 2005.

  1. laurie

    laurie Guest

    I really am surprised what I read here on the message boards. Now lets be honest, not everyone likes the same players. Thats true and fine with me. What I don't understand is that despite a player's achievements, some of the people on this message board try to make out that its all an illusion and somehow his level of ability is in question and he shouldn't have won even one tenth of the titles he did. Does disgust and dislike of a player run that deep to be in denial of his ability and achievements?

    Whats the score on this as maybe someone can explain to me why this is the case. Or if it is the case, maybe I'm reading the situation wrong. I can't remember any other great player getting so much stick despite their ability and achievements.
     
    #1
  2. Andy Hewitt

    Andy Hewitt Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,293
    Location:
    SHEEE-KAH-GO!
    Cuz he's greek. People hate Greeks, what can ya do?

    I'm jus kiddin ;)
     
    #2
  3. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    IMO he is underappreciated because he is understated, thoughtful, uncontroversial, classy, and just let his racquet do the talking....he just didnt do a lot of jive talkin noise or feel the need to draw all the attention to himself...i think people thought the game just came easy to him becase he made it look so, but he worked as hard as most all the pros and was one of a the very few who could swing a racquet that heavy that fast...which i think caused it to look easy, but was also one of the reasons why he was so spent at the end of some of his matches. Stan Smith is/was also that way and was also underappreciated i feel...seems like the people who should be appreciated the most, are often appreciated the least.
     
    #3
  4. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    his style.

    no one wants to watch wimbledon on other surfaces, some dont even wanna watch wimbledon.

    and he was a cry baby, how many times do we have to see him cry? if things are that bad dont step onto the court, very poor sportsmanship. that match with correja was pathetic, he took like 1 min between each pt just so he can wipe his tears, get ur ass off the court or play tennis.

    he basically won wimbledon and got an easy draw at the open, to get his year end rankings.

    i do like him for the tennis channel, i think him and agassi were the initial financial backers.
     
    #4
  5. alfa164164

    alfa164164 Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,164
    Location:
    ATL
    I kinda thought he was overappreciated! One of the greatest short-point fast-court one-trick ponies ever. Basically a (better) fast court version of a Thomas Muster (who was equally one dimensional), who also had sporadic decent results on surfaces other than clay (Pete - Rome, Muster - Miami).
    Ohh, and that quiet "class", Pete was like Lendl, he didn't lose often, but when he did, he wasn't necessarily the most gracious loser. When someone upset him, they were just "swinging for the fences, had nothing to lose, and were on that day - basically lucky" - but when Pete won using the same tactic (going for aces on 2nd serves, going for broke on groundstrokes because he didn't have the patience, consistency, or physical stamina to grind out a point) it was skill. Give me a break!
    Is this enough to incite a riot among the Sampras faithful?
     
    #5
  6. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    I attribute the under appreciation to the passing of time. I didn't expect it to be this fast, but Sampras is a victim of not being in the limelight any more. I've already seen some of the same things written on these boards about Sampras that were written about Borg and Laver. 1) Competition not as good, 2) only a few players at the top any good, 3) the game has changed and he wouldn't translate well to it, and 4) he was nowhere near as talented as today's top players.
     
    #6
  7. joehight

    joehight New User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
    Messages:
    88
    His record speaks for itself. One of the top players ever to play the game. Some would say the best ever. Others would say in the top five ever. Certainly, for sure one of the top 10 ever. He was one helluva tennis player, but he wasn't an exciting personality, not a drop of charisma. And it looks as though he put everything he had into it while he was playing. Pretty well spent at the end. I couldn't believe the time he threw up on the court between change overs and still went on to win.

    He certainly deserves to sit back, relax, spend time with the family and enjoy what he accomplished on the court.

    I appreciate him, and wish he were still playing. But as a serve and volleyer, Patrick Rafter was more exciting.
     
    #7
  8. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    I think Rabbit has a good point.

    The majority of the long term, knowledgable posters on this board have shown they respect Sampras. The others seem to fall into a couple of categories:

    1.The newbs/young people, who either never saw Sampras or at least never in his prime. It takes time to develop perspective, young people always think that the best right now, must be by far the best ever. Some are already mature enough to acknowledge they didn't experience the past and are open minded and interested in it. Others are astonishingly ignorant and declare themselves to be experts! Even going so far as to declare that they have been watching tennis much longer than they have which becomes apparent upon careful reading of their posts. (occasionally I'll point this out, but often I let it go, lot's of fakers here and I'm sure many of you pick up on it)

    2.The Sampras haters. For whatever reason a few individuals seem to have a strong anti-Sampras bias. This becomes apparent when they resort to comical and inane Sampras bashing reasoning. Of course they are entitled to hate Sampras if they like and it's moderately amusing to watch them attempt to rationalize their bashing.

    It's somewhat ironic that I find myself defending Sampras in a few threads recently. During all those years, I was cheering for underdog Agassi in their classic encounters. While I always appreciated Sampras incredible talent from a player/coach perspective and would very much enjoy watching him from that perspective, I never really liked the guy much though I didn't really dislike him either. Nevertheless, he earned the accolades he gets.

    Of course come to think of it, I didn't like Agassi either from ages 19-26ish. I liked him as a young brilliant 16-18yr old, for his talent. Then his punkish attitude rubbed me the wrong way, though I still marveled at his ground game and would watch anytime I could. It wasnt' until he started displaying the maturity of his later years that I came to respect him not only for his game but for his personality.

    So, I think I've always seperated my appreciation of a player's game and my overall like/dislike of a player.
     
    #8
  9. iscottius

    iscottius Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,146
    Pete Sampras is a great champion, but he is somewhat unlikeable....he was an understated champion, classy, etc. but if he felt underappreciated, he was a baby (davis cup), (everyone likes andre better), exciting on the court, paint drying off the court.
     
    #9
  10. davey25

    davey25 Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    5,059
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    I dont agree he is hated on. Just because some dont coronate him as the undisputed best ever, or bemoan how horrable the game has become now that he is gone, does not mean he is being hated on, or believing that Federer of last year could have challenged Sampras in his prime is not some sort of disregard for Petes greatness. Although I would expect Laurie to see how not taking that point of view translates into that.
     
    #10
  11. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Very interesting comments, and I agree with most of them. I discount the one re Greeks (at first I thought it said Geeks, which I found a bit appropriate, but then I saw it related to Pete's national origin, which I didn't find quite as funny *lol*).

    I never particularly enjoyed Pete's game, which always seemed to me to be all serve and nothing more (and far less exciting than Roddick's because at least, Andy shows emotion).

    Pete never was a great returner, but it was nearly impossible to break that serve, even when he was down 0-40. And as a Pat Rafter fan, that frustrated me to no end. Can only imagine what it did to Pat Rafter.

    But Pete was way more than a serve. We all know that. Can't amass the record he did without being a great all-court player, which he was. As time goes on, I appreciate him and his accomplishments more and more, whereas others seem to be doing the opposite.

    And a lot of it is because of Roger Federer. Roger's game is more attractive than Pete's (at least in my opinion), and he's more charismatic than Pete ever was. And he's an international personality, who speaks several languages, and is someone the whole world can embrace. Whereas, even us Americans had trouble embracing Pete in his heyday.

    Time will tell if Roger will surpass Pete's legacy. He has great talent, but he's a long way from finishing at No. 1 the same No. of years, letting alone the number of slam wins.

    The excitement over Fed should continue, but it shouldn't erase or even tarnish what Pete has accomplished. That speaks for itself. Roger's racquet has to do a lot more talking before he can be mentioned in the same breath, in terms of history.
     
    #11
  12. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,439
    I think it's because he spent so much of his career slouching around the court with his jaw slack, and his tongue lolling out. Sure, he dominated, but he looked vaguely mongoloid while doing it. It's hard to appreciate that a sport you've been playing your whole life at a club-player level has been mastered by a guy who just might have defective chromosomes.
     
    #12
  13. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Yes, well, I'm sure that you have done much better, without those defective chromosomes.

    So where have you earned your millions and international acclaim?

    Anyone who makes this type of assinine analogy should be prepared to back it up.

    I'd especially like to hear how you would explain to someone with Down's Syndrome how someone with Pete's accomplishments is considered unpopular because he displays Down's Syndrome tendencies?

    Have you had any instruction in political correctness? Or even politeness?

    Obviously not. And I'm going on that assumption.

    Because I cannot believe that anyone in my own country is that unenlightened.
     
    #13
  14. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,439
    Did you miss the part where I said he'd mastered the game, and we labour at the club level? Or was this just a willful suspension of literacy on your part?

    No amount of success changes the fact that he was less than the image of DaVincian glory out there. It's an honest appraisal of a reason I think he lacks a certain amount of respect -- he never looked the part of a guy who deserved it. The public likes its idols to look the part. Pete looked more simian than man a lot of the time. Tough for a guy like that to earn the accolades of the masses, even while he's rolling the competition.
     
    #14
  15. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    I didn't miss any of that.

    This isn't about Pete.

    It's about your politically incorrect and totally ignorant comments, as I noted above.

    If you want to go ahead and delete them, I'm fine with that.

    I'll adjust my comments accordingly.

    No one with Down's Syndrome should be discussed in that manner, IMO.

    Mongoloid???? You must be way older than me, because that term went out years ago.
     
    #15
  16. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    Sampras is respected and appropriately appreciated by almost all who really understand tennis IMO..for those who don't ,or are maybe of the 'Image is everything' ilk, I can see how Pete may not be so appealing.
     
    #16
  17. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,439
    Why in god's name should I have to "back up" an opinion on why the man might not be all that popular? It's not like there are stats for these things.

    I wouldn't. What would be the point? To upset the Down's patient? Doesn't make the fact that most people would rather spend an afternoon flossing their toes than watch one play tennis any less true.

    Thank heavens, no. It's made the world a ridiculous place. Listen, PC or not, people don't flock to idolize guys who don't look like they have their faculties about them. Pete was an athletic marvel, who -- to the detriment of his international marketing appeal -- looked like a kid who spent too much time smoking pot and playing video games in his parents' basement, and whose basic facial control functions suffered for it.

    Should he CARE about this? I don't see why he should, unless it's important to him why he wasn't adored by the public. The public loves a beautiful athlete. Pete was a glorious sad-sack.

    All I'm offering is the suggestion that this may be part of why he doesn't receive accolades by the heap, post-retirement. Don't like it, get together a collection and send him to one of those poise schools for impending debutantes.
     
    #17
  18. Tahsin1982

    Tahsin1982 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    129
    I remember seeing the Road to AO where pete took on Jim Courrier. I cant remmeber which year but he had the news of his former coach who had brain tumor or something.

    Can understand what he is going through but he should have been considerate cause he was crying through out the match and it was affecting Courriers match a lot and Courrier lost.

     
    #18
  19. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Okay, you've convinced me. It's not worth the effort to convince you that you have insulted people less fortunate than you.

    Because I know now they are more fortunate than you.

    Just think of what players do at the Special Olympics; they work so hard, and fight so hard.

    They aren't going to worry that some ignoramus here says negative things about them. Nor should they.

    So I won't either. It only goes to credibility, in any event. And yours has dropped mightily.
     
    #19
  20. Phil

    Phil Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,877
    Location:
    In a tent, along the Silk Road
    I thought your first post was a joke, and I was just about to nudge Susan to lighten up and then I read your second post...I guess you're serious. You're also an idiot. If I want to see GQ models play tennis, then I guess I can go to Fire Island and watch them prance around there, or maybe you can make a recommendation based on your experience, though I probably will decline. Otherwise, who cares how he looked on court? The results were there-it isn't a friggin' fashion show (not for knowledgable tennis fans, at least). Roger looks like he doesn't even need a shower after a match, Pete looked a more frazzled...again, so what-different styles.

    And Susan...the Greek comment WAS a joke-the guy actually said that at the end of his post (you know, the "just kidding" part?).
     
    #20
  21. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Phil, I added a *lol* in that thread -- I also was trying to make a Geek/Greek joke. I got derailed with the other stuff, which I don't consider a laughing matter.

    And many of you, when you get older and are in a situation where a child you are about to bear has this or another type of hereditary condition, will also see this. (This hasn't happened to me personally, but it's hit close enough.)

    I've considered asking Don or Chris delete the references to mongoloid and defective chromosomes and such.

    They are very offensive, IMO.

    But I assume they'll view the thread and make their own decision.
     
    #21
  22. Aykhan Mammadov

    Aykhan Mammadov Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,673
    Location:
    Baku, Azerbaijan
    Why is he underappreciated ? I don't think so, he is 14 times GS champion and one of the greatest ever. Here at forum it is possible.

    But I think despite he was GREAT in tennis, probably he wasn't bright figure as a man. Peoples always like and remember bright figures. Say Agassi with his ear-ring, bald-headed and with his strange steps is somebody retained in memory. The same is Kuerten say, or McEnroe.

    To my wish Federer with his brilliant tennis is not bright as if he doesn't have temperament inside.
     
    #22
  23. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,439
    In the spirit of peace, harmony, and good will among men of all races, sexual orientations, and genetic makeups, I humbly withdraw my comments. Which is to say, I disavow my belief in them, and will pursue them no further. I'm not deleting them, as surely some future cyber-archaeologist will want to come along and marvel at their ghastliness for himself.

    I am an **** (edit: think lower end of the colon) among men, and deserving of grief and misfortune.

    I cheerfully concede that my comments are asinine, and perhaps even assinine, though that be a grievous spelling error and probably in some way a violation of the user agreement.

    I withdraw my assertion that physical appearance means anything w/r/t fandom, and slink back to my woeful life, leaving you to continue your entirely virtuous crusade as cheerleader-in-chief for boytoy Latino heart-throb Rafael Nadal, which I'm certain you would have undertaken even if he suffered from poor posture, and presented himself slack-jawed and mongoloid with unfortunate unibrow tendencies. Right?

    XOXO,

    Grim
     
    #23
  24. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    I accept your not-so-humble apology. Although it should not be made toward me, or even toward Rafael, who is genetically gifted.

    It should be made toward the people who are not so gifted. And I'm not talking about us average joes and janes who can't do that much with a tennis racquet, but do our best.

    I'm talking about people who struggle to make a normal life for themselves, and who succeed because of sheer will. They may not be perfect, but they look so in comparison to many of us. And certainly in comparison to you.

    You may not have those physical infirmities, but you may have some others. And my spelling of assinine was intentional, Webster's notwithstanding.

    I sit on a board for a non-profit organization that works with and places people with these types of challenges, and I see what they accomplish on a daily basis. They may not win tennis tournaments, but they are impressive in their own right. And several of them are board members themselves.

    And thank goodness. it's nice to sit on a board with people who are reasonable and who are remarkably unprejudiced toward people who don't have the same issues they have.
     
    #24
  25. nkhera1

    nkhera1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    338
    Because he is retired and has stayed out of the news since retiring. This happens to many great sports starts once they retire, for example just look at Michael Jordan. For a one dimensional guy his 1 dimension must have been pretty good in order to keep him number 1 for so long.
     
    #25
  26. Bertchel Banks

    Bertchel Banks Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    437
    Location:
    Kursk
    Because the pundits demanded we appreciate him NOW for once he retired the tour wouldn't see such a talent for a good 20-30 years, if ever again.

    He was a bore who did an excellent job in choking the life out of the game as a respectable spectator sport.

    Thank God for Andre and Roger Federer who demonstate that you can dominate, entertain, and inspire at the same time. That tennis is more than just a big serve, a ten pound racket, and a spinach-injested Popeye-esque forearm to wield it.
     
    #26
  27. radical tourist

    radical tourist Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    211
    Amazing. He either has no emotion or he's too emotional, according to you guys. Because he keeps his emotions in check to win and because his coach just died. Good grief, folks. Underappreciated cause he didn't spend time being self-important. One dimensional game? You didn't see him serve and volley in his prime. You want multi-dimensional entertaining tennis? Watch some of the #40 and lower women's doubles. For entertainment, it beats the men's and women's singles game these days. Everyone since Sampras has been annointed here at one time or another as the next hot thing - Hewitt, Safin, Federer, Kuertin. They have yet to prove it. At least two of them have no chance of ever proving it. To pile up the record Sampras amassed over the years, stay healthy, win even though everyone was gunning for him? To conclude that his opponents were bad because he won so much? To take one match or one tournament by one current player and say that's proof he is better than Sampras? We're talking Roy-Hobbs-as-The-Natural movie stuff here. It makes a career unimportant. It makes even playing the game irrelevant if you look at one match or one tournament or one season and say 'best ever.' All wonderful fun and fodder for discussion but basically just pffffffffffffftt!
     
    #27
  28. nkhera1

    nkhera1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    338
    Like I said, he must have had one heck of a dimension.
     
    #28
  29. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    905
    Location:
    nor cal
    Sampras is underappreciated because he simply played the GAME. He could have been more popular but he chose to play the game with class and grace, just like his idol, Laver. He was all business on the court, and, on top of his domination to the sport, he dated two beautiful actresses. Sampras acted with class like a true gentleman on and off court. I admire his dedication to the game. The competition was always Laver, the place, Wimbledon. He did not care about the negative opinions about him. He knew he was the best, and he proved it. I believe Sampras being an introvert actually helped him focus on whats important, 14 grand slams.

    At times Sampras might have looked lazy or boring, but hey, if you've dominated the game for so long, you have nothing else to prove. You are a "player". You just let the racquet do the talking. I respect Sampras for his contribution to the court. He is a true champion.
     
    #29
  30. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    and you wonder why I say you know nothing about the game.
     
    #30
  31. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    That's funny because a few months ago you were chastizing people for talking about Federer too much.
     
    #31
  32. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    Give me a break!
     
    #32
  33. sarpmas

    sarpmas Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    I can understand why people do not appreciate Sampras because of his TENNIS, be it style, strokes whatever, but to underappreciate him because of how he looked and how he lacked emotion?! I think it is really ridiculous. I believed a truly knowledgeable tennis fan will not discredit Sampras this way. I supposed Borg or Lendl should also be underappreciated?
     
    #33
  34. 35ft6

    35ft6 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    6,557
    Lendl is grossly underappreciated.

    Without hesitation, I put Sampras in the top 3 of all time. But for me there's a huge ass asterik next to his claim of GOAT because of 7 Wimbledons, 0 French Opens. To me, that's important. Greatest fast court player of all time? Undoubtably.

    On his best day and on Federer's best day, who would win? I would say Federer's uncanny ability to read big serves would neutralize Sampras' biggest weapon, so Roger wins 4 out of 5 times even on grass.

    As far as his on court personality, can he be faulted? Other athletes do, so why not him? I give credit people for being true for being himself, but that's not really a virtue in and of itself. If a person is an butthole, I would give him more credit for trying to develop a new "himself." Sampras said he let his racket do the talking but I personally think he owed the sport more than that, as all athletes do. His personality sucked! He was a baby. He's like the guy who pouts and refuses to dance with his wife because he feels uncomfortable doing it. I give way more credit to the person who compromises and is willing to step outside of his comfort zone for the greater good. It was immature of him to crawl ever deeper into his shell as people criticized him for being inaccessible. That's how a child acts. At some point, you have to grow up and realize that just because it comes naturally to you, and it's comfortable, it doesn't mean it's good. But this is only why I was never crazy about him as a person. As far as his tennis goes, I will be equally critical of Federer if he wins 14 or 15 Slams, but none on clay.
     
    #34
  35. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    No, I'm not giving you or anyone else one in this particular instance, re the specific issue I've mentioned above.

    I'm off to Carson, but trust me, I won't give you one from there either.

    The hotel has free wireless internet.
     
    #35
  36. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Got that wrong. I think it was you who said I was talking about Nadal too much.

    In any event, I never said folks were talking too much about Fed. I said they were canonizing him too much. There is a difference.

    And my comments then are consistent with my comments above.

    Pete will be canonized before Rogi, IMO, in terms of tennis, of course.
     
    #36
  37. Young Pete

    Young Pete Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    905
    Location:
    nor cal
    Why do u think Sampras owes more to the game? He gave his blood sweat and tears to dominate the sport while keeping a low profile. I personally think that is an excellent characteristic in an athlete..low key... If a person is dominating the sport, why change? Goes to show some fans demand MORE from a player than just playing the game.
     
    #37
  38. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    See below for my messsage, as I did a double post my mistake. Sorry.
     
    #38
  39. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    If you are going to quote me for my lack of knowledge, please post my whole quote, and not just the bit that you think supports your point.

    After that particular quote I said:

    The last paragraph was why I posted in this thread to begin with. I actually thought this would be a non-controversial sort of thread, at least with respect to me.

    Guess not.

    The only real issue I have though is what I said above. Those insults are beyond the pale, IMO, and they weren't directed at me.

    As for the ones against me. No worries.

    I'll deal with them from Carson, if I have time to check in.

    Go USA!!!!!!
     
    #39
  40. 35ft6

    35ft6 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    6,557
    First off, in now way do I equate Sampras' "transgressions" to that of real problems/evils in the world.
    I think he could have done more in the same way that I think it wouldn't kill an actor or rock star to stop and take a picture or sign an autograph for a fan. Sure, they don't have to. I understand they're only human and they need a private life, too, and they don't want to be bothered all the time. Still, the fans are the reason why Sampras made tens of millions of dollars. Without fans, there is no ATP. One can argue that playing excellent tennis is enough, but dammit I love tennis and I don't think it gets enough respect and coverage in the USA. A part of me will never forgive Sampras for not doing more to make tennis popular in the USA.

    You can certainly argue that that's the way Sampras was, that he couldn't change... you could also say that maybe that's why he was so successful, because he didn't divert any precious energy to being a good ambassador for the sport... but to me there's something distasteful, arrogant about an actor, musician, or sportsman (sports is entertainment... improvised theater...) not showing proper gratitude to the fans who make their privileged existence possible.

    And, again, I can't help but feel ESPN and the networks would provide better tennis coverage if Sampras had tried harder to project a likable personality. Simply playing good tennis is preaching to the choir. A tennis fan will fully comprehend and appreciate Sampras' game. But to attract new fans, in order to convert the non-believer, you need personality. Sports is character driven, just like a decent movie. Great personalities transcend technique. e.g. I'm not going to watch the Tour de France to watch a guy pedal, but I WILL tune in to see Lance Armstrong.
    To increase the popularity and help insure the future relevance, survival of the sport he claims to care about.
    In general, I probably demand more from people period. With great power comes great responsibility as a dead uncle once said. I think Sampras dropped the ball. But I think he's going to realize how much tennis has given him and will someday try to make up for all the years he took the fans and game for granted. Like a father who had to be maniacally driven in order to become CEO, who suddenly realizes one day that he's been neglecting his wife and kids, the very people who supported him as he sprinted towards success.

    Whatever. This ain't no big thing at all. I think Sampras is a bit of a boor.
     
    #40
  41. laurie

    laurie Guest

    Davey, somehow I would expect you to misread my post and make fabricated speculations. That doesn't phase me though. If you read some of the posts on this thread you will see that people have all sorts of opinions on Sampras, some favourable and some not very favourable at all. However, his achievements are there for all to see.

    So what does this statement "Although I would expect Laurie to see how not taking that point of view translates into that." got to do with other poeple's opinions or likes and dislikes. Am I speaking for everyone on the message borad? Of course not. Am I allowed to have an opinion? Of course. Do you have a problem with that? I hope not.
     
    #41
  42. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    talk about asterisks..i think there shoud be an asterisk next to the French that sez ----> "Borderline Major" it's often won by people who never win much again or only those who can win on the slowest of red clay courts and not even on the Har-Tru, not that there are mens Har-tru events much anynore, and clay isnt even that relevant of a surface on the mens tour these days. The NASDAQ is more of a majour than the French IMO. I think they should switch that to HarTru and declare it a Major replacing the French Open not that it would happen. all the other surfaces have become more winnable by non specialists especially Wimbledon where the higher bounding truer bouncing ball can allow even a Nalbandian to win..my .o2
     
    #42
  43. Kobble

    Kobble Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,365
    Sampras is thought to be underappreciated because he was selfish, and appeared it. You don't get a following contributing to yourself all the time. Pete seemed to be all about himself, and the hell with everyone else. Federer is much of the same. On the other hand, guys like Safin and Muster lend themselves to you on the court. It seems like it would be a lot more fun to be them, than a Sampras or Federer.
     
    #43
  44. Camilio Pascual

    Camilio Pascual Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,825
    Hmmmm. I wonder how many points are at stake on clay as opposed to grass on the ATP tour? I also wonder where all those Spaniards and Argentinians are playing tennis. If it is not on clay, then clay must be a great surface to train on for playing on hard courts.
     
    #44
  45. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    my point Camilio is look who wins the French, then look who wins the other Majors. as far as Sampras being incomplete, other immortals and legends in tennis <and golf> are missing a Majour....that desnt make them less great and it seems the French is becoming less impt these days for a number of reasons anyway....so someone with all 4 majors and a total of 4 majors would be considered better than Samps? how does this work? The French is def the low tourney on the totem pole amongst the majours by most peoples perception, and is won by specialty type players in many cases.
     
    #45
  46. troytennisbum

    troytennisbum Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    353
    Now that is an interesting question mentioned above....who would win on their best day...Sampras or Federer ?????

    I would say Federer would....most of the time.
     
    #46
  47. TS Ramesh

    TS Ramesh Guest

    I think NoBadMojo has a point there, at least to the extent that Roland Garros has historically had a bigger percentage of one-slam wonders who were basically clay court specialists pretty much incapable of winning anything else. Wimbledon, on the other hand, despite being part of an extremely short grass court season, has predominantly had champions who won Slams on other surfaces besides grass. In the last 30 years, Wimbledon has had 4 one-trick ponies (Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Stich and Cash), while Roland Garros has had almost 3 times as many (Gaudio, Ferrero, Costa, Kuerten, Moya, Muster, Bruguera, Gomes, Chang, Noah, Panatta). And before somebody beats up on me about Kuerten and Bruguera, my definition of "one-trick pony" is somebody who never won a slam on any other surface.
    --Ramesh
     
    #47
  48. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    When did I say that Susan?
     
    #48
  49. joehight

    joehight New User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
    Messages:
    88
    Can anyone help me out? What is the little triangle that appears in so many posts? When you put your cursor on it, you get the message "report bad post" or something to that effect. Has the post been reported as "bad" to TW, or has the author of the post making a judgement about the post, and if so where are they getting access to the sybol?
     
    #49
  50. drexeler

    drexeler Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    112
    But Federer IS being appreciated. It is hard to think of many players that have generated that much excitement in the tennis world - commentators, writers, former players (some real old-timers), current players and fans. They speak of his game in glowing terms (compare it to art and poetry) and make comments like they would pay to watch him practice.

    On the other hand, Pete has been underappreciated relative to his achievements. Part of it, I think is his being a contemporary of the charismatic, fan-favorite Agassi who took away the limelight from Pete. Another reason is the unfair characterization of him as a serve-dependant player, whereas in reality, he had all the complete all-round skills including fleet (underrated) movement and classical strokes. This unfair assumption was behind the grumblings you would hear, esp. after his Wim duels with Goran, that men's tennis has been taken over by power and killed the artistry. (I believe these grumblings would have grown even louder if somebody like Roddick, J. Johansson or even Safin were dominating currently instead of Federer.)

    On another note, everybody criticizes players like Sampras for lack of charisma but fan favorites like Tiger Woods, Joe Montana were just as, if not more, wooden.
     
    #50

Share This Page