Originally Posted by hoodjem
In another thread on here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=298502
opined that Pete Sampras would have been a "dazzling" player, even without his serve and his volleying.
I do regard Sampras as a great player. But I happen to believe that his three best weapons on which he built his game were:
1) his serve
2) his volleying
3) his forehand
suggests to truly measure Sampras's greatness, we should erase the first two of these. That leaves Sampras with his big forehand and his backhand, and hypothetically (because we have removed his serve and volleying), we must relegate him to the backcourt with a mediocre serve.
So how good would Sampras have been--in your opinion--as a purely backcourt player with a really good forehand?
Was the poster samprasvsfederer123 referring to taking away Sampras's serve and his volley, or his serve-and-volley?
I think it would make quite a difference in this discussion if we allow Sampras to retain all his strokes but keep him from using the serve-and-volley strategy.