Originally Posted by kragster
Good to see some Fed fans with an objective view on Sampras. There's no doubt Fed has exceeded Sampras's accomplishments but he was a great player nonetheless, at least top 5 all time. Some *******s make it look like Sampras would be schooled by Nalbandian!
Sampras is one of the greatest players ever to grace a tennis court, and the sport is better off having had him be a part of it. He obviously had an amazing serve, wonderful running forehand, unbelievably explosive athleticism, and penetrating, near perfect volleys. His slam dunk will probably always be remembered.
Having said that, I just think Federer's game is a class above Pete's. I think he does everything (except for serving) better. I think the stats on how incredibly dominant he was in his prime on all surfaces CLEARLY show this, and how he continues to be a major contender on all surfaces despite nearing 31 just adds credibility to my claim. Pete based his whole legacy, his whole greatness around the number of slams won, and Roger won more in half the time. Nostalgic Sampras fans need to move forward and accept that he is not the best to play this game, but that doesn't mean he isn't in the top top tier.
Tennis progresses and moves forward. The game evolves, and players get better and better and better. In 20 years from now, Nadal and Djokovic and Federer's groundstrokes will probably look slow (and that is a pretty scary thing to imagine). What will make Federer stand out is his unique God given talent, and how much FUN he made it to watch this sport. In many ways, Roger is a combination of Borg, Agassi, and Sampras in one. He surpasses the dominance of Sampras, changed the game more than Borg, and is more beloved than Agassi.