Originally Posted by shakes1975
+1. To me, the main difference in this match was regarding the fact that Sampras was a step slower in closing to the net. At 30 yrs and for a S/V'er that makes a significant difference in how well you can hit that 1st volley. He had a great serving day that kind of made it that close, but if he had been younger, his 2nd serve performance would've been better.
Also, they were in different places mentally. One was the Open Era GOAT" at the time, satisfied at having achieved all that he thought possible, was married, lost that edge from his hunger/desire for the game, while the other was a up-and-coming youngster, keen to make a mark, charged up at the prospect of upsetting the "GOAT", closer to his athletic peak.
you seem to try very hard to fight evidence that maybe
Federer would've handled Pete's serve easier than all of Pete's contemporaries did? Is that why you come up with this load of cr@p ? Federer has always been good at handling big servers -- go watch his matches against Ivanisevic and Krajicek around the time of the Pete match.
Sampras would go on to play possibly the best match of his career a few weeks later at the USO, and reached the final as well, so most of the "reasons" you post for Sampras' loss sound like butt-hurt excuses.
Face it, Pete's famed serve did not pass the test against an arguably superior returner.