View Single Post
Old 09-29-2012, 12:03 PM   #40
shakes1975
Semi-Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fed_rulz View Post
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.
Handling big servers is not a common denominator where you can directly draw analogies between players. Because what makes a hell of a difference is how the big server backs up his big serve. Fed's "superior" returns have done squat against Nadal who has one of the weaker serves among top champions. This is because Nadal backs up his serve with a tremendous game.

The entire premise of my argument is that a younger, faster & fitter, "hungrier" Sampras would've backed up his 2nd serve better than he did in this match. He would've been able to close in to the net a little faster, putting himself in a position to hit better volleys.

Also, Fed's not a superior returner to Agassi against big servers. He gets back more returns, which is useful when the server doesn't have great volleys or a great groundgame (see Roddick, Ivanisevic, Krajicek) to back up his serve.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fed_rulz View Post
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.
At that stage of Fed's career - 2010 - Fed lost to Berdych in the Wim QF. By your token, I think we can agree that Fed's famed game did not pass the test against an arguably superior player.
shakes1975 is offline   Reply With Quote