Originally Posted by 90's Clay
I agree.. When people say Fed is more "skilled" all around I question that. Fed is more skilled in certain aspects. But "overall" skill his very highly debatable considering Pete was known to demolish guys from both the net and the baseline.
I don't think people realize how skilled you have to be to do that.
1st and 2nd serve- Sampras by a mile
FH- Fed was better standing still hitting the inside-out FH, Pete was better on the run with his FH and many can argue its just as much of a bullet is as Fed's is
BH- Neither their strong points but both could do damage with it at times. Kind of a moot comparison.
Mental toughness- Pete was certainly more clutch under pressure then Roger. Pete seemed to "welcome" the big points and clutch situations more then Roger who I never felt was ever that comfortable in those situations. At least not as much as Pete was.
Defense-Roger was superior... But Pete was no slouch on the defensive end tracking those balls down for some running FH winner
Athleticism- Pete certainly was more of an athlete
Stamina- Roger due to Pete's blood disorder which caused him to fatigue faster then other guys
Net Play- Pete by a mile
Transition to the net- Again Pete by a mile
Speed-Sampras was faster
Fed really only has Pete in a few categories. This place is crazy sometimes.. I swear some people didn't watch Pete in h is prime here.
Its almost as if people here want to compare Roger at his peak to Pete at the end of his career and not the pete of the early-mid 90s
ITA with all you said, especialy the last sentence. Although I must say Sampras's inside out forehand scared opponents to heck as well, people would be scared to his forehand in his prime and would desperately try to work over his backhand corner, but eventually would have to go to the open court and face that dreaded running forehand. It was tough to know where to go vs prime Sampras from the baseline, except on clay sometimes where just made lazy errors, and not enough mental resilence or patience at times. Sampras's down the line forehand was amazing and IMO better than Federer's, and his inside out forehand was almost as great, only Federer's crosscourt forehand without being on the run (without either Sampras or Federer hitting it on the run, but more from a standstill) is more clearly better I guess. I wont even get into Federer's backhand which is so overrated on this forum it isnt even funny, it isnt bad of course, but it is closer to Sampras's than what people on this forum view it as being which is much superior to Gasquet, Kuerten, Nadal, Murray (who all have a much better backhand than Federer does), basically supposably better than anyone but Nalbandian, Agassi, and Djokovic on Planet TW.
Anyway that all aside this thread is purely about who is the better athlete so even those who feel Federer has a way better and more complete tennis game, Sampras should still come out ahead here. He is no doubt physically stronger, jumps higher by a long ways, is faster, is atleast as agile and flexible. In no way is Federer a better athlete. In a decathalon I would be willing to bet money Sampras comes out ahead easily.