Originally Posted by 90's Clay
How that exactly? To beat a 30 year old Sampras (7-5 in the 5th) who was done on grass and would retire the year after?.
Not to mention Pete won ZERO titles in 2001 and had a 35-16 record. Which was freakin horrid for his standards. One match isn't much of a sample size.. Especially when one guy was playing above his years, and the other guy's career was winding down
I guess that's just another reason why Fed>>>>Sampras, Fed would never be owned on a consistent basis by noobs like Sampras was in his later years.
"By the Nalbandian logic, I could beat Federer when I'm "in form". Nalbandian is only a threat to linesmen." - pvaudio