Originally Posted by Agassifan
Pete ain't worth bashing anymore. Post FO 2009, that is. He isn't irrelevant by any means, but comparing him to Roger when Roger has taken pretty much every one of his records is a bit silly.
Well by that reasoning let's all go home. Bar Laver's double grand slam, Fed's achievements over all shadow everyone else. So why single out Pete? Why not single out Lendl, or Borg, or McEnroe? Or anyone else?
I think I know why. The one player Fed fans would not want to see their player play in a prime v prime match is Sampras. Wimbledon is the biggest show on earth, and against Sampras in his prime in the biggest match of the biggest show on earth, it could get very ugly for Fed.
And that's just the fans. What about Fed himself? He can accept the *** reamings he copped against Nadal at the FO, but facing PISTOL Pete on W Centre Court might just be enough to make the great Swiss cry...and that's before a ball has even been bounced. Note, prime Sampras, you know, 7 titles in 8 years...that Sampras, not well-past-it-Sampras.