Originally Posted by mistik
I really think that Roger today and before him Agassi is a proof that you can still play some great tennis and be competitive as you get older.I know that Sampras have some early defeats in majors as he gets older but there was still some great tennis left in him after he won his last slam in 2002 Us Open.Sampras could still play some great tennis in 2003 and he might steal some slams against Agassi in AO or more likely 03 Us Open against Roddick. I think on his good day he would still be a more threat to Fed in Wimbledon than the likes of Roddick or Philipossis.I think Roger knows that he is going to lose more than he wins against the likes Nadal,Djokovic and Murray but he still competitive and he can still win like he did in last years Wimbledon, after having not win a slam since his 2010 AO.In a way that is good to see Federer not doing the same mistake like Pete done after he won 2002 Us open.Even at some point someone break his record he wont have any regrets that ı could have done a little bit more,because he is giving himself every possible chance before saying goodby.
I strongly disagree with you. Sampras lost to George Bastl at Wimbledon and had not won a tournament all year. His confidence was at an all time low going into the US Open. The magic returned over the course of the 2 weeks. Sampras beat top players like Rusedski, Haas, Roddick and of course his greatest rival, Agassi in the finals to win. He was able to rise to the occasion 1 more time. Sampras could not have scripted a better ending to his career.