Better athlete: Federer or Sampras

[World Beater]

Originally Posted by fed_rulz

that explains why Sampras is a superior player to Federer and has stats backing him up.

Forget that.

Shakes categories dont even make sense.

It should be:

Baseline Game
Net Game

NOT

Baseline game
S/V

S/V is a subset of having a great net-game. You can't S/V on a return game.

I agree that Pete had a great S/V Game. Maybe the greatest from a historical POV.

But his net game, nope...

[tennis_pro]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Yea horribly overrated.. I mean so many guys could do this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emPy439hmCQ

Can't you read? He said that it was unnecessary for Sampras to do a slam dunk each time, not that Sampras can't smash well.

Both Federer and Roddick have better overheads than Sampras, they rarely miss one while Sampras could attempt a slam dunk in a crucial moment and fail at times.

[smoledman]

Roddick was a better athlete then Sampras. Remember he was called "Sampras on Steroids'. I cringe when I remember that.

[dangalak]

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

Can't you read? He said that it was unnecessary for Sampras to do a slam dunk each time, not that Sampras can't smash well.

Both Federer and Roddick have better overheads than Sampras, they rarely miss one while Sampras could attempt a slam dunk in a crucial moment and fail at times.

Good God in heaven......

Sampras killed lobs that others would put away awkwardly. And yes, without jumping.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...zR8BYaHc#t=80s Would Roddick ever be able to backpedal this efficiently?

[tennis_pro]

Originally Posted by dangalak

Good God in heaven......

Sampras killed lobs that others would put away awkwardly. And yes, without jumping.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...zR8BYaHc#t=80s Would Roddick ever be able to backpedal this efficiently?

Roddick made the overhead look like a routine shot, while Sampras had to introduce needless acrobatics to get more credit. Anyway, I'm not saying that Sampras had a weak smash, not by any means, he had an excellent overhead, just think that Roddick and Federer have better.

Besides, Sampras didn't have to backpedal much to get to that lob, the ball would land midcourt if he let it bounce.

[shakes1975]

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

Roddick made the overhead look like a routine shot, while Sampras had to introduce needless acrobatics to get more credit. Anyway, I'm not saying that Sampras had a weak smash, not by any means, he had an excellent overhead, just think that Roddick and Federer have better.

Besides, Sampras didn't have to backpedal much to get to that lob, the ball would land midcourt if he let it bounce.

While most pros rarely miss overheads, Sampras' vertical leap was definitely a plus because it meant that the lob had to be much "higher" (and, therefore, nearly perfect) to clear his "wing span". Backpedalling also works fine, but it robs the smash of power and forces you to rely on placement instead and there is a chance that the opponent can get it back if he guesses right.

[shakes1975]

Originally Posted by World Beater

Forget that.

Shakes categories dont even make sense.

It should be:

Baseline Game
Net Game

NOT

Baseline game
S/V

S/V is a subset of having a great net-game. You can't S/V on a return game.

I agree that Pete had a great S/V Game. Maybe the greatest from a historical POV.

But his net game, nope...

Sampras had a great net-game. I wouldn't say he was the greatest, but he is right up there.

[TheFifthSet]

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

fastest first serve speed of Roger Federer: 135 mph 2006 AO against Haas.
fastest first serve speed of Andy Roddick: 155 mph
2004 Davis Cup against Volchkov
fastest first serve speed of Pete Sampras: 135 mph 1998 US Open 4th round against Safin
f. 2nd serve speed of Federer: 126 mph 2004 Halle against Haas
f. 2nd serve of Roddick: 133 mph 2004 Wimby final against Fed
f. 2nd serve of Sampras: 127 mph 2001 U.S Open against Agassi
average fist serve speed Fed: 114-121 mph
Roddick: 122-132 mph, Sampras: 114-123 mph
average second serve speed Fed: 90-105 mph
Roddick: 100-110 mph, Sampras: 90-115 mph
I take it back about that weak serve comments form me in the past. Federer does have a real fast and potent serve.

So you claiming that Sampras's serve had an additional 15 mph on it compared to Sampras is an utter lie as Sampras' FASTEST EVER RECORDED SPEED clocked at 135, which is nothing faster than Federer's fastest ever 1st serve.

Those stats which I found only prove that Sampras had a consistently better 2nd serve than Federer (not even by much) which I agree with (and always has), even considering that the surfaces were way faster in the Sampras era.

Also, for such a Federer fan you seem to favor Sampras quite heavily. Luckily, reality is on Federer's side.

To be fair, the radar guns they used back then (up til the late 90's) tracked the speed of the ball as it crossed the net, which resulted in slower speeds. Now they track the speed when the ball hits the court, part of the reason why guys are serving "faster" now. In the 2001 Wimby match between Sampras and Fed, Sampras's first serve averaged 125 and his second serve 111. For Fed it was 114 and 98. That's a big discrepancy. Near the end of Pete's career (using the same guns they use today) Pete regularly averaged 121-122 on his first serve per match.

Fed, in all the years of looked at post-match stats (which is pretty much every match) I've never seen him average higher than 120 over the course of a whole match. He tops out around 117-119, and is usually at 115-116. Sampras topped out at 125-126 and usually was at 121-124. So yes, Sampras was definitely a faster server.

As far as the speed issue goes though, I agree with edberg505. It's pretty negligible. Federer from 2004-2006 was a speed demon. He's lost a step, sure, but the difference isn't massive between Federer and Sampras IMO. Although I agree that Pete had the higher vertical leap. In the other aspects Fed mostly has him beat -- balance, coordination, stamina, etc.

[TheFifthSet]

Originally Posted by TMF

Fed was young back then. Give Fed enough years to develop a solid s/v like Pete did you never know, especially on fast courts in the 90s.

Agassi is better than Pete from the baseline. Just because Federer is better than Agassi from the baseline doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to beat Agassi using s/v(given enough training + reached his prime). You're just speculating.

Let's be real here. Federer is an infinitely better at the service line, and better at the net, but he's not better at the baseline. Agassi is arguably the greatest from the baseline of all time (or up there).

[roberttennis54]

Originally Posted by TheFifthSet

Let's be real here. Federer is an infinitely better at the service line, and better at the net, but he's not better at the baseline. Agassi is arguably the greatest from the baseline of all time (or up there).

Disagree with that. Federer is better from the baseline than Agassi on every surface. Federer is faster, has more power, better passing shots, better forehand and a better slice. Agassi has a better and more steady backhand.

EDIT
Back on topic it's hard to vote.

Sampras was stronger and could jump higher. As I said before speed is hard to choose, but probably edge to Federer. Federer is fitter too and more agile. If they had to compete in a Decatholon, my money would be on Sampras.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by TheFifthSet

Let's be real here. Federer is an infinitely better at the service line, and better at the net, but he's not better at the baseline. Agassi is arguably the greatest from the baseline of all time (or up there).

They played a lot on hc and I say that's a neutral surface. I think Fed is better because he's a superior mover behind the baseline, cover the court better(better defense), his superior fh make up for his disadvantage bh.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by roberttennis54

Disagree with that. Federer is better from the baseline than Agassi on every surface. Federer is faster, has more power, better passing shots, better forehand and a better slice. Agassi has a better and more steady backhand.

Exactly. If Agassi had Fed's calibre from the baseline he would have achieved more.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by TMF

Exactly. If Agassi had Fed's calibre from the baseline he would have achieved more.

Agassi had as good a sense and the shots. Just not the movement.

[TheFifthSet]

Originally Posted by roberttennis54

Disagree with that. Federer is better from the baseline than Agassi on every surface. Federer is faster, has more power, better passing shots, better forehand and a better slice. Agassi has a better and more steady backhand.

I think it seems that way because Federer is a much better all-around player. But if we judge "who was better at the baseline" by "who would win more points only from the baseline", then I think it has to go to Agassi IMO. His steadiness, lack of errors and punishing groundstrokes were amazing. Federer has more variety but if it was entirely a baseline war -- no drop shots allowed, no coming to the net, and their serves were equal (Federers serve is hugely superior, of course) -- Agassi would have the advantage I would say.

Federer is undeniably the better "baseliner" (in that he is primarily a baseliner just like Agassi, and is a better player) but "at the baseline" I think it's Andre. But to each their own. Two of my favourites of all time...I just wish prime Fed and prime Agassi would have squared off. Fed would have the advantage but I think they would have had some amazing matches. Their 2004 US Open match was sublime for the first three sets, but unfortunately the wind derailed it and the last 2 weren't quite as good.


PS I gotta disagree with the passing shots one a lot, to me Agassi was far more consistent on the pass.

[TheFifthSet]

Originally Posted by TMF

Exactly. If Agassi had Fed's calibre from the baseline he would have achieved more.

Well....it could be because Federers serve is 10 times better, his net game is 10 times better, he's mentally stronger and is a much better mover. Just because Federer is a better tennis player doesn't have to mean he's better at everything.

[World Beater]

Originally Posted by shakes1975

Sampras had a great net-game. I wouldn't say he was the greatest, but he is right up there.

debatable.

Sampras was the greatest s/v player i saw. mainly the combo of his great serve and good volleys.

but there are quite a few players i hold in higher esteem than pete at net.

rafter, edberg, mcenroe, henman, laver, stich all had better volleys, anticipation at net.

sampras is slightly better than becker.

pete was much more well rounded skillswise than all those players mentioned except perhaps stich. sampras was better in the areas of athleticism and much more mentally determined than stich.

[World Beater]

Originally Posted by TheFifthSet

I think it seems that way because Federer is a much better all-around player. But if we judge "who was better at the baseline" by "who would win more points only from the baseline", then I think it has to go to Agassi IMO. His steadiness, lack of errors and punishing groundstrokes were amazing. Federer has more variety but if it was entirely a baseline war -- no drop shots allowed, no coming to the net, and their serves were equal (Federers serve is hugely superior, of course) -- Agassi would have the advantage I would say.

Federer is undeniably the better "baseliner" (in that he is primarily a baseliner just like Agassi, and is a better player) but "at the baseline" I think it's Andre. But to each their own. Two of my favourites of all time...I just wish prime Fed and prime Agassi would have squared off. Fed would have the advantage but I think they would have had some amazing matches. Their 2004 US Open match was sublime for the first three sets, but unfortunately the wind derailed it and the last 2 weren't quite as good.

on hardcourts, you could say andre was more steadier than federer. But i think federer's fh makes up for the difference in the bhs. Federer also has the slice which can hurt andre agassi. But i can understand that some would favor andre on the baseline strictly in terms of fh/bh with no footwork or movement in consideration.

On clay though, i would give the decisive edge to federer, and this is because fed's shots are weightier due to the spin he imparts on the ball.

On grass its a similar story except that federer covers up his bh inconsistency better with his slice which stays lower. The ball also stays in his strike zone longer on grass - fed likes the ball from knee to hip height. Andre like the ball higher especially on the backhand.

[NadalAgassi]

I love Agassi but his movement was not good enough for him to be the best ever from the baseline. It is true he would have won more than he did if he were truly the best baseliner ever. Nadal has a weaker serve than Agassi, nowhere near the return, probably volleys better but it is such an almost non factor for both players that it is moot, and has already surpassed Agassi's career by a good margin. So obviously Nadal's game is more effective overall from the baseline than Agassi was in their overall careers as Nadal has hardly anything else which contributed to his success other than his fitness and strong mind, vs Agassi who also had a historic GOAT service return. That said Nadal probably isnt even the best or most effective baseliner ever, so Agassi certainly is not.

Did Agassi have the best ever forehand and backhand combination in history though? Perhaps yes. So one could say he is arguably the greatest groundstroker in history. That is very different from the best baseliner, and there is alot more components to baseline play than just the quality of ones groundstrokes.

Comparing Federer to Agassi, Federer's forehand is better, Agassi's backhand is better by a bigger margin than the forehand, so overall just groundstrokes Agassi wins I would say, but then Federer's movement is better by an even bigger margin than the backhand difference, so now going into overall baseline play Federer is already clearly ahead now, and that is before even considering overall defense (clearly Federer again), point construction (very close), court positioning (very close, maybe Agassi by a bit), variety (clearly Federer).

[above bored]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Yea horribly overrated.. I mean so many guys could do this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emPy439hmCQ

I was never impressed with Sampras' slam dunk smashes. I thought they were ugly and unnecessarily theatrical. Better to just put the ball away without making a song and dance about it.

[RF20Lennon]

This thread will survive the apocalypse