How could someone call Sampras the Goat

[tennisbuck]

It doesn't make sense? what has he done that federer hasn't? If someone argues that Fed isn't the GOAT and Laver is i have no problem with that. But how could it be Pete?

[90's Clay]

Beat his main rival more times then not. ROFLMAO

Something your boy couldn't do

[sureshs]

LOL that was a good one. A GOAT needs to have a winning H2H against his main rival

[bluescreen]

This is really beating a dead horse, but here goes.

Most of the Sampras argument stems from his h2h against his rivals and the notion that Sampras' era of players was "better" than today's era. The idea is that the players Sampras often had to beat were slam winners and "A list" players, while most of the players Federer has had to go through are somehow "lesser" players except for Nadal.

[90's Clay]

Originally Posted by sureshs

LOL that was a good one. A GOAT needs to have a winning H2H against his main rival

A hands down GOAT does.. Yes. Thus why Fed is only in the GOAT "discussion" not given the hands down label.

How can you be a hands down GOAT when your rival has owned your arseee your entire career?

[pennc94]

When you cannot advance far enough in the draw of an event taking place on a surface (clay) that better suits your main rivals, it certainly makes your H2H look nicer.

[tennisaddict]

Originally Posted by pennc94

When you cannot advance far enough in the draw of an event taking place on a surface (clay) that better suits your main rivals, it certainly makes your H2H look nicer.

This needs to be the signature of all Sampra fans.

[Polaris]

The TW scale of GOATS (in descending order of GOATness)

[Based on the collected wisdom of TW armchair critics]

1. Nadal
2. the GOAT = undisputed GOAT = hands down GOAT
3. Open Era GOAT
4. in-discussion GOAT
5. probable GOAT = GOAT candidate
6. surface GOAT
7. transition GOAT
8. slow-grass GOAT
9. fast-grass GOAT
10. joke grass GOAT
11. HC GOAT
12. clay GOAT (generally = red clay GOAT)
13. blue clay GOAT
14. Plexicushion GOAT
15. one-slam-wonder GOAT
16. slamless GOAT
17. not GOAT
18. joke GOAT
19. Federer

[NatF]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

A hands down GOAT does.. Yes. Thus why Fed is only in the GOAT "discussion" not given the hands down label.

How can you be a hands down GOAT when your rival has owned your arseee your entire career?

Owned on clay, Federer leads off it; go back into your cave troll. The whole board is wise to your crap.

[JRAJ1988]

Surely the competitor with the most slams is the GOAT? Though Tomas Johansson won the AO in 2002 did that make him better than Nalbandian?

[NatF]

Originally Posted by JRAJ1988

Surely the competitor with the most slams is the GOAT? Though Tomas Johansson won the AO in 2002 did that make him better than Nalbandian?

Better career maybe but not greater. Federer isn't a one slam wonder though and he has plethora of other records. Having said that Sampras deserves to spoken of when talking about medium-fast surfaces. I don't think Sampras should be forgotten, but there's no question Federer is greater.

[Agassifan]

Originally Posted by Polaris

The TW scale of GOATS (in descending order of GOATness)

Except when there is a poll, 90% of posters pick Federer. Just a couple of insecure people start all these threads.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

A hands down GOAT does.. Yes. Thus why Fed is only in the GOAT "discussion" not given the hands down label.

How can you be a hands down GOAT when your rival has owned your arseee your entire career?

Exactly. Federer will always have that stigma around his career, and it is why he will never be given the title of undisputed GOAT as much as his fanboys are desperate to push that onto him.

As for the ****s who bring out the tired old clay court excuse Federer is 0-5 vs Nadal in slams on clay, 2-3 on slams off clay (meaning they played as many slams off clay as on, and Federer trails even off clay in slams, lol), 2-8 in slams overall, and was 27 or younger for all but 2 of those 10 meetings. Federer is Nadal's beetch plain and simple. It doesnt make Nadal GOAT, but it does bring into heavy question whether Federer is. None of Laver, Gonzales, Sampras, Tilden, even Rosewall were "owned" by anyone. They were too good for that (PS- Rosewall has quite respectable head to heads vs both Gonzales and Laver so he wasnt owned).

[President]

I don't understand it myself, great player yes but there's no way anyone can call Petros the GOAT. Rod Laver, Pancho Gonzales, even Bjorn Borg have respectable reasons to call them the GOAT. Pete Sampras was just like Roger Federer 0.5, Fed is better in almost every way and takes Petros out of the GOAT discussion.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by President

Fed is better in almost every way

So Federer has a better first and second serve, better volleys, better overhead, greater vertical leap, a better running forehand? Hardly, Federer's game isnt even that similar to Sampras, but there are many things Sampras does better than Federer (and things Federer does better than Sampras too of course).

[President]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

So Federer has a better first and second serve, better volleys, better overhead, greater vertical leap, a better running forehand? Hardly, Federer's game isnt even that similar to Sampras, but there are many things Sampras does better than Federer (and things Federer does better than Sampras too of course).

I was talking about their career, although I think as a player Federer is much more well rounded as well and a better player at his best.

[Sid_Vicious]

Because Sampras was one of the greatest tennis players of all time and tennis historians consider more than just raw stats when they debate about who the GOAT is, which makes the whole GOAT issue subjective. Bud Collins contends that even though Federer broke all the records, Sampras's peak form was greater than Federer's.

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Exactly. Federer will always have that stigma around his career, and it is why he will never be given the title of undisputed GOAT as much as his fanboys are desperate to push that onto him.

As for the ****s who bring out the tired old clay court excuse Federer is 0-5 vs Nadal in slams on clay, 2-3 on slams off clay (meaning they played as many slams off clay as on, and Federer trails even off clay in slams, lol), 2-8 in slams overall, and was 27 or younger for all but 2 of those 10 meetings. Federer is Nadal's beetch plain and simple. It doesnt make Nadal GOAT, but it does bring into heavy question whether Federer is. None of Laver, Gonzales, Sampras, Tilden, even Rosewall were "owned" by anyone. They were too good for that (PS- Rosewall has quite respectable head to heads vs both Gonzales and Laver so he wasnt owned).

Everyone has their faults. Despite the head-to-head with Nadal, Federer has destroyed pretty much every other record Sampras held, except for the six year-end no. 1 finishes. Other than that, Federer is superior in every single way. More slams, more Masters, more WTFs, more tournaments, more weeks at number one, more dominance, better longevity, etc. I agree that Federer is not the GOAT, but the argument for Sampras has fallen by the wayside, and that's what this thread is about.

[Steve0904]

Nobody can be given a hands down GOAT label anyway. Not Federer, not Sampras, not Nadal, not Laver, etc... Otherwise you'd have a "perfect" player, but I think if you did a worldwide poll you'd find that the consensus (at least for now) is Federer, if of course you believe in that kind of thing (and I could see why someone wouldn't.) In essence, Federer is tops or tied in the most important categories, so he is the closest to "perfect."

In regards to the topic, I don't know how it can be Sampras. IMO it can't ever be Sampras now, but that's because Federer broke pretty much every record he had, and he played in an era too similar to Federer's when compared to say the difference between Federer and Laver's era, which is why some people understandably don't believe in the GOAT concept. It's also why everybody that doesn't believe Federer is the GOAT says it's Laver, because it can't be Sampras in most people's eyes, thanks to Federer, and the conditions were so different that it's impossible to compare, so they stick to their opinion and I stick to mine. Both are fine, and Sampras was a great player in his own right which some people don't give due credit to IMHO which is really too bad. And everybody knows why that is. All comes back to Federer having a better list of accomplishments again in most people's eyes.

[Steve0904]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Beat his main rival more times then not. ROFLMAO

Something your boy couldn't do

Man, you must spend a lot of time on the floor. How do you find the time to post?