Sampras or Djokovic Forehand

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Sampras had the best forehand of his generation. He destroyed Courier and Agassi in baseline forehand to forehand exchanges throughout their career. In his generation only Becker had a forehand to match his (only 2 years

Total falsehood. Both courier and Agassi dominated Sampras from the baseline, even in fh to fh exchanges.

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by drakulie

Total falsehood. Both courier and Agassi dominated Sampras from the baseline, even in fh to fh exchanges.

No they didn't. In the 1999 Wimbledon final Sampras broke Agassi's serve for fun. Think about this, every baseline rally in the match began with a serve to Sampras's backhand, and Agassi still couldn't hold his serve with baseline rallies. That goes for every Grand slam final they played bar the AO.

And Courier???? How many majors did Sampras knock Courier out of? Courier says himself the key to that match up was Sampras getting im out wide on the backhand then slamming the ball to Courier's forehand - Courier's extreme grip meant he was terrible at hitting the ball late. He'd pop up a short ball and Sampras would slam home a forehand winner. Very like the Blake - Nadal match up come to think of it.

[sportsfan1]

This is a good list. However on the passing shots, while I haven't seen Sampras's (youtbe videos show s&v, some BH DTL passing), isn't Djok better in this area - he seems to know exactly how much spin to apply and how much to go through the stroke, even when he's completely out of position (which is only when most opponents approach these days)?

Originally Posted by Nathaniel_Near

Here is what I would take from either player:

...
Passing Shots - tie
...

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

No they didn't. In the 1999 Wimbledon final

In the 1999 wimbledon final, of rallies that went at leat 4 shots (all of which coincidentally were on AA's serve), Agassi won 57% of those points.

Courier also dominated Sampras from the baseline. For example, the 1995 AO, using the same guielines as above, Courier won 65% of the points from the baseline.

In fact, under this scenario, Sampras had 2 bh winners/27 errors, and 4 fh winners/ 17 errors. Courier had 7 bh winners/15 errors and 15 fh winners/15 errors.

Both above matches in which sampras won.

Like I said, you are dead wrong.


"errors" defined as "didn't get ball back into play whether forced or unforced.

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by drakulie

In the 1999 wimbledon final, of rallies that went at leat 4 shots (all of which coincidentally were on AA's serve), Agassi won 57% of those points.

Courier also dominated Sampras from the baseline. For example, the 1995 AO, using the same guielines as above, Courier won 65% of the points from the baseline.

In fact, under this scenario, Sampras had 2 bh winners/27 errors, and 4 fh winners/ 17 errors. Courier had 7 bh winners/15 errors and 15 fh winners/15 errors.

Like I said, you are dead wrong.


"errors" defined as "didn't get ball back into play whether forced or unforced.

Consider that every SINGLE baseline point was on Agassi's serve and began with a serve to Sampras's backhand and Sampras STILL won JUST under 50%!!!!!!!!! That is insane!

And that's just on Agassi's serve! Imagine if Sampras had served and stayed back??? He'd have won 95% of baseline rallies on his own serve and would have an overall baseline win % of around 80%! He DOMINATED Agassi from the baseline. He broke Agassi to love more than once. Then he did it again in Cincinnati, Los Angelos and the TMC!

[Devilito]

Originally Posted by drakulie

Total falsehood. Both courier and Agassi dominated Sampras from the baseline, even in fh to fh exchanges.

…on slow surfaces only. At Wimbledon or the US Open forget about it. There is a reason Andre and Jim were most successful at the Australian Open. Once Wimbledon, US Open and the indoor season hit, in comparison to Petros, they were better off staying at home. And that includes baseline rallies. Watch Petros dominate both Andre and Jim at the US Open from the baseline. It’s was rather disheartening because I was a big Agassi and Courier fan and found Petros boring to watch (mainly because of his lack of personality). But when I saw Andre or Jim come up against Petros in the US Open draw I knew it was going to be lights out barring a miracle.

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by Devilito

…on slow surfaces only. At Wimbledon or the US Open forget about it.

I suppose you didn't read the above stats (one of them is from Wimbledon). But since you mentioned it, here are the following:

• US Open in 1995, Agassi won 64% of the basleine exchanges,
• US Open in 2001, Agassi won 65%.
• Year end finals 1999, Agassi won 67%
• etc

PS: If you want to be taken seriously, stop calling Sampras "Petros". It sounds stupid.

[roberttennis54]

Originally Posted by Devilito

…on slow surfaces only. At Wimbledon or the US Open forget about it. There is a reason Andre and Jim were most successful at the Australian Open. Once Wimbledon, US Open and the indoor season hit, in comparison to Petros, they were better off staying at home. And that includes baseline rallies. Watch Petros dominate both Andre and Jim at the US Open from the baseline. It’s was rather disheartening because I was a big Agassi and Courier fan and found Petros boring to watch (mainly because of his lack of personality). But when I saw Andre or Jim come up against Petros in the US Open draw I knew it was going to be lights out barring a miracle.

This is partly true. Agassi definitely won most of the baseline points even at the US, but this was because of Pete. All of sudden when it was a big point Pete would concentrate harder, put more effort in and win. Back then I was a big Agassi fan. I used to be annoyed and shocked how Sampras would suddenly even start hitting great backhands on important points. The 95 US Open final probably changed tennis history.

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by drakulie

I suppose you didn't read the above stats (one of them is from Wimbledon). But since you mentioned it, here are the following:

• US Open in 1995, Agassi won 64% of the basleine exchanges,
• US Open in 2001, Agassi won 65%.
• Year end finals 1999, Agassi won 67%
• etc

PS: If you want to be taken seriously, stop calling Sampras "Petros". It sounds stupid.

Every single baseline rally in 2001 began with a serve to Sampras's backhand and Sampras STILL won BARELY under 50%!! Imagine what that % of baseline exchanges would have looked like if Sampras had stayed back????

In 1995 every single baseline exchange began with a second serve from Sampras or a serve from Agassi to SAmpras's backhand! Imagine what that % of baseline exchanges would have looked like if Sampras had stayed back???


Sampras comprehensively dominated Agassi from the baseline on fast surfaces.

[fed_rulz]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Every single baseline rally in 2001 began with a serve to Sampras's backhand and Sampras STILL won BARELY under 50%!! Imagine what that % of baseline exchanges would have looked like if Sampras had stayed back????

In 1995 every single baseline exchange began with a second serve from Sampras or a serve from Agassi to SAmpras's backhand! Imagine what that % of baseline exchanges would have looked like if Sampras had stayed back???


Sampras comprehensively dominated Agassi from the baseline on fast surfaces.

you make sampras look like an idiot for venturing the net more often as opposed to staying back. because, according to you, Sampras would've had more success than what he actually did if Sampras stayed back more, and you sure must know more than what he did on how to play Agassi. In other words, you claim Sampras had no clue as to what he was doing, but it somehow worked??

wtf dude.. you start with the assumption that Sampras had a better ground game (FH, for instance) than Agassi, and you're making adjustments to stats to fit your assumption. Do you have a valid explanation for Drakulie's stats? if not, please stop making stuff up to suit your agenda.

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by fed_rulz

you make sampras look like an idiot for venturing the net more often as opposed to staying back. because, according to you, Sampras would've had more success than what he actually did if Sampras stayed back more, and you sure must know more than what he did on how to play Agassi. In other words, you claim Sampras had no clue as to what he was doing, but it somehow worked??

wtf dude.. you start with the assumption that Sampras had a better ground game (FH, for instance) than Agassi, and you're making adjustments to stats to fit your assumption. Do you have a valid explanation for Drakulie's stats? if not, please stop making stuff up to suit your agenda.

Sampras won about 90-95% of points on his first serve on grass in about 3 shots thanks to serve and volleying. He had bad stamina and would have been an idiot to stay back and only win 75%-80% from the baseline and play long exhausting points.

But look what he was doing on Agassi's serve. You can't tell me with him winning 46% of points on Agassi's serve he would have had a problem winning from the baseline behind his own serve?

[fed_rulz]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Sampras won about 90-95% of points on his first serve on grass in about 3 shots thanks to serve and volleying. He had bad stamina and would have been an idiot to stay back and only win 75%-80% from the baseline and play long exhausting points.

But look what he was doing on Agassi's serve. You can't tell me with him winning 46% of points on Agassi's serve he would have had a problem winning from the baseline behind his own serve?

I can, and I will. Drak's stats are from rallies that lasted 3 shots or more, so you can make a fair assumption that who was serving was a non-issue.

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by fed_rulz

I can, and I will. Drak's stats are from rallies that lasted 3 shots or more, so you can make a fair assumption that who was serving was a non-issue.

Even though the serve determines who has the upper hand in a rally? Nadal and Djoker mostly hold serve when they play and their rallies are insanely long so your interpretation of that statistic doesn't work.

[fed_rulz]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Even though the serve determines who has the upper hand in a rally? Nadal and Djoker mostly hold serve when they play and their rallies are insanely long so your interpretation of that statistic doesn't work.

but we're not talking about Djokovic or Nadal, are we? stick to the point. And in the 1999 wimbledon final, Agassi got only 46% of his first serves in, so more than half the time he served, he was starting the point in a neutral position!

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by fed_rulz

but we're not talking about Djokovic or Nadal, are we? stick to the point. And in the 1999 wimbledon final, Agassi got only 46% of his first serves in, so more than half the time he served, he was starting the point in a neutral position!

Watch the match. Sampras started hitting insane returns and Agassi had to try and red line his serve and nothing worked for him. In the former pro player section there is a stat showing it was Agassi's highest ever average mph on first serve in a final.

Remember, Sampras was used to facing Becker and Ivanisevic in the final. Agassi's 115mph serves must have looked hilariously slow to him.

Djokovic-Nadal and countless other matches establish the principle that your interpretation of that stat is wrong.

[fed_rulz]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Watch the match. Sampras started hitting insane returns and Agassi had to try and red line his serve and nothing worked for him. In the former pro player section there is a stat showing it was Agassi's highest ever average mph on first serve in a final.

Remember, Sampras was used to facing Becker and Ivanisevic in the final. Agassi's 115mph serves must have looked hilariously slow to him.

Djokovic-Nadal and countless other matches establish the principle that your interpretation of that stat is wrong.

dude, you're all over the place. FOCUS.

So you do agree that Agassi won most of the rallies that started from a neutral position (Sampras hitting insane returns, nothing working for Agassi, living on 2nd serves, 115mph weak serves etc.)?

[BeHappy]

Originally Posted by fed_rulz

dude, you're all over the place. FOCUS.

So you do agree that Agassi won most of the rallies that started from a neutral position (Sampras hitting insane returns, nothing working for Agassi, living on 2nd serves, 115mph weak serves etc.)?

No, he was either hitting 115mph serves to Sampras's backhand or kicking the ball up high to Sampras's backhand on his second serve, which Sampras was never really able to get around and hit a forehand on in that match. So you have to admit that either Sampras's forehand or backhand was far better than you say it is.

Anyway, I'm finished posting here for today, back tomorrow. See you then.

[gennosuke]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Consider that every SINGLE baseline point was on Agassi's serve and began with a serve to Sampras's backhand and Sampras STILL won JUST under 50%!!!!!!!!! That is insane!

And that's just on Agassi's serve! Imagine if Sampras had served and stayed back??? He'd have won 95% of baseline rallies on his own serve and would have an overall baseline win % of around 80%! He DOMINATED Agassi from the baseline. He broke Agassi to love more than once. Then he did it again in Cincinnati, Los Angelos and the TMC!

You're so full of ****. Agassi's serve wasn't particularly hard to return.

[Russeljones]

Originally Posted by drakulie

I suppose you didn't read the above stats (one of them is from Wimbledon). But since you mentioned it, here are the following:

• US Open in 1995, Agassi won 64% of the basleine exchanges,
• US Open in 2001, Agassi won 65%.
• Year end finals 1999, Agassi won 67%
• etc

PS: If you want to be taken seriously, stop calling Sampras "Petros". It sounds stupid.

If you want to be taken seriously you'd use more than 3 matches to support your theory about a player's stroke.

[Devilito]

Originally Posted by drakulie

I suppose you didn't read the above stats (one of them is from Wimbledon). But since you mentioned it, here are the following:

• US Open in 1995, Agassi won 64% of the basleine exchanges,
• US Open in 2001, Agassi won 65%.
• Year end finals 1999, Agassi won 67%
• etc

PS: If you want to be taken seriously, stop calling Sampras "Petros". It sounds stupid.

The majority of baseline exchanges were on Andre’s serve. Basically showing his service game holds. The fact that they were that close is amazing to see how into every one of Andre’s game Pistol was. If Pistol stayed back on his serve the stats would be completely different and in Pistol’s favor