Sampras has truly beaten Federer

N

NadalForever

Banned
Why are all the Fed fans such pathetic winers and can't accept the fact that Sampras has beaten Federer. Don't have a nervous breakdown Fed fans because Federer still has a 3-1 record over Sampras but the fact is that both Federer and Sampras have played at their absolute best in those three exibition matches. Anybody who actually saw those matches would clearly see that and that both of them were going for winners at every occasion. Now I stress that Federer played at his absolute best in the given situation and his situation was not perfect because he had just played Master's Cup the week before and so he might have been a bit tired. However let's not forget that Federer also was tired at this year's US Open semifinal and final where he played very bad but Davydenko and Djokovic were not able to take advantage of that. Therefore all credit has to be given to Sampras for being such a champion. It's too bad they were not born in the same year because then we would have the greatest rivalry in tennis history.
 
L

leonidas1982

Hall of Fame
NadalForever said:
Why are all the Fed fans such pathetic winers and can't accept the fact that Sampras has beaten Federer. Don't have a nervous breakdown Fed fans because Federer still has a 3-1 record over Sampras but the fact is that both Federer and Sampras have played at their absolute best in those three exibition matches. Anybody who actually saw those matches would clearly see that and that both of them were going for winners at every occasion. Now I stress that Federer played at his absolute best in the given situation and his situation was not perfect because he had just played Master's Cup the week before and so he might have been a bit tired. However let's not forget that Federer also was tired at this year's US Open semifinal and final where he played very bad but Davydenko and Djokovic were not able to take advantage of that. Therefore all credit has to be given to Sampras for being such a champion. It's too bad they were not born in the same year because then we would have the greatest rivalry in tennis history.
Click to expand...

They think he's god or father; father never dissappoints
 
F

FedForGOAT

Professional
NadalForever said:
Why are all the Fed fans such pathetic winers and can't accept the fact that Sampras has beaten Federer. Don't have a nervous breakdown Fed fans because Federer still has a 3-1 record over Sampras but the fact is that both Federer and Sampras have played at their absolute best in those three exibition matches. Anybody who actually saw those matches would clearly see that and that both of them were going for winners at every occasion. Now I stress that Federer played at his absolute best in the given situation and his situation was not perfect because he had just played Master's Cup the week before and so he might have been a bit tired. However let's not forget that Federer also was tired at this year's US Open semifinal and final where he played very bad but Davydenko and Djokovic were not able to take advantage of that. Therefore all credit has to be given to Sampras for being such a champion. It's too bad they were not born in the same year because then we would have the greatest rivalry in tennis history.
Click to expand...

You're a very objective judge (as your username clearly suggests).

I don't think anyone who has gotten even a glimpse of the 1st match would say that Fed was trying that match. hewas serving <100mph serves and hitting shots straight at Sampras. Watch the matches before you tell others to watch them.
 
pcpshortbus

pcpshortbus

Rookie
NadalForever said:
Why are all the Fed fans such pathetic winers and can't accept the fact that Sampras has beaten Federer. Don't have a nervous breakdown Fed fans because Federer still has a 3-1 record over Sampras but the fact is that both Federer and Sampras have played at their absolute best in those three exibition matches. Anybody who actually saw those matches would clearly see that and that both of them were going for winners at every occasion. Now I stress that Federer played at his absolute best in the given situation and his situation was not perfect because he had just played Master's Cup the week before and so he might have been a bit tired. However let's not forget that Federer also was tired at this year's US Open semifinal and final where he played very bad but Davydenko and Djokovic were not able to take advantage of that. Therefore all credit has to be given to Sampras for being such a champion. It's too bad they were not born in the same year because then we would have the greatest rivalry in tennis history.
Click to expand...

no, obviously YOU did not watch the match. federer played with a watch on, and as you said he was "going for winners at every occasion". federer was trying to hit ridiculous shots to please the crowd and have fun points, because afterall, it was an exhibition. yes it was supposed to be competitive, but the whole reasoning behind that match was to make some money and have some fun. nothing more, nothing less.
 
Mick

Mick

Legend
roddick beat federer in an exhibition match and felt so good until he met federer again in a tournament match.
 
P

power_play21

Semi-Pro
i seriously cannot believe there are still threads coming up about this.

someone with the your threads sucks b/c script should post that here and check everything
 
R

raiden031

Legend
Something tells me (maybe Fed himself) that Fed doesn't play the way he wants to play when he's in tournament matches because he knows he will lose. I'm guessing in an exhibition he would play more the style he likes to play, and hence losing to guys like Roddick and now Sampras.
 
V

Vision84

Hall of Fame
It's an exhibition. Stop looking so much into it. They should have a huge banner saying this on the main page or something. Geeez.
 
H

helloworld

Hall of Fame
raiden031 said:
Something tells me (maybe Fed himself) that Fed doesn't play the way he wants to play when he's in tournament matches because he knows he will lose. I'm guessing in an exhibition he would play more the style he likes to play, and hence losing to guys like Roddick and now Sampras.
Click to expand...
Sampras >>>>> Roddick
Sampras can beat Fed any time he wants. Roddick needs tremendous luck to beat Fed.
 
N

NadalForever

Banned
Federer played worse in this year's US Open final than he did against Sampras in the third match and Sampras still won. Sampras has clearly shown that Federer's competition this decade is such a laughable joke. According to Federer fans every match where he looses is because he tanked it or because it was an exibition match. Federer fans really need to grow up. I admit though that the exibition match against Roddick this year was fake because Federer was serve and volleying all the time but not against Sampras.
 
Last edited:
F

Fedexeon

Hall of Fame
NadalForever said:
Federer played worse in this year's US Open final than he did against Sampras in the third match and Sampras still won. Sampras has clearly shown that Federer's competition this decade is such a laughable joke. According to Federer fans every match where he looses is because he tanked it or because it was an exibition match. Federer fans really need to grow up. I admit though that the exibition match against Roddick this year was fake because Federer was serve and volleying all the time but not against Sampras.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the opinion, NadalForever.
 
C

catspaw

Rookie
35ft6 said:
In an exhibition. Do you know what exhibition means? Sampras sure does.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm a huge huge Fed fan, and I honestly don't give a tinker's curse whether he wins or loses an exhibition match. Now, if he loses a bona fide ATP tournament match, I happily admit that I go into deep mourning for a few days and wail like a banshee (well, not quite, but you get my drift). But an exhibition match? Give me a break! The only reason I wish, in retrospect, that he HAD won that final one with Sampras is that it would have avoided all this drivel that is being bandied about now - it's beyond ludicrous.
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Yes Sampras has truly beaten Federer-in an EXHIBITION that is,so did Roddick,Haas and Agassi.
 
kimizz

kimizz

Rookie
These threads wouldnt keep on coming if you guys gave credit for both players. Scripted or not I think most of petes serves were unreturnable...he was playing great. So pls dont try to give an image that Pete was only doing well becaue Roger let him.
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
kimizz said:
These threads wouldnt keep on coming if you guys gave credit for both players. Scripted or not I think most of petes serves were unreturnable...he was playing great. So pls dont try to give an image that Pete was only doing well becaue Roger let him.
Click to expand...

Pete still has the best serve in the game and on a lightning fast surface can give anyone a match but it's still an exhibiton and from what I saw Federer served many weak serves to give Pete a chance.I don't think it was scripted but I also don't think Federer gave it his all.And no these threads will keep coming up because there are fanboys here who believe that Sampras at 36 can come back and win Wimbledon or USO because he beat Fed in an exo.I would love to see Pete come back but realistically his only chance to make a comeback is in doubles and I don't think he can commit himself to that.
 
superman1

superman1

Legend
It's a more legit win than most of the exo's in the past. Why? Because Sampras' serve was unreturnable on that surface. Most exo's have a lot of rallies - not this one. On every other slower surface, it would be a tight match but Fed would win every time.
 
jelle v

jelle v

Hall of Fame
I watched the last match on YouTube. One can hardly call it a "tennis"match.

the court was so fast that it became pure servicecompetition and clearly, Sampras still has the big serve.

Too me it also was clear that Sampras never attempted to be funny by hitting some special or funny balls, he was pure business on the court. Federer on the other hand however had a lot of points where he clearly chose for a funny or original option to end a point (and failed) and he often prolonged the point by not goig for a straight winner where he could. Very imprted because there were very few rallies, it was a service duel.

If there is one thing that this match made clear, it that Sampras still has a really really really big serve and his forehand is still really big too. But in the moving area at the baseline he seems to move in slowmotion. I also was impressed by sampras's volleys by the way, but volleys may have come easier due to the really fast surface and difficult to return big Sampras serve.
 
caesar66

caesar66

Professional
NadalForever said:
Why are all the Fed fans such pathetic winers and can't accept the fact that Sampras has beaten Federer. Don't have a nervous breakdown Fed fans because Federer still has a 3-1 record over Sampras but the fact is that both Federer and Sampras have played at their absolute best in those three exibition matches. Anybody who actually saw those matches would clearly see that and that both of them were going for winners at every occasion. Now I stress that Federer played at his absolute best in the given situation and his situation was not perfect because he had just played Master's Cup the week before and so he might have been a bit tired. However let's not forget that Federer also was tired at this year's US Open semifinal and final where he played very bad but Davydenko and Djokovic were not able to take advantage of that. Therefore all credit has to be given to Sampras for being such a champion. It's too bad they were not born in the same year because then we would have the greatest rivalry in tennis history.
Click to expand...

Federer has a 1-0 record against Sampras. Exhibitions DO NOT matter.
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
thats ridiculous. If he wanted to prolong points he would not hit twice as many aces as he ussually hits in a match. He knows how to aim doesnt he?
I watched loads of Fed matches against average guys and he just likes rallying, sometimes he hits it back 10 times where he could have gone for a winner on the first shot. You can buy lots of his matches on dvd on the internet and observe it. On thing I observed vs Sampras is Sampras stuck in the backhand corner a bit tempting Fed to blast one to his forehand, but Fed didnt fall for it, because he knows how explosive Sampras is running onto his forehands.

He tried his best and lost and thats all there is to it.

And Sampras should also get more credit for going within a couple of points of winning match 2.

jelle v said:
I watched the last match on YouTube. One can hardly call it a "tennis"match.

the court was so fast that it became pure servicecompetition and clearly, Sampras still has the big serve.

Too me it also was clear that Sampras never attempted to be funny by hitting some special or funny balls, he was pure business on the court. Federer on the other hand however had a lot of points where he clearly chose for a funny or original option to end a point (and failed) and he often prolonged the point by not goig for a straight winner where he could. Very imprted because there were very few rallies, it was a service duel.

If there is one thing that this match made clear, it that Sampras still has a really really really big serve and his forehand is still really big too. But in the moving area at the baseline he seems to move in slowmotion. I also was impressed by sampras's volleys by the way, but volleys may have come easier due to the really fast surface and difficult to return big Sampras serve.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
P

PROTENNIS63

Hall of Fame
OP:

Fed and Sampras each made around 3-5 million for each exhibition match. Fed made more from these 3 matches than winning the U.S Open. Get one thing through your head: All 3 matches were fixed. How can Fed beat Sampras 3 times in a row? It just cannot happen. The Greatest Player (Sampras as of now) cannot go down 3 times so of course Sampras had to win at least 1 match. Think about that.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
pcpshortbus said:
federer played with a watch on,
Click to expand...
So what? He also plays with a headband on. How would either affect the quality of his play? :confused:
pcpshortbus said:
and as you said he was "going for winners at every occasion". federer was trying to hit ridiculous shots to please the crowd and have fun points, because afterall, it was an exhibition.
Click to expand...
No, he was going for winners to win the point. Plain and simple. If he wanted to please the crowd, he would have kept the ball in play so that he and Sampras would get into some long rallies. Federer had to go for the winner because he knew if he didn't that Sampras would.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
lambielspins said:
I see you are still trying to give BreakPoint and TheNatural some competition for the dumbest poster award. Keep it up, at this rate you will be right in the running along with those clowns.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and if Federer had won all three matches easily, you'd be here screaming how much better Federer is than Sampras and that these exhibition matches PROVED it. :roll:

BTW, I hear that you already have a lock on the dumbest poster award, just like Federer has a lock on the #1 ranking.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
35ft6 said:
In an exhibition. Do you know what exhibition means? Sampras sure does.
Click to expand...
Buy apparently Federer doesn't, as Sampras was the one that was clowning around and taking it easy while Federer was the one that was all serious and trying to win.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
PROTENNIS63 said:
OP:

Fed and Sampras each made around 3-5 million for each exhibition match. Fed made more from these 3 matches than winning the U.S Open. Get one thing through your head: All 3 matches were fixed. How can Fed beat Sampras 3 times in a row? It just cannot happen. The Greatest Player (Sampras as of now) cannot go down 3 times so of course Sampras had to win at least 1 match. Think about that.
Click to expand...
Do you have any proof of these accusations? I didn't think so.

BTW, I doubt they made that much money. Where would the money come from? The venues were not that huge so they couldn't have made that much money from just one match. In most of the world, it wasn't even televized and was only on The Tennis Channel here in the U.S., which not many people get.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
lambielspins said:
5 posts in a row for BreakPoint. Poor guy, has no friends so has to talk to himself.
Click to expand...
Yet you posted first in this thread. :roll:

BTW, when I quote someone in my posts, that's not exactly talking to myself now is it? But I wouldn't expect someone of your intelligence to understand that. :cry:
 
Polaris

Polaris

Hall of Fame
NadalForever said:
Federer played worse in this year's US Open final than he did against Sampras in the third match and Sampras still won.
[..]
I admit though that the exibition match against Roddick this year was fake because Federer was serve and volleying all the time but not against Sampras.
Click to expand...
Tools, Inc.
 
Z

zachattack698

Rookie
Why do people keep making threads about Sampras and Fed? Most likely no one will ever know if the match was fixed or not so why bother arguing it? We will never know who would of beaten who in their primes so once again why continue to argue about it?
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
Havnt you heard, Federerism is a new religion, and the whiners are the 'defenders of the faith'.

:)

Sampras is the man


NadalForever said:
Why are all the Fed fans such pathetic winers and can't accept the fact that Sampras has beaten Federer. Don't have a nervous breakdown Fed fans because Federer still has a 3-1 record over Sampras but the fact is that both Federer and Sampras have played at their absolute best in those three exibition matches. Anybody who actually saw those matches would clearly see that and that both of them were going for winners at every occasion. Now I stress that Federer played at his absolute best in the given situation and his situation was not perfect because he had just played Master's Cup the week before and so he might have been a bit tired. However let's not forget that Federer also was tired at this year's US Open semifinal and final where he played very bad but Davydenko and Djokovic were not able to take advantage of that. Therefore all credit has to be given to Sampras for being such a champion. It's too bad they were not born in the same year because then we would have the greatest rivalry in tennis history.
Click to expand...
 
S

sureshs

Bionic Poster
With Sampras' serve on a fast court, with his bigger racquet and better strings, the best that any opponent can hope for is a tie breaker, where again Sampras has the edge. It really does not matter if the opponent is Fed or me (OK maybe that is taking it a bit too far). At 130+ mph, with spin, and placed right down the middle or out wide, the return of serve is mostly guesswork and luck, and hence not predictable. When the game degenerates to this, something needs to be done, because one aspect of the game dominates everything else, and that too is beyond human limits to counter. Wood racquets seem to the best option.
 
J

JackSkellington

Rookie
BreakPoint said:
So what? He also plays with a headband on. How would either affect the quality of his play? :confused:

No, he was going for winners to win the point. Plain and simple. If he wanted to please the crowd, he would have kept the ball in play so that he and Sampras would get into some long rallies. Federer had to go for the winner because he knew if he didn't that Sampras would.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous. Are you that dense? Prolonging rallies at a high level with someone who has been off the tour for how many years and who is succumbing to the effects of age? Sorry kid, but I just found out who the clown of Talk Tennis is. Sampras beating Roger. That's a laugh.
 
F

FedForGOAT

Professional
sureshs said:
With Sampras' serve on a fast court, with his bigger racquet and better strings, the best that any opponent can hope for is a tie breaker, where again Sampras has the edge. It really does not matter if the opponent is Fed or me (OK maybe that is taking it a bit too far). At 130+ mph, with spin, and placed right down the middle or out wide, the return of serve is mostly guesswork and luck, and hence not predictable. When the game degenerates to this, something needs to be done, because one aspect of the game dominates everything else, and that too is beyond human limits to counter. Wood racquets seem to the best option.
Click to expand...

If a player happens to guess correctly a couple times in a service game, Sampras happens to make an error or two, Sampras could lose serve. and after that, his opponent would just need to hold serve, which isn't that hard on a fast surface against a returner like Sampras.
 
superman1

superman1

Legend
Fed wasn't returning Sampras' serve. I think the real dummies on this board are not the ones who take exo's seriously, but the ones that don't realize that there is a difference between beating Federer from the baseline (almost impossible) and beating him because your serve is un-f*cking-believable and you're on a lightning fast surface. This is one of the only exo's I will ever take anything out of, because most exo's are just two guys hitting the ball back and forth from the baseline without much effort, but this was a serving match.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
JackSkellington said:
Ridiculous. Are you that dense? Prolonging rallies at a high level with someone who has been off the tour for how many years and who is succumbing to the effects of age?
Click to expand...
Well, obviously, Federer was threatened enough by old man Sampras to feel he had to go for a clean winner at every opportunity. If he wasn't, Federer would have been more than happy enough just to keep the ball in play knowing that Sampras would eventually wear out, not get to the next ball, or make an unforced error.

When I play someone at a lower level than me, I just keep the ball in play knowing full well that I would be able to outlast him and that my opponent would eventually make an unforced error.
JackSkellington said:
Sorry kid, but I just found out who the clown of Talk Tennis is.
Click to expand...
Kid? I'd bet you weren't even born when Sampras won his first US Open. And if you were, based upon your posts, you sure weren't born before me.
JackSkellington said:
Sampras beating Roger. That's a laugh.
Click to expand...
Well, you must be laughing a lot these days because Sampras did just that.
 
F

FedForGOAT

Professional
BreakPoint said:
Well, obviously, Federer was threatened enough by old man Sampras to feel he had to go for a clean winner at every opportunity. If he wasn't, Federer would have been more than happy enough just to keep the ball in play knowing that Sampras would eventually wear out, not get to the next ball, or make an unforced error.

When I play someone at a lower level than me, I just keep the ball in play knowing full well that I would be able to outlast him and that my opponent would eventually make an unforced error.

Kid? I'd bet you weren't even born when Sampras won his first US Open. And if you were, based upon your posts, you sure weren't born before me.

Well, you must be laughing a lot these days because Sampras did just that.
Click to expand...

You seem to really care about how old people are, and yet not tell people your age. weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CyberShot
  • Poll
Sampras: I could've beaten Federer on grass.
3 4 5
Replies
239
Views
13K
Olli Jokinen
Olli Jokinen
G
History repeats itself with Federer and Sampras match
2
Replies
91
Views
5K
fastdunn
F
Chicharito
Boris Becker: ´The best Pete Sampras would have beaten Roger Federer´ and more...
2 3 4
Replies
188
Views
10K
BorgTheGOAT
B
L
Why Federer is clearly greater than Sampras
2
Replies
60
Views
2K
Chadwixx
C
Rabbit
Sampras vs Federer
Replies
11
Views
810
FedForGOAT
F
Top