Why Roger Federer owned Pete Sampras, even before he won the FO

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

Game Sampras..... you have a lot of fun calling Fed a cakewalk draw player, but let me show you Pete's cakewalk draws:

Here is an analysis of Fed's slam wins:
Wimby 03 - yes he did only beat 1 top 10 player, but he lost only 1 set
AO 2004 - beat 2 top 10 players, as well as an in form Lleyton Hewitt, and on fire Marat Safin (who would be back in the top 10 by years end)
Wimby 04 - took out 2 top 10 players both former world no 1's. Andy Roddick played the match of his life and still lost in 4
USO 04 - took out 3 top 10 players, including 2 former world no 1's, and bageled Hewitt twice in the final
Wimby 05 - lost only 1 set, and handled Hewitt and Roddick easily
USO 05 - killed his daddy Nalbandian in straights, then beat 2 former world no 1's
AO 06 - His easiest draw in a major, but did have to face an on fire Bhagdhatis, as well as an inform Tommy Haas. Also took out top 10 player Davydenko, who never beats himself
Wimby 06 - lost only 1 set in the final, had a bagel set against Nadal, and did have to play tough matches early on
USO 06 - took out 3 top 10 players including an out of his mind Blake, and a rejuvinated Roddick
AO 07 - lost no sets, embaressed Roddick who beat him the week before, and he did play 3 top 10 players, incluidng an on fire Gonzo
Wimby 07 - had to beat young gun Del Potro, former world no 1 Ferrero, and Safin, had a week of then came back an killed Gasquet, before fighting so hard to take out an on fire Nadal
USO 07 - took out the no 3, 4, 5 ranked players without loosing a set. Roddick and Djokovic were both playing great tennis
USO 08 - he had to fight to win this.... playing crap tennis for 4 rounds, killed in form Djokovic, and realled outplayed on fire Murray, whose nerves werent a big factor early on
FO 09 - statistically the easiest draw hes had, but he did take out an in form and on fire Del Potro, Nadal's killer Soderling, Gael "pong" Monfils, and really showed fight by beating Haas and Acusso

Now His losses in GS's in his prime (04 - 07):
- Guga Keurton FO 04 - no shame in loosing to a 3 time champ
- Safin AO 05 -- when on Safin can beat anyone
- Nadal FO 05 - no explanation needed
- Nadal FO 06 - ditto above
- Nadal FO 07 - ditto above
- Djoko AO 08 - had mono, and lost the the in form world no 3
- Nadal FO 08 - ditto 2 above
- Nadal Wimby 08 - lost to the very soon to be world no 1
-- his only loss outside the top 4 was Keurton, and of course he was no stranger on clay, or on the big scene

Now: here is Sampras::::

the 93 USO he beat 1 top 10 player... the overrated clay courter Chang....

AO 94 he beat only 1 top 10er Courier, yet he still lost 5 sets

USO 95 he beat only 1 top 10 player again,
same for AO 97,
Wimby 97 his best win was over 18 ranked old man becker,
Wimby 98 his highest ranked win was in the 3rd round,
Wimby 00 his highest ranked win was over 20's ranked Rafter,
USO 02, he beat overrated Haas at 3, and his only good win was over Agassi

Now let me get to the losses in his prime:
-Sergei Brugera (rank 11) 93 FO
- Jamie Yzaga (23) 94 USO
- Gilbert Schaller (24) 95 FO
- Mark Philopusis (40) 96 AO
- Krajick (13) 96 Wimby
- Petr Korda (16) 97 USO
- Karol Kucera (20) 98 AO....... wow so many i am too tired to continue

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

Its funny... Who is Fed ALWAYS being compared to by most everyone? Not Pancho, Not Budge, Not Laver, Not Rosewall.. But Sampras!!!

Even though Laver is highly regarded as the GOAT, (and still is by most) why is it Fed is always being compared to Pete?

Btw.. Are u taking Pete's injury into account against Yzaga? Yea thought not. Another federphile trying to **** me off

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Its funny... Who is Fed ALWAYS being compared to by most everyone? Not Pancho, Not Budge, Not Laver, Not Rosewall.. But Sampras!!!

Even though Laver is highly regarded as the GOAT, (and still is by most) why is it Fed is always being compared to Pete?

Btw.. Are u taken Pete's injury into account against Yzaga? Yea thought not

Laver >>>>> Roger>>Borg == Pancho == Rosewall >>>>Sampras

I just put that becuase u have a thing for Federer's cakewalk draws

I actually hate Federer too..... dont believe me... look at my thread created called:

Fed Haters: Are you really stuck figuring out who you want to win

where is say:
I am a Federer hater..... ive hated him ever since he stole Wimbledon 04 from Andy Roddick, and i hate his subtle arrogance

I support Federer's stats becuase i am unbias

zagor · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Its funny... Who is Fed ALWAYS being compared to? Not Pancho, Not Budge, Not Laver, Not Rosewall.. But Sampras!!!

Even though Laver is highly regarded as the GOAT, (and still is by most) why is it Fed is always being compared to Pete?

Because most people here only watched Pete and Fed out of all GOAT candidates,the average age of TT poster is relatively young.

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Its funny... Who is Fed ALWAYS being compared to by most everyone? Not Pancho, Not Budge, Not Laver, Not Rosewall.. But Sampras!!!

Even though Laver is highly regarded as the GOAT, (and still is by most) why is it Fed is always being compared to Pete?

Btw.. Are u taking Pete's injury into account against Yzaga? Yea thought not. Another federphile trying to **** me off

You are right. I would list Pete somewhere on my list of best players of all time in the 4-7 range. Sampras played in a weak era, and therefore flourished..when he ran into clay court specialists, he didnt fare well.

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Laver >>>>> Roger>>Borg == Pancho == Rosewall >>>>Sampras

I just put that becuase u have a thing for Federer's cakewalk draws

And I dont deny that Pete had some cakewalks in his later years.

This is how I look at it.

During Pete's rise to the top, he had much much tougher opposition particular at the top then Fed to his. Pete had Edberg, Becker, Chang, Goran, Courier, Andre, etc to overcome in his rise to the top. Where Fed had Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Old Brokeback Agassi, Davydenko etc. Pete had a tougher hill to climb during his rise say early-mid 90s. Whereas Fed didnt have it as tough I feel until about 2008 where Nadal finally primed, and you had Djoker and Murray come on the scene (though both are really impressing me slam wise but still feel they are a tougher rivals overrall during the course of the season then Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, Nabandian were). Late 90s, competition leveled off a bit for Pete and it definitely wasnt what it was early to mid 90s. I feel Sampras' clay court competition was far superior depth wise to Roger's

Yes both had some cakewalk draws at slams. But why cant I comment on a cakewalk draw Roger had without you bringing pete into the equation. What I said about Roger's cakewalk at RG, really cant be disputed. I mean its obvious thats what it was as soon as Djoker and Nadal went out (two players who would have given Fed fits and its very doubtul Fed would have got through both). Yes a win is a win. A slam is a slam. But a cakewalk is a cakewalk as well

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
You are right. I would list Pete somewhere on my list of best players of all time in the 4-7 range. Sampras played in a weak era, and therefore flourished..when he ran into clay court specialists, he didnt fare well.

Roger has had to deal with Rafa. But outside of a Rafa, has Roger had to overcome anyone on Bruguera's, Muster's, Courier's, Andre's level on clay? No he hasnt.t Especially this year. He played guys at RG this year that couldnt whipe Sergi Bruguera's jockstrap on clay.

I dont believe the depth today on clay is anywhere near the depth today as it was in Pete's era. Not even remotely close.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
You are right. I would list Pete somewhere on my list of best players of all time in the 4-7 range. Sampras played in a weak era, and therefore flourished..when he ran into clay court specialists, he didnt fare well.

lol.... i just trashed Pete but now i am going to defend him...the weak era argument is weak in itself.... to many variables..... the only thing i can say is that Old man Agassi took sets from Nadal and prime Federer

And the reason why i only compared Federer to Sampras is becuase there is no GameBorg, GameLaver or GamePancho on this board who trolls around with all this bias and foolish comments, is more afraid of Sampras' records going away than the man himself is

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Roger has had to deal with Rafa. But outside of a Rafa, has Roger had to overcome anyone on Bruguera's, Muster's, Courier's, Andre's level on clay? NO!!

Right now, a healthy Nadal is the 1st, 2nd , and 3rd best clay court player in the world. Nadal was better than those you mendtioned combined.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Roger has had to deal with Rafa. But outside of a Rafa, has Roger had to overcome anyone on Bruguera's, Muster's, Courier's, Andre's level on clay? NO!!

Sorry by how many good years did Courier have ---- he had like 3 years in the top 10..... same for Burgera.... and if Pete played Agassi once at RG on clay

Chelsea_Kiwi · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Now let me get to the losses in his prime:
-Sergei Brugera (rank 11) 93 FO
- Jamie Yzaga (23) 94 USO
- Gilbert Schaller (24) 95 FO
- Mark Philopusis (40) 96 AO
- Krajick (13) 96 Wimby
- Petr Korda (16) 97 USO
- Karol Kucera (20) 98 AO....... wow so many i am too tired to continue

Gosh you don't get it do you? All these guys would win calender grand slams in todays era. Do you even bother listening to GameSampras and his buddies very sound logic?

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
Right now, a healthy Nadal is the 1st, 2nd , and 3rd best clay court player in the world. Nadal was better than those you mendtioned combined.

The way Nadal was playing this year at RG. Muster, Courier or Bruguera would have demolished Rafa no problem. Possibly even Agassi as well. Nadal did not look good at all. Obviously he is far from 100 percent. It showed too.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

Chelsea_Kiwi said:
Gosh you don't get it do you? All these guys would win calender grand slams in todays era. Do you even bother listening to GameSampras and his buddies very sound logic?

lol i didnt even add most of his FO losses to:
Galo Blanco
Medvedev ranked 100
Ramon Delgado ranked 97
Magnus Norman ranked 67
Thierry Champion ranked 77.....so how can the era be strong if he was loosing to 3rd tier players

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
lol.... i just trashed Pete but now i am going to defend him...the weak era argument is weak in itself.... to many variables..... the only thing i can say is that Old man Agassi took sets from Nadal and prime Federer

And the reason why i only compared Federer to Sampras is becuase there is no GameBorg, GameLaver or GamePancho on this board who trolls around with all this bias and foolish comments, is more afraid of Sampras' records going away than the man himself is

You got it wrong. Sampras has 14 majors. That speaks for itself. You are acting like Sampras never did anything on the court. Your arguments are very weak.

Chelsea_Kiwi · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
lol i didnt even add most of his FO losses to:
Galo Blanco
Medvedev ranked 100
Ramon Delgado ranked 97
Magnus Norman ranked 67
Thierry Champion ranked 77.....so how can the era be strong if he was loosing to 3rd tier players

Yeah but these guys beat the clay king in Sampras and would easily triple bagel Roger and Rafa.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
The way Nadal was playing this year at RG. Muster, Courier or Bruguera would have demolished Rafa no problem. Possibly even Agassi as well. Nadal did not look good at all. Obviously he is far from 100 percent. It showed too.

So first u say Nadals the only good claycourter, then you call him crap.... then u make it seem like Muster Courier and Brugera are better players than Agaasi... wow troll you should be banned

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
lol i didnt even add most of his FO losses to:
Galo Blanco
Medvedev ranked 100
Ramon Delgado ranked 97
Magnus Norman ranked 67
Thierry Champion ranked 77.....so how can the era be strong if he was loosing to 3rd tier players

I never said Pete was a clay court marvel did I? You also have to remember Roger grew up playing on clay.. That helps too.

At his best, I still think Pete was the greatest to ever play the game even though he didnt have the success on clay. Thats fine by me. i still have my opinions as do you

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
The way Nadal was playing this year at RG. Muster, Courier or Bruguera would have demolished Rafa no problem. Possibly even Agassi as well. Nadal did not look good at all. Obviously he is far from 100 percent. It showed too.

That was one match. The matches that nadal played before soderling were impresssive. Nadal is a hawk, a lion, a bull and that can be said about his play before soderling. He played one bad match

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
You got it wrong. Sampras has 14 majors. That speaks for itself. You are acting like Sampras never did anything on the court. Your arguments are very weak.

Sorry.... i am not trashing Sampras..... i am trashing game Sampras becuase ive seem him on at least 3 threads today with the words "Federer" and "cakewalk" within 1 sentence of eachother

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
So first u say Nadals the only good claycourter, then you call him crap.... then u make it seem like Muster Courier and Brugera are better players than Agaasi... wow troll you should be banned

What the hell? Go to school and learn to read Federphile

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
What the hell? Go to school and learn to read Federphile

I dont even like Federer

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
That was one match. The matches that nadal played before soderling were impresssive. Nadal is a hawk, a lion, a bull and that can be said about his play before soderling. He played one bad match

Ehhh.. nadal has not been "Nadalesque" since the Australian Open I think. I still believe that slam took a bit of starch out of him. He narrowly escape Djoker a few weeks ago and was taken out by Soderling? A player he used to destroy? Thats not the Nadal on clay I know. Hes playing too much tennis and not focusing on smarter scheduling and its caught up with him obviously. Taken out before the quarterfinals? And what I saw of Soderling today, didnt impress me one bit. Horrible serving with crappy movement and terrible return of serve

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
So first u say Nadals the only good claycourter, then you call him crap.... then u make it seem like Muster Courier and Brugera are better players than Agaasi... wow troll you should be banned

I think you are more of a troll. With bold statements like yours, theres no wonder why I laugh. You see, clay is the surface that is the most sketchy..Whenever clay is dry you have different players, whenver it is moist, you have different players. I know tennis, do you?

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Ehhh.. nadal has not been "Nadalesque" since the Australian Open I think. I still believe that slam took a bit of starch out of him. He narrowly escape Djoker a few weeks ago and was taken out by Soderling? A player he used to destroy? Thats not the Nadal on clay I know. Hes playing too much tennis and not focusing on smarter scheduling and its caught up with him obviously.

Sorry but IW, Barcelona, Rome and MC disagree with you

bruce38 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
Ehhh.. nadal has not been "Nadalesque" since the Australian Open I think. I still believe that slam took a bit of starch out of him. He narrowly escape Djoker a few weeks ago and was taken out by Soderling? A player he used to destroy? Thats not the Nadal on clay I know. Hes playing too much tennis and not focusing on smarter scheduling and its caught up with him obviously. Taken out before the quarterfinals? And what I saw of Soderling today, didnt impress me one bit. Horrible serving with crappy movement and terrible return of serve

He had pretty much the same schedule the last year as he himself admitted and won last year. Isn't he supposed to be getting better? So what gives? Could it be that he is more in Sampras' league, but not Feds?

GameSampras · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Sorry but IW, Barcelona, Rome and MC disagree with you

The French Open doesnt disagree. He burned himself out beforehand. Losing to Soderling? Please

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
I think you are more of a troll. With bold statements like yours, theres no wonder why I laugh. You see, clay is the surface that is the most sketchy..Whenever clay is dry you have different players, whenver it is moist, you have different players. I know tennis, do you?

All i know is that the rules of tennis stay the same.... you serve motion, groundstroke motion stay the same....
If Tiger Woods and the PGA played on clay, how much do you want to bet that Woods' # would be similar

I may not know as much about mechanics and court speeds as you, but i understand luck, mentality, fight, belief, consistency. These are all just s important on the tennis court

Deleted member 25923 · Jun 7, 2009

Please stop calling Agassi brokeback. He has a wife and two kids.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

GameSampras said:
The French Open doesnt disagree. He burned himself out beforehand. Losing to Soderling? Please

Which shows that even the world no 1 is still human

but Federer hasnt lost to a player ranked outside the top 4 in a major since right here 2004

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Which shows that even the world no 1 is still human

but Federer hasnt lost to a player ranked outside the top 4 in a major since right here 2004

It shows how good Federer is. Now you know what it takes to win one single major. Sampras and Federer have 14 of them. Give them some respect.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
It shows how good Federer is. Now you know what it takes to win one single major. Sampras and Federer have 14 of them. Give them some respect.

Im sorry, but thats what i have been doing this whole time.... i defended Sampras against the weak era statement, and have called Federer the GOTOE (Open Era).... when i dislike Federer.... Nadal and Roddick are my favs...

federerGOAT · Jun 7, 2009

Sampras doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as the great Fed. Prime Sampras would not even be in the ATP top 5 of today.

Conquistador · Jun 7, 2009

federerGOAT said:
Sampras doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as the great Fed. Prime Sampras would not even be in the ATP top 5 of today.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

federerGOAT said:
Sampras doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as the great Fed. Prime Sampras would not even be in the ATP top 5 of today.

Sorry mate, but thats a bit harsh.... Sampras did beat Federer in 07... i know it was an exhibition, but that was some good tennis from him

While i do believe Federer> Sampras, i have the greatest respect for Pete, and do believe that he is one of the greats

valiant · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
It shows how good Federer is. Now you know what it takes to win one single major. Sampras and Federer have 14 of them. Give them some respect.

I think you are misunderstanding Clayman. He is not saying that Pete is a joke .Just that Fed dint have cake walk draws as some of the posters are trying to suggest. So he wants to show that Sampras also had some draws similarly.

clayman2000 · Jun 7, 2009

valiant said:
I think you are misunderstanding Clayman. He is not saying that Pete is a joke .Just that Fed dint have cake walk draws as some of the posters are trying to suggest. So he wants to show that Sampras also had some draws similarly.

Thank you for understanding what i say... my whole purpose was to disprove the argument that Federer is where he is becuase of cakewalk draws

Azzurri · Jun 7, 2009

Conquistador said:
You are right. I would list Pete somewhere on my list of best players of all time in the 4-7 range. Sampras played in a weak era, and therefore flourished..when he ran into clay court specialists, he didnt fare well.

do you realize not a single poster that knows who you are would ever, ever take you seriously?

Azzurri · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Game Sampras..... you have a lot of fun calling Fed a cakewalk draw player, but let me show you Pete's cakewalk draws:

Here is an analysis of Fed's slam wins:
Wimby 03 - yes he did only beat 1 top 10 player, but he lost only 1 set
AO 2004 - beat 2 top 10 players, as well as an in form Lleyton Hewitt, and on fire Marat Safin (who would be back in the top 10 by years end)
Wimby 04 - took out 2 top 10 players both former world no 1's. Andy Roddick played the match of his life and still lost in 4
USO 04 - took out 3 top 10 players, including 2 former world no 1's, and bageled Hewitt twice in the final
Wimby 05 - lost only 1 set, and handled Hewitt and Roddick easily
USO 05 - killed his daddy Nalbandian in straights, then beat 2 former world no 1's
AO 06 - His easiest draw in a major, but did have to face an on fire Bhagdhatis, as well as an inform Tommy Haas. Also took out top 10 player Davydenko, who never beats himself
Wimby 06 - lost only 1 set in the final, had a bagel set against Nadal, and did have to play tough matches early on
USO 06 - took out 3 top 10 players including an out of his mind Blake, and a rejuvinated Roddick
AO 07 - lost no sets, embaressed Roddick who beat him the week before, and he did play 3 top 10 players, incluidng an on fire Gonzo
Wimby 07 - had to beat young gun Del Potro, former world no 1 Ferrero, and Safin, had a week of then came back an killed Gasquet, before fighting so hard to take out an on fire Nadal
USO 07 - took out the no 3, 4, 5 ranked players without loosing a set. Roddick and Djokovic were both playing great tennis
USO 08 - he had to fight to win this.... playing crap tennis for 4 rounds, killed in form Djokovic, and realled outplayed on fire Murray, whose nerves werent a big factor early on
FO 09 - statistically the easiest draw hes had, but he did take out an in form and on fire Del Potro, Nadal's killer Soderling, Gael "pong" Monfils, and really showed fight by beating Haas and Acusso

Now His losses in GS's in his prime (04 - 07):
- Guga Keurton FO 04 - no shame in loosing to a 3 time champ
- Safin AO 05 -- when on Safin can beat anyone
- Nadal FO 05 - no explanation needed
- Nadal FO 06 - ditto above
- Nadal FO 07 - ditto above
- Djoko AO 08 - had mono, and lost the the in form world no 3
- Nadal FO 08 - ditto 2 above
- Nadal Wimby 08 - lost to the very soon to be world no 1
-- his only loss outside the top 4 was Keurton, and of course he was no stranger on clay, or on the big scene

Now: here is Sampras::::

the 93 USO he beat 1 top 10 player... the overrated clay courter Chang....

AO 94 he beat only 1 top 10er Courier, yet he still lost 5 sets

USO 95 he beat only 1 top 10 player again,
same for AO 97,
Wimby 97 his best win was over 18 ranked old man becker,
Wimby 98 his highest ranked win was in the 3rd round,
Wimby 00 his highest ranked win was over 20's ranked Rafter,
USO 02, he beat overrated Haas at 3, and his only good win was over Agassi

Now let me get to the losses in his prime:
-Sergei Brugera (rank 11) 93 FO
- Jamie Yzaga (23) 94 USO
- Gilbert Schaller (24) 95 FO
- Mark Philopusis (40) 96 AO
- Krajick (13) 96 Wimby
- Petr Korda (16) 97 USO
- Karol Kucera (20) 98 AO....... wow so many i am too tired to continue

you wasted a WHOLE lotta time.

lawrence · Jun 7, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Sorry mate, but thats a bit harsh.... Sampras did beat Federer in 07... i know it was an exhibition, but that was some good tennis from him

While i do believe Federer> Sampras, i have the greatest respect for Pete, and do believe that he is one of the greats

pete is definitely top 5, imo

but you cannot be serious when talking about exo's
you think it wouldve been a good image for fed to straight set pete 3 matches in a row?
pete is good, but hes been retired for a while now

R_Federer · Jun 7, 2009

You can run your mouth until the cows come home but if this was a court case the two damning evidences are Federer has a career Slam, Sampras doesnt and Federer will have more Slams than Sampras.

End of story.

Cenc · Jun 8, 2009

clayman2000 said:
Game Sampras..... you have a lot of fun calling Fed a cakewalk draw player, but let me show you Pete's cakewalk draws:

Here is an analysis of Fed's slam wins:
Wimby 03 - yes he did only beat 1 top 10 player, but he lost only 1 set
AO 2004 - beat 2 top 10 players, as well as an in form Lleyton Hewitt, and on fire Marat Safin (who would be back in the top 10 by years end)
Wimby 04 - took out 2 top 10 players both former world no 1's. Andy Roddick played the match of his life and still lost in 4
USO 04 - took out 3 top 10 players, including 2 former world no 1's, and bageled Hewitt twice in the final
Wimby 05 - lost only 1 set, and handled Hewitt and Roddick easily
USO 05 - killed his daddy Nalbandian in straights, then beat 2 former world no 1's
AO 06 - His easiest draw in a major, but did have to face an on fire Bhagdhatis, as well as an inform Tommy Haas. Also took out top 10 player Davydenko, who never beats himself
Wimby 06 - lost only 1 set in the final, had a bagel set against Nadal, and did have to play tough matches early on
USO 06 - took out 3 top 10 players including an out of his mind Blake, and a rejuvinated Roddick
AO 07 - lost no sets, embaressed Roddick who beat him the week before, and he did play 3 top 10 players, incluidng an on fire Gonzo
Wimby 07 - had to beat young gun Del Potro, former world no 1 Ferrero, and Safin, had a week of then came back an killed Gasquet, before fighting so hard to take out an on fire Nadal
USO 07 - took out the no 3, 4, 5 ranked players without loosing a set. Roddick and Djokovic were both playing great tennis
USO 08 - he had to fight to win this.... playing crap tennis for 4 rounds, killed in form Djokovic, and realled outplayed on fire Murray, whose nerves werent a big factor early on
FO 09 - statistically the easiest draw hes had, but he did take out an in form and on fire Del Potro, Nadal's killer Soderling, Gael "pong" Monfils, and really showed fight by beating Haas and Acusso

Now His losses in GS's in his prime (04 - 07):
- Guga Keurton FO 04 - no shame in loosing to a 3 time champ
- Safin AO 05 -- when on Safin can beat anyone
- Nadal FO 05 - no explanation needed
- Nadal FO 06 - ditto above
- Nadal FO 07 - ditto above
- Djoko AO 08 - had mono, and lost the the in form world no 3
- Nadal FO 08 - ditto 2 above
- Nadal Wimby 08 - lost to the very soon to be world no 1
-- his only loss outside the top 4 was Keurton, and of course he was no stranger on clay, or on the big scene

Now: here is Sampras::::

the 93 USO he beat 1 top 10 player... the overrated clay courter Chang....

AO 94 he beat only 1 top 10er Courier, yet he still lost 5 sets

USO 95 he beat only 1 top 10 player again,
same for AO 97,
Wimby 97 his best win was over 18 ranked old man becker,
Wimby 98 his highest ranked win was in the 3rd round,
Wimby 00 his highest ranked win was over 20's ranked Rafter,
USO 02, he beat overrated Haas at 3, and his only good win was over Agassi

Now let me get to the losses in his prime:
-Sergei Brugera (rank 11) 93 FO
- Jamie Yzaga (23) 94 USO
- Gilbert Schaller (24) 95 FO
- Mark Philopusis (40) 96 AO
- Krajick (13) 96 Wimby
- Petr Korda (16) 97 USO
- Karol Kucera (20) 98 AO....... wow so many i am too tired to continue

ON FIRE BAGHDATIS i like this one
let me remind u, also on hard court few months later baghdatis lost to ON FIRE 36 y.o. andre

Azzurri · Jun 8, 2009

R_Federer said:
You can run your mouth until the cows come home but if this was a court case the two damning evidences are Federer has a career Slam, Sampras doesnt and Federer will have more Slams than Sampras.

End of story.

exactly...now Fed is really making it tough to call him GOAT because he is still dominated by another player in his era that has defeated him in 5 grand slams...NADAL. Pete was NEVER owned in that manner by anyone in his era.

TsongaEatingAPineappleLol · Jun 8, 2009

I agree. Nadal screwed him out of 6 Grand Slams. Sampras was screwed from Agassi in a Grand Slam way less times than that.

navratilovafan · Jun 8, 2009

Cenc said:
ON FIRE BAGHDATIS i like this one
let me remind u, also on hard court few months later baghdatis lost to ON FIRE 36 y.o. andre

Your beloved Sampras as the dominant #1 lost in straight sets to 33 year old Lendl in 1993, and Lendl wasnt a late bloomer who won over half of his slams between ages 29-33 like Agassi either. In fact Sampras lost 3 times to a 30 something Lendl, and took 5 sets to beat a 30 year old Lendl in the quarters when he won his first U.S Open when Lendl had already won his final slam(your other mancrush Agassi in the final was much easier to crush than the 30 year old Lendl had been mind you). Agassi also had to go 5 sets and was fed a bagel at the U.S Open by 37 year old Jimmy Connors in 1989. Then in 1991 39 year old Jimmy Connors came out of Agassi's quarter to the semis by beating Aaron Krickstein, the same guy who put out 21 year old Agassi in the first round in striaght sets. See isnt this fun.

Cesc Fabregas · Jun 8, 2009

Conquistador said:
You are right. I would list Pete somewhere on my list of best players of all time in the 4-7 range. Sampras played in a weak era, and therefore flourished..when he ran into clay court specialists, he didnt fare well.

Lets go through Federer's slam wins

1. Old past him prime Philippoussis who was part of the Sampras era.
2. 86 ranked Safin.
3. Roddick.
4. Hewitt.
5. Roddick.
6. Old 35 broke back Andre who had played 3 5 setters in a row and was 4-2 up in the 3rd set.
7. Unseeded Baghdatis who had played 3 5 set matches before the final and was leading Federer a set and a break before running out of gas.
8. Young Nadal playing in his 4th grass court tournament of his life.
9. Roddick.
10. Gonzalez playing in his first and only slam final.
11. Nadal who had played 5 days in a row and he bust his knee at the end of the 4th set and blew 4 break points in the 5th.
12. Djokovic playing in his 1st slam final who blew 3 sets points in the 1st set and a 4-1 lead in the 2nd.
13. Murray playing in his 1st slam final and had to play 2 days in a row against Nadal whilst Federer had the Sunday off.
14. Soderling playing in his 1st slam final and before had never been past the 3rd round of a slam.

Yeah Federer's competition was great.

Rhino · Jun 8, 2009

GameSampras said:
Its funny... Who is Fed ALWAYS being compared to by most everyone? Not Pancho, Not Budge, Not Laver, Not Rosewall.. But Sampras!!!

Even though Laver is highly regarded as the GOAT, (and still is by most) why is it Fed is always being compared to Pete?

Btw.. Are u taking Pete's injury into account against Yzaga? Yea thought not. Another federphile trying to **** me off

Dude you have to admit, there are an awful lot of FACTS in the OP's list of Grand Slams. I have nothing against Pete, but I like facts.

Rhino · Jun 8, 2009

Cenc said:
ON FIRE BAGHDATIS i like this one
let me remind u, also on hard court few months later baghdatis lost to ON FIRE 36 y.o. andre

Thats stupid, did you see that match? He was a cramping blister factory, he could hardly walk.

Winners or Errors · Jun 8, 2009

Mansewerz said:
Please stop calling Agassi brokeback. He has a wife and two kids.

I don't think it's a reference to the movie, but to the back problems that ended Agassi's career. Broken back... Rude, but not really indicating Agassi was gay for you homophobes out there. ;-)

grafrules · Jun 8, 2009

Cesc Fabregas said:
Lets go through Federer's slam wins

1. Old past him prime Philippoussis who was part of the Sampras era.
2. 86 ranked Safin.
3. Roddick.
4. Hewitt.
5. Roddick.
6. Hewitt.
7. Unseeded Baghdatis who had played 3 5 set matches before the final and was leading Federer a set and a break before running out of gas.
8. Young Nadal playing in his 4th grass court tournament of his life.
9. Roddick.
10. Gonzalez playing in his first and only slam final.
11. Nadal who had played 5 days in a row and he bust his knee at the end of the 4th set and blew 4 break points in the 5th.
12. Djokovic playing in his 1st slam final who blew 3 sets points in the 1st set and a 4-1 lead in the 2nd.
13. Murray playing in his 1st slam final and had to play 2 days in a row against Nadal whilst Federer had the Sunday off.
14. Soderling playing in his 1st slam final and before had never been past the 3rd round of a slam.

Yeah Federer's competition was great.

OK lets go through Pete's 14 slam wins

1. Young choking Agassi who went 0-3 in his first 3 slam finals including a loss to 30 year old career pretender Andres Gomez in the French Open final

2. Jim Courier on GRASS where Courier has a lifetime 19-11 record and advanced past the 3rd round only three times his whole career.

3. Cedric Pioline

4. Todd Martin, a player in the first of his career two slam finals (both which he would lose)

5. Goran Ivanisevic who isnt anymore accomplished a player than Roddick or Hewitt (arguably less)

6. a well past his prime Boris Becker in his first slam final in 4 years.

7. Agassi

8. Michael Chang, a player who won his only slam title in 1989 on clay, and who is generally looked at a poor mans Hewitt

9. Carlos Moya on hard courts, a mostly clay court specialist in 1 of his only 2 career slam finals (and that even includes his prefered clay).

10. Cedric Pioline again.

11. a past his prime Ivanisevic who had gone 1-5 in his last 5 slams going into that Wimbledon and was ranked #25.

12. Agassi on grass where he is less accomplished overall than young Nadal already is, the player Federer beat in 2 Wimbledon finals already.

13. Rafter who had a 17-7 lifetime record at Wimbledon before that that year and was ranked #21 at the time.

14. Agassi who was even older than 31 year old Pete at 32.

Winners or Errors · Jun 8, 2009

Azzurri said:
exactly...now Fed is really making it tough to call him GOAT because he is still dominated by another player in his era that has defeated him in 5 grand slams...NADAL. Pete was NEVER owned in that manner by anyone in his era.

No, Pete was owned by virtually every clay courter on the planet, and therefore rarely made it far enough to actually face a good clay courter. Weren't three of those Nadal-Federer slam finals on clay at the French Open? What's the record outside of the French Open... 2-2? Hmmm. You're silly. Pete was simply not good enough on all surfaces to amass a losing H2H record. When you're owned by #100, how can you say anything about your record against #10, who you rarely ever play?

Why Roger Federer owned Pete Sampras, even before he won the FO

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Banned

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Deleted member 25923

Guest

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Banned

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Legend

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Legend

Banned

Banned

Legend

Legend

Legend

Legend

Banned

Legend

Similar threads