safin says Federer = Sampras + Agassi!!

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

.. towards the end of the video (link courtesy VGP in a thread in FPP section):

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Media/Videos/2009/10/ATP-Uncovered-S1-E6-Pete-Sampras.aspx

Kafelnikov deflects the question, while Safin clearly thinks Fed is the GOAT

that makes four players (Safin, Agassi, hewitt and henman) who have played both players at their peaks, crowning Fed as the GOAT.

Sampras himself says that tennis now is tougher than the times when he played..

AndrewD · Oct 14, 2009

fed_rulz said:
that makes four players (Safin, Agassi, hewitt and henman) who have played both players at their peaks, crowning Fed as the GOAT.

Now, re-read that a few times, very carefully, and try to see what what's wrong.

I'll give you a hint - the term is 'Greatest of ALL time', not 'Greatest of the last 20 years'.

Bonus points if you picked that, of the players you listed, only Agassi and Henman could possibly have played both Sampras and Federer at their peak.

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

AndrewD said:
Now, re-read that a few times, very carefully, and try to see what what's wrong.

I'll give you a hint - the term is 'Greatest of ALL time', not 'Greatest of the last 20 years'.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger. Safin was asked who was the greatest of ALL TIME to which he replied. If you don't like it, go take it with safin (or any of those players that I mentioned) or the one that asked Safin the question in the first place.

statto · Oct 14, 2009

Quoting Henman as a tennis authority! I'm English, but that's nuts.

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

statto said:
Quoting Henman as a tennis authority! I'm English, but that's nuts.

why not? he's more qualified to comment on how good Fed/Sampras are than tennis analysts who base their opinions on just watching them play

settolove · Oct 14, 2009

statto said:
Quoting Henman as a tennis authority! I'm English, but that's nuts.

Henman has probably forgotten more about tennis than most people on this board will understand in their lifetimes. People seem to forget that he climbed to number 4 in the world and he wasn't the most talented junior that the UK produced. But because he never won Wimbledon, people (particularly uk ) are very dismissive of him. It isn't easy to win grand slams or even get into finals. I say this as someone who didn't particularly like Henman.

statto · Oct 14, 2009

I'd still take the word of ex players who've won multiple slams and been world #1. There's no shortage of those who're willing to crown Fed GOAT without having to rely on "Tiger Tim".

aphex · Oct 14, 2009

just watch the rafaela brigade come in here trying to discredit safin...

statto · Oct 14, 2009

statto said:
I'd still take the word of ex players who've won multiple slams and been world #1. There's no shortage of those who're willing to crown Fed GOAT without having to rely on "Tiger Tim".

To qualify my statement, I have a lot of respect for Tim as someone who did a great deal for British tennis, and on another board where he is frequently derided by my fellow Englishmen I stick up for him. But to say Fed is GOAT because Agassi, Hewitt, Safin and Henman say so. Let's just say it's not hard to spot the odd one out.

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

statto said:
I'd still take the word of ex players who've won multiple slams and been world #1. There's no shortage of those who're willing to crown Fed GOAT without having to rely on "Tiger Tim".

Name other slam winners who have played both Fed & Sampras in their primes, and are willing to crown Fed as GOAT?

statto · Oct 14, 2009

fed_rulz said:
Name other slam winners who have played both Fed & Sampras in their primes, and are willing to crown Fed as GOAT?

Two of the players you mentioned didn't play them in their primes.

What do Kuerten, Rafter, Ferrero, Ivanisevic et al think?

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

statto said:
Two of the players you mentioned didn't play them in their primes.

What do Kuerten, Rafter, Ferrero, Ivanisevic et al think?

All four that I mentioned have played Fed & Pete in their primes, unless you take Pete's prime to be 93-97.... And Rafter and Ivanisevic did not play Fed in his prime. i don't know if Ferrero played pete in his prime. I do not know of Kuerten's opinion on the GOATness..

Blinkism · Oct 14, 2009

aphex said:
just watch the rafaela brigade come in here trying to discredit safin...

Why the paranoia?

Why would Nadal fans want to discredit Federer?

We cheer for a guy whose greatest achievements come from beating Federer...

Why would we suddenly want to knock Federer down?

I think you have Nadal fans confused with Federer haters.

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

aphex said:
just watch the rafaela brigade come in here trying to discredit safin...

no, it'll be more of the Pete-****s, and nostalgia-lovers.

TMF · Oct 14, 2009

fed_rulz said:
.. towards the end of the video (link courtesy VGP in a thread in FPP section):

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Media/Videos/2009/10/ATP-Uncovered-S1-E6-Pete-Sampras.aspx

Kafelnikov deflects the question, while Safin clearly thinks Fed is the GOAT

that makes four players (Safin, Agassi, hewitt and henman) who have played both players at their peaks, crowning Fed as the GOAT.

Sampras himself says that tennis now is tougher than the times when he played..

Santoro and Bjorkman played both played against prime Sampras in the 90s and prime Federer in this era, they both said Federer is the better player.

That makes six players.

TMF · Oct 14, 2009

statto said:
Quoting Henman as a tennis authority! I'm English, but that's nuts.

Agassi, Santoro and Bjorkman are all nuts too? Guess all the players playing in both decades must be nuts. LOL

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

TMF said:
Santoro and Bjorkman played both played against prime Sampras in the 90s and prime Federer in this era, they both said Federer is the better player.

That makes six players.

thanks, i had forgotten about santoro and bjorkman..

statto · Oct 14, 2009

TMF said:
Agassi, Santoro and Bjorkman are all nuts too? Guess all the players playing in both decades must be nuts. LOL

I only questioned the inclusion of Henman with the other three mentioned in the OP. You'll have to point me in the direction of my post which says I don't think Fed is GOAT.

kOaMaster · Oct 14, 2009

there is no doubt about fed being better than sampras now. why bother?

ksbh · Oct 14, 2009

There is, else the Federer lovers wouldn't be telling us at every turn why he's greater than Sampras, this thread being the latest!

kOaMaster said:
there is no doubt about fed being better than sampras now. why bother?

edberg505 · Oct 14, 2009

AndrewD said:
Now, re-read that a few times, very carefully, and try to see what what's wrong.

I'll give you a hint - the term is 'Greatest of ALL time', not 'Greatest of the last 20 years'.

Bonus points if you picked that, of the players you listed, only Agassi and Henman could possibly have played both Sampras and Federer at their peak.

And Santoro!

Connors · Oct 14, 2009

Fed is clearly better than Sampras, if nothing else for one clear reason:

On clay's biggest stage, Federer has won a French, was a 3 time finalist and also a semi-finalist. In all four of his losses, he lost to the greatest clay courter we'll probably ever see in Nadal.

Sampras could but manage ONE semi in 13 tries at the French. When he got there, he was destroyed by Kafelnikov in sets 3 and 4--completely spent physically and nowhere even CLOSE to winning.

Right there, that settles it. GREATEST implies the ability to be great on all surfaces. Federer has been GREAT on clay. He also won the Italian Open don't forget and Hamburg as well.

OddJack · Oct 14, 2009

Well, Safin knows more than most of you armchair pundits... sooo

President of Serve/Volley · Oct 14, 2009

Connors said:
Fed is clearly better than Sampras, if nothing else for one clear reason:

On clay's biggest stage, Federer has won a French, was a 3 time finalist and also a semi-finalist. In all four of his losses, he lost to the greatest clay courter we'll probably ever see in Nadal.

Sampras could but manage ONE semi in 13 tries at the French. When he got there, he was destroyed by Kafelnikov in sets 3 and 4--completely spent physically and nowhere even CLOSE to winning.

Right there, that settles it. GREATEST implies the ability to be great on all surfaces. Federer has been GREAT on clay. He also won the Italian Open don't forget and Hamburg as well.

All of this is true, but one has to wonder if Tim Gullikson did not passed away, I think Pete would have won a FO.

Azzurri · Oct 14, 2009

fed_rulz said:
.. towards the end of the video (link courtesy VGP in a thread in FPP section):

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Media/Videos/2009/10/ATP-Uncovered-S1-E6-Pete-Sampras.aspx

Kafelnikov deflects the question, while Safin clearly thinks Fed is the GOAT

that makes four players (Safin, Agassi, hewitt and henman) who have played both players at their peaks, crowning Fed as the GOAT.

Sampras himself says that tennis now is tougher than the times when he played..

somehow I think Rafa would disagree. Until Fed has no equal in his OWN era he cannot possibly be GOAT.

Azzurri · Oct 14, 2009

fed_rulz said:
All four that I mentioned have played Fed & Pete in their primes, unless you take Pete's prime to be 93-97.... And Rafter and Ivanisevic did not play Fed in his prime. i don't know if Ferrero played pete in his prime. I do not know of Kuerten's opinion on the GOATness..

It is QUITE obviosu you know absolutely nothing about Pete. His prime was NOT 2000. Yes, it was 93-97. He won 2 majors in one season in 93, 95, and 97 and had 6 years of #1 ranking at years end(till 98).

Steve132 · Oct 14, 2009

President of Serve/Volley said:
All of this is true, but one has to wonder if Tim Gullikson did not passed away, I think Pete would have won a FO.

What's the basis for this claim? Sampras never came close to winning the French Open when Gullickson was alive.

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

Azzurri said:
It is QUITE obviosu you know absolutely nothing about Pete. His prime was NOT 2000. Yes, it was 93-97. He won 2 majors in one season in 93, 95, and 97 and had 6 years of #1 ranking at years end(till 98).

Lol. Both hewitt and safin have played Pete since 1998. do a fact check before shooting your mouth off

. So let me get this straight: Pete was not in his "prime", yet he ended the year at # 1 in 98.

President of Serve/Volley · Oct 14, 2009

Steve132 said:
What's the basis for this claim? Sampras never came close to winning the French Open when Gullickson was alive.

In Sampras's book, Tim wanted to win the FO together with Pete.

8pNADAL · Oct 14, 2009

federer = sampras + agassi - goat serve - goat volley - goat return

ubermeyer · Oct 14, 2009

obviously he is though

ubermeyer · Oct 14, 2009

8pNADAL said:
federer = sampras + agassi - goat serve - goat volley - goat return

sampras had the goat serve? are you brain-dead?

he didn't have goat volleys either... although at least that is closer

JeMar · Oct 14, 2009

8pNADAL said:
federer = sampras + agassi - goat serve - goat volley - goat return

Federer at his prime was Sampras + Agassi with a great serve, great returns, and good volleys.

That's still a pretty damn good player.

Oh, and Sampras didn't have the best serve of all time, nor the best volleys. Agassi's claim for greatest return of all time is debatable, but I'd be willing to let that go. Sampras' serve and volleys, though... no dice. Karlovic's serve is better than Sampras' and I can name 5 players with better volleys than Pete.

fed_rulz · Oct 14, 2009

Azzurri said:
somehow I think Rafa would disagree. Until Fed has no equal in his OWN era he cannot possibly be GOAT.

err.. rafa disagrees with you; he calls Fed the "greatest in history" repeatedly

8pNADAL · Oct 14, 2009

thats funny that someone would think federer had a serve even close to sampras....sampras is the standard by which serving excellence is measured, and serve-volley too the highest standard (though the ease of the volley is helped by the freak serve)

viduka0101 · Oct 14, 2009

ubermeyer said:
sampras had the goat serve? are you brain-dead?

he didn't have goat volleys either... although at least that is closer

i guess you like being a smartass?
i'm still waiting for an explanation on the calculus question you supposedly answered

8pNADAL · Oct 14, 2009

last few wimbledons federer has missed some laughably easy volleys, that is the most glaring problem when he plays nadal at wimbledon

ksbh · Oct 14, 2009

Why not? According to ******* logic, that is possible.

According to *******s, Federer is no longer at his peak though he's made the final of the last 7 grand slams, winning 3 of them. As a Federer fan, you should have known this! ROFL!

fed_rulz said:
Lol. Both hewitt and safin have played Pete since 1998. do a fact check before shooting your mouth off . So let me get this straight: Pete was not in his "prime", yet he ended the year at # 1 in 98.

Tennis_Monk · Oct 14, 2009

President of Serve/Volley said:
All of this is true, but one has to wonder if Tim Gullikson did not passed away, I think Pete would have won a FO.

I like this concept.

Applying this, If i had started playing tennis when i was 5, i would have won 20 grandslams and probably be the GOAT.

If i didnt miss that bus few yrs ago, i would be Bill Gate's right man minting millions now...

ksbh · Oct 14, 2009

So I take it that you concur with McEnroe that Sampras would beat Federer a majority of the time on fast courts ... because he knows 'more than most of you armchair pundits... sooo'?! ROFL!

OddJack said:
Well, Safin knows more than most of you armchair pundits... sooo

varsity8993 · Oct 14, 2009

But what about tennis on other planets and possibly in other dimensions. Can't declare Federer anything until that question is answered.

TMF · Oct 14, 2009

ksbh said:
So I take it that you concur with McEnroe that Sampras would beat Federer a majority of the time on fast courts ... because he knows 'more than most of you armchair pundits... sooo'?! ROFL!

Mac never played Federer, but Safin played BOTH Fed/Pete in the biggest stage in mens' tennis. Safin knows more about their game than Mac?

8pNADAL · Oct 14, 2009

mac has a more accurate perspective than safin, because safin can only judge based on the sampras v safin matchup, or based on the federer v safin matchup, so that is a head2head perspective which depends on the player's pespective, like federer hates playing nadal, yet blake didn't mind playing nadal etc., so mac has a more impartial pespective hence a better judge

Azzurri · Oct 15, 2009

fed_rulz said:
Lol. Both hewitt and safin have played Pete since 1998. do a fact check before shooting your mouth off . So let me get this straight: Pete was not in his "prime", yet he ended the year at # 1 in 98.

do you have any idea what you read?? First off Marat played him ONCE prior to 2000 and that was in 1998 and Pete destroyed him. Pete was just not the same player by 2000. Yes he won W and made 2 more USO finals (losing them) before winning in 2002, but he was no longer in his prime and not the same player. You are utterly without clue.

Hewitt????? Lleyton did not beat Pete until 2000. So again, please wake up. Each player you mentioned played Pete ONE time in 98 and LOST. Prime Pete was no match for Lleyton/Marat. Get a clue.

Azzurri · Oct 15, 2009

JeMar said:
Federer at his prime was Sampras + Agassi with a great serve, great returns, and good volleys.

That's still a pretty damn good player.

Oh, and Sampras didn't have the best serve of all time, nor the best volleys. Agassi's claim for greatest return of all time is debatable, but I'd be willing to let that go. Sampras' serve and volleys, though... no dice. Karlovic's serve is better than Sampras' and I can name 5 players with better volleys than Pete.

Do you mean 1st serve?? I love when people bring in the goon Karlovic to try and bring down Pete's serve..give me a break.

wyutani · Oct 15, 2009

agassi + federer = sampras.

JeMar · Oct 15, 2009

Azzurri said:
Do you mean 1st serve?? I love when people bring in the goon Karlovic to try and bring down Pete's serve..give me a break.

Obviously I'm talking about first serves.

Deleted member 21996 · Oct 15, 2009

fed_rulz said:
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. Safin was asked who was the greatest of ALL TIME to which he replied. If you don't like it, go take it with safin (or any of those players that I mentioned) or the one that asked Safin the question in the first place.

if the messenger distorts the message with a clear agenda, i believe he is bound to get shot too.. deserved might i add...

Deleted member 21996 · Oct 15, 2009

ksbh said:
There is, else the Federer lovers wouldn't be telling us at every turn why he's greater than Sampras, this thread being the latest!

i always wondered why the federetes start a new thread about his greatness and his "first player ever to win ________(insert random bs) while being ________(insert more BS) and having ____________(idem) whit closed eyes" records every friggin 30 seconds... but that is just me...

ps: insecurity comes to mind...

Azzurri · Oct 15, 2009

JeMar said:
Obviously I'm talking about first serves.

ok, but it was not obvious. You stated SERVE. there are 2 allowed per attempt. What does it matter that Karlovic has a better 1st serve?? What does it mean? Aaron Krickstein had a better BH than Pete, again what does it mean? Karlovic has done NOTHINg with that great 1st serve. Again, what is your point?

safin says Federer = Sampras + Agassi!!

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Professional

Banned

Professional

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Talk Tennis Guru

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Banned

Legend

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Legend

Legend

Professional

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Banned

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Rookie

Talk Tennis Guru

Banned

Legend

Legend

Hall of Fame

Legend

Deleted member 21996

Guest

Deleted member 21996

Guest

Legend

Similar threads