If Federer were like Sampras in 2 respects...

The_18th_Slam · Jul 2, 2015

If Federer were like Sampras in 2 respects, his head-to-head with Nadal would look really different. The two respects are:

1. If Federer sucked on clay like Sampras
2. If Federer retired at 31 like Sampras

The clay H2H would then be 0-0 instead of 2-13. And Federer wouldn't have the 5 losses post-2012. The new H2H would then be:

8-6 to Federer.

In effect, when people detract Federer for his H2H, they're actually praising him for being a much better player than Sampras

Golden · Jul 2, 2015

Bit harsh with the trolling dude. Federer is greater than both Sampras and Nadal, what more do you want?

The_18th_Slam · Jul 2, 2015

Golden said:
Bit harsh with the trolling dude. Federer is greater than both Sampras and Nadal, what more do you want?

Huh? How am I trolling?

Inanimate_object · Jul 2, 2015

Careful you don't pull a muscle with those syllogistic gymnastics.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 2, 2015

Inanimate_object said:
Careful you don't pull a muscle with those syllogistic gymnastics.

Careful you don't by actually putting your neurons to use for once.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

I guess Federer is a worse player for having been better on clay!

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

If Sampras was as PATHETIC against his main rivals like OVerratederer!!! Unfortunately, Sampras wash alpha male who raised his game against his main contemporary rivals while Fed craps his pants

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
If Sampras was as PATHETIC against his main rivals like OVerratederer!!!

Richard Krajicek: 4-6
Michael Stich: 4-5
Lleyton Hewitt: 4-5
Marat Safin: 3-4
Andy Roddick: 1-2
Roger Federer: 0-1

Djokovic2011 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
If Sampras was as PATHETIC against his main rivals like OVerratederer!!! Unfortunately, Sampras wash alpha male who raised his game against his main contemporary rivals while Fed craps his pants

If Pete faced Nadal on all surfaces as many times as Federer did, he wouldn't have a winning H2H either.

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
Richard Krajicek: 4-6
Michael Stich: 4-5
Lleyton Hewitt: 4-5
Marat Safin: 3-4
Andy Roddick: 1-2
Roger Federer: 0-1

I dont see 23 losses to one player in there anywhere. ROFLMAO. Nice try though.

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

Djokovic2011 said:
If Pete faced Nadal on all surfaces as many times as Federer did, he wouldn't have a winning H2H either.

Righht... Explain Fed's LOSING h2h vs. Rafa on hard courts then. And an overall PATHETIC 2-9 in slams??

forzamilan90 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
If Sampras was as PATHETIC against his main rivals like OVerratederer!!! Unfortunately, Sampras wash alpha male who raised his game against his main contemporary rivals while Fed craps his pants

Outside of Nadal, who else has Fed's number?

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
I dont see 23 losses to one player in there anywhere. ROFLMAO.

That's because he took his ball and went home. And also because he sucked on clay.

If Federer sucked on clay like Sampras, and retired at 31 like Sampras, his H2H with Nadal would be 8-6.

forzamilan90 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
I dont see 23 losses to one player in there anywhere. ROFLMAO. Nice try though.

That's cause Sampras wasn't good enough to play the same clay courters too many times, instead he lost too often to far too many different individuals to keep count.

Djokovic2011 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Righht... Explain Fed's LOSING h2h vs. Rafa on hard courts then. And an overall PATHETIC 2-9 in slams??

Terrible match-up and very few meetings on fast hard courts like Dubai and Cinci.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Righht... Explain Fed's LOSING h2h vs. Rafa on hard courts then. And an overall PATHETIC 2-9 in slams??

If Federer never played Nadal on clay and retired at 31, he'd lead the H2H 8-6.

TMF · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
I dont see 23 losses to one player in there anywhere. ROFLMAO. Nice try though.

But Sampras was losing to a young 19/20 years old players.

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

forzamilan90 said:
Outside of Nadal, who else has Fed's number?

Overrall.. Nole has been getting Fed's number for quite some time now. Hes taken his fair share of the pie

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Overrall.. Nole has been getting Fed's number for quite some time now. Hes taken his fair share of the pie

Roddick would have gotten Sampras's number if Sampras was playing till he was 34

forzamilan90 · Jul 4, 2015

Djokovic2011 said:
Terrible match-up and very few meetings on fast hard courts like Dubai and Cinci.

Exactly it's not rocket science.

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

Djokovic2011 said:
Terrible match-up and very few meetings on fast hard courts like Dubai and Cinci.

Sounds like more EXCUSES to me. Guess Fed isn't as great as billed.

forzamilan90 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Overrall.. Nole has been getting Fed's number for quite some time now. Hes taken his fair share of the pie

LOL terrible argument, Djokovic is even younger than Nadal who is 5 years younger than Fed. The years Djokovic started dominating, Fed was way past it at that point.

Who else besides Nadal? Cause last time I checked Federer blew everybody off the court 2004-2007 literary with only Nadal in the way on clay. Get out of here with that weak argument crap. Show some respect.

TMF · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Overrall.. Nole has been getting Fed's number for quite some time now. Hes taken his fair share of the pie

But Nole is 6 years younger than Federer who was at his best during 2004-2009.

forzamilan90 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Sounds like more EXCUSES to me. Guess Fed isn't as great as billed.

Or Nadal sucks on faster courts and didn't go deep enough when Fed was dominating.
Wimbledon number 8 is coming up. Buy diapers cause you're going to need them.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Sounds like more EXCUSES to me. Guess Fed isn't as great as billed.

Laver is 2-5 against Borg. Don't make excuses for that, either.

Djokovic2011 · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Sounds like more EXCUSES to me. Guess Fed isn't as great as billed.

He is as great as billed if you believe overall accomplishments are more important than H2Hs. Clearly you don't which I guess is a view you're entitled to.

Gary Duane · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
Richard Krajicek: 4-6
Michael Stich: 4-5
Lleyton Hewitt: 4-5
Marat Safin: 3-4
Andy Roddick: 1-2
Roger Federer: 0-1

Only Krajicek and Stich were contemporaries. Those other wins were after 2000, players from a different generation.

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
Laver is 2-5 against Borg. Don't make excuses for that, either.

Big difference between a 5 year age difference and a TWENTY year age difference

Gary Duane · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
Laver is 2-5 against Borg. Don't make excuses for that, either.

Laver was born in 1938, Borg in 1956. No excuses necessary. You are reaching.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Gary Duane said:
Only Krajicek and Stich were contemporaries. Those other wins were after 2000, players from a different generation.

One could argue Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation as well. Where do you draw the line?

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Big difference between a 5 year age difference and a TWENTY year age difference

Sounds like EXCUSES to me

Thetouch · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
Richard Krajicek: 4-6
Michael Stich: 4-5
Lleyton Hewitt: 4-5
Marat Safin: 3-4
Andy Roddick: 1-2
Roger Federer: 0-1

Some of your records aren´t true at all because some sides I visited claim this

And to be more specific:

Safin is 3:3 - 2:2 at Slams
Stich is 3:3 - 1:0 at Slams
Roddick 1:2 - 1:0 at Slams
Hewitt 4:5 - 1:1 at Slams
Krajicek 4:6 - 1:1 at Slams

So except for Federer who only faced him once, none of them owned him when it really mattered.

And I am not going to put his records against Becker, Agassi, Courier etc.

Russeljones · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
If Federer were like Sampras in 2 respects, his head-to-head with Nadal would look really different. The two respects are:

1. If Federer sucked on clay like Sampras
2. If Federer retired at 31 like Sampras

The clay H2H would then be 0-0 instead of 2-13. And Federer wouldn't have the 5 losses post-2012. The new H2H would then be:

8-6 to Federer.

In effect, when people detract Federer for his H2H, they're actually praising him for being a much better player than Sampras

I'd like to know why you thought such a thread was necessary.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Gary Duane said:
Laver was born in 1938, Borg in 1956. No excuses necessary. You are reaching.

No, I'm not. Who is to decide what are excuses and what aren't? If arguments explaining the Federer-Nadal H2H are excuses, so is anything explaining the Laver-Borg H2H. Be consistent, or log out.

Gary Duane · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Righht... Explain Fed's LOSING h2h vs. Rafa on hard courts then. And an overall PATHETIC 2-9 in slams??

Easy. Fed was dominant on hard until 2008, and other than Miami, first meeting, Nadal won only at Dubai up to 2007 and was a non-factor in slams.

Five year difference in age. Age matters.

Inanimate_object · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
One could argue Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation as well. Where do you draw the line?

Use your brain. Nadal and Djokovic are the same age. Borg is almost 20 years older than Laver.

Gary Duane · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
No, I'm not. Who is to decide what are excuses and what aren't? If arguments explaining the Federer-Nadal H2H are excuses, so is anything explaining the Laver-Borg H2H. Be consistent, or log out.

18 year difference in age is an excuse? When Laver won his second slam when Borg was 13? When Laver took a set off Borg, on clay, at the age of 37 at the US Open? Obviously you don't know much about tennis history.

Gary Duane · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
One could argue Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation as well. Where do you draw the line?

Drawing the line between 1 year and 18 years is rather easy for anyone with a working brain, Einstein.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Thetouch said:
Some of your records aren´t true at all because some sides I visited claim this

And to be more specific:

Safin is 3:3 - 2:2 at Slams
Stich is 3:3 - 1:0 at Slams
Roddick 1:2 - 1:0 at Slams
Hewitt 4:5 - 1:1 at Slams
Krajicek 4:6 - 1:1 at Slams

So except for Federer who only faced him once, none of them owned him when it really mattered.

And I am not going to put his records against Becker, Agassi, Courier etc.

There are conflicting statistic about Stich in particular, but I'll defer on that one.

Sampras-Bruguera : 2-3

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Gary Duane said:
Drawing the line between 1 year and 18 years is rather easy for anyone with a working brain, Einstein.

Work on your comprehension, Shakespeare. I said Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation to Federer.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Gary Duane said:
18 year difference in age is an excuse? When Laver won his second slam when Borg was 13? When Laver took a set off Borg, on clay, at the age of 37 at the US Open? Obviously you don't know much about tennis history.

How is that not an excuse when the surface distribution for the Federer-Nadal H2H is?

And I know more about Tennis history than you ever will.

Thetouch · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
There are conflicting statistic about Stich in particular, but I'll defer on that one.

Sampras-Bruguera : 2-3

It´s 2:2 and guess what? They faced 2 times at Roland Garros, with being even 1:1 on CLAY. lol

90's Clay · Jul 4, 2015

Gary Duane said:
Easy. Fed was dominant on hard until 2008, and other than Miami, first meeting, Nadal won only at Dubai up to 2007 and was a non-factor in slams.

Five year difference in age. Age matters.

Fed has been losing to Nadal on hard courts dating all the way back to 2004. When Fed was near his peak and Nadal a good 4-5 years from his

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Thetouch said:
It´s 2:2 and guess what? They faced 2 times at Roland Garros, with being even 1:1 on CLAY. lol

4-6 Krajicek
4-5 Hewitt
1-2 Roddick
0-1 Federer

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

90's Clay said:
Fed has been losing to Nadal on hard courts dating all the way back to 2004. When Fed was near his peak and Nadal a good 4-5 years from his

Laver is 2-5 against Borg. No EXCUSES.

Gary Duane · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
Work on your comprehension, Shakespeare. I said Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation to Federer.

Work on your English, Einstein:

One could argue Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation as well.

We aren't mind-readers, and you have not exactly been clear today. You are not making friends today.

I have consistently said that the 5 and 6 difference between Federer and Nadal/Novak matters, which is why I have consistently pointed out Fed's dominance off clay up to 2008 against Nadal, and Nadal's dominance from 2008 on. And, by the way, even a year makes a difference later on. There is a wall most players hit between 27 and 28. Fed hit it in 2008, Nadal hit it in 2014, and Novak may hit it next year.

People look at the ages of players now and conclude that 30 or 31 or 32 is the new 28. But I won't believe it until I see players winning 2 or more slams after the age of 28 or 29.

Thetouch · Jul 4, 2015

The_18th_Slam said:
4-6 Krajicek
4-5 Hewitt
1-2 Roddick
0-1 Federer

LOL, yeaaaaah, just cry little baby.

You should better do research before throwing some ridiculous, partly false records, to justify whatever the hell you are trying to say.^^

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Gary Duane said:
Work on your English, Einstein:

We aren't mind-readers, and you have not exactly been clear today. You are not making friends today.

There is a difference between saying:
1. Nadal and Djokovic are from different generations.
2. Nadal and Djokovic are from a different generation.

I'm sorry the subtlety of the English language is lost on you.

I have consistently said that the 5 and 6 difference between Federer and Nadal/Novak matters, which is why I have consistently pointed out Fed's dominance off clay up to 2008 against Nadal, and Nadal's dominance from 2008 on. And, by the way, even a year makes a difference later on. There is a wall most players hit between 27 and 28. Fed hit it in 2008, Nadal hit it in 2014, and Novak may hit it next year.

People look at the ages of players now and conclude that 30 or 31 or 32 is the new 28. But I won't believe it until I see players winning 2 or more slams after the age of 28 or 29.

So you're in agreement but are just picking on me for the hell of it? I'd hate to see your IQ score.

The_18th_Slam · Jul 4, 2015

Thetouch said:
LOL, yeaaaaah, just cry little baby.

You should better do research before throwing some ridiculous, partly false records, to justify whatever the hell you are trying to say.^^

Deleted member 77403 · Jul 4, 2015

Why do we need to have a thread that is going to do nothing but cause a fight between Sampras and Federer fans, and I like both players.

If Federer were like Sampras in 2 respects...

Hall of Fame

Golden

Guest

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Banned

Banned

Legend

Hall of Fame

Legend

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Talk Tennis Guru

Banned

Hall of Fame

Legend

Banned

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

Banned

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Deleted member 77403

Guest

Similar threads