Did Sampras ever get dominated on grass like this?

[Nadalgaenger]

I think Federer's miserable performance today has to leave us asking if Sampras should not be reaffirmed as the Grass GOAT.

There is no way Pete would allow himself to get dominated that easily in a big match at the All England Club.

 

[mikekelley]

 

[Deleted member 25923]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibgjPMNVkSc

 

[Devilito]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibgjPMNVkSc

Not even close. Krajicek in 96 on 90s grass would have beaten both Federer and Murray from today’s match at the same time

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Not even close. Krajicek in 96 on 90s grass would have beaten both Federer and Murray from today’s match at the same time

Nice post. Representing the obnoxious Petetards well. Btw, who did Sampras lose to right before he was turning 31? Oh yeah, George Bastl the GOAT.

George Bastl would have whooped both Sampras and Krajicek in 2002 on grass at the same time. LOL!

Can someone say legend?

 

[Devilito]

Nice post. Representing the obnoxious Petetards well.


OP, Sampras got straight setted at Queens club by Hewitt, Woodforde, and Martin.

LOL.

wow Queens club. Obviously Petros focused on bigger tournaments and won enough consistently throughout the year to finish a record years and number 1 and weeks at number 1 until just recently overtaken by Federer.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

wow Queens club. Obviously Petros focused on bigger tournaments and won enough consistently throughout the year to finish a record years and number 1 and weeks at number 1 until just recently overtaken by Federer.

Yeah so how exactly can Federers bad loss at the Olympics, not Wimbledon, be held against him?

Anyone can see that Federer played at a much higher standard at Wimbledon than he did at the Olympics. If you think this loss means something on Federers grass court resume, then Sampras's butt whoopings at Queens club mean something as well.

 

[fundrazer]

Even though this is total trolly thread, first thought was the Krajieck match.

 

[Mustard]

Ivanisevic beat Sampras at 1992 Wimbledon without even facing a break point. The score was 6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 6-2.

 

[TennisTalkGuru]

LOL, Sampras couldn't even hold Fed's jockstrap on a grass court.

 

[Agassifan]

No.. but he lost in round 2 or something

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Federer is still a much better player than Sampras.

 

[nadal2012uso2013ao]

Federer has only ever been better than Sampras on clay. And that's no achievement..

 

[Kunohara]

Federer has only ever been better than Sampras on clay. And that's no achievement..

I want some of that stuff you're having.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Federer has only ever been better than Sampras on clay. And that's no achievement..

Off your meds again?

 

[MariaRafael]

No, he isn't off meds either his or yours. He repeats what *******s have been saying for years: clay is nothing, wins on clay don't matter, clay courters are not tennis players. Hence, you'll have to decide in your ****y division whether clay matters, and Federer is better on it that Sampras ever been, or clay is nothing, and Sampras is GOAT.

 

[Mainad]

Anyone can see that Federer played at a much higher standard at Wimbledon than he did at the Olympics.

Hmmm...I think his epic semi with Del Potro equalled if not surpassed anything Federer produced at Wimbledon last month. He had to play some of the best tennis of his life to withstand the bombs Del Potro was hurling at him! Undoubtedly the titanic effort left him a bit flat for the final!

 

[zagor]

No, he isn't off meds either his or yours. He repeats what *******s have been saying for years: clay is nothing, wins on clay don't matter, clay courters are not tennis players.

Talk about generalizing about a specific fanbase.

Clay is a legit surface, aside from a few people on this forum nobody denies that.

Hence, you'll have to decide in your ****y division whether clay matters, and Federer is better on it that Sampras ever been, or clay is nothing, and Sampras is GOAT.

First of all, Fed has at the very least comparable results with Sampras off clay.

Secondly, Sampras never won an Olympics medal so per the *******s/Fed haters he can never be the GOAT

 

[MariaRafael]

Only gold medals count

 

[Raging Buddha]

Only gold medals count

Only slams count. But nice try.

 

[Djoker]

LOL, Sampras couldn't even hold Fed's jockstrap on a grass court.

Larry Holmes, is that you? :lol:

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Hmmm...I think his epic semi with Del Potro equalled if not surpassed anything Federer produced at Wimbledon last month. He had to play some of the best tennis of his life to withstand the bombs Del Potro was hurling at him! Undoubtedly the titanic effort left him a bit flat for the final!

:shock: I completely disagree. Federer made some of the most embarrassing errors I have ever seen from him in years. He missed overheads, simple put-away volleys, and 2/13 BPs (I understand del potro played huge on many of them, but some of them were just pathetic efforts by Federer) .

Federer certainly did not summon up anything remotely close to his best tennis level to win that match. He was breezing through almost all of his service games (Del Potro was not getting anything going on return) and then got himself to 0-30 or 15-40 situations only to take the backseat and hope Del Potro made some errors.

 

[tennis_pro]

Only gold medals count

17 majors, 6 Masters Cups, 75 titles, Olympic Gold and Silver

LOL GTFO Nadal has nothing on Federer, oh sorry he still has more Barcelona and Monte Carlo titles. You can always hold on to that and the clay skewed h2h.

I should give you credit for staying on the boards, though. The vast majority of Nadal fans are off till Monte Carlo.

 

[purge]

was there any grass around the baseline?

 

[Raiden]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibgjPMNVkSc

Nice zinger.

And that was Peak Sampras - in the middle of his prime, not when he was 30-something years old.

 

[Swissv2]

 

[tennis_pro]

First of all, Sampras would've lost to Del Potro in the semis, thank you very much. Of course if he avoided Bastl in the draw, that is.

 

[Feather]

17 majors, 6 Masters Cups, 75 titles, Olympic Gold and Silver

LOL GTFO Nadal has nothing on Federer, oh sorry he still has more Barcelona and Monte Carlo titles. You can always hold on to that and the clay skewed h2h.

I should give you credit for staying on the boards, though. The vast majority of Nadal fans are off till Monte Carlo.

NSK's versions have a different take about US open 2012

 

[nadal2012uso2013ao]

17 majors, 6 Masters Cups, 75 titles, Olympic Gold and Silver

LOL GTFO Nadal has nothing on Federer, oh sorry he still has more Barcelona and Monte Carlo titles. You can always hold on to that and the clay skewed h2h.

I should give you credit for staying on the boards, though. The vast majority of Nadal fans are off till Monte Carlo.

And you can hold onto Federer's wins over Agassi at the US Open (the QF in 5 sets in 2004, and the 2005 final in 4 sets - after the 35-year-old had played THREE five-setters just to reach the final), while Sampras was never taken to 5 sets at the US Open by PRIME Agassi. Nobody cares if Federer can whoop guys in the 'transition era'. His dominance ended when Nadal became a factor at the Australian Open and Djokovic became a factor at the US Open.

 

[tennis_pro]

And you can hold onto Federer's wins over Agassi at the US Open (the QF in 5 sets in 2004, and the 2005 final in 4 sets - after the 35-year-old had played THREE five-setters just to reach the final), while Sampras was never taken to 5 sets at the US Open by PRIME Agassi. Nobody cares if Federer can whoop guys in the 'transition era'. His dominance ended when Nadal became a factor at the Australian Open and Djokovic became a factor at the US Open.

While Sampras at his absolute best couldn't beat Agassi on any of the 2 occasions they played at the Australian Open while Federer straight setted Andre in their only AO meeting. What does that have to do with anything?

I guess we must be in another transitional era cause Nadal seems unable to win anything outside of clay, even in his teens he was a bigger factor in winning titles outside of clay while Federer is the no 1 player in the world and just won another major a month or so ago.

 

[soleil]

What grass? You mean green clay? Dude the court was so slow during the Fred-Muzza match

 

[nadal2012uso2013ao]

While Sampras at his absolute best couldn't beat Agassi on any of the 2 occasions they played at the Australian Open while Federer straight setted Andre in their only AO meeting. What does that have to do with anything?

I guess we must be in another transitional era cause Nadal seems unable to win anything outside of clay, even in his teens he was a bigger factor in winning titles outside of clay while Federer is the no 1 player in the world and just won another major a month or so ago.

Are you glossing over the fact that Nadal won the 2010 US Open and was a couple of games from winning the 2012 Australian Open? And he beat Federer in the 2012 AO, in 4 sets.

Oh yeah, Federer won a major a month ago. It was the first major he won since 2010 AO. Is it impressive that Federer now wins a slam every 2 and a half years? Since Federer won the 2010 AO, Nadal won 2010 Wimbledon, 2010 US Open and made the final of 2 other hardcourt slams (and also won 3 straight French Opens, even though Roland Garros doesn't count according to federer fans at Talk Tennis).

 

[Zarfot Z]

Since Federer won the 2010 AO, Nadal won 2010 Wimbledon, 2010 US Open and made the final of 2 other hardcourt slams (and also won 3 straight French Opens, even though Roland Garros doesn't count according to federer fans at Talk Tennis).
2003-2010

I could talk about how Federer has collected 11 majors during the 2004-2007 heyday, whilst Nadal only won a measly 3 majors. So, yeah. When it comes to Grand Slams, Federer utclasses your idol by miles. Try and avoid that topic in the future.

 

[nadal2012uso2013ao]

I could talk about how Federer has collected 11 majors during the 2004-2007 heyday, whilst Nadal only won a measly 3 majors. So, yeah. When it comes to Grand Slams, Federer utclasses your idol by miles. Try and avoid that topic in the future.

Nadal was age 21 in 2007. Was he really supposed to win slams back then? He may have been a claycourt slam champion in 2005, but everyone has to develop before they can win on their weaker surfaces (especially at the slams). What was Federer doing at age 21? Nadal was in the Wimbledon finals and already a 3-time Roland Garros champion.

 

[merlinpinpin]

Only gold medals count

Oh well, and here I thought that having gold and silver was better than gold only. My bad, I guess... :roll:

 

[ark_28]

I am a huge Pete fan he was my idol but this thread is just silly! The games may have been at Wimbledon but everyone knows it's not as prestigious a loss for Federer does not tarnish his record on grass just because it happened to be at Wimby he lost on a hard court in Beijing to Blake last time, would Blake ever beat Federer in a major? Of course not!

Pete for the record does not even believe tennis should be in the Olympics! I share that view.

 

[nadal2012uso2013ao]

I am a huge Pete fan he was my idol but this thread is just silly! The games may have been at Wimbledon but everyone knows it's not as prestigious a loss for Federer does not tarnish his record on grass just because it happened to be at Wimby he lost on a hard court in Beijing to Blake last time, would Blake ever beat Federer in a major? Of course not!

Pete for the record does not even believe tennis should be in the Olympics! I share that view.

Something tells me Sampras wouldn't have said that if he won a gold medal...

 

[merlinpinpin]

I think Federer's miserable performance today has to leave us asking if Sampras should not be reaffirmed as the Grass GOAT.

There is no way Pete would allow himself to get dominated that easily in a big match at the All England Club.

Nice one!

That's why we're so proud of our trolls, here at TT. Always back for more ***-whopping, no matter how butthurt...

 

[ark_28]

Something tells me Sampras wouldn't have said that if he won a gold medal...

Pete never took it seriously even in his prime to be fair

 

[Cup8489]

Nadal was age 21 in 2007. Was he really supposed to win slams back then? He may have been a claycourt slam champion in 2005, but everyone has to develop before they can win on their weaker surfaces (especially at the slams). What was Federer doing at age 21? Nadal was in the Wimbledon finals and already a 3-time Roland Garros champion.

So many excuses for Nadal, but yet Federer is allowed none.

What a hypocrite.

I have to ask, was there ever a 4 year period in which Nadal even came CLOSE to winning 11 majors? No, there isnt.

 

[tennis_pro]

So many excuses for Nadal, but yet Federer is allowed none.

What a hypocrite.

I have to ask, was there ever a 4 year period in which Nadal even came CLOSE to winning 11 majors? No, there isnt.

If we take Nadal's best 4 years he's got 7 majors total which isn't even an average of 2 per year (Fed had an average of almost 3 per year).

I mean come on, what is there to debate?

 

[PeteD]

When Pete asked the ball boy to remove the ball from his shorts, and the ball boy refused, he was not only dominated on grass, he was on grass

 

[henryshli]

Federer has only ever been better than Sampras on clay. And that's no achievement..

How old was Pete when Federer beat him at Wimbledon.......urrrr

 

[tennis_pro]

Federer has only ever been better than Sampras on clay. And that's no achievement..

I assume you're only taking achievements into consideration. How on earth is Sampras better than Fed on grass or hard courts, then?
grass - same no of Wimbledons but more finals, more finals on grass, more titles on grass, far less sets lost at Wimbledon during domination, better win %
hard - 9 to 7 majors, 6 to 5 WTF's, need to go further?

Unless you base your statement purely on opinion which makes it irrelevant.

 

[MariaRafael]

What grass? You mean green clay? Dude the court was so slow during the Fred-Muzza match

Another hater with a builtin speedometer. You are so singsongly repetitive. OK. I'll rub it into your silly face once again. THE GRASS WAS REPLACED IN 2001. FEDERER WON ALL HIS TITLES ON GREEN CLAY. Learn something about tennis, it may improve your posting to an acceptable level.

 

[TennisTalkGuru]

^^^No, you're not a fanboy.


^^^No, you're not a fanboy either.

Check the title of your post idiot, Sampras is not a 16-time slam winner. Wishful thinking ****.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

I fight ****ism with ****ism, that's one way of dealing with things

LOL, I appreciate your honesty t_p (and more importantly, your humor), but while I love back-and-forth trainwrecks, after a while it gets too "same old/same old" after a while. hmmmm....maybe you just gave me an idea.....maybe I should instigate and "GO ****" myself....hmmm..... (wink)

regards

 

[MariaRafael]

I could talk about how Federer has collected 11 majors during the 2004-2007 heyday, whilst Nadal only won a measly 3 majors. So, yeah. When it comes to Grand Slams, Federer utclasses your idol by miles. Try and avoid that topic in the future.

So unfortunate that your bad knowledge and/or bad memory do not allow you to remember that in 2004 Nadal was 17 years old.

 

[TennisTalkGuru]

So unfortunate that your bad knowledge and/or bad memory do not allow you to remember that in 2004 Nadal was 17 years old.

I didn't realize he was 17 for the entire of 2004.

 

[mightyrick]

Not even close. Krajicek in 96 on 90s grass would have beaten both Federer and Murray from today’s match at the same time

^ This. It isn't even a comparison.

In that match, Krajicek went "Rosol" on Sampras. Although Krajicek that year was unbeatable.

Furthermore Sampras almost won as many games in the first set as Federer did in the entire match against Murray. Sampras never rolled over. Not like Fred did.