Fed's 2010 vs. Sampras' 2000, which one is better?

[abraxas21]

Both guys were the same age so it's kind of interesting.

Federer
AO (2000) title
Cinci (1000) title
Basel (500) title
Stockholm (250) title
--------------------
RG QF
Wimby QF
US Open SF
Madrid F
Toronto F
Shanghai F
Halle F
WTF ?
Year End Ranking: 2?
____________________________________________________________

Sampras
Wimby (2000) title
Miami (1000) title
---------------------
AO SF
RG R1
US Open F
Queen's F
WTF (or TMC back then) SF
Year end ranking: 3

 

[Tennis_Monk]

It doesnt matter which version of Sampras we pick. Federer is always better.

Just dont forget that Sampras is also ran on Clay and didnt really need hotel stay in Paris beyond a week. Federer will usually make it to second week.

 

[kishnabe]

I think Sampras had a tougher time but he did much better at the slams as a whole subtracting the FO than Federer. Federer played poorly at a few places in 2010 in term of capable ability. I believe Sampras a bit more consistent that year...he played pretty well in Australia but got outclassed by Agassi. FO....let not talk about that. WImbledon...usual. US open...Lost to a hot safin who he woudn't beat even if he was playing his best that day.


Federer plaued poorly where he was expected to win at Wimbledon and US open. Still he lost to capable guys and they fully earned it but he could have easily won the Soderling match in fact that 4 set was almost his to get and who knows what would happen in the fifth set. Wimbledon had his chances but Berdych was having the weeks of his life...really can't say anything about this match. US open...Djokovic played well in sets 1,3,5 and 2,4 where poor concentration from Fed. The match points that Djokovic saved was key and he deserved it.

Still Fed by skill, and ability this year he is better than Sampras 2000. However expectations this year he is bad compared to Sampras. Sampras usually bags 1 slam a year mostly while Fed does 2-3 and the rare 1 slam a year. Poeple seeing Federer talent, greatness expect so much from him, however Sampras loseing here and there is slams are okay. He loses mostly at RG, and many people though Safin was the real deal when Sampras lost. It wasn't a big deal like it is now for Federer.

So Sampras 2000 is better in terms of expectations. If we compare 2001....That would be a different story...he wasn't even able to win one slam.

 

[danielrios]

WTF ?

WTF?

Federer obviously.

 

[BrooklynNY]

Pete is a ****ty tennis player.

What a clown.

 

[The-Champ]

Pete is a ****ty tennis player.

What a clown.

If that's the case then everyone is a ****ty tennis player.

 

[BrooklynNY]

If that's the case then everyone is a ****ty tennis player.

I'm joking/being sarcastic.

Pete Sampras was and will always be my favorite tennis player.

Better than the new guys

 

[Tennis_Monk]

I'm joking/being sarcastic.

Pete Sampras was and will always be my favorite tennis player.

Better than the new guys

Not really. If he was better than new guys, he would have had more slams than new guys. If he was better than new guys, he would have played better on clay.

I understand you are his fan and respect that. But he is not better than new guys.