Apun94
Hall of Fame
Ok calm down tiger. I know this is a Pete thread, but no need to go overboard. Nadal is not like Sampras on clay lol
Greatest forehand of all time! Not greatest ground game or greatest baseliner.
- Thread starter SamprasisGOAT
- Start date
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, I’m still taking GOATdal’s FH 
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Well, I agree.
On anti-tennis surfaces Sampras is better.
On pro-tennis surfaces the Big 3 crush him.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Of course he was great, hugely talented, but that doesn't change the fact that he was a servebot.
Opelka jokes about being a servebot, why wouldn't Sampras own it too?
Nowhere is it written that a servebot has to have a certain height or that he can't be talented or win slams.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
Yeah, I’m still taking GOATdal’s FH
/granite-web-prod/ef/c0/efc06ce9357c431ba417503bf0932ba8.gif)
I’ll take Petes forehand over Nadals 7 days a week and twice on a Sunday
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
And I’ll take RAFA’s 365 days of the year
I’ll take Petes forehand over Nadals 7 days a week and twice on a Sunday
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
Sampras was an attacking entertainer who happens to out GOAT your favourite
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
He was the most boring "entertainer" in the history of GOAT tennis.
Robots had more charisma and flair.
Speaking of the bald-headed kid you assume I am a big fan of, Sampras was lucky to have a semi-motivated tennis-hating meth user as his biggest rival, and Agassi was unlucky to have not played in this era, which would have suited him much more, with its normal-speed surfaces which allow for actual tennis to be played.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
And I’ll take RAFA’s 365 days of the year
Your salty because he dominated his era like nobody else in history.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Of course.
Your salty because he dominated his era like nobody else in history.
All 90s servebotting made me want to throw salt at the men's tour. Those guys ruined the decade, but it wasn't their fault. The ATP took a decade to realize that technology was speeding things up absurdly and that the level of tennis on half the tour was weak and boring, so the servebots exploited it as anyone would have. Why else would they slow things down in the early 00s?
You're a fan of aces, I'm a fan of rallies, but I am quite sure you're in the minority...
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras had one of the best forehands in the game and a volley game that would put everyone except a handful of players to shame. That is not servebot material.
Servebot material is someone with only a great serve and literally nothing else. Pete already had two excellent weapons in addition to his serve.
Servebot material is someone with only a great serve and literally nothing else. Pete already had two excellent weapons in addition to his serve.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
The ATP realised the technology was speeding things up? Sampras used a racket that came out in 1984.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Strings, balls, rackets, surfaces, there are many components to this...
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
And just the thought that a phenomenal athlete like Sampras is being compared to Hagrid, ugh!
To those accusing him of servebotting, why do you ONLY selectively check the serve stats? Why don't you have a look at his return stats and tell me who of Isner, Opelka, Karlovic, Raonic get close to Sampras' return %? I've got news for you, even Roddick is a fair way behind Sampras on the ATP career return leaderboard. And Roddick had a powerful forehand and a decent backhand and moved well too.
Sampras essentially had Nadal's wheels, a serve more devastating than Fed and volleys miles better than anyone in the top 10 today but with return and groundstroke game weaker than Fed.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
You lost me at "Roddick had a decent BH"...
Then of course, the Nadal comparison.
Sampras was a servebot. Why is this a bad word? Some posters here love 90s tennis, they love a barrage of aces and serve winners with very little variety and rallies. They should embrace the word.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Because the word servebot as commonly used here means a player who does nothing else but serve well. Not simply a player whose serve is their best shot. Obviously this did not apply to Sampras so it’s just incorrect.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
You should embrace the word fool.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
But if you're a fan of aces and service winners and easy putaway volleys then you must love the word servebot, logically.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
But your saying Sampras is a servebot and he ruined the 90s era and it was a terrible time for tennis, so the ATP realised the technology was changing so fast they had to do something. Yet the racket that the main culprit Sampras was using came out in 1984 and the strings were natural gut. Yet it was the technology?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Nah, you hogged it so hard I have no chance to take it away even briefly.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
I already explained it earlier. Can't repeat myself.
And I never said Sampras ruined the decade. The servebots all did. There were quite a few.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
topspin_forehand
Semi-Pro
Pete who? King Kyrgios forehand revolutionized tennis
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
Pete would bagel nick at Halle
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Lolz, yeah not salty at all. RAFA just equaled PETE’s total GS haul at RG alone
Your salty because he dominated his era like nobody else in history.
And once again, it’s “you’re”.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
I said Nadal's wheels. And I stand by it. Sampras ran like a rabbit. If you think he just stood motionless and served ace after ace to win, you never watched him, like, REALLY watched him so I don't care for your self-certifications of watching tennis for centuries because it's worthless.
And compared to every servebot I mentioned (except Isner), Roddick did have a decent backhand. The comparison was with servebots, not with Nadal or Djokovic. You deliberately misdirect the argument, as always.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Pete would bagel the Nadal too.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Also the notion that poly would have somehow stopped Sampras had the 'ATP' only introduced it earlier is so laughably wrong. People don't want to see what Sampras' already heavy serve would be with poly. It would be even more devastating, a Roddick /Isner level weapon but with more variety. And he would take bigger cuts on the returns now that the strings were generating spin for him. As you said, the 'equipment' that purportedly propelled Sampras was already there in the 80s. He was just a freak.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
It makes me a little sad that many here never watched Sampras and few of these others in theirs peaks. They have no idea just what the heck Sampras really was. You had to have lived through that entire era to truly appreciate. Will always remain my favorite player of all time, with Goran as my most sentimental fav.
They probably never saw him play. His first serve was the best in the history of the game. His second serve was ever better. Big 3 can't even volley like Sampras. His forehand was powerful and his running forehand was a thing of beauty. Supremely athletic. I remember a match when he was upset over his coach's ill health. Tears were streaming down and he blasted Courier off court from an impossible scoreline.
His game was nearly unbeatable in fast courts of his era. Posters here denigrating Sampras are clueless.
Servebot is a disparaging term for a player who has no game apart from a booming serve. Do you win 14 slams by being a Servebot?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
So you're comparing Sampras, who "ran like a rabbit" only occasionally, to Nadal who runs that way throughout the match?
Are you sure this is a reasonable comparison? Like comparing a sprinter to a marathon runner then concluding that the sprinter has as much endurance as the long-distance expert.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Occasionally? Have you ever watched Sampras? Or were you busy munching enchiladas as you and your numb nut friends gathered to whine about how Sampras hit 'too many aces'?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
He served so many aces and service winners, plus easy (or hard) putaway volleys, that he had no reason to run nearly as much.
Is this really new to you?
Turning Pro
Hall of Fame
If the persons name DOSEN'T have 'Dal' in it, it can't be the best forehand of all time.
Bro, yes Federers Forehand is versatile in the ways you describe but Nadals Forehand Tops it. This is not Nadal vs Federer but just think of it, Nadal varies his Forehead in all conditions, be it spin on Clay, flattening out on hard courts, varying through grass courts, only single example is Wimbledon where he adapts over the period of 2 weeks. It's the single most powerful shot in Tennis and playing a major part in his success. Even now with his speed reduced a bit, his Forehead is goin strong. Whether you isolate the FH or driving the ground game, it's the distant best. I can only imagine what that FH can do say with a Federer serve or Pete's serve, that's not saying Nadals serve is bad.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
I never said he had to run as much as Nadal (I was referring to footspeed when I said wheels but trust you to find some angle to whine about) but he also wasn't running 'occasionally', not even close. He was a serve-volleyer, not a stand-and-deliver hulk like Isner or Opelka. But you never watched him, so you're simply trying to look at the stats and at today's servebots and extrapolate what he was like.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
The footwork required for S&V is different from baseline play, as is the mileage.
Yet you want to compare them, as being the same that way...
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Footspeed is footspeed, firstly, and secondly Sampras did play a lot from the baseline too. Again, you never watched him, it's so obvious.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Ah, now you want to isolate mini-details and then equate them by force...
"They both use legs so they do the same things." Pretty much what you're saying.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
No, not mini details, rather my comparison was broad and YOU started to nitpick which is your wont. Sampras was the fastest guy barring maybe Michael Chang in the 90s. And his ability to conjure up winners from way back or out of court on the dead run was a precursor to Nadal. Obviously the way they used their athleticism is different because one was an all courter and the other is a baseliner. But that should have been obvious and I am sure it was but you decided to be deliberately obtuse anyway. How's that working out for you, huh?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Nobody denies his athleticism and speed, but comparing a guy who can afford to sprint a few times here and there to a guy who does so throughout the match - hence has to learn to manage energy more or have far more stamina - is very misleading.
Plus the fact that forward running and sideways movement aren't the same.
Comparing him to Chang is also misleading. Chang had to work for most points, Sampras didn't. He got bundles of so-called free points by serve, far more than either Nadal or Chang.
You get the gist? It is much easier to break all 100-meter records when you know you won't be running that way for 3 hours, but only on occasion.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
There is nothing misleading about it in the context I wrote it which is quite crystal clear and I am not going to go to first principles every time. And as you are the only one who is repeatedly engaging in this argument about it, you are the one who has a problem, not me.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
We shall never know how those scores may have been if WTF was played in mid-year.
Nadal is usually totally shot by September, common knowledge. Of course, that's how he plans the year, it's his decision hence not an excuse but it may explain part of why those H2Hs are so clear.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Similar threads
