McEnroe Says Fed Might Not Catch Sampras

GameSampras

Banned
Fed will suprass Pete I think.. though I dont want him too. But hes only 27 and has 3 years anyways where he can still be a threat I think at each slam.

Of course the thing about Pete is, even though his already game began to slip late 20s early 30s, his serve-volley always kept him as a threat and you never knew when he was going to go off and in the zone where everything is clicking. Roger doesnt have the types of weapons that Sampras had and the ability to keep points quick.. So that could hurt Fed. Its tougher being a baseliner for the majority of the time and keeping a high level of play up passed your prime
 
Last edited:

rwn

Semi-Pro
because even if he does catch up or exceed the # of grand slams....he did it in a time of MEDIOCRE no talent ass clowns in the top 10.

just insane how many top ten players get bageled and broken so easily. :-/

Sampras won those slams with a much more talented and deeply skilled top 10.

That top 10 was so skilled that Sampras faced only 2 of them in his 1997-2000 run at Wimbledon. Yes, you read it right, he faced TWO top 10 players in 4 years. One of them was the mighty Tim Henman.
 
That top 10 was so skilled that Sampras faced only 2 of them in his 1997-2000 run at Wimbledon. Yes, you read it right, he faced TWO top 10 players in 4 years. One of them was the mighty Tim Henman.


i agree.. the field has more to it these days for fed to contend with and a slower surface at wimby isnt much help either for him ... pete had becker , henman and a few others to deal with that also could use the faster courts then at wimby.
 

mrmo1115

Hall of Fame
With Federer winning USO, it made me less nervous about him breaking the GS record. But now, with him winning the last GS, he has the momentum into the AO, with also a few other players also riding high confidence like Novak Djokovic after his impressive Shanghai run.
 

All-rounder

Legend
because even if he does catch up or exceed the # of grand slams....he did it in a time of MEDIOCRE no talent ass clowns in the top 10.

just insane how many top ten players get bageled and broken so easily. :-/

Sampras won those slams with a much more talented and deeply skilled top 10.
ur not serious federer did have high class acts in his time players like prime roddick nalbandian safin hewitt haas henman ferrero these are players that were able to stop fed at his prime you saying that fed not being able to win slams due to better top 10 players in this generation is nonsense as he has passed his prime as we all now he's up against young players who are eventually gonna be a step ahead of him i would like to see nadal in the next 5 years if he can still win french or even wimbledon
 
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/26084440/

LOS ANGELES - Former world No. 1 John McEnroe has cast doubt on whether Roger Federer may ever pass Pete Sampras' record of 14 grand slam titles.

The American told reporters on Thursday that the coronation of Rafael Nadal at the top of the world rankings, to be confirmed on Aug. 18, and the Spaniard’s defeat of the Swiss in the Wimbledon final, had broken Federer’s aura of invincibility.

When Federer won his fourth straight U.S. Open title last September for his 12th grand slam crown, it seemed only a matter of time before he would overtake Sampras at the top.

However, Nadal thrashed Federer in June to win his fourth straight French Open and followed that up a month later by ending the Swiss’s five-year reign at Wimbledon with a dramatic five-set triumph.

Speaking at the ATP event in Los Angeles, McEnroe said breaking Sampras' record was no longer a given for Federer.

“Let’s put it this way, Pete’s sleeping a little better than he was about five months ago,” the seven-time grand slam winner said.

“He’s thinking ’maybe I actually have a chance to hold on to this thing’. It’s not out of the question that 14 is going to be enough.

“It’s not going to be as easy to just mow through it the way most of us thought. Pete talked about 17, 18, and I thought he was going to get it, but you always hit that spot when it starts to get tougher.

“When Pete hit 14 I thought, ’God who’s going to get there?’, and it’s pretty amazing that Roger has got so close. Roger is 27 (today) and how many did Pete win after 27? It doesn’t get any easier.”

Only three of Sampras' wins came after he turned 27.

Federer lost in the semi-finals at the Australian Open in January and in contrast to previous years, he has not won a single Masters Series crown.

McEnroe said Federer had perhaps paid the price for setting the bar so high.

“What Federer has done is amazing,” he said. “He has had four of the greatest years in the history of Open Tennis (since the sport went professional in 1968).

“No one, Roger, Pete — he had an incredible run too — you can’t keep it up. Sooner or later the law of averages catch up to you.”

McEnroe said Nadal fully deserved to become the world No. 1.

“On some levels it’s a surprise, obviously, because Federer was playing so great for so long that you start to think that (losing it) is never going to happen,” he said.

“But then you realize that he’s a human being and Nadal’s made some great improvement in the last year or so. It’s well-earned.

“He did something that hasn’t been done since 1980 (winning the French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back). He’s followed up with some wins in some other events, so he deserves it.”

I predict Federer will tie the record in the first 6 months of 2009, and likely break it in the second. CC
 

Rhino

Legend
because even if he does catch up or exceed the # of grand slams....he did it in a time of MEDIOCRE no talent ass clowns in the top 10.

just insane how many top ten players get bageled and broken so easily. :-/

Sampras won those slams with a much more talented and deeply skilled top 10.

Look who stopped Sampras from winning the French:

Gaudenzi, Blanco, Philippoussis, Medvedev, Delgado, Norman, Kafelnikov, Schaller, Courier, Bruguera, Agassi, Champion, and Chang.

Thats 13 chances and not even a final. Federer would've smoked probably at LEAST 10 of those guys and taken the French multiple times. But unfortunately he's in the NADAL era. Sampras was freakin' lucky.
 

vtmike

Banned
Except that Mcenroe didn't really claim anything.He said Fed "might" not catch Sampras which basically means maybe he will,maybe he won't.Anyone else could have told you the same thing.

Well Menroe is a true journalist now....he just leeps on changing his mind according to current form! Just in dec 2007, he said in an interview tht Fed is arguably the best player on grass and nobody can stop him......so I've stopped paying attention to what mcenroe says.....
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Look who stopped Sampras from winning the French:

Gaudenzi, Blanco, Philippoussis, Medvedev, Delgado, Norman, Kafelnikov, Schaller, Courier, Bruguera, Agassi, Champion, and Chang.

Thats 13 chances and not even a final. Federer would've smoked probably at LEAST 10 of those guys and taken the French multiple times. But unfortunately he's in the NADAL era. Sampras was freakin' lucky.

I think the poster means talent overall--not just the results at one slam.

Overall, it is a joke in poor taste for anyone to suggest the field Federer is dealing with (aside from ONE in the form of Nadal) is on the same level of talent as the men Sampras faced throughout his career, which is why I do not doubt Federer will be able to match or even pass Sampras' record.
 

Alexio92

Professional
Fed will end up on the same amount of GS after winning wimbledon next year, then if he is lucky he will break the record at the uso but I have a feeling someone might get hot at the uso and finally get a win over federer there whose name starts with a D.
 

mordecai

Rookie
I think the poster means talent overall--not just the results at one slam.

Overall, it is a joke in poor taste for anyone to suggest the field Federer is dealing with (aside from ONE in the form of Nadal) is on the same level of talent as the men Sampras faced throughout his career, which is why I do not doubt Federer will be able to match or even pass Sampras' record.

You're incredibly stupid. Fly away troll.
 

NamRanger

G.O.A.T.
Fed will suprass Pete I think.. though I dont want him too. But hes only 27 and has 3 years anyways where he can still be a threat I think at each slam.

Of course the thing about Pete is, even though his already game began to slip late 20s early 30s, his serve-volley always kept him as a threat and you never knew when he was going to go off and in the zone where everything is clicking. Roger doesnt have the types of weapons that Sampras had and the ability to keep points quick.. So that could hurt Fed. Its tougher being a baseliner for the majority of the time and keeping a high level of play up passed your prime



Federer has a better forehand. He has a better backhand. He is a better lateral mover, even though he has lost a step.


His serve is not far behind Sampras in terms of clutch ability, and his volleys are good enough to end points.



I don't see how you think Federer can't keep points quick. When Federer's forehand is on, points end instantaneously the second the ball comes to his forehand.
 

LanceStern

Professional
Federer can keep points short. He approaches the net so well, and his serve has improved so much...

Only real trouble are Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and Roddick. Always a thorn in his side. Throw Simon in there as well
 

RCizzle65

Hall of Fame
Throw in Roddick? What the heck? I like Roddick, but 15-2 you'd think he doesn't have much trouble with him....
 

LanceStern

Professional
Roddick is always a pain in his butt.

Sure there were thrashing, but Roddick always has a hatter's chance with that serve of his. He had match points against Fed in his prime...

and 2 wins is nothing to scoff at against Fed, sadly enough to say haha
 

DoubleDeuce

Hall of Fame
Mac is also saying Murray will win AUO.
Baloney in both cases.
He better stick to his commentator job, which he does well.
 
Last edited:

LeftySpin

Rookie
I think Fed has it in him to make one more slam to tie with Sampras. This is a Nadal fan speaking here, so there is no bias in this. Honestly he still has a lot in him, yes there are a lot of great, young players in the top 10, but he is still fairly good. AO he was sick and still got to semi's and the courts are simular to the USO (which he won) and Wimbledon was close, just because Nadal won doesn't mean he has secured it like the FO. I am pretty sure that with the way Nadal plays he will defiantly pull out for an injury at a certain point, making it Fed's chance. If I'm wrong then someone please tell me because I would like to think this is correct. Also what is GOAT? People mention it to describe great players but I still dont know what it means
 

DoubleDeuce

Hall of Fame
I think Fed has it in him to make one more slam to tie with Sampras. This is a Nadal fan speaking here, so there is no bias in this. Honestly he still has a lot in him, yes there are a lot of great, young players in the top 10, but he is still fairly good. AO he was sick and still got to semi's and the courts are simular to the USO (which he won) and Wimbledon was close, just because Nadal won doesn't mean he has secured it like the FO. I am pretty sure that with the way Nadal plays he will defiantly pull out for an injury at a certain point, making it Fed's chance. If I'm wrong then someone please tell me because I would like to think this is correct. Also what is GOAT? People mention it to describe great players but I still dont know what it means

goat stands for Greatest of all time.
And you are the most humble Nadfan I've seen so far.
God Bless.
 

LeftySpin

Rookie
I would definatly not want Fed to break Sampras's record but we have to be realistic here. He just set the bar so high that now its even hard for him to meet it.
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
BigMac is all talk, just ignore him. :)
He does like to hear himself talk. And I think he, like many others, are making way too much out of the Wimby final. It was Rafa's day. Just because JMac and Borg lost their presumed invincibility and were never the same doesn't mean Roger will not be a threat at every Slam for the next 3 years.

You're incredibly stupid. Fly away troll.
I'll 3rd that. That argument is so ridiculous.

Federer has a better forehand. He has a better backhand. He is a better lateral mover, even though he has lost a step.


His serve is not far behind Sampras in terms of clutch ability, and his volleys are good enough to end points.



I don't see how you think Federer can't keep points quick. When Federer's forehand is on, points end instantaneously the second the ball comes to his forehand.
You did well. But you left out Return of Serve. And I'm not sure about the lost step - we'll see this year whether that was just a manifestation of the mono and fouled up training schedule or not. I'm laughing at those who think he will either end up tied with Sampras or maybe get to 15. I think he'll easily get 16 if not more. He's still the favorite at Wimby and the USO. One grass court loss after a huge win streak doesn't mean he's done.
 

Azzurri

Legend
Well Menroe is a true journalist now....he just leeps on changing his mind according to current form! Just in dec 2007, he said in an interview tht Fed is arguably the best player on grass and nobody can stop him......so I've stopped paying attention to what mcenroe says.....

me too. the guy changes his mind like the wind.
 

Vector

Banned
I am afraid too.


You should be afraid because Fed is getting older every second

______________________________________________
brucelee4gj.gif

Translation - heycal is owned
 

fastdunn

Legend
It won't be easy but Federer will break the 14 slam record eventually. But it will be increasingly harder for Federer to be back/staying at #1.

When Sampras won his 14th slam, he said someone will surpass #14 some day in the future but the record of 6 straight year end #1 will be much harder to break. Sampras knew which one is harder to achive.
 

DoubleDeuce

Hall of Fame
It won't be easy but Federer will break the 14 slam record eventually. But it will be increasingly harder for Federer to be back/staying at #1.

When Sampras won his 14th slam, he said someone will surpass #14 some day in the future but the record of 6 straight year end #1 will be much harder to break. Sampras knew which one is harder to achive.

Fed already has the record for consecutive weeks at number one.
Pete lost the number one ranking several times during those 6 years and then reclaimed it.
 

LanceStern

Professional
Still, it's very hard to YEAR END #1 6 times in a row.

Federer was the only one I could see doing that, and that was broken this year by Nadal, who definitely won't be Year End #1 6 years in a row.
 

klementine

Hall of Fame
I think federer should take a year or two off, his demeanor is not positive to me. As if he is trying to beat-up his dad, very emotionally and psychologically drained. I would love to see him take 1-2 years off, even though his play is still exceptional and worthy of #1, I would love to see him take some time off, let these young guns rise, quit, burn out, fail. Forget about the rankings, you are two slams away from history, take the time off, come back and play well into your early 30's.
 

GameSampras

Banned
Still, it's very hard to YEAR END #1 6 times in a row.

Federer was the only one I could see doing that, and that was broken this year by Nadal, who definitely won't be Year End #1 6 years in a row.

I agree. 14 slams isnt a feat that was so far and way uncatchable of course. All it takes is someone to dominate their respective era. Even if Fed gets 16 or 17. Thats even breakable. 6 years of Number 1. That may NEVER be broke. Fed still needs another year under of #1. At this point, I dunno Fed is going to be able to maintain a high enough level of tennis week in-week out for a whole another year and some change. I see Fed dropping in the rankings before I ever see him get the #1 slot again.. But I doubt thats even on his mind. Hes at the point in his career that getting the Slam record is all he should think about anyways. Thats more realistic than managing another year of a #1
 
Last edited:

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
I would love to see him take 1-2 years off,
I have a lot of friends who would need to see psychologists if he took your advice. :) They are already dreading 2012 when he has alluded to retiring. I think he'll do fine with the limited schedule and no Olympics to throw things off.
 

fastdunn

Legend
If you think about it, top 4 GOATS basically won about 20 majors (slams and pro slam equivalents). They have ranked as #1 for almost a decade(7-8 years).

Sampras holds 14 slam record only because it was fully professional era and official slams. Sampras' year end #1 record is also only official record. pre-open era largely did not have "official" ranking. (for example, it was via votes)

If you also think about pre-open era, 3 majors were played on same surface, grass(quick one).

Under the current homogeneous conditions (grass and hard courts playing slow and similar), you gotta figure that someone will be more likely to break the 14 slam record sooner or later. Even calendar grand slam is also more likely to happen compared to 70's - 90's, IMHO....
 
Last edited:

fastdunn

Legend
Fed already has the record for consecutive weeks at number one.
Pete lost the number one ranking several times during those 6 years and then reclaimed it.

Yep, it doesn't have to be "straight years". top 5 GOATS dominated the game for about 6 - 8 years. although consecutive weeks are impressive, it would not fare well against top 5 GOATS if Federer does not come back to #1 again. 4+ years is pretty short domination compared to top 5 GOATs.

# of slams are the most important factors but years at #1 is also important. True GOATs dominated one decade defining the tennis for that era.

Federer is facing only 5 year younger players who basically play a carbon copy of the game Federer revolutionized and defined for a new era. He should show he is still the original here for coming years.

True legacy of Federer's greatness will be tested in next a few years.
 
Last edited:

zagor

Bionic Poster
Still, it's very hard to YEAR END #1 6 times in a row.

Yes it is.However,it is also hard to achieve 18 consecutive slam semifinals(Sampras had only about 3 consecutive),to hold number one spot for consecutive 237 weeks(the closest player who got to that was Connors with 160 consecutive weeks),to win 5 Wimbledons in a row(Sampras best was 3 and then 4 in a row),to win 5 USOs in a row(Sampras managed to win 2 USOs in a row),to be the only male player ever to have won 5 consecutive slams at 2 different slams(5 USOs and 5 Wimbledons),to have won 3 slams in a year on 3 occasions(Sampras never had a 3 slam year in his whole tennis career),to reach all 4 slam finals in a year on 2 occasions(Sampras reached 3 slam finals in '95 but other than that didn't come close) etc.

Sure Sampras will have some records over Fed but the reverse is also true-Fed has some records over Sampras and achieved some things Sampras never could(although whether his fans on this forum will ever admit that is a different matter entirely).

True GOATs dominated one decade defining the tennis for that era.

Then by your definition Sampras isn't a true GOAT either as he never dominated one decade but rather he dominated 6 years(although '98 was hardly a domination IMO,one could argue that Fed's 2008 was better/comparable).6 years is not close to being a full decade,it's slightly over half of the decade.

Federer is facing only 5 year younger players who basically play a carbon copy of the game Federer revolutionized and defined for a new era.

Murray and Djokovic are 6 years younger than Fed while Nadal is 5 years younger but no,neither one of them play a carbon copy of Fed's game,all of their games are quite different.

True legacy of Federer's greatness will be tested in next a few years.

Funny and here I thought that having 13 slams by the age of 27 actually is greatness.So it seems that only what you achieve after the age of 27,28(an age at which most all-time greats decline)matters? I disagree as I tend to look at a player's whole career not chose a period that best suits my argument.
 
Last edited:
Top