Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by ArrowSmith, Sep 8, 2009.
He's the one great who never picked against Federer at the Open. Way to go Pete.
Sampras never doubted Federer would break his record, and he certainly won't pick against him at the Open. They're great friends with mutual respect.
The same Pete we all know.
Wait, how does that make him a "class act"? It might make him right, if Federer goes on to win the open, but it's completely unrelated to whether he's a class act or not. You can be right and still be a jerk, or you can be wrong and still be a class act.
(For what its worth, I do agree that Sampras is a class act, but his predictions about what Federer will do have nothing to do with that.)
Sampras is a class act, no doubt. His speech when he was inducted into the Hall of Fame was very moving, as he thanked everyone including his father, tim gullikson, paul annacone, his mom, wife and others. The speech was great, because he had "let his racket do the talking" his whole career, and then all that emotion came pouring out of him at that speech, as well as at that US Open ceremony after he announced he was retiring with Agassi. What a great guy he is. Much like Federer, Borg, and Laver. It's wonderful that many of the all time greats have great sportsmanship as well. I'd put Nadal on that list as well. Great sportsmanship, even in the face of fierce competition, is not something everyone can pull off easily.
Actually to be honest to you, Pete was quite arrogant and wouldnt give credit to his opponent when he lost in his playing days. Almost like Serena Williams. I remember one time when he claimed he deserved as much attention as Michael Jordan. Just because he behaved well on court didn't mean he was a class act.
I always felt Sampras held himself to very high standards for off- court and on court behavior. I only knock him for his apathy towards Davis cup in an otherwise blemish less career.
Very true...although overall Pete was classy (especially compared with Lendl, McEnroe and Connors), he was VERY passive-aggressive especially when other players got more attention than him.
- 1998 press conference after losing to Rafter in the Cincinnati Masters final (his infamous "10 grand slams" remark when asked about the difference between Rafter and himself)
- 1997 Miami Masters after losing to Bruguera on HC --"That's a match I win 8 out of 10 times"
The times I don't miss Pete are when he and his *********** legion attempt to downplay the importance of clay, which was only because he always under achieved at the French.
Pete had other blemishes, but in all fairness he actually gave a lot to Davis Cup...he first played in 1990, and then also in 1992. Unlike Fed, Pete chose to give a full commitment to Davis Cup during his most prime years before he had broken the career Slam record (1995 being the prime example), and had by far his greatest achievement on clay when he single-handedly carried the US to victory in the final on Russian red clay. His effort during the 1995 Davis Cup final (in December) was probably a contributing factor to his early exit from the 1996 Australian Open.
First, the quote about Rafter was simply due to repeated questioning about Rafter. It irritated Pete that suddenly a guy with one slam is all reporters were asking him about. Nevertheless, it was a a slip by Sampras. However, I think, if anything, Sampras was overly generous to his opponents.
The Serena Williams comparison is asinine. If Sampras declared he deserved as much attention as Michael Jordon, please give a reference to it darthpwner. Having said that, in many ways he did, and a magazine article once compared him to Jordan, in that he was rewriting tennis history and redefining the complete game, while not receiving appropriate accolade.
Sampras is arrogant b/c for him to say he’s “unbeatable” is ridiculous.
No player is unbeatable. Nadal never said he’s unbeatable on clay and TMF never said that at SW19.
Could you please quote the reference to that. I don't recall Sampras saying that either. I recall him saying he sometimes FELT unbeatable. HUGE difference, obviously.
No, the quote about Rafter was the first question he was asked after the match, and he responded "Ten grand slams". He then went on to say that Rafter was lucky to win the match and that Rafter wasn't truly great until he won a second slam title -- VERY Serenaesque there.
I notice you didn't even try to defend Pete's arrogance after he lost to Bruguera on HC in 97...smart move.
Unlike Sampras, Michael Jordan was a complete player and never constantly had apologists excusing away his glaring shortcomings the way the tennis media did with Sampras on clay. Now Jordan as a person is a terrible role model c/w with Sampras, but as an athlete, there's no comparison between the two.
I read once that Sampras didn't like Rafter's goofing off in the locker room. He found his humor offensive. What I read (I hope someone can corroborate it) that Rafter would come up to him from behind and rip a huge fart. Pete found it disgusting.
This is a little bit of insight into Rafter's thoughts on a few fellow pros.
Rafter waited for fight with Tarango
May 2, 2005
Pat Rafter admits he once waited in the locker room for American Jeff Tarango to arrive so the pair could have a fist-fight after an angry on-court exchange.
In an interview to be screened on the ABC with Andrew Denton tonight, the former Australian of the year also comes clean on which players he didn't get along with on tour, including Pete Sampras.
Rafter, 32, recalls the day he met Pope John Paul II and made a bit of a mess of things, while also revealing plans to move his family to France, but not for a few years. The two-time US Open champion and his wife, former model Lara Feltham, have a son Joshua, two.
"And we have another baby coming shortly, too," Rafter said. "So for the next, sort of, three or four years I want to be there for the babies and and my family."
Rafter said he had mixed memories of meeting the Pope about five years ago.
"Instead of asking for blessings for the rest of the family or whatever, I just said, 'Um, oh, bless you'," Rafter said. "I've walked out to see Pete, my brother, and I've gone, 'Oh Pete, I think I've just messed up'. I don't know if he [the Pope] heard me. And Pete goes, 'You're supposed to call him Your Holiness'; I called him Your Honour. And I said, well, I just blessed the Pope."
Rafter says he was overcome by nerves in losing the 2000 Wimbledon final in four sets to Sampras, but the following year's Wimbledon final loss to Croatian Goran Ivanisevic was much more painful.
"I choked [against Sampras], but that's OK," Rafter said. "And then after the second Wimbledon when I lost to Goran, and I came away bitterly, bitterly disappointed. Just shattered."
Rafter said he was once challenged to a fight by Tarango, who, according to the Queenslander, had set out to become "the next John McEnroe". "Once he said, 'Let's go for a fight after the match'," Rafter said. "And I thought, well, this'd be a new one â€¦ anyway, so he wasn't there."
Rafter said Chile's Marcelo Rios was not one of the most amiable players on the tour and he had strained relationships at times with Austrian Thomas Muster, Sampras and Tarango.
"He was a strange cat," Rafter said of Rios. "Sampras and I had our run-ins but we'd always talk." Rafter said he also had some rows with Mark Philippoussis because the Victorian didn't work hard enough at Davis Cup training sessions.
Bit more Rafter
Here's some of the transcript of that Rafter interview where he talks a bit about other players on the tour and a fair bit about Sampras.
ANDREW DENTON: Who are the players you couldn't stomach on tour?
PAT RAFTER: Um, I had a bit of a problem with Rios. He was one guy you'd sort of - you'd be in an elevator of all places and say g'day to and he'd just look at you. And you sort of go, "Where did that come from?" So you sort of look the other way. It's a long, you know, 10 storeys up in an elevator. He was a strange cat.
ANDREW DENTON: Yeah.
PAT RAFTER: Sampras and I had our run-ins, but we'd always talk.
ANDREW DENTON: Yeah, because you did have a little bit of niggle happening there. What was that about?
PAT RAFTER: I just found in '97 I got Pete two or three times in that particular year, and then I won the US Open. And I think it was then - no, I didn't beat him in '97, maybe I didn't, but I won the US Open and he felt like I'd taken the title away from him or something. I've got no idea. And then he got his back up a little bit in that Davis Cup. We played him in a semi-final in Washington. I don't know what happened then. Then I wasn't afraid of him anymore, and so then I would sort of voice my opinion. In '98 I beat him in the finals of a tournament, a big tournament in America and he came in and smashed a few things around and...
ANDREW DENTON: Pete smashed things?
PAT RAFTER: He smashed a lot in the locker room. Yeah, he lost it. Then he said something in an interview, and I just said, "Oh, he's just a big baby. Just cop it on the chin" or something like that. And I beat him in the US Open later on in the semi-finals. He said, "I had a sore knee." I said, "Oh, when is this guy going to give me any credit for beating him?" And then the media sort of went on that, and then played it up and took a few misquotes out of the ordinary. I rang him up once, when there was something totally wrong was said, and I just said, "Pete, listen, that wasn't what I said."
ANDREW DENTON: I did not say that you caused the invasion of Poland. When you say you rang him up, I would imagine that's not a regular thing to do. Was that a hard thing for you to do?
PAT RAFTER: Yeah, it was a little bit, because he would have heard what was said, not really what was said, but what was taken completely out of context. I didn't want to face him knowing that, you know, he was really going to dislike me and I don't like people disliking me. It's going to happen, but if I can avoid it I will.
ANDREW DENTON: So how was the conversation? Was it awkward?
PAT RAFTER: I just rang him up and said, "G'day, Pete. It's Pat here." And he just said, "Pat who?"
PAT RAFTER: One thing with Pete, you didn't really want to upset him too much, either.
ANDREW DENTON: Why's that?
PAT RAFTER: Because then you just gave him more ammunition for him to beat you.
ANDREW DENTON: Is that right?
PAT RAFTER: Yeah, see, and unfortunately I did that a couple of times.
ANDREW DENTON: Because you said after that game that you felt you choked.
PAT RAFTER: Oh, definitely.
ANDREW DENTON: Because you would have trained for that all your life, having the mental toughness to deal with the moment.
PAT RAFTER: Yeah, but each occasion and each match is different. And I'd come back from shoulder surgery and I hadn't played a lot of tennis going into there, so for me to be thrown straight into the finals of a Wimbledon, I mean, I didn't know how long I was even going to play for. Could I get back to even playing well again after the surgery? So it was like I was just so excited to be there, and so I walked away from that Wimbledon feeling that was a good result; yeah, I lost, I choked, but that's okay. And then after the second Wimbledon when I lost to Goran, I came away bitterly, bitterly disappointed, just shattered.
ANDREW DENTON: Because you thought you were going to win that one, didn't you?
PAT RAFTER: Yeah, I did. I did. Even to the last point I still thought I was going to win, and I was very, very close there again. I had love-30 on his serve to two points away from the match. He came up with a couple of amazing serves. And the one thing about Goran, which is good, you don't have time to choke. This guy just hits it. He doesn't know where the ball's going, so how are you going to know? You're sort of going - so but that one really hurt and I stayed in the house for about a week after that; didn't want to go and face anyone; didn't want to talk about it.
ANDREW DENTON: You talk about his serve, which was I think clocked at 820,000 km an hour. Did you ever get hit by one of his serves? What did that feel like?
PAT RAFTER: No.
ANDREW DENTON: Just as well, or you wouldn't be sitting here right now.
PAT RAFTER: No, but I remember talking about getting hit by serves, I remember playing doubles with Mark Philippoussis and we were playing against a couple of guys, Guy Forget and a guy called Jacob Lasic from Switzerland. And we were playing at Wimbledon on a back court and Mark was popping them down, and I said to Mark, "All right, let's do a body serve." And he's gone straight at them, and they've turned their back and hit them in the back, you know, and they've given up and given an awful look, and "stop doing that sort of thing", and Mark goes, "Now where should I serve now?" And I said, "Go up the body again." And this happened and I just kept saying "body" to him - and I was, and these guys were getting so irate, and it was just great to see these guys get so mad. I just kept fuelling the fire.
ANDREW DENTON: Because I was about to say you always had a reputation as a nice guy and in fact you - you got I think four times you got the ATP sportsmanship award. The other players obviously thought you were a nice guy, but was it overrated? When were you a *******?
PAT RAFTER: The only real guy I had a run in was a guy called Jeff Tarango on the actual court itself. We had a few run-ins and he went out of his way to, um, to sort of wind things up. He thought he was going to be the next John McEnroe, but he just couldn't play tennis very well. He could play it OK, just enough to annoy you.
ANDREW DENTON: Yeah.
PAT RAFTER: But no generally, I mean, I tried to play the game as fairly as I could and I think what turned that whole thing around or started giving me the awards was a point that I gave back to a guy in Adelaide on a very, very big occasion in a tournament there, which obviously you don't normally do, but it was just so far out and I conceded that I'd lost the point, and they called it in and I went back to serve and they've gone 9-8 Rafter in the tie-break, and I've just gone, "oh, I can't accept that". So and then everyone thought I was this nice guy.
ANDREW DENTON: Who won that game?
PAT RAFTER: I think I double faulted the next point and lost. And that was exactly what Rochey did.
ANDREW DENTON: Is that right?
PAT RAFTER: He was he was very disappointed. "What were you doing?" I said, "Well, I don't know, a weak moment."
ANDREW DENTON: It's interesting 'cos a few years ago you said you've been watching Lleyton Hewitt playing. You said "I couldn't remain that intense for more than two weeks." Do you reckon you had enough mongrel in you?
PAT RAFTER: Yeah, I think so. People always said to me growing up "You've got to be a mongrel, you've got to be this, you've got to be that. You've got to be hard, you got to be like McEnroe" and sort of stuff everyone else. But that wasn't really my philosophy. I thought you could play the game and hold your head high and do your best and you could win that way... I think I would have cramped after two minutes if I did what Lleyton does. So, ah, no, Lleyton has an amazing amount of in intensity and that's how he needs to get himself up to win matches and that's what works for him. But for me, I sort of needed to pace myself but when certain moments called for it, I definitely got fired up.
ANDREW DENTON: Having that background, having that family background, being brought up that way, do you feel comfortable when you watch Lleyton and his carry on?
PAT RAFTER: I don't necessarily agree with everything he does, but, you know, that's him and that's his personality and that's what works for him, and Lleyton's a completely different cat when you get him off the court.
ANDREW DENTON: Yeah.
PAT RAFTER: He's very shy; he's quiet, he's polite and when he gets on the court he fires up and that's what makes him perform. That's what he needs to do.
Ah. I see you're a troll who hates Sampras. Funny lines "Jordan a complete player"....LOL. Trying to hit all the Sampras hot buttons and not caring if you make any real sense.
Funny how trolls are used to getting away with outright lies...but sooner or later, Troll will run into somebody like me who knows the facts.
No point in arguing with a troll, BUT FOR THE RECORD, and anybody who reads this, NO, it was not the "first" question Sampras got asked. It was in the middle of the interview, and the Sampras/Rafter bad blood had been brewing for quite some time, largely created by the media, who wanted to stir up trouble (As Rafter and Pete have both acknowledged now)
Note also that Sampras was STEAMING mad about a line call in that match, and came off the court still mad. It had been a very close match and Sampras had felt that call may have cost him the match. NOTE ALSO, that the "ten grand slams" was a joke (though Pete had no love for Rafter), and Sampras said it in a lighthearted way. Drwood is a liar/ignorant and his statements should be taken accordingly.
I agree nowadays Pete is much more gracefull / refined but . . . Back in his playing days he was arrogant especially when he lost. Quite a drama king at times. I don't think hes anymore classy than your average top 10.
Not to mention Pete has stated that he could win a prime fed vs prime sampras matchup. However confident you may be thats just not something you say publicly imo. Its as crazy as calling Fed the GOAT.
I don't think Fed and Sampras are "friends." I think there is just a mutual respect based on each others careers.
Anyone who calls me a troll is demonstrating ignorance at its best. EVERYTHING I have ever stated is backed up by FACT. I'm sorry if you can't handle the truth about the ungracious part of Sampras. Michael Jordan was a complete player -- there was no important barrier in his sport he couldn't overcome. We all know that Pete could never consistently win big matches at the French, hence why he never came close to reaching a final (and no, making 1 SF where you lose in straight sets including getting bageled is not close).
I know the facts b/c I followed Sampras his entire career. Obviously you didn't. That's how I also know about his comments after losing to Bruguera on HC in 1997, which are so indefensibly arrogant you haven't even tried to address them.
The "ten grand slams" was not a joke. As Sampras himself said right after that statement, it was a smartaleck remark -- but he never denied meaning what he said.
To call me a liar is trolling and flaming at its best. You have no evidence whatsoever to support your conclusions about me. Period.
comparing jordan to sampras? lawl.
I gave Sampras too much credit about his statement after losing to Bruguera -- he actually said he'd win that kind of match 9 out of 10 times (instead of 8 out of 10 times).
Just so anyone reading knows that I NEVER make statements about players without EVIDENCE to back them up, here is a reference to that match:
The text is below.
Bruguera's Play Insures Meltdown by Sampras
By ROBIN FINN
Published: Saturday, March 29, 1997
The day was steamy and soupy, and the stadium court at the Lipton Championships felt enough like a hot kitchen to Pete Sampras that he plunked an oversized white cap on his head to ward off the tropical sun. But Sampras couldn't handle the heat and surrendered today's semifinal match to the bare-headed, bold-minded Sergi Bruguera of Spain.
The 30th-seeded Bruguera, a two-time French Open champion who last year took a rankings tumble from 13th to 81st, handled Sampras with a combination of baseline patience and intermittent aggression that proved sufficient for a 5-7, 7-6 (7-2), 6-4 comeback against the world's top player. And he accomplished it on a hardcourt surface where Sampras, not the clay-bred Bruguera, ought to have felt more comfortable.
''It's one of the best feelings you can have in tennis, to beat the No. 1 in an important match,'' Bruguera said. Today's coup was the fourth time in Bruguera's career that he had beaten a No. 1 player, and for the third time, that No. 1 player was Sampras.
Bruguera will meet the second-seeded Thomas Muster, who defeated Jim Courier, seeded 22d, 6-3 6-4. Muster is 11-3 against Bruguera. His only previous Lipton final came in 1989, but he suffered a career-threatening knee injury when he was struck by a drunken driver on the eve of his match with Ivan Lendl.
Sampras, the top-seeded player, was off to a career-best 20-1 start in 1997, a season he commenced by capturing his ninth Grand Slam title at the Australian Open, but this afternoon's 2-hour-8-minute stumble made his bright start seem immaterial.
''It's a match I should have won 9 times out of 10,'' said Sampras, who had been counting on making restitution here for his opening-round loss to Bohdan Ulihrach two weeks ago at Indian Wells, Calif.
After skulking away from the court today, Sampras settled into an overstuffed plaid chair in the interview room like an old-timer; his head lolled back, and had the chair boasted a recliner option, he would have availed himself of it.
''I just played a bad match, really disappointing,'' said Sampras, who rated his performance a 4 on a 10-point scale and was especially annoyed by his timidity in the second set's tie breaker.
''He played well and served well, but I kind of let him. And he hit the ball pretty heavy and strong to my backhand.''
After being discombobulated by the desert conditions in Indian Wells, Sampras, twice a Lipton champion, let the humidity here turn his game soggy.
''I could have set up the points a little better and not risked as much,'' said Sampras, a patsy for Bruguera's passing shots whenever he rushed to the net behind a less-than-impeccable approach.
Now 3-2 against Sampras in career confrontations, Bruguera felt today's upset was even more of a stunner than Sampras's five-set demolition-derby victory against the Spaniard at last year's French Open. But Bruguera acknowledged that even though he arrived at this event without lofty expectations, his opening-round ouster of third-seeded Michael Chang hinted of bigger upsets to come.
''That match gave me confidence,'' said Bruguera, whose resume had not offered high points like this since his surprising sleeper run to a silver medal at the Atlanta Olympics.
Today, Sampras's performance was so anemic that even from the service line, a spot where he usually feels competent, he succumbed on all four break points allotted the Spaniard; adding insult to injury, the 26-year-old Bruguera also out-aced him, 10-8.
Sampras was so-so even in the opening set, when he immediately lost his serve in the fourth game with an errant forehand, one of 35 unforced errors, after breaking Bruguera in the third. Sampras broke Bruguera again to take a 6-5 lead and was awarded the set on a questionable call: apparently only Sampras and the officiating staff felt his down-the-middle ace hit the border of the appropriate service box.
Another controversial ace, this one a blast to the outside corner that appeared both long and wide, delivered Sampras into the second set's tie breaker. But once there, he fizzled.
Bruguera scrambled for every ball, went up by 6-2 when Sampras pushed a lame backhand return long, then evened the match with an ace of his own.
Sampras fell behind by 3-1 in the final set, rallied to 3-3, and lost his serve in the seventh game when Bruguera drilled a consummate backhand pass at break point. Ahead by 5-3, Bruguera began the last game with his 10th and final ace, and Sampras netted a backhand return on Bruguera's first match point.
Photo: Sergi Bruguera of Spain returning a volley at the net from Pete Sampras in their semifinal match yesterday. Bruguera won, 5-7, 7-6 (7-2), 6-4. (Reuters)
You stated it was the first question he was asked. WRONG. You now ADMIT that in his very next sentence he STATED he was being a smart alec. CORRECT. I said it was meant in a lighthearted manner. IT WAS. The reporters LAUGHED. Sampras then said SAID he was being a "smart ass". HE THEN WENT ON TO say Rafter played similarly to him, and Edberg. I also noted that much of the press conference was about Pete's anger at the line callsa and that he was in a very bad mood. Sampras himself said it was the angriest he's ever been on court. Now, WHICH one of us better reflected the truth? I'll let others decide.
I think it's apparent who has the extreme bias and who is grasping at straws to built a amazingly feeble case. Comparing Sampras to Serena Williams repeatedly. That in itself speaks volumes.
Pete said that he was being a smart aleck -- I don't curse, so I didn't quote exactly what he said. However, he never denied his true meaning about what he said, and didn't really start caring about the media perception of his feud with Rafter until AFTER Rafter beat him in the US Open SF to win his second straight US Open. Furthemore, Rafter and many other players couldn't stand Pete and his excuses whenever he lost, although Rafter eventually took the initiative to mend fences with Sampras.
Example quote from Rafter about Sampras (can be found on Sampras' Wikipedia bio):
"He really does say some funny things at the wrong time," said Rafter, "We are out there busting our guts and he doesn't show a lot of respect at the end of the day. He tries to play down the reason why he lost, giving no respect to the other player, and that is what really upsets me about him and the reason I try to [anger him] as much as I can." (reference: http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/09/sports/sp-50252)
It certainly is apparent who has the extreme bias and is grasping at straws...and its not me. Read the reference I just posted after Pete lost to Bruguera...those comments are just like Serena's after a defeat. That in itself speaks volumes. I am not a distorter of the truth. Period.
guys, the media were getting ridiculous around this time.
they just wanted a "fight" between them that just wasn't gonna happen anyway...just a bunch of smartass comments from both of them.
At times reading some magazines I started to get the impression
rafter was more loved in the us than sampras, which is ********.
pete had been top of the tree for a long time..yet I think he felt a little agrieved
at all the "boring sampras wins again" vibe when he was making history out there.
what would the us media give now to have a plyer of pete's calibre?
Look at all the love fed recieved the last couple of years...he isn't even american.
As much as I respect pete...I think he was arrogant at times...but that's
waht champions have to be...
some people on here go on about arrogance as if it's 100% bad.
Take fed's comments on murray after losing to him dubai 08 for example.
fed..after losing pretty much full out said murray isn't winning anything playing the way he does. now in a way..that's hugely arrogant statement.
so what? arrogance for the top guys is ok....you could tell by demeanor etc
both fed and pete have a healthy dose a good sporting arrogance.
you gotta go out there thinking crush opponent...self-doubt is bad.
The perfect attitude of a champion is extreme self-confidence without arrogance. The problem is that extreme self-confidence can spill over into arrogance if its not checked; however its better to be arrogant than timid in order to consistently win, so many champions don't mind being arrogant. But if you're confident without being arrogant, you won't underestimate opponents and will reach the height of your potential.
If Americans like Fed more than Pete, its b/c Pete always treated the media as the enemy (until Fed started breaking his records), while Fed has always been gracious and giving of his time to the media -- you reap what you sow. Pete tended to play the victim mentality with the media -- i.e. "they don't like me because I don't yell and scream like McEnroe; woe is me" when the truth was if he had humbled himself before them the way Federer has, they would have loved him a lot more. That being said, the media still treated Sampras very well for most of his career by constantly downplaying his failures on clay, especially since he was the only top American of his generation to never win the French or even make a French final.
I loved Pete's game, it was so effortless and based on short points that it was easy to conceive of as boring to those who weren't true tennis fans. However, if he had been more willing to be an ambassador of tennis, the "boring" label wouldn't have stuck to him so easily.
Actually I think Sampras is more classy than Jordan. Look at their Hall-Of-Fame induction speeches. Sampras seems genuinely humbled to receive that honor whereas Jordan uses his speech to get back at people and coaches who he thought had crossed him in the past.
I can tell you that Todd Woodbridge (who wrote as much in his autobiography), Pat Rafter, Mark Woodforde, Jason Stoltenberg, Mark Philippouissis and the rest of the Australian players of his era DID NOT consider Pete to be anything resembling generous to his opponents. On the contrary, they considered him to be an 'okay bloke' but a bit 'up himself'.
Agree with this. That certain bit of arrogance is necessary
But it was pete's fault as much as it was media's that he was considered to be 'boring', well maybe media played a bigger part, but pete contributed quite a bit to it as well.
Bold #1: Perhaps Pete was boring. The serve fests in the 90s were boring
Bold #2: the media would give nothing NOW for a player of pete's caliber; in fact, they have someone who is of better caliber than Pete .
Bold #3: Perhaps Fed is loved more because he is that good, and well-mannered. He is very well received in every country that he plays in. The french treat him like their own, the wimby crowd treats him very well.. See a pattern here? It's not the media, its the person....
I've always thought that Sampras was/is a class act. But picking Fed at the 2009 USO (or not picking Fed) had nothing to do with it.
I guess it means Sampra didn't think all that highly of DelPo's game, which I would argue has little to do with being a "class act."
Azzurri, as much as we've disagreed on other topics, I was impressed with your defense of Chang versus Safin in the other thread. Nice job.
so now you are comparing two different sports??? maybe you would not know this, but tennis and basketball are different sports...UNLIKE Pete, MJ needed a multitude of other players to win 6 titles..but Pete needed just himself to win 14. again, another clueless post.
no one but Pete and Fed know their relationship. Pete did come to the W finals for Fed..that shows something.
I had a good laugh myself. unreal.
well said. MJ is a huge jerk, maybe the biggest jerk in sports. Pete has shown class, while MJ is a..JERK as usual.
not sure why you are so anti-sampras.
the Chang-Safin...is that thread still going???:shock:
Well lets be fair. MJ was (and still is, even if retired) probably the most popular living sportsman on the planet. He was an aloof man who got more attention than he ever wanted. He also lost his dad, the person who influenced him most, and went through a horribly demoralizing divorce. The guy is now a bitter, lonely man, but he isn't an arsehole. I would fault the Hero Machine moreso than the hero.
BTW . . . . biggest jerk in sports is ridiculous. There are thousands worse. Jordan has lived a fairly ego-driven life but in the panetheon of despicable athletes there have been drug addicts, murderers, rapists, etc. Jordan's antics pale in comparison.
Yes only pete and fed know their relationship so im not sure why all the people defending sampras love to say they are friends. Like somehow that makes either one of them more or less "classy." I think pete came to the finals to see his record be broken more than for federer. Regardless thats not important.
I think most of the people in these forums are young and don't even remember Sampras when he played. They just see him in a suit being interviewed and it screams class.
Not sure if this thread is pertaining to sampras NOW or back during his career. Or both . . .
Back in his day he had his share of tantrums and drama just like any other. I don't think he stands out.
I'm not anti-Sampras. I'm just willing to tell the truth about him -- both the good and the bad -- just like I am with Federer and Nadal. No difference.
The Chang-Safin thread was revived today.
Pete just needed himself? Right. That's why he never did anything on grass until Gullickson taught him how to return serve on grass. Try again.
Basketball and tennis are two different sports -- however in his sport MJ is unquestionably the GOAT. There are clear reasons to argue against Pete in tennis -- most glaringly his average (for a GOAT candidate) record on clay. Not so for MJ...he had no weaknesses in his sport.
MJ is clearly a much bigger jerk than Sampras, but Sampras could be a jerk as well, especially when he was losing.
I respect Sampras' career and loved his game -- I never thought his game was boring at all -- a dominant serve is a beautiful thing to watch.
is MJ considered a jerk because of his arrogance..or something else...
in that case..Ali was a jerk, and many others.
somebody tried to defend sampras comment of 10 slams as light hearted. that made me laugh. that comment was full of spite.
but i think for the most pete conducted himself in a low key polite manner that i admire and that lot of other sportsmen can certainly learn from.
I did. And it was. But I pointed out that Rafter and Sampras had been annoyed with each other for a while AND that Sampras had already explicitly said that he was angrier than he had ever been after a match (due to the line call). So he made a smart ass comment. It got big laughs and then he immediately said he was "being a smart ass". That's makes it pretty darn OBVIOUS that it wasn't meant as an entirely serious spiteful comment. He then compared Rafter's game to Edbergs and his own.
It was a funny jibe at Rafter made in a smart ass way. Sampras fully admitted it. Basically, Sampras blew off some steam by taking a little shot at Pat. Nothing more, nothing less. Hardly a Serena Williams class conference. Incidently, it's actually a moment where Sampras let his smart ass sense of humour show. He was known for this, but never let it out in public.
But this has been beat to death. People can think what they like. Funny how often these things get hopelessly misquoted and embellished here though. Creates little TW urban legends.
I don't place jerks in the class of murderers, rapists and addicts/dealers...you do??? So someone kills 20 people and he is a jerk. OK.
Your whole statement about Jordna's personal life is based on complete ignorance.
huh? The guy was pretty reserved. Did you even watch him play? Tantrums???? There is ONE Pete tantrum that I know of and that was when he asked the umpire if he was smoking something. Pete had his share of drama...compared to who?? Mac and Tarango or Chris Everet. I am curious as to who you would relate his tantrums with.
Jordan had no crossover, that is a weakness. Jordan was poor at the left handed lay-up, that is a weakness. While I agree MJ is the GOAT in the NBA, it has no bearing, meaning, or any other word with tennis. Gretzky domianted his sport like no other athlete and I would not call Gretazky a better GOAT than MJ because they played 2 seperate sports. You can discuss things about the way they handled themselves, the way they lifted up other players, but you can't really compare who is the greater GOAT.
MJ never played basketball on a clay court, so how would you know if he had a weakness or not? Show me one time MJ played on a clay court. Pete serve would haved been monster on a wood floor. Too bad he never got to play on it. Pete's GAME was a weakness on clay, not any one particular shot (as some have mentioned). Too many good CC players in his day for him to win the FO with his S&V style of play. His game was geared around his serve and he stated that many times. The clay hindered his serve and took away his strengths; pressure, pressure, pressure. But you don't understand, nor realize this. sad, sad you never actually watched Pete play.
Lastly, I respect what Gully did for Pete as a tennis player and person. Pete always had the grass game in him. Gully obviously was the right guy to bring it out. But make no mistake, it was Pete all alone winning 7 Wimbledon titles. Again, I give credit to Gully, but you seem to think Gully had his hand on Pete as he was playing. Pete had to hit every stroke, return ever serve and volley every ball. Gully just sat in his glory (deservedly so). Let's not forget Annacone. He did a lot to help Pete's game.
Pete is a very sarcastic person. People that know his say he like to bus chops. He admits that his sarcasm can be pretty thick. But yes, he was ribbing Rafter. I don't understand why Pete needed to be Mr. Popular in the locker room. He just wanted to win and he gave up a lot to win 14 GS titles that others were not willing to sacrfice (Mac, Agassi, Wilander, Becker, etc.). They wanted to "good life" along with the tennis. Give Pete credit for his sacrifice.
Oh you know what I meant. What a manipulative misrespresentation of my post.
Yes, to imply that Jordan is the most arrogant athlete in all of pro sports in ridiculous.
Ah, ok. Interesting contribution.
Pete's arrogant and mega ego is the problem for him being a sore loser. Rafter said it best - "Oh, when is this guy going to give me any credit for beating him".
OK, if Jordan fits the bill more than any other athlete, fine. I won't argue with your subjective opinion.
But next time, could you argue with a little less conviction when you basically admitted that you don't know very much about other athletes jerk-ish exploits?
Again, interesting. Zing.
you got me. most of my posts are not as convected as they seem. I don't take anything personal. I just have a large amount of disdain for MJ...a LARGE amount.
Separate names with a comma.