Sampras on Federer

Ripper said:
Poor Sampras. Who would have believed his record was going to be threatened and so fast.
Click to expand...

You took the words out of my mouth. I think its funny that something that Pete worked so hard for and achieved will be eclipsed in a matter of single digit years. In a way Fed is not only stealing slams away from other players but also stealing Sampras' thunder. He will pass his slam total by '08 and very likely the record for year-end number one as well.

I do believe that Sampras would have appreciated someone breaking his slam records later on in his life (like in his 50's or 60's). I think he would have liked for people to see his records and achievements for a longer amount of time. But now that will all be broken very soon by Federer and right now he's getting all the GOAT press that otherwise Pete would've gotten.

Not only that, he even lost to Fed in his backyard (Wimbledon) in their only appearance. Even Fed has him beat there as well. I know that Pete wouldn't have wanted to play Fed back in the 90's. I say that because Pete would have A LOT less slams than 14. Let's just say for the hell of it that if both players had been around at the same time Pete would have perhaps 6-7 slams and Federer would have had 12. I know Sampras fans will really get fumed over this but I only judge based on what I see. Fed would've eventually taken away Pete's serve effectiveness. After all, he did it throughout their only matchup.
 
Keep in mind there were no-names who took away Pete's service effectiveness at times. It happens. That one matchup between them says a little bit, but not a lot about what a prime matchup would look like.

If Federer dies mysteriously, I think we know whom to point the finger at.
 
Poor Sampras...hooeey!! I don't think anything can ge gleaned from their one Wimbledon meeting. The score was 7-6, 5-7, 6-4, 6-7 7-5. A 20YO Fed against a 30YO Sampras in the next to last year of his career. Fed would dominate on clay and probably Australia but I would take Pete at Wimbledon and his home court of the US Open. Fed will be the GOAT in terms of stats and wins on all surfaces but Pete's game was overwhelming when on. Fed has tons of trouble with the rpms that Nadal produces on his groundies and they can't compare to the rpms on Pete's serve. We also know that Pete was a fighter and could come back when on the ropes. We haven't really seen that from Fed. This has been argued to death but in IMHO, the top 10 was better throughout Pete's career. We can argue all day about talent/power/etc., but Pete's peers at least had the mental strength/belief to win. Fed faces an array of mental midgets like Safin, Roddick, Gonzalez, Haas, Ancic on a regular basis. Finally, Pete had to face a variety of playing styles, ranging from baseliners to serve and volleyers to counterpunchers to all courters. Fed faces baseliners and counterpunchers. Pete made a good point during one of the ESPN Aussie Open interviews. He was praising Fed but mentioned that he wonders how Fed would have handled the constant pressure of his serve and net approaches during his prime. We can only wonder...
 
That's the problem: nobody can beat Roger at Roger's game, but the only game that's played these days is that very game: baseline tennis. I'd love to see Edberg kick his serve up to the Federer backhand and follow it up with his trademark volleys, or any S&V player for that mater.
 
if Fed and Pete played in the same era, Fed would still have as many slams as he is on pace to getting today, and Pete would just be another whipping boy.
 
Sampras serves aces but how many would Fed have stolen from him?Federer knows how to return big servers.I think he would do well returning his serves on ocassion.
 
stormholloway said:
That's the problem: nobody can beat Roger at Roger's game, but the only game that's played these days is that very game: baseline tennis. I'd love to see Edberg kick his serve up to the Federer backhand and follow it up with his trademark volleys, or any S&V player for that mater.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see that too, and see how embarassed Edberg will become from being passed helplessly time and again, and reduced himself to a wonnabe baseliner.

You see the transition from an SVer to a baseliner in Tim Henman.... why would Edberg be much (if any) different.
 
I think Fed would eat up serve and volley players today.I wanna see Rafter try and play in today's game, he would have small success.
 
There was a good article in last Friday's Wall Street Journal in the weekend section. I don't want to quote it at length here, as it is a subscription site. The interesting points were:

1. "Of the 11 players with four or more Grand Slam singles titles who played entirely in the Open era (not including Mr. Federer), six won their last slam before their 26th birthday."

Of course two notable exceptions are Sampras and Agassi...

2. Regarding Sampras and Agassi, the article states "Mr. Federer faces an obstacle that they(Sampras and Agassi) were able to avoid -- a great young rival. ... Sampras and Agassi took advantage of a relative power vacuum in the game around the turn of the millennium"

Interesting that the author clearly thinks Sampras and Agassi benefitted from weak competition, a view I agree with. In any case, the article is worth a read if you can dig it up. It's from Jan 26.
 
Just wondering...who will they say are the great "runner up" players from Fed's era? Pete played against Becker, Edberg, Lendl, Agassi and even Courier. Some may say these guys are "also rans" but those five guys each have 4 or more Slams under their belts. Who is like that for Fed?
 
Last edited:
rod_b said:
Just wondering...who will they say are the great "runner up" players from Fed's era? Pete played against Becker, Edberg, Lendl, Agassi and even Courier. Some may say these guys are "also rans" but those five guys each have 4 or more Slams under their belts. Who is like that for Fed?
Click to expand...

The debate is.....no one, BECAUSE of Federer.
 
I agree with Federer stealing Sampras' thunder.

Even Sampras seems a bit uncomfortable with this one.

It took over twenty years after Emerson and Laver for Borg to achieve waht he did. Then another twenty for Sampras to exceed Borg. Now we're looking at a possible five to six years and Federer could surpass Sampras' total.

Pete hasn't had an opportunity to even lose all his hair, get real fat and arthritic, and say that there's no possible comparison between racket technology to rest on.
 
rod_b said:
Just wondering...who will they say are the great "runner up" players from Fed's era? Pete played against Becker, Edberg, Lendl, Agassi and even Courier. Some may say these guys are "also rans" but those five guys each have 4 or more Slams under their belts. Who is like that for Fed?
Click to expand...

lendl!?!?!

an also ran!?!?!

lendl was just as dominant as fed, just a shade better on clay and a shade worse on grass, he definitely had stiffer competition than fed, he is a canditate for the goat.
 
rod_b said:
So everyone he plays are stiffs and no one is challenging him.
Click to expand...

Basically, yeah.

At least no one's posting GS single's wins (besides Nadal), right?

It's getting closer. Look at all the tighter sets Federer's been able to pull out time and again. When the aura of invincibility is dented, if not shattered, then we'll see what Federer's made of.
 
Comparing Henman to Edberg is the funniest thing I've read on this board this year. Henman is another mental midget that doesn't know how to go for the throat. No one's game works against Fed because he's the best at it. Problem is, today's players are so one-dimensional that when Plan A doesn't work, they're rooted because there is no Plan B. "Volley" is a dirty word these days and most players can't hit a decent slice backhand unless they're pulled out wide in a defensive situation. And in terms of a great young rival, Nadal needs to be there the next 4-5 years. One great year does not a rival make.
 
dozu said:
I'd love to see that too, and see how embarassed Edberg will become from being passed helplessly time and again, and reduced himself to a wonnabe baseliner.

You see the transition from an SVer to a baseliner in Tim Henman.... why would Edberg be much (if any) different.
Click to expand...

Because Edberg is thrice the match player Henman is/was. Also, when does Edberg ever play from the baseline? Stefan would attack net relentlessly regardless of being passed.
 
We can understand where Sampras is coming from. But I think it's in his best interest to say as little as possible about Federer. It just makes Sampras look a bit uncertain and maybe even insecure.
 
omniexist said:
We can understand where Sampras is coming from. But I think it's in his best interest to say as little as possible about Federer. It just makes Sampras look a bit uncertain and maybe even insecure.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Sounds more and more like sour grapes to me.
 
Sampras = serve, volley and some forehand. Thats all.
Federer = has everything.
Poor Sampras....
 
The Gorilla said:
lendl!?!?!

an also ran!?!?!

lendl was just as dominant as fed, just a shade better on clay and a shade worse on grass, he definitely had stiffer competition than fed, he is a canditate for the goat.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Lendl was an "also ran." I have a lot of respect for those players. I'm saying that some pro-Fed guys might dismiss the accomplishments of the competition Sampras faced.
 
Shabazza said:
Indeed. Sounds more and more like sour grapes to me.
Click to expand...

I see your point. But from his side, what he feels is totally deserved.

If you are record holder of the most prestigious 30yr old record in the sport and you break it and push it even further, it is hard to digest.

And to top it, he retires with head held high by winning a home major and in less than 5 years, even before inducted to HOF, there comes a guy swinging and is within reach of the record that he fought for and scraped through all life, it gotta hurt.

But, Sampras has been there and done that, and it is time for him to move on than venting in public though :(
 
Last edited:
rod_b said:
I'm not saying Lendl was an "also ran." I have a lot of respect for those players. I'm saying that some pro-Fed guys might dismiss the accomplishments of the competition Sampras faced.
Click to expand...

You mean like Agassi and Courier and Becker and Edberg and Rafter ?
 
I don't know why people keeps talking about S&V... if you actually understand tennis... current players return better, move better, and pass better... hence constant S&V is a suicide in today's game.. it's best reserved to use as a suprise tactic, or on really fast surface.... Just look at Fed... do u think he is actually worried about people coming up to volley? He is so comfortable hitting passing shots that he actually BRINGS people into the net. If you watch the old tapes... the approach shot that Rafter, Edberg and McEnroe will get murdered today!! I know Sampras keeps saying he facies himself...and licking his chops... that's just to cover his insecurities :)
 
as much as i like federer and his magical tennis, the slam dunk smash belongs to only one guy, right, pistol pete.
 
prosealster said:
I don't know why people keeps talking about S&V... if you actually understand tennis... current players return better, move better, and pass better... hence constant S&V is a suicide in today's game.. it's best reserved to use as a suprise tactic, or on really fast surface.... Just look at Fed... do u think he is actually worried about people coming up to volley? He is so comfortable hitting passing shots that he actually BRINGS people into the net. If you watch the old tapes... the approach shot that Rafter, Edberg and McEnroe will get murdered today!! I know Sampras keeps saying he facies himself...and licking his chops... that's just to cover his insecurities :)
Click to expand...

Exactly. To live and die today on serve and volley alone will end your career faster, just look at Taylor Dent. I know he's "injured" but he won't have a long career coming to net on every play. The players now just are too good to let that style beat them throughout the duration of a match. Unless you have a serve like Karlovic or Sampras in which holding serve is a certainty, then maybe you can hit the net every chance. Not everybody can possess that kind of serve. Even Edberg and McEnroe with their lame duck (but effective) serves would get ripped apart today. To succeed today with S&V you either need a great volley and great serve or one of each. Federer still wouldn't have trouble since he would figure them out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rod_b said:
Just wondering...who will they say are the great "runner up" players from Fed's era? Pete played against Becker, Edberg, Lendl, Agassi and even Courier. Some may say these guys are "also rans" but those five guys each have 4 or more Slams under their belts. Who is like that for Fed?
Click to expand...

For Sampras I would only put Agassi, Edberg and Courier in there because Lendl won his last two slams came in 1989 and 1990. He retired in 1994. He was done in 1992, he eventually had so much pain in his back he was gone from tennis forever. Becker won 5 of his 6 slams from 1985 to 1991. The only ones to be in Sampras' way were Courier and Edberg up to 1993. After 1993 the only person to win slams against Pete of the list was Agassi. Becker won a last slam in '96, Edberg retired that same year and Courier stopped winning slams 3 yrs prior. So where was the competition? Agassi was irrelevant in 1993, 1997 and 1998. Those years he wasn't in shape and Sampras snatched 5 slams in those years without a serious rival. So throw that "lack of rival" garbage in Fed's face but truth is that he's so good that nobody can compete with him (besides Nadal and Safin) in any era. Sampras should be thanking his lucky stars that Federer wasn't his main rival instead of Agassi. I assure you he would have reduced his slam total by half or more. Fed would be "licking his chops" at that thought.
 
prosealster said:
I don't know why people keeps talking about S&V... if you actually understand tennis... current players return better, move better, and pass better... hence constant S&V is a suicide in today's game.. it's best reserved to use as a suprise tactic, or on really fast surface.... Just look at Fed... do u think he is actually worried about people coming up to volley? He is so comfortable hitting passing shots that he actually BRINGS people into the net. If you watch the old tapes... the approach shot that Rafter, Edberg and McEnroe will get murdered today!! I know Sampras keeps saying he facies himself...and licking his chops... that's just to cover his insecurities :)
Click to expand...

Tennis is much slower than it was 10yrs ago.
 
Whoever puts Taylor Dent and Tim Henman in the same sentence with Edberg, Rafter, Becker, Johnny Mac must be under 18YO with no concept of tennis. We can all agree that players are faster, stronger, the game is faster. With the exception of Fed, that doesn't mean they're better. Guys in the NBA are faster and stronger but you put recent champions against the Celtics and Lakers of the 80's, Trailblazers and Bulls of the late 80's and early 90's, heck, even the Pistons of the late 80's and early 90's and they would get their clocks cleaned. Just like modern NBA athletes, today's tennis pros (with the exception of Fed) are one-dimensional robotic ping pong players. Fed is a champ for the ages; his contemporaries are not.
 
Federer would dominate Sampras in any era. Be it today, or yester-year. Just like he did at Wimbledon Center Court. THE END.
 
prosealster said:
I don't know why people keeps talking about S&V... if you actually understand tennis... current players return better, move better, and pass better... hence constant S&V is a suicide in today's game.. it's best reserved to use as a suprise tactic, or on really fast surface.... Just look at Fed... do u think he is actually worried about people coming up to volley? He is so comfortable hitting passing shots that he actually BRINGS people into the net. If you watch the old tapes... the approach shot that Rafter, Edberg and McEnroe will get murdered today!! I know Sampras keeps saying he facies himself...and licking his chops... that's just to cover his insecurities :)
Click to expand...

Current players have vastly powerfull rackets with a massive sweet spot which makes it far easier to hit passing shots. Previously the ball had to come off the very centre of the raquet and a big swing was required. You are also saying that Federer tries to draw players into the net, but not vollyers. Federer draws people like Roddick into the net because Roddick can not volley very well. You give Federer a very good vollyer and he will keep him near the back of the court while he can.
 
noeledmonds said:
Current players have vastly powerfull rackets with a massive sweet spot which makes it far easier to hit passing shots. Previously the ball had to come off the very centre of the raquet and a big swing was required. You are also saying that Federer tries to draw players into the net, but not vollyers. Federer draws people like Roddick into the net because Roddick can not volley very well. You give Federer a very good vollyer and he will keep him near the back of the court while he can.
Click to expand...

Racquet technology hasn't changed all that much since the Sampras era.
 
dima said:
Racquet technology hasn't changed all that much since the Sampras era.
Click to expand...

The technology has changed since the begginning of Sampras's era. If you look at the message I was responding to there was also references to Edberg and Mcenroe.
 
noeledmonds said:
Current players have vastly powerfull rackets with a massive sweet spot which makes it far easier to hit passing shots. Previously the ball had to come off the very centre of the raquet and a big swing was required.
Click to expand...

Except, Federer uses a very small racquet by modern standards, and it has a small sweet spot.

Furthermore, you're acting like Federer wouldn't adapt to changes by opposing players. I mean, right now, he's working on coming in to the net more, S&V-ing more, and there's absolutely no pressure on him to do that (he did it in the exhibition vs. Roddick). He has very great touch, hands probably about as good as McEnroe.

He will probably work on S&V, and do that more in the future, to close out matches quicker.
 
Obviously, playing baseline is not going to work against Federer, so what are you going to do? Why not try SV, or even better, mixing it up like Federer? Will it rattle Federer? Probably not. But hey, at least it gives Federer something different to worry about. It is not SV or mixing it up that is ineffective against Federer, it is the lack of quality player to execute this type of game plans, that is the problem. How is it so inconceivable for some of you to recognise that someone of Sampras calibre may present problem for Federer. If you can recall, a little known Suzuki did give Federer a few scare in two of their meetings recently. Like Sampras said, if Federer can pass him at will in 3 sets, you just gonna tip your hat to Federer and say too good.

Due to his dominance, Federer may single-handedly mould the tennis world into adopting complete playing style for the future tennis prodigies.

By the way, just curious, for the Federer fans, who in the past is capable of beating Federer. From the looks of many of the responses so far, it seems that Federer is unbeatable.
 
drakulie said:
Federer would dominate Sampras in any era. Be it today, or yester-year. Just like he did at Wimbledon Center Court. THE END.
Click to expand...

Hey Drak - did you say dominate ? didn't that match go five sets, and wasn't Sampras close to retirement - just checking my friend.:p
 
bluegrasser said:
Hey Drak - did you say dominate ? didn't that match go five sets, and wasn't Sampras close to retirement - just checking my friend.:p
Click to expand...

Yeah, I did. Based on the FACT that Fed to this day has still not reached his peak, and Sampras was at the the latter stage of HIS peak.
 
2001 meeting: nowhere near domination...Sampras on-the-slide, Federer on-the-rise.

It's an almost impossibe debate to resolve - the cloest you can to is mere speculation.

Both players have so many pluses to their games but there are also other factors to take into consideration: court-speeds and game-styles being the main two.
I don't think racquet technology should be factored into this so much...

If I had to make any biased viewpoint it would be that Sampras' offensive game is superior to Federer's defensive game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Why do people act like Fed never played Sampras?
Replies
4
Views
845
Deleted member 3771
D
L
Is Henman Being Disingenuous?
Replies
3
Views
1K
MarcRosset1992
M
W
So are players always massively overhyped?
Replies
5
Views
958
Ronaldo
Ronaldo
B
Sampras predicts 15-18 GS wins for Federer
2
Replies
58
Views
6K
Pheasant
Pheasant
noeledmonds
Aims of top Players for the coming years
Replies
9
Views
906
West Coast Ace
West Coast Ace
Back
Top