D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Fed took 10 years to win his 7, Sampras only took 8. 7/8 is better than 7/10.
Sampras? Sampras who?
- Thread starter tennis_pro
- Start date
Fed took 10 years to win his 7, Sampras only took 8. 7/8 is better than 7/10.
You mean Federer > Sampras because he has been on top longer?
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
That doesn't matter, overall Federer has done better at wimbledon. At Fed's age Sampras was losing early on the Bastl. You can say Federer is better because he is still able to win at 30 wheras Sampras was washed up at Wimbledon by that age. Federer has won the same amount of titles and reached more finals over a longer period of time, showing staying power.
Let's turn this the other way. Sampras has the same amount of US Open titles as Federer.
Federer took less time to win 5 - 5 years, compared to 12 for Sampras.
Sampras made more finals.
Who is the better US Open player judges on those factors?
sliceroni
Hall of Fame
Pete no doubt had the best 1st and 2nd serve the sports has ever scene. Right now its subjective whom you think is a better grasscourt player. I remember in 2001 Wimbledon when a very young Federer facing a 30 yr old Sampras and crushing Pete's 1st serves back for winners including on match point. Yeah I know Pete was past his prime but he still had the best serve on tour that year. On grass I say equal. On clay Sampras would get served and bagel or breadstick 10/10
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
If Fed stays on top from now until the end of 2017 he will be on top for 6 years in a row like Sampras.
If Fed stays on top from now until the end of 2017 he will be on top for 6 years in a row like Sampras.
I meant Wimbledon finals and titles, obviously. Fed's career spans more productive years, Sampras' was more short-lived.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Nothing is "meaningless" about having the best serve of all time. It is funny seeing Murray, Nadal, and Djoker rolling in 80mph second serves when Pete could smash them at 120.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
With both having 7 titles it is completely subjective who is the better grass and Wimbledon player. There isnt any major statistical edge either way so it is up to personal opinion alone.
mightyrick
Legend
Federer is better than Pete on 2002 grass forward. Pete is better than Federer on 1992 grass to 2001.
Anyone can debate on how the grass is different in the last decade versus the prior. But the one thing that nobody will debate is that the grass is different and affects the ball different. Even the AEC head groundsman admits it.
You cannot compare era to era with individual performance statistics alone. It simply isn't possible. You have to also consider factors outside of individual performance statistics when you talk about GOAT stuff.
Last edited:
Pete is not even in the top 5 for best 1st serves; definitely the GOAT of 2nd serves, no doubt.
mightyrick
Legend
throw in other grass court results, and the edge to Fed will be much more than just "slight"
i know, it's almost blashphemy to suggest that Sampras does not have the best 1st serve, unfortunately, those that do claim that Pete has the best 1st serve do not have the stats to back it up. Karlovic, Goran, Isner, Krajicek, pim-pim and Roddick are some names that spring to mind when discussing better 1st serves than Sampras.
Last edited:
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
well i was talking about wimbledon only.
wonder if thenatural will answer my us open question? probably not lol.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
what was the question?
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
You Forgot the Sampras Davis Cup title on grass.
I as talking about Wimbledon specifically, not grass as a surface
Let's turn this the other way. Sampras has the same amount of US Open titles as Federer.
Federer took less time to win 5 - 5 years, compared to 12 for Sampras.
Sampras made more finals.
Who is the better US Open player judged on those factors?
blue steel
Rookie
hard to make the argument that sampras could beat federer on grass when it was federer who beat sampras and ended his wimbledon winning streak. when federer was only 19.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Sampras, because he did it with a tiny 85" racket and no poly.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
classic butthurt **** :lol:
I'm afraid Laver, mac, Connors, Borg etc outrank Sampras cos they did it with wooden racquets
World Beater
Hall of Fame
Somehow the myth that pete would be better on fast grass than federer is still strong here.
there is basically no evidence whatsoever to back this claim up..especially when federer beat pete as a 19yr old when pete was the defending champ and served at 69% first serves, and 130+ mph.
All we can do is speculate / extrapolate. But judging by federer's play on indoor surfaces - it seems he would just fine on faster surface especially considering his domination of the usopen & WTF, which is the fastest surface currently. sampras was nowhere near as dominant as fed at the usopen.
there is basically no evidence whatsoever to back this claim up..especially when federer beat pete as a 19yr old when pete was the defending champ and served at 69% first serves, and 130+ mph.
All we can do is speculate / extrapolate. But judging by federer's play on indoor surfaces - it seems he would just fine on faster surface especially considering his domination of the usopen & WTF, which is the fastest surface currently. sampras was nowhere near as dominant as fed at the usopen.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Fed and Sampras should settle it with their wooden rackets. Sampras is up for the challenge
mightyrick
Legend
It isn't blasphemy. It's just stupid. You're just trolling.
What factors determine a great first serve? Speed, placement, consistency. You're saying that Sampras' first serve isn't even in this top 5?
All-time Ivanesevic Career Aces : #1 at 12.79 per match (10183 aces in 796 matches)
All-time Ivanesevic Career First Service Percentage Rank : #204 at 55% over 796 matches
All-time Ivanesevic Career Service Games Won : #11 at 86% over 796 matches
All-time Sampras Career Aces : #3 at 10.31 per match (8858 aces in 859 matches)
All-time Sampras Career First Service Percentage Rank : #102 at 59% over 859 matches
All-time Sampras Career Service Games Won : #4 at 89% over 859 matches
You are so full of fail.
none of the stats you quote are relevant in determining who has the better 1st serve.. better overall serve -- may be; not 1st serve. please don't act butt-hurt or slighted, but facts don't support you.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Fed and Sampras should settle it with their wooden rackets. Sampras is up for the challenge
but if fed won, he would get no credit for beating an old man.
No sorry the wooden racquet lot are miles above fed and sampras obviously.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
How do those surfaces compare to Macau, where 36yr old Sampras straight setted prime Fed with a Sv master class. We know that Old Sampras can beat prime Fed with a modern racket and poly strings as long as he gets a few weeks of practice in first.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
lol, exhibition 3 set match compared to Wimbledon.
Gotta laugh at the lengths samptards will go to :lol:
mightyrick
Legend
LOL.
First service percentage doesn't have anything to do with who has a better first serve? Aces (which mostly occur on first serve) don't have anything to do with it? Service games won (which mostly occur on first serve) doesn't factor?
I see. What is it? Just speed?
You're dismissed.
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Those flick backhand of Feds would only make it half way to the net with a wooden racket.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
and sampras's serve would suck. Old man Johnny Mac, known for having a weak serve, out aced Sampras (and beat him) in an exo with a modern racquet.
Btw, this isn't about Federer, I just said Sampras is nowhere near Borg, Laver, Mac, Connors etc, because they played with tiny wooden racquets. Which is true obviously. Stop bringing federer into this. My point is Sampras is miles behind every multislam winner who won with a wooden racquet.
Last edited:
good to know that Nadal has one of the best 1st serves ever... his 1st serve % is at least 10 points higher than Pete's. And he has a very high hold % as well.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
+1. He said many times he thought someone might equal or break his records - but he wasn't happy that it happened so fast. And he still skirts around the issue of who's better - on the ATP Uncovered show he dropped a "I'd like my chances" line. He's still the same guy who was tweaked that he didn't get mentioned in N American sports in the same sentence with Jordan and Gretzky ('Anatomy of a P*ssed Off Champion').
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
It is sad and pathetic.
Today (and really the whole fortnight) Fed's BH held up brilliantly. He went BH to Bh with Djokovic Friday and Murray today. Sampras' weak BH wouldn't last against most of today's players.
Sampras was a serving machine at a time when conditions - fast grass and a longer indoor carpet season - favored that style. I applaud him for his serve and ability to handle pressure. Period.
exactly! some clowns will claim that Pete's BH was not much far off Fed's BH.
And as I watching the djoker and murray matches, I was wondering if those claiming that Fed has a weak BH would actually change their minds after watching the match!
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
They should be forced to watch the '95 Agassi - Sampras Aussie Open final. Conditions weren't super fast; Agassi was able to get into rallies and toyed with Sampras. Pete's very lucky the USTA loved him and ginned up the surface and balls at the USO - or he wouldn't have 14 majors.
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
Have to side with West Coast Ace and DB.
Sampras is the greatest grass and fast court player and did not choke under pressure.
Federer is the greatest all court player and really his greatness is being defined late in his career.
We all know Federer is greater achievement wise no need to rub it and be major a**holes.
disagree. there's no room for niceties when debating who's the best ever. Sampras does not have the #s to support that he's the best grass or fast court player. Federer does. period
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
actually, it would be Crenshaw, who won the singles 7 times and doubles 5 times. Remind us how many times sampras won the doubles? :roll:
oh, and BTW, check this out:
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
actually, it would be Crenshaw, who won the singles 7 times and doubles 5 times. Remind us how many times sampras won the doubles? :roll:
oh, and BTW, check this out:
LOL Epic achievements by Creshaw major props.
Monstrous win for Federer.
He might get more majors.
Last edited:
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
No arguing with you there.
IMO Sampras just had tremendous confidence on the fast grass.
fair enough. i do agree that Federer has appeared more "beatable" in the wimby finals than Pete, though I'd attribute that to mental "giants" such as pioline or ivanisevic not being able to push Pete as opposed to guys like Nadal or Roddick.
kiki
Banned
First, Laver won a pro major which was substantially more important than an amateur one back in 67
Secondly, he won on three different grass courts as opposed to similar 4 surfaces today
third, he won, in 69, the two biggest non slam events: Indoors at MSg and hard court at Johannesbourg.It is like 6 slam titles out there.
Third, beating Murray at a Wimbly final is no big deal.Borg had a much tougher time in beating Roscoe Tanner, whom I´d pick over Murray anytime.
kiki
Banned
How true¡¡
Similar threads
