What does Sampras do better then great Federer?

[federerfanatic]

Personally I dont think Sampras does anything better then the great Fedster. Serve, forehands, backhands, movement, net play, mental game, return game, passing shots, and court smarts. Do you think Sampras does anything better then king Federer? Vote for the categories you think he is better in. I voted for none, if you think none for the none at the bottom. It is multiple so vote for as many as you want.

 

[drakulie]

There is no poll.

However, Pete has a much better first and second serve.

 

[noeledmonds]

This poll is clearly manipulated to make Federer look good. Putting in specific catergories such as passing shots while missing out other possible catergories like dividing up net game into ( FH volley, BH volley, Half Volley etc.) or having 1st and 2nd serve. Still I am impressed you asked the question at all given our previous discussion.

 

[federerfanatic]

This poll is clearly manipulated to make Federer look good. Putting in specific catergories such as passing shots while missing out other possible catergories like dividing up net game into ( FH volley, BH volley, Half Volley etc.) or having 1st and 2nd serve. Still I am impressed you asked the question at all given our previous discussion.

So you think I should have included 3 different types of volleys, LOL! You are really over the top with that one, you seem to be an Agassi fan, would you have done a poll with 3 different types of volleys when comparing Agassi to Edberg or Becker? I doubt it for obvious reasons. So yeah I am a bit biased but my poll options are reasonable based on the common breakdowns usually done of games. If you look at most game breakdowns done in magazines or on TV they usually focus on forehand and backhand, while only volley as opposed to different types of volleys. When they do go into detail to break down different types of volleys they break it down to forehand and backhand volley, but in that case break down the forehand and backhand further to slice backhand, topspin backhand, drive forehand, topspin forehand, etc...

Anyway I already said I think Federer is a bit better volleyer no matter how crazy you think that is so why would I go out of my way to manipulate options. I am confident Federer is best at almost everything except McEnroe volleying better is all.

 

[noeledmonds]

So you think I should have included 3 different types of volleys, LOL! You are really over the top with that one, you seem to be an Agassi fan, would you have done a poll with 3 different types of volleys when comparing Agassi to Edberg or Becker? I doubt it for obvious reasons. So yeah I am a bit biased but my poll options are reasonable based on the common breakdowns usually done of games. If you look at most game breakdowns done in magazines or on TV they usually focus on forehand and backhand, while only volley as opposed to different types of volleys. When they do go into detail to break down different types of volleys they break it down to forehand and backhand volley, but in that case break down the forehand and backhand further to slice backhand, topspin backhand, drive forehand, topspin forehand, etc...

Anyway I already said I think Federer is a bit better volleyer no matter how crazy you think that is so why would I go out of my way to manipulate options. I am confident Federer is best at almost everything except McEnroe volleying better is all.

Maybe I am going a little overboard requesting 3 types of volley, but I have never seen "court smarts" or "passing shots" in a magazine poll. As for your view on Federer's game. You can already see it is not reflected by the general tennis watching public.

 

[onkystomper]

Yawn. Anyone who uses your name on the boards is clearly not going to be able to post any subjective views about federer and his rivals past or present. This is the 3rd or 4th thread i have seen you posting overly bias views in.

 

[gsquicksilver]

just curious, how old are you federerfanatic?

i'm curious to know what are the age groups who believe federer is GOAT and the age groups who believe sampras is GOAT.

i'm 28, and i grew up watching and learned from watching sampras. to me, he's the GOAT, but that is my opinion.

 

[drakulie]

^^^^ I'm 37, and grew up idolizing Mcenroe, Sampras, Agassi. I believe Fed is by far the best player I have ever seen. Much better than Sampras.

In defense of federerfanatic>>> Federer is a very good volleyer. If he would play more serve and volley, and attack the net more he would be right up there with Sampras, if not better. However, he doesn't volley as much so one would have to give that category to Sampras.

 

[federerfanatic]

just curious, how old are you federerfanatic?

i'm curious to know what are the age groups who believe federer is GOAT and the age groups who believe sampras is GOAT.

i'm 28, and i grew up watching and learned from watching sampras. to me, he's the GOAT, but that is my opinion.

I am 27 and I since I started following alot of tennis around 1990, I am almost the same age as you. I have seen Sampras in his glory days and I definitely dont think he is better then Federer, not in a million years. Federer's forehand, backhand, return of serve, anticipation which is a big part of movement, shot improvisation, passing game, and strategic awareness are all much better then Pete's. Sampras would have to serve incredably and do incredably well at the net to even have a hope vs Federer.

Federer's overall baseline game is even stronger then Agassi's IMO, particularly counting the movement aspect of baseline play, and as for returning Federer is the master of getting more returns back in play then anybody else vs the best servers which Sampras is, and his serve is much better and harder to break then Agassi's, and he would obviously be able to come to net more and take the net away from Sampras much better then Agassi can. Agassi was a tough opponent for Sampras as their head to head shows, Federer would be much tougher.

 

[tintin]

nothing but the serves

 

[noeledmonds]

just curious, how old are you federerfanatic?

i'm curious to know what are the age groups who believe federer is GOAT and the age groups who believe sampras is GOAT.

i'm 28, and i grew up watching and learned from watching sampras. to me, he's the GOAT, but that is my opinion.

I am not sure this is true. I do think that there is just a lack of respect for players of generations people did not see. I actually belive that Federer does have an overall better game than Sampras. (On grass and decoturf courts I would still fancy Sampras's chances though at least half of the time.) What I disagree with is people who say Federer is best at every part of game, and people who say that Federer has already achived enough to be the defenitive GOAT. I don't even know why people can claim with such certainty that Sampras was the GOAT (before Federer's success) when there were players like Laver and Borg to consider.

 

[larlarbd]

Pete Obviously had a much better First & Second serve than FED will ever have .

But Some are forgetting that he had the best fightback ability on his own service game ( 0-30 down = fire aces , 0-40 down = come up with unreturnable volleys - thats foxing your opponent ) - no one did that better than sampras , also he did up his game on a perfect moment in the match - I think thats his mental game & it was quite unbeatable . Fed does lose focus in-between sets & he does not have the best closure , after winning 1st set in French Final against NADAL ( I so so hoped FED win that ) he lost total focus - Pete would have made NADAL eat the red dust if he won first set 6-1 ( now I have my doubts abt pete on clay but I'm just saying he w'd runover an opponent if he won 6-1 in a slam ) - thats his mental game , FED is yet to improve this part .

Net Game - sampras half-volleys ( FED will only dream about those & never make'em ) , sampras also made great angle's on volleys - FED has NONE . also the S&V - Sampras is atleast 10-times better . FED is still a good net player but he is below average compared to past champions .
Forehand - this is a matter of great debate & everyone will have their own opinion but I beleive sampras had a Better Forehand caz his FH had a bit more weight to it than FED .

Backhand - offcourse FED is better , Sampras can't even touch the FED backhand with his slow slice - even the FED slice is better .
Movement - FED wins by mile , but there is a very big but here - some players are natural movers , some are casual movers with a very good anticipation , now FED is very fast - but sampras was a casual mover which suited his game & let me remind you - sampras was a great natural mover in his time .

Passing Shots - obviously sampras with that deadly running FH. Fed messes up when hitting passing shots - I dunno why he does that & nowadays we don have too many gd S&V players - who are good at net , so FED has a easy time passing them - give FED rafter & we will see him running from corner to corner with ZERO passing shots being made.

Court Smarts - Sampras .

Return of serve - obviously FED , I still beleive he is undervalued in this dept . he has a great return of serve.

 

[lambielspins]

Serve-Sampras easy, but Federer's serve is far underrated still.

Net Game-Sampras now but Fed will improve and pass him in this so I voted Federer.

Forehand-Federer easy, Fed's forehand is the best shot ever.

Backhand-Federer easy, Sampras never had one of the best backhands and nowhere close to Fed's.

Return-Federer easy again.

Movement-Sampras once he got going was quicker but Federer was quicker off the mark, and anticipated better so got going earlier so Fed.

Court Smarts-Federer easily.

Mental Game-this one is close, I went with Fed because he is more dominant and Pete had the odd loss in slams in matches he had won(eg-Korda 97 U.S open 4th round, up a break in final set).

Passing shots-Federer easily again.

 

[AndrewD]

You should have asked what Sampras does better OR as well

Serve- Sampras: and it's not even close

Net Game- Tie. Sampras's net game was merely good and Federer is at least the equal of him in that respect.

Forehand- Federer

Backhand- Federer, without doubt.

Return- Federer by a long way.

Movement- Tie. Sampras was an exceptional athlete and I wouldn't want to make any distinction between the two.

Court Smarts-Tie: They're both winners on a major scale so I don't see how you can separate the two.

Mental Game- Federer. I base that comment solely on Sampras's attitude towards the French Open.

Passing shots- Federer

OVERALL: Some days Federer, some days Sampras.

 

[psamp14]

Personally I dont think Sampras does anything better then the great Fedster. Serve, forehands, backhands, movement, net play, mental game, return game, passing shots, and court smarts. Do you think Sampras does anything better then king Federer? Vote for the categories you think he is better in. I voted for none, if you think none for the none at the bottom. It is multiple so vote for as many as you want.

you, federerfanatic, are a federer fanatic....you think sampras doesnt have anything better than federer?

even the nadal freaks and sharapova lovers, ....even the other federer fans, obviously vote on the sampras serve being superior to federer's serve

along with that i go with mental game, court smarts, and the net game

i also voted forehand and movement because i find them about equal...sampras' movement was way underrated and nothing comes close to sampras' on the run forehand

federer's forehand itself is lethal but sampras' is not more than a half-step behind and obviously no contest with the running forehand

 

[callitout]

You should have asked what Sampras does better OR as well

Serve- Sampras: and it's not even close

Net Game- Tie. Sampras's net game was merely good and Federer is at least the equal of him in that respect.

Forehand- Federer

Backhand- Federer, without doubt.

Return- Federer by a long way.

Movement- Tie. Sampras was an exceptional athlete and I wouldn't want to make any distinction between the two.

Court Smarts-Tie: They're both winners on a major scale so I don't see how you can separate the two.

Mental Game- Federer. I base that comment solely on Sampras's attitude towards the French Open.

Passing shots- Federer

OVERALL: Some days Federer, some days Sampras.

Agree with much of this but one the biggest difference to me is the return.
They both hold serve rather easily. Pete would put pressure on for a break maybe once a set. Roger puts pressure on all the time, and this is why he is dominant.
As for calling Pete's net game "merely good" only if youre comparing him to legends of the game. But compared to top 10 players of the past 25 years he's the 3rd or 4th best volleyer. Edberg, Mcenroe, maybe Rafter ahead of him, then Pete and Roger. So I'd say for sure Pete had an excellent volley.

 

[madhavan]

Serve is of course Pete - fed has a good serve, but Pete was awesome

Net game - Pete by a long way. Fed has good volleys, but is often fairly loose
(AO final was great though). Pete's volleys were crisp and had great
variety. When Fed follows his 2nd serves to the net and picks off hard low
returns with as much bite/angle as Pete did, then we can talk about him in
the same breath.

Overhead is also definitely Pete - one of the best in the Open era.

Movement and mental game are a tie - both of them move like big cats.
Pete was the ultimate big match player. It would be interesting to see
someone push Fed to 5 sets to see how he responds in a close tussle - he'll probably do just fine.

 

[jelle v]

I voted Serve.

But in my opinion Sampras also had a better running forehand, not forehand but running forehand. Imo Federer's forehand is way more versatile and dangerous and just plain better.

 

[ATXtennisaddict]

Does this even need a poll?

Serve obviously. Net game,obviously. Mental game, not to so obvious but still pretty obvious.

 

[federerfanatic]

I am shocked at the huge number of votes Sampras has for the better forehand. I consider Federer's forehand the best shot in the history of tennis.
It is always interesting to see polls to see how much others opinions may shock you, such a huge number of votes for Sampras having the better forehand when I consider Federer's forehand the best shot ever completely bowls me over but is interesting to see nonetheless.

 

[deucecourt]

Does Federer Fanatic discuss any else but his love for Fed. Get off his d--k He is a great tennis player not a religion.

 

[federerfanatic]

My biggest interest in tennis is Federer who is my favorite player, and on top of that most of the rest of the mens tour are guys I cant stand. I talk about other players but he is my favorite and the one I hold the most interest in following, most of the rest I follow is the womens tour. If you dont like that, I dont give a damn, I can talk mostly only about Federer until my hearts content as he is what interests the most of the current mens field.

Get your own favorite, or enjoy watching 50 different players equally, I dont care, Federer is the one I have the most interest in following then the rest of the bozos who make up the mens tour today.

If you dont like so called Federer fanatism dont come on a Federer thread, there are tons of other threads on the other hacks that make up the mens tour today.

 

[deucecourt]

Freak, You probabaly will stalk him when he arrives in the US. Should I warn the authorities?

 

[laurie]

Interesting results. I think the author of this thread was expecting nothing like this.

Shows past players can be appreciated for their talents even though Federer is a phenomenal talent of today.

 

[gsquicksilver]

like i said in another thread comparing sampras to blake, there is no point in creating these threads to compare sampras to federer. it's just nonsense. what's the whole point? are the authors of these threads just trying to get everyone to agree with them so they could feel better? who cares what everyone thinks. everyone is entitled to their own opinions. there is no point in creating threads like this so that people would start arguments on these boards or talk smack here and there.

if only sampras would have won that 5th set in wimbly 2005 against federer, maybe none of this nonsense would have ever started.

 

[federerfanatic]

Well to the last poster the reason there are so many threads comparing Sampras to Federer, or Federer to Agassi, or Federer to somebody else past, by not only me but many others, is probably because the current field does not provide anyone you can compare to Federer, there is no discussion that can really be made worthwhile of Federer vs any other current player. So that in some ways leaves the only possible interesting discussion opposing Federer and somebody else, being one to past great players like Sampras, Agassi, others, who you can even try to compare him to.

You cannot compare any of other current players to Federer, not even 1 of them, so what is there to talk about in "current player" vs Federer? A Federer vs Roddick thread, or Federer vs Davydenko thread is a joke and those are the current #3 and #4 players in the world so what would be the point?

 

[larlarbd]

On grass & hard courts - the sampras forhand has more weight & depth , so it's better ( higher tension-75lbs , 18g strings GUT , 4 layers of lead weight tape 6inch - thats extra 48grams of swing weight - on grass thats mindblowing ). on clay Federer forhand has more bite so its better ( lower tension - more like 48lbs , multi-filament/gut mix - ball kicks up , skids off surface faster ) - FED = better forehand on slow surface .

 

[larlarbd]

just curious, how old are you federerfanatic?

i'm curious to know what are the age groups who believe federer is GOAT and the age groups who believe sampras is GOAT.

i'm 28, and i grew up watching and learned from watching sampras. to me, he's the GOAT, but that is my opinion.

ahh , the classic old-timer VS new boy intown confrontation - I love this , I grew watching sampras too - now I'm watching FED - I too beleive sampras is G.O.A.T .
will always be .

 

[federerfanatic]

I would rather have Federer's forehand then Sampras's on any surface. His winners/errors ratio is definitely better from match to match, I am not just talking about 1 or 2 matches. I wish I kept stats so I could post them, but I pretty sure on that from my general recollection. Maybe I should start keeping stats of matches so in the future I can pull them up as well.

 

[laurie]

I would rather have Federer's forehand then Sampras's on any surface. His winners/errors ratio is definitely better from match to match, I am not just talking about 1 or 2 matches. I wish I kept stats so I could post them, but I pretty sure on that from my general recollection. Maybe I should start keeping stats of matches so in the future I can pull them up as well.

No, no, please! No more home made Drakulie type stats!!

 

[larlarbd]

Interesting results. I think the author of this thread was expecting nothing like this.

Shows past players can be appreciated for their talents even though Federer is a phenomenal talent of today.

I second that . Well said .

 

[larlarbd]

Well to the last poster the reason there are so many threads comparing Sampras to Federer, or Federer to Agassi, or Federer to somebody else past, by not only me but many others, is probably because the current field does not provide anyone you can compare to Federer, there is no discussion that can really be made worthwhile of Federer vs any other current player. So that in some ways leaves the only possible interesting discussion opposing Federer and somebody else, being one to past great players like Sampras, Agassi, others, who you can even try to compare him to.

You cannot compare any of other current players to Federer, not even 1 of them, so what is there to talk about in "current player" vs Federer? A Federer vs Roddick thread, or Federer vs Davydenko thread is a joke and those are the current #3 and #4 players in the world so what would be the point?

ahaahah , funny - YOU are the last poster.

 

[Pete.Sampras.]

Serve, no doubt about it. There are some other things as well, but I had to choose one...

 

[fastdunn]

Federer is physically stronger and Sampras is a bit more athletic
I mean in a nut-shell.

Sampras was super athletic but wasn't exactly super strong or fit.

Federer is built better for today's very physical, running game.

 

[callitout]

I totally disagree, Pete was stronger. He wasnt better but he was stronger..Fed's incredible timing and flexibility create uncanny torque and therefore power. And Fed handles pace from other players better than anybody I've ever seen. He seems to have no problem hitting the onehand bh passing shot even when Roddick or Gonzo blasts an approach right to the baseline. But once Pete filled in by his midtwenties he was a physically more imposing specimen.

 

[Moose Malloy]

Federer is physically stronger and Sampras is a bit more athletic
I mean in a nut-shell.

Sampras was super athletic but wasn't exactly super strong or fit.

really? Sampras looks to have quite a bit more muscle(esp in the arms, forearms, calves) than Federer. He probably hit the weights more(esp in later years) & had one of the most intense trainers(Pat Etceberry) work with him. I'd bet anything that Sampras can bench more than Federer, even in retirement.

I don't see how one can dunk a basketball(like sampras) & not be pretty strong.

Anyway strength really doesn't matter much in tennis, both these guys look like children compared to NBA guys.

Fitness is something different than strength. My neighbor runs marathons & is built like a 12 year old girl. Anyone can be really fit, but not everyone can be athletic or strong.

 

[larlarbd]

really? Sampras looks to have quite a bit more muscle(esp in the arms, forearms, calves) than Federer. He probably hit the weights more(esp in later years) & had one of the most intense trainers(Pat Etceberry) work with him. I'd bet anything that Sampras can bench more than Federer, even in retirement.

I don't see how one can dunk a basketball(like sampras) & not be pretty strong.

Anyway strength really doesn't matter much in tennis, both these guys look like children compared to NBA guys.

Fitness is something different than strength. My neighbor runs marathons & is built like a 12 year old girl. Anyone can be really fit, but not everyone can be athletic or strong.

I second that . Sampras was very powerful indeed - & to his credit he retained his flexibility with all that muscle . Everyone knows when You gain muscle - you definitely lose some flex - to Sampras's credit he retained his flex to max .
One more thing I have seen Sampras Live & I have seen FED live - No one hits 130+MPH serves regularly ( even with the greatest technique in the world - which he had ) without massive POWER . FED can't even match the speed let alone keep it up for the whole match.

 

[laurie]

I third that.

 

[laurie]

Actually, this is something I've mentioned before, when Sampras hit aces on both the deuce and ad courts, the ball is rising and often hit the backboard headheight, especially on the ad side - the ball straightens up (slides away from the opponent's forehand) with the centre line, many times hitting the centre line judge (taking evasive action) or the judge having to duck when the ball sails over their head.

Many of Federer's aces hit the backboard not much higher than waist height. That's a huge difference in power/spin ratio.

 

[drakulie]

Fed does everything better than Sampras except the serve.

Who cares about how much weight they could lift, or if they could dunk a basketball. By the way, you don't have to be very strong to dunk a basketball. Just strong enough to be able to lift the ball over your head.

 

[lordmanji]

everyone seems to remember the sampras towards the end of his career even those who watched him his entire career. when he was in his prime in the mid 90s he was unstoppable. here are a couple of links to remind that sampras did use to have a very good forehand AND a backhand.

these links are from the 93 US Open QF with Michael Chang, then ranked 7 in the world while Sampras was ranked 2 in the world and had just won Wimbledon.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Hx8JhBwXG14

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lHKk2vOwhFg

 

[drakulie]

^^^^ Yeah, he was awesome. But he still does not do anything better than Fed except the serve.

Oh, he could also dunk a basketball. LOL

 

[jasonbourne]

Federer http://youtube.com/watch?v=UlogSPZYKWM

Sampras
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esbvf2RJXDQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAtTegC3OH0

 

[Mr. Sean]

Sampras played more formidable opponents than federer and won tough matches. I have yet to see federer do so. All the opponents that federer has played dont really have complete games and aren't nearly the same quality as sampras' such as agassi in his prime, courier, rafter, cheng, mcenroe. However to show both sides of the argument mabe r-fed is so damn good he makes all of his opponents look like 4.0 players compared to him.

 

[drakulie]

Sampras played more formidable opponents than federer and won tough matches.

Sampras just wasn't able to dominate his opponents in the manner Federer has.

All the opponents that federer has played dont really have complete games

Agassi, Chang, Courier, weren't great at the net so these players did not have "complete games". The same way Feds competition is not great at the net.

On the other hand, Rafter, McEnroe, krajicek, weren't great at the baseline, so they didn't have "complete games" either.

 

[federerfanatic]

Sampras played more formidable opponents than federer and won tough matches. I have yet to see federer do so. All the opponents that federer has played dont really have complete games and aren't nearly the same quality as sampras' such as agassi in his prime, courier, rafter, cheng, mcenroe. However to show both sides of the argument mabe r-fed is so damn good he makes all of his opponents look like 4.0 players compared to him.

Agassi is a great player but he doesnt have a complete game. His net game sucks(what net game) and he isnt really a good defensive player. Courier was a great player to a degree, not an all time great, and he also sucked at the net, and his backhand was even kind of average, and his second serve was a duck, so he was not a complete player either. Rafter isnt anymore accomplshed then Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, or Nadal and those players are all either in the middle of their careers or early(Nadal). Rafter wasnt that good a baseliner or returner so not a complete game. Chang is just another Hewitt, probably weaker then Hewitt a couple years ago when Fed was always beating him. McEnroe was at the end of his career when Pete came up and not as close to his best as Agassi was when Fed started dominating.

 

[fastdunn]

OK, I should have said "look" stronger. I do not know their actual bench
press weights.

I think Federer has stronger "frame" in his upper body.
(Not sure about "built" that includes muscularture..)

Sampras was flexible and had relatively thin frame (in his upper body).
I remember one of Tennis magazine article quote one of Sampras'
advantage is his "teenager" like flexible body frame.

In tennis, muscle does not equal "power", IMHO. Flexibity and timing helps
better. Look how Ivanesvic hits his serve and Petr Korda hits his
forehand....

really? Sampras looks to have quite a bit more muscle(esp in the arms, forearms, calves) than Federer. He probably hit the weights more(esp in later years) & had one of the most intense trainers(Pat Etceberry) work with him. I'd bet anything that Sampras can bench more than Federer, even in retirement.

I don't see how one can dunk a basketball(like sampras) & not be pretty strong.

Anyway strength really doesn't matter much in tennis, both these guys look like children compared to NBA guys.

Fitness is something different than strength. My neighbor runs marathons & is built like a 12 year old girl. Anyone can be really fit, but not everyone can be athletic or strong.

 

[ibemadskillzz]

In his prime, pete did everything better than federer, except for movement.

 

[drakulie]

In his prime, pete did everything better than federer, except for movement.

????????????????????????????????

 

[sarpmas]

these links are from the 93 US Open QF with Michael Chang, then ranked 7 in the world while Sampras was ranked 2 in the world and had just won Wimbledon.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Hx8JhBwXG14

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lHKk2vOwhFg

Sorry to sidetrack a little, but I really want to credit Chang for his fighting spirit. I believe this is one quality that many of the players today are lacking.

To the OP, I voted Serve, Net Game and Mental Game. Movement is the one I have a hard time deciding. But Pete's relatively poor results on Clay tilt the balance to Federer.