Which GS Final performance was worse?

Which GS Final Performance was worse?


  • Total voters
    19
See Poll.

Between Sampras at the 2001 USO Final or Federer in the 2008 FO Final. Which of these legends put in a worse showing?

Sampras was getting destroyed on his serve by Hewitt's passing shots.
Federer was getting hit off the court by Nadal.

Are these both equally bad?

I find it funny that both men went onto win those tournaments one year later...great way to recover from a brutally embarrassing Final loss.
 

InsideOut900

Hall of Fame
It's still a mystery for me how a player of Sampras's caliber can get a double breadstick on a fast court,with a serve like that.
Beatdowns on clay can happen and Federer was at the wrong place and at the wrong time,up against arguably the best performance on clay. Sampras was also dealing with a bad match-up and a peaking opponent,but as said above,fast HC shouldn't allow such beatings.

Anyway,comparing garbage with garbage,any answer could be correct.

 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Federer's for sure. He came in with a crappy game plan and executed it poorly. Combine that and you have what you got.

Sampras at least has an excuse because he came through a very tough draw with Rafter/Agassi/Safin and his shoulder was cooked by the final. He was also past his prime. His serve sucked after the first set. Was 10 mph slower than usual. That being said Hewitt put on a clinic.
 

Dope Reign

Banned
I remember thinking at the time that Pete looked like a little boy struggling to deal with the occasion and Hewitt looked like the seasoned campaigner with all the titles and experience.

I haven't seen the fo08, but I can't imagine his performance was better than Pete's with only winning 4 games. Though it is more likely on clay than another surface.
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Well Sampras was pretty much on the slide at the time whereas Federer was number #1 in the world. Sure, Nadal was playing at an extremely high level but if even Djokovic(who most Fed fans deem to be less of a clay courter) could push him to a tiebreaker in the semis, there's no excuse for Roger to win a paltry four games in the final. It was an embarrassing performance and one which still probably gives him nightmares to this day. And if it doesn't, it should.
 

Dope Reign

Banned
Well Sampras was pretty much on the slide at the time whereas Federer was number #1 in the world. Sure, Nadal was playing at an extremely high level but if even Djokovic(who most Fed fans deem to be less of a clay courter) could push him to a tiebreaker in the semis, there's no excuse for Roger to win a paltry four games in the final. It was an embarrassing performance and one which still probably gives him nightmares to this day. And if it doesn't, it should.
I doubt it does, especially because it was on clay. If he got blown out like that on grass or hardcourts I think it would leave a scar. I suspect he was probably more scarred by losing Wimbledon a month later.

If Federer has nightmares, I doubt it's memories of matches. More likely it's drawsheets flashing in front of his face, with Nadal as his next opponent.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Well Sampras was pretty much on the slide at the time whereas Federer was number #1 in the world. Sure, Nadal was playing at an extremely high level but if even Djokovic(who most Fed fans deem to be less of a clay courter) could push him to a tiebreaker in the semis, there's no excuse for Roger to win a paltry four games in the final. It was an embarrassing performance and one which still probably gives him nightmares to this day. And if it doesn't, it should.
Fed tanked that final so he probably doesn't even care.

Rome 06, RG 06, USO 09, RG 11, USO 11, AO 12 should give him nightmares as the better player who got unlucky.
 

Matthew Lee

Professional
At least Fed has a FO title. Sampras has USO titles, too. I think they only think of it as memories from a while back.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
RG 2008 was a demolition job so bad that Nadal didn't even celebrate the win the way he normally does.

A better comparison would have been Federer v Hewitt USO 2004 F, but at least that match had a fight in set 2.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
I doubt it does, especially because it was on clay.
I think it does, especially for an all-surface player who most view as the GOAT. Losing to the clay GOAT isn't a bad thing, but winning four measly games is inexcusable. I'm sure it's something Roger never wants to discuss, and wishes can be erased from his record.
 
Top