ForehandRF
Legend
He played on those slow courts in Miami and I think those conditions were the closest to the current ones at the US Open.
Which peak Big 3 would be toughest matchup for Sampras at USO?
- Thread starter Nadalgaenger
- Start date
zagor
Bionic Poster
Roddick said Courier BH was ugly, not ineffective, not to mention that the guy had one of the best IO FHs ever. Agassi did waste a lot of his years in the 90s but even when he was on form and playing some of his best career tennis (like 1995) Sampras was still able to hang with him from the backcourt.
Point is, peak Sampras wasn't vulnerable from the baseline on anything but clay. This modern narrative about him being a glorified servebot who attacked the net at every opportunity is nonsense. In his best years under Gullikson he was known as the most complete player on tour, basically Fed of his time.
Sampras career trajectory was very standard for players of the 80-90s era, dropping off in late 20s and peaking in early-mid 20s was the norm. Sampras wasn't really a serve and volleyer (like Edberg and Rafter), he was an all-courter.
Who knows how Sampras would develop in this era (he played with a 2 hander until he was 14) but with that serve, FH, footspeed, hands, mental toughness etc. I sincerely doubt he wouldn't be able to challenge the famed big 3 on HC/grass (even modern grass). A guy like Tsonga was able to beat all of them in slams, Sampras would be a much, much improved version of him.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Don't think they were as slow at the time but yeah Pete usually did really well in Miami, good point.
alexio
G.O.A.T.
like like
zagor
Bionic Poster
alexio
G.O.A.T.
double like i'd give for this sentence..i mean
Yugram
Legend
Why not pathetically fast?
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Becuz Fred better on fast
Yugram
Legend
It’s ironic how "aesthetically pleasing" tendencies live in Federer fans minds alongside love to low-IQ ugly pim-pam 2 shot tennis.
NonP
Legend
The '01 USO final is a p!ss-poor example cuz it's a documented fact that Pete served almost 10 mph slower that day than in the previous rounds. Maybe you really didn't know Pete was gassed vs. Rusty, but that's really common knowledge among aficionados by now.
No! This is why (one of my few genius analyses, ain't even kidding):
Why did Sampras give up on clay?
Dude only won Masters 1000 Titles on the clay courts, never even remotely looked close to winning the French Open at any moment in his career. For a 14 time Grand Slam winner for all his talent he should have worked at his clay court game just like Nadal did to improve his grass court and hard...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com
Man this is just wrong all around. A couple things:
- The Courier BH was much better than it looked. And anyone from this era not named Nadal (hell, even Rafa too in most years) would wanna avoid peak Jim at RG:
- It's pretty much established that Pete coasted a lot in his later years, but not so much at the majors:
1999 Sampras vs 1980 Borg at wimbledon
Assuming both had graphite racquets. best of five set match. on the pre 2001 grass. before they slowed it down.
tt.tennis-warehouse.com
Compare those #s with his regular-season ones and you'll see why it's unwise to judge Pistol's top level by the latter.
- Even the biggest haters know Pistol couldn't play his usual S&V at RG, right? Well guess what, he still put together not one but two CC seasons w/60+% of games won, something that several former FO champs and finalists (including Stan and Thiem) couldn't manage once:
90s clay
You jokers are too much. Almost didn't open this thread cuz I thought it was about you-know-who, LOL. "Glad" I did, I guess. Before I educate y'all these two posts are more or less on target: I mean sure if we're going to start with the premise that the three highest peaks in the decade are...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com
But you're right about one thing: it's indeed "ridiculous to think Sampras could do anything other than serve + pray for miracle vs Big 3"... cuz he'd beat 'em more often than not at the Slams (K outside RG)!
like like like
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
[x] Nadal would want to avoid Courier.
- It's pretty much established that Pete coasted a lot in his later years, but not so much at the majors:
1999 Sampras vs 1980 Borg at wimbledon
Assuming both had graphite racquets. best of five set match. on the pre 2001 grass. before they slowed it down.
Compare those #s with his regular-season ones and you'll see why it's unwise to judge Pistol's top level by the latter.
- Even the biggest haters know Pistol couldn't play his usual S&V at RG, right? Well guess what, he still put together not one but two CC seasons w/60+% of games won, something that several former FO champs and finalists (including Stan and Thiem) couldn't manage once:
90s clay
You jokers are too much. Almost didn't open this thread cuz I thought it was about you-know-who, LOL. "Glad" I did, I guess. Before I educate y'all these two posts are more or less on target: I mean sure if we're going to start with the premise that the three highest peaks in the decade are...
But you're right about one thing: it's indeed "ridiculous to think Sampras could do anything other than serve + pray for miracle vs Big 3"... cuz he'd beat 'em more often than not at the Slams (K outside RG)!
like like like
[x] Pretents to be objective.
It's actually a nice example of the mental gymnastics required to hype the 90s
NonP
Legend
First off, I never pretend to be objective, cuz I know and freely and loudly profess that I'm the smartest one around this corner.
Second, why does your simple-minded insistence on stats somehow take a back seat when it comes to the '90s? They clearly show that only three versions of Nadal have bested '92 Courier in terms of games won at RG. Do numbers no longer count when they don't jibe with your alternate reality?
Third, "mental gymnastics" is no longer a thing unless you wanna remain stuck in the aughts, which I don't think is much better than hyping up the '90s.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Wind also favors certain styles over others. It favors a player like Agassi who has cleaner, longer hitting zones on both wings.
It also favors a player like Nadal, for different reason. His high-margin spin becomes more effective as a weapon.
D
Deleted member 777746
Guest
Pistol shoots through Bull (mentality but not the game for hardcourt) and 40-15-Man (game but not the mentality) any day of the week.
Nole is his hardest matchup by FAR. Got a good solid game, and ATG mental game.
Nole is his hardest matchup by FAR. Got a good solid game, and ATG mental game.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Peak Nole in 2011 and 2015-1H2016 has been the toughest challenge for both Nadal and Federer and he beat them in the USO final in 2011 and 2015. I would suspect that Novak would be the toughest challenge for Sampras also.
Djokovic is reputed to be amongst the best returners ever and he would put pressure on enough of Pete’s service games where Sampras could not just coast till he got just one break in each set which was his modus operandi. Sampras also is not going to beat any of the Big 3 from the baseline and least of all, peak Djokovic who in my opinion is the BOAT baseliner.
Djokovic is reputed to be amongst the best returners ever and he would put pressure on enough of Pete’s service games where Sampras could not just coast till he got just one break in each set which was his modus operandi. Sampras also is not going to beat any of the Big 3 from the baseline and least of all, peak Djokovic who in my opinion is the BOAT baseliner.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
The one aspect I would push back against here is that with Nadal standing so far back for the return, he would give Sampras both time and court real estate to hit volleys into. That was a big issue for him against both Safin and Hewitt in the respective finals where he got burnt because they took up much more aggressive return positions and STILL burnt him with their returns. Note of course that this was a tired Sampras in both finals (see how easily he beat Safin in 2001 on a hot Saturday) but in general, an aggressive returner is harder to handle than one who stays way back if you're a serve volleyer.
From that standpoint, I am going to say I consider Djokovic the most dangerous matchup for Sampras because he will be early on the returns and from both wings. Sampras against a hypothetical young Fed with neo backhand would be impossible but the young Fed's actual backhand would be a little more susceptible to Sampras' kicker. Against Nadal, yes, Sampras would face difficulties in returning Nadal's heavy lefty serves and forehands into his backhand. The strongest leftie (from the baseline) in Sampras' time was maybe Muster unless you count Rios' here today-gone tomorrow moment under the sun. There is no comparison that way between Nadal and Muster, especially at USO. Fed would also be tough because of his own serve being so consistent. He could either edge him out in tiebreaks or punish Sampras for the one bad service game, similar to the Wimbledon 2001 dynamic. But overall, at USO, I am going with Djokovic as the toughest proposition.
All of the above with the caveat that I don't know just what Sampras' serve would look like with poly. Given the spin he got just off full nat gut, Sampras wielding a poly and maybe a 95 instead of an 85 would be monstrously good on serve. My question then would be whether ANYBODY would break him on a fast USO, basically Arthur Ashe from 97 to 2004. You - as in a general you and not you specifically - may regard this observation as hyperbole if you hadn't seen how unbreakable Sampras was on serve especially under the clutch in heavyweight bouts. He really brought his A+ game on serve and I can't help but think that poly would improve his consistency even more.
Similar threads
- Poll
