The Shape-shifter
Rookie
That attitude was the norm during the 1990s, and in fact he was the most professional athlete during his time.
Why are people so high on Sampras?
- Thread starter The Guru
- Start date
deaner2211
Semi-Pro
Yes you are slow they weigh the same (between 56-59. grams). The last major change to tennis balls was in 1972 when the ITF changed them from white to optic yellow.
deaner2211
Semi-Pro
They sound different due to different string composition and different balls. Wilson balls in the USO and Slazenger for Wimbledon. You are silly, ITF regulates ball specs which includes weight and circumference
Darrell
Rookie
You're 100% correct. I don't think Pete could compete in this era with the game that he had. It just wouldn't be possible, especially with the homogenization of the courts. And he definitely couldn't use his trusty PS85 in today's game. But his game was world class for the era that he played.
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
When he retired he had the most Slams - and is still No. 4. It's not rocket science. A lot of TTers, as tennis junkies, naturally parse achievements and stats in great detail and for them the numbers don't always tell the whole story. But, on the other hand, plenty do just look at the numbers, as do most casual observers. GOAT obsessives are never going to find peace because there will never be official GOAT determinations.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
you yourself came up with career inflation era though.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Federer lost to Berdych, Delpo in his 20s.
Im(moral) Winner
G.O.A.T.
Who are better than Kucera and Korda
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Korda was better than Berdych and Delpo.Who are better than Kucera and Korda
Do you mean that serious? Cause if not thats the dumbest comment ever
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Imagine Sampras turning 22 today, with a larger racket, growing up with string technology his whole life, playing in slower conditions, with better training, better recovery, and better understanding of the game through metrics...
He would end the big 3 right now.
This is why you can not compare eras. Sampras was the big 3 for his era. You ask why he still gets praised?
Because he was one of the best tennis players of all time.
He would end the big 3 right now.
This is why you can not compare eras. Sampras was the big 3 for his era. You ask why he still gets praised?
Because he was one of the best tennis players of all time.
SamprasisGOAT
Hall of Fame
Finally
droliver
Professional
Sampras was a brilliant player, but He was much less consistent and was more limited in a lot of ways then Fed, Nadal, and Novak. Sampras had an all time great serve which often dictated play, but he wasn’t going out defense anyone if needed. On a mediocre serving day, Sampras was much more vulnerable to upset by 2nd and 3rd tier players then the big 3 are
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras was the Michael Jordan of tennis. A legend of the game who will be remembered. Even though he has fallen in the "slam race", he dominated his peers in his time like probably no one ever did, no player bested him in his era. That's why he will always be amongst the greatest to play the game, no matter how many more slams big 3 wins.
Young Sampras coming up now would spell trouble for everyone I agree, but sorry to tell you players like Sampras don't come very often. It is very rare. You cant expect that.
Last edited:
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras was awfully good on defense on the early 90s. He was just as good of an athlete as any of the Big3 before he got lazier and fattened up in the late 90s.
droliver
Professional
Sampras was a great athlete, but he was not a particularly good defender, especially the ways guys cover the court now and keep the ball in play. I'm not one who thinks he would be a top player in this era with his backcourt play style. I don't know that he was ever "lazy and fat" but he broke down much faster the the big 3 in terms of his fitness and movement, although a rapid decline in the late 20's was par for the course until Agassi and Federer
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Talking about Sampras, why do you think he played so badly against Hewitt in the US Open 2001 final after losing the first set in the tie break?
Did he demoralize so fast?
Was he so tired when he reached the final despite having won in straight sets against Safin the day before and he was only 30 years old?
Was so much pressure for him, at that time, to win a title and especially a Major, having the possibility at that time, to win for the ninth consecutive year a GS breaking the record of Borg?
Or simply, was Hewitt the worst opponent Sampras could have?
What do you think of all this, why did the American go "kamikaze" against the Australian, a tactic that was not working?
Did he demoralize so fast?
Was he so tired when he reached the final despite having won in straight sets against Safin the day before and he was only 30 years old?
Was so much pressure for him, at that time, to win a title and especially a Major, having the possibility at that time, to win for the ninth consecutive year a GS breaking the record of Borg?
Or simply, was Hewitt the worst opponent Sampras could have?
What do you think of all this, why did the American go "kamikaze" against the Australian, a tactic that was not working?
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Tell us tell us.Talking about Sampras, why do you think he played so badly against Hewitt in the US Open 2001 final after losing the first set in the tie break?
Did he demoralize so fast?
Was he so tired when he reached the final despite having won in straight sets against Safin the day before and he was only 30 years old?
Was so much pressure for him, at that time, to win a title and especially a Major, having the possibility at that time, to win for the ninth consecutive year a GS breaking the record of Borg?
Or simply, was Hewitt the worst opponent Sampras could have?
What do you think of all this, why did the American go "kamikaze" against the Australian, a tactic that was not working?
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Why are people so high on Sampras????
Have you ever seen this guy play?
Have you ever seen this guy play?
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Missing him makes me realise to cherish every Fed moment.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
BrooklynNY
Hall of Fame
That behind the back half volley touch shot though!!
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
BrooklynNY
Hall of Fame
I saw Sampras play Andy Roddick at an exo in 2010 and he hit one of the best and hardest forehands I've ever seen in person, inside in, up the line rocket straight to the corner.
It's burned in my mind forever
It's burned in my mind forever
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
This is becoming a GOAT thread.
Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
What we have to respect is that tennis and everything around it was very different back then. When Sampras won his 14th major, this was an unprecedented number that at the time seemed highly unlikely to ever be surpassed. To expect Pete to stay motivated despite this fact(he openly admited in his book that this was the ultimate goal for him and that after he did it his motivation to continue was not there anymore) way into his 30s(which in the 90s was considered very old) when fitter, younger rivals were coming after him with a level of belief and determination we simply don't see in today's youngsters is simply not fair on him.
Science was not at todays' level either. Recovery time was longer, and injuries would hinder you or even keep you out of the game more so than today. Sampras had his fair share of those.
Not to mention how much more diverse playing surfaces were back then. Conditions were pretty much as polarized as they could get, and winning titles on clay vs grass vs hard vs carpet demanded a much higher degree of adjustment and variety of skill than today's tour players are ever forced to make/have. Winning a career Grand Slam back then was an insane achievment, and I really don't think Agassi ever got the credit he deserved for doing it.
Science was not at todays' level either. Recovery time was longer, and injuries would hinder you or even keep you out of the game more so than today. Sampras had his fair share of those.
Not to mention how much more diverse playing surfaces were back then. Conditions were pretty much as polarized as they could get, and winning titles on clay vs grass vs hard vs carpet demanded a much higher degree of adjustment and variety of skill than today's tour players are ever forced to make/have. Winning a career Grand Slam back then was an insane achievment, and I really don't think Agassi ever got the credit he deserved for doing it.
BlueB
Legend
Too many times - he convinced me (along with his other servebot contemporaries) that it was better to watch WTA for the time being. [emoji2957] It was Hewitt and Andre's resurgence, who gave me a hope for man's tennis again.
Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
It started with Sampras so it was always a GOAT thread.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Best thing you've ever written.
Sampras was the Michael Jordan of tennis. A legend of the game who will be remembered. Even though he has fallen in the "slam race", he dominated his peers in his time like probably no one ever did, no player bested him in his era. That's why he will always be amongst the greatest to play the game, no matter how many more slams big 3 wins.
Young Sampras coming up now would spell trouble for everyone I agree, but sorry to tell you players like Sampras don't come very often. It is very rare. You cant expect that.
