Sampras v Federer


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Thu Sep 15, 2005 4:40 pm

at their peak ( ok, sampras '99 v federer anytime past 3y )

who wins over 5 grass/cement/indoor sets ?
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby bambam » Thu Sep 15, 2005 4:44 pm

Sampras on grass, Federer on anything else. Perhaps Laver beats them both on any surface. And going back to the 50s, Jack Kramer said if he had to have one man play one match to represent the Planet Earth, he would pick Lew Hoad.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Per Andersen » Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:02 pm

Agassi now clearly feels that Federer is superior to Sampras.
Per Andersen
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby jhc68 » Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:18 pm

Agassi ought to know best, although Agassi was younger and quicker when he played Sampras so his perspective may be a bit skewed. I'd give the nod to Federer by virtue of superior fitness.
jhc68
 
Posts: 3289
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:24 pm

big bill

i respect you the most of anyone ( i'm just jealous that us mere 'fizzicians' have to cede the

big bucks/kudos/dick :(

to you

'"jock" sawbones' )


anyhows, back to topic - blake slaugtered agassi for 2 sets +, in the style pistol wouda done ( i egest thinkin how good he wouda been in '99 in the open, trying to claim the innuagural arthur, stadium trophy ! ) - just that pete was EVEN more athletic & had an INFINITELY better serve

agassi ( with no back problem ) couda won '05 ( set all & break-up in the 3rd ) which suggests to me, that, pistol of '99 defies belief !!!
Last edited by eldrick on Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby XML » Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:26 pm

Ahhh, yes, and George Mikan would have been a match for Jordan or Shaq... NOT!

Federer is a new kind of animal.. and if Andre says he's the best he's ever seen, then I believe him.

Cheers.
XML
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Per Andersen » Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:52 pm

<agassi ( with no back problem ) couda won '05

Dream on.
Per Andersen
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby hi-tech » Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:16 pm

Courier, Chang, Agassi, Kafelnikov, Kraijek - all played in the Sampras era and were grand slam champions. Right now Federer has no competition (on surfaces other than clay),nobody stands out. Federer is the Larry Holmes of tennis. Holmes dominated after Ali; let's wait and see if Federer is as good as Holmes was.
hi-tech
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:19 pm

>at their peak ( ok, sampras '99 v federer anytime past 3y )

Agree Sampras' peak was '99, but we're probably 5 years from Federer's peak. I suspect by then that there'll only be one possible answer.
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:23 pm

>Courier, Chang, Agassi, Kafelnikov, Kraijek - all played in the Sampras era and
>were grand slam champions. Right now Federer has no competition (on surfaces
>other than clay),nobody stands out.

On a good day, Marit Safin can beat anybody, Federer included. Safin's talent and Federer's psyche would be unstoppable!
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Per Andersen » Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:22 pm

I thoght Pat Rafter brought Pete down to earth a bit in '98.

Federer on a good day beats Safin on a good day. But what about Ivanisevic with Federer's psyche ? Unbelievable!!!!
Per Andersen
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Infama » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:48 am

Federer will beat all of them.

His versatility is unparalleled. He does not have any big weaknesses. The Sampras backhand sucks. That was his weakness on clay. Federer will win Roland Garros one day. His angled crosscourt is just too good.

Federer has to face players like Safin, Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Ferrero, Nadal etc, all previous Slam winners. Its not like he has an easy ride.
Infama
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:33 am

>I thought Pat Rafter brought Pete down to earth a bit in '98.<

from memory, i recall that pistol was leading that epic match ( set-all & ? break-up), but got ?back /?quad/?hamstring sprain which slowed him down & he lost thereafter

upto that point, he was beating rafter, who was the best "pure" serve-volleyer out there ( pete's serve was so good that he didn't even need to volley that much ! )
Last edited by eldrick on Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:41 am

may i add that federer is not currently playing against any top draw serve-volleyers

there is no pistol/edberg/goran/rafter/stich out there for him

remember, unil a coupla years ago, he had an abysmal record against henman ( just below top-echelon serve-volleyer ), who just crowded the net & put away any returns - it was amazing to see the look of frustration on fed's face during those matches

i'm not sure he has the return to beat guyz like the above when they were on fire
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:00 am

>I thoght Pat Rafter brought Pete down to earth a bit in '98.

Federer on a
>good day beats Safin on a good day.

Both had "good days" (as opposed to their best game days) in Melbourne this year, Safin won. Trouble is that Safin's absolute best is almost an unknown quantity, it's so rarely seen. But it demolished Sampras at Flushing Meadow (2000?) - that was special. A fully fit, non-partying, motivated, demon-free Safin... never gonna happen?!
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:14 am

>>But
>it demolished Sampras at Flushing Meadow (2000?) - that was special.<

pete was expected to win that & just didn't turn up that day

it may have been that he wasn't that familiar with safin's game & didn't adapt

look at what happened the following year, when he got to the final & in the process went thru the hardest draw that a slam has ever produced - he beat the 3 preceding champs to get there - agassi ( in probably he greatest tennis match ever played - 4 tie-break sets where neither man lost their serve - this is what fed hasn't faced ), rafter & then safin ( who he destroyed, once he'd learnt how the mercurial guy's game functioned )

yes, he got blown away in the final to hewitt, but he was exhausted getting thru that draw ( but remember, he beat hewitt the year before in the semis, so he knew he coud beat him )
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:25 am

I'm deliberately avoiding the question, because I just don't know! Time will tell.... I know that the best tennis performance I've ever seen was Mac's destruction of Connors at Wimbledon in '84. It was an honour to have seen it, and I find it hard to believe that anyone could have played better in one match.
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby bambam » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:55 am

>>Trouble is that Safin's absolute best is almost an unknown quantity, it's so rarely seen.

Boy is that correct. The best question is who do you pick, Safin's girlfriend or James Blake's girlfriend. Like we'd ever get to do so, of course!
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby bambam » Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:03 am

>Ahhh, yes, and George Mikan would have been a match for Jordan or Shaq... NOT!

This is the old argument that Jesse Owens was not as good as Justin Gatlin because he ran slower times. All you can compare is how good, how dominant, they were against their own eras. Nobody has dominated tennis like Laver did in 1961-62, and 1968-69. He won the Grand Slam twice, for goodness sakes! He was banned from all the Grand Slams 1963-67 because he played professionally. Had he played in them in those 5 years, he would have put the record for most Grand Slam titles out of reach. As it is, he won 11.

And for Federer, he needs a bit more time probably to be called the GOAT. What they say now about Federer, they said in 1974-75 about Jimmy Connors who was unstoppable at the time. He won the finals of Wimbledon and the US Open in 1974 with the total loss of 7 games. In 1974, he only did not win the Grand Slam probably, because the French refused his entry because he was playing World Team Tennis.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Infama » Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:50 am

El D.

I agree that the year Pete lost to Hewitt in the US Open was exhaustion, as he has to mow thru 3 former champs to get to the final. This is why I was sure he was not DONE back then. That final was an anomaly, but even wiith that, if he had decent backhand, he could still have won it.

However, you guys use the wrong criteria to judge Federer. You should look at his stroke play, serve and match temperment to understand what makes him special. This man is hitting near impossible shots, can play back, all court AND serve and volley. He is a complete player.

Federer losing to Henman should be viewed in context, he was young and perfecting his craft. Hell, I recall when Fed was Junior Wimbledon champ back in 1998, and look how many lean years came in bewtten that and his eventual triumph there. Fed is just 24 now and has been dominant for 2 years or so.

BTW, I liked Rafter, but his serve sucked and his volley had elements of 'pop-up' to it, not as bad as Yannick Noah, but eneough to exploit it. He could not volley like the very best, ie McEnroe, Laver and Edberg. Now, if Phillipousis could just have volleyed better with THAT serve, THEN we would be talking top notch.

Long and short, if Fed keeps going, he will be GOAT in another 3 years.
Infama
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Cyril » Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:17 am

I don't know who would win at their "best". Maybe Sampras would take Roger. But, because of his complete balanced play, Federer has many more "best" days on any surface than Pete.

Federer is a complete package. Being a complete package he will ultimately give Federer longevity, consistency and the ability to handle any opponenet on any surface. So, as great as Sampras was I would have to agree with Agassi.
Cyril
 
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:20 am

>That final was an anomaly, but even
>wiith that, if he had decent backhand, he could still have won it.

that's a joke !

i've never heard anyone ever say pistol had a weak backhand !


>BTW, I liked Rafter, but his serve sucked and
>his volley had elements of 'pop-up' to it, not as bad as Yannick Noah, but
>eneough to exploit it. He could not volley like the very best, ie McEnroe,
>Laver and Edberg. Now, if Phillipousis could just have volleyed better with
>THAT serve, THEN we would be talking top notch.<

there was absolutely nothing wrong with rafter's serve !

it had the bigest "kick" of anyone's & pistol admitted that's what made it so difficult to return & hence break

after bouncing, it woud rear up to ~ shoulder height making it so difficult to keep the return down low

with high balls coming back to volley away, rafter didn't need a great volley - he had easy put aways resulting from the serve
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:31 am

there was
>absolutely nothing wrong with rafter's serve !

it had the bigest "kick" of
>anyone's & pistol admitted that's what made it so difficult to return & hence
>break

after bouncing, it woud rear up to ~ shoulder height making it so
>difficult to keep the return down low

with high balls coming back to volley
>away, rafter didn't need a great volley - he had easy put aways resulting from
>the serve

Well said . Rafter's serve, especially his second, was a beast - up there with Edberg's. He was truly underestimated, especially in England - I'll be daring here and say that Joe Public with his Wimbledon tickets hasn't got a clue about tennis - 2 weeks a year and screaming "C'mon Tim!" isn't quite enough. GB tennis is a joke, and that cannot be stressed enough.
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Infama » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:33 am

You dont need anyone to tell you Sampras had a weak backhand...just look for yourself.

Everyone in my circle knew it. It was not reliable and was easy prey at Roland Garros with the long rallies.

He tended to lift it too much and go long when pressures. It was not a well controlled stroke. Compare him to Fed or Lendl with their singlehanded backhands. THOSE are waepons, not just means to keep the point going. How many winners did Pete get of the backhand against top players?

Rafters bserve came from a closed racket face and yes while he could get lift, it was not particularly angled or powerful. No one feared his serve...how many aces did he average???

He was a decent volleyer but tended to 'pop up', a fatal flaw in my books. Lendl would have eaten him for breafast, lunch, tea and dinner.
Infama
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Infama » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:35 am

Vern,

who was underestimated, Edberg or Rafter?
Infama
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Infama » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:38 am

Vern

Edberg and Rafter had similar serves and yes they could be tricky, especially on faster surfaces, but the dont compare to Sampras, Fed, Roddick, Safin, Poussis or Zedski.

Crafter and Edberg had success more than some of the bigger servers because they have a better al round game, that is they could play. Zedski is just a big server.
Infama
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:05 pm

>Vern,

who was underestimated, Edberg or Rafter?

By me, neither. But here I meant Rafter - his best performances went unnoticed in the UK. Edberg won Wimbledon, which makes a big difference according to the part-time fans that plague British tennis.

BTW, my brother wants me to say that Edberg's victory over Courier ("92? 93? Sure your boys know!") was up there with Mac in '84. Since Stefan is a LUFC nut, he'll always be a god for me....
Last edited by Vern on Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby bambam » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:15 pm

>Long and short, if Fed keeps going, he will be GOAT in another 3 years.

I think Infama is about right on this.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Vern » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:30 pm

>>Long and short, if Fed keeps going, he will be GOAT in another 3 years.

I
>think Infama is about right on this.


Me too, impossible Safin scenario notwithstanding. How good is Donald Young?
Vern
 

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby slowcoach » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:40 pm

>>Long and short, if Fed keeps going, he will be GOAT in another 3 years.

>I think Infama is about right on this.


Hear that, Eldrick?
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby cullman » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:26 pm

Men's tennis is changing as it is just starting to attract better athletes that will have the strokes and mental makeup to take the game to a higher level than what you see with a Sampras or a Federer. Imagine a Safin with brains! That is still a generation away but it's coming.

Federer looks good right now but his weaknesses will become appearant to every player on the tour once they stop treating him like god. After that it's a matter of execution. Agassi was serving at set-all 4-2 in the third and lost his serve to let Federer off the hook. I'm sure that was noticed in the locker room.

Even though Nadal may never be considered a future GOAT, he may be the one player that will prove Federer to be human on hardcourts. Nadal seems to have the ability to stay one step ahead of Federer on that surface. I can hardly wait until next season.

Sampras v Federer? Doesn't make the winner the greatest but it would have made a heck of a Wimbledon final. It will be overall record that determines that. Pete's is in the books. We saw two great matches between Rosewall and Laver in the 1970 WCT finals and a great match at Wembley between Nastase and Laver with Laver losing all three. Laver is still considered one of the all-time greatest while Nastase and Rosewall don't get a mention.

Oh yeah, I pick Pete...but that's because he was a member at a dinky little club in Toronto I used to be head pro at. It was near the hotel he was staying and it was just before he won his last US Open. Musta been our club.:o)

cman
cullman
 
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: ...in training...for something...

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Cyril » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:31 pm

>Federer looks good right now but
>his weaknesses will become appearant to every player on the tour once they stop
>treating him like god.

Please tell us. What are they?


After that it's a matter of execution. Agassi was
>serving at set-all 4-2 in the third and lost his serve to let Federer off the
>hook. I'm sure that was noticed in the locker room.

It was notice that Roger wasn't playing up to par and Agassi was playing his A game. When Federer woke up (like he often finds a way of doing) it was lights out Andre.
Cyril
 
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby bambam » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:34 pm

>>>How good is Donald Young?

I have heard he is too small for the modern power game - only about 5-10 (178). Perhaps he'll grow a bit.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby cullman » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:51 pm

>>Federer looks good right now but
>>his weaknesses will become appearant to every player on the tour once they stop
>>treating him like god.

>Please tell us. What are they?

Agassi served extremely well up until that point but reverted to the Andre of old and failed to hold his serve at the worst possible moment. If he takes the third set and keeps Federer from finding his touch for a couple more games...who knows.

A guy that can keep Federer off balance with his serve and has a good returns and a power ground stroke game can keep Roger from finding his rhythm. Nadal on a good serving day and Safin when the mood strikes him are two players that come to mind. You could ugly it up a bit like Nic Kiefer and disrupt the flow to Roger's game too but you have to have a better serve than Kiefer if you want to win.

It's like boxing, if you can't keep the opponent from getting rhythm and establishing his game...you lose.

cman
Last edited by cullman on Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
cullman
 
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: ...in training...for something...

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby Cyril » Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:51 pm

I guess the trick is to find someone who can keep Federer "off balance". Since RF is so balanced, obviously, that is much easier said than done. You mentioned on a "good day" Nadal and Safin can do that. But it takes a very good day for them. And, as we have seen, they don't have too many days that good. Contrasting, Federer appears to have many good days. He may get knocked off balance on occasion, but he usually finds that balance again - very quickly.

Knocking a player off balance is key to tennis. The more complete a players game the harder this task is. Of course, Feder's game is very complete.

There may be a very good reason the others "treat him like God".
Cyril
 
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby rexus » Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:54 pm

i've seen both of them play and i must say federer has the edge. he would beat sampras on any surface, but on grass it would be a tie. anyhoos, i think agassi is still the best unless federer wins himself the french open coz he's already better than sampras. i admit federer plays a near perfect game, but agassi had won all the grand slams so he has this winning point over federer.
rexus
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:29 pm

>You dont need anyone to tell you Sampras had a weak backhand...just look for
>yourself.

Everyone in my circle knew it. It was not reliable and was easy
>prey at Roland Garros with the long rallies. <


i've no idea wha your circle may be - all i know is that it goes around & eventually gets nowhere

pistol had no problem with the backhand, just that his mentality wasn't suited to the long rallies on clay

on grass, points last usually about 3 - 5 strokes on average ( providing return is good ), whereas on a hardcourt, they may stretch to 5 - 10

pistol had the speed/power/athleticism/etc. to "handle" this kinda scenario, but on clay, serves & powerful groundshots are nullified & it turns into a patience contest, with points maybe lasting 10 - 20 shots - pistol wasn't brought up on clay & didn't have the patience to rally away all day for just 1 point - his was a quick-point power game

however, 1y he did go for it & in '95 french he beat courier ( a great clay courter ) in 5 epic sets, after losing 1st 2 sets in their quarter-final

in the semi, he was spent & lost tamely to kafelnikov ( eventual tourney winner ) - a guy i wouda favoured him to beat ( even on clay ) if fresh


>He tended to lift it too much
>and go long when pressures. It was not a well controlled stroke. Compare him to
>Fed or Lendl with their singlehanded backhands. THOSE are waepons, not just
>means to keep the point going. How many winners did Pete get of the backhand
>against top players?<

pistol got tons of backhand winners against top players - go watch the '99 wimbledon final - he was fizzing backhand winners down/cross-court in the final

how the hell do you expect to win 7 time wimbledon/ 5 time US champions with a weak backhand ???

lendl was brought up on clay & had patience to rally on it all day ( regardless of his backhand ) & allied to his power did give him an edge over the opposition ( if both players have the patience, power can tip the balance )

federer hasn't impressed on clay - he won a masters tourney on it this year, but got soundly whupped on it by nadal in the semi of french & similarly, kuerten taught him a lesson on it the previous year

his "great" backhand has only got him to a french semi ( same as pistol ), so i don't see this as some "key" for him

fed to me, also doesn't have the patience for clay - to me, if all the guz are fit & ready, i'd back a nadal,ferrero,coria & nalbandian to beat him on it

>Rafters bserve came from a closed racket face and yes
>while he could get lift, it was not particularly angled or powerful. No one
>feared his serve...how many aces did he average???<

you know bugger all about tennis, if your going on aces

how many aces does rudeski serve ?

how may slams has he got ?

count how may aces fed serves - not in the rudeski/roddick/karlovic/ancic league - but count the no. of slams they have & he has

fed's acknowledged to be the best server around ( on the FAR more important criteria of how often he is broken in a match/tourney ), but he doesn't dominate aces count

>He was a decent volleyer
>but tended to 'pop up', a fatal flaw in my books. Lendl would have eaten him
>for breafast, lunch, tea and dinner.<

ridiculous !

agassi, the best returner in the game coud do little with it in 2 succesive wimbledon semis ('00 & '01 ) & got beaten in 5 sets both times

if you had either a weak serve or weak volley, agassi wouda eaten you for breakfast !
Last edited by eldrick on Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby eldrick » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:27 pm

may i point out an overlooked performance this year

my tip for french this year was coria, who i believe has the best clay court game out there ( since ferrero has gone downhill following injury ) - maybe even better than nadal !

coria choked in last year's final, when it looked like he coudn't lose ( & taught agassi a lesson on clay in an earlier round ) & this year in run-up to french he'd lost only to nadal & fed ( but claimed those claycourts weren't ideal for him - too quick for him & more akin to a slow hardcourt, than the "true" slow courts of roland garros ( albeit, he couda beaten ginepri to get to US Open semi ! ))

well, to cut a long story short, i thought only nadal or fed wouda stood a chance to beat him in paris & then probably only in 5 hard sets

however, he lost this year to davydenko after winning the 1st set:

see story here ( it's towards the middle of the article ):

http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2005-05-31/h.php

i'll be blunt - i didn't believe there was a man alive who coud do that to coria on his preferred paris clay

i'd consider that the performance of the year & i woud seriously keep an eye on this ruskie ( he lost unfortunately in semi to puerta, where he really shouda won ) - especially on clay

if he stays fit, he can be a modern great:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/pla ... umber=D402
Last edited by eldrick on Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby bambam » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:44 am

Sampras was not great on clay by any means, but he did win an Italian Open on it, so he had some abilty on it.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Sampras v Federer

Postby gh » Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:57 am

I don't watch all that much tennis, but am I the only one who thinks that the clay-court game is ridiculous? Not in and of itself (cue Paul Simon---slip-slip slidin' away), but because it's sooo different than the rest of the sport.
gh
 
Posts: 46302
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests