Retired Pete Sampras defeats Roger Federer in exhibition!

[Nors]

I see a strong case for Sampras as the best ever.

Borg was captivating and majestic in the day....

Though 5th set I need a win, Jimmy Connors was tough as nails and is the returner that could have given Sampras a game in his prime.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

The problem with Sampras was always Sampras. He was more talented than Federer but he didn't have the desire since he beat people so easily. He didn't work on his game like Federer or train meticulously. Feder has a more complete game than Sampras but when Sampras was on with his serve and volley, it was unstoppable. I also felt that Sampras had tougher competition because Agassi was in his prime and even old school vets like Connors and McEnroe made grand slam semi appearances in the early 90's. Tennis was a much bigger sport and thus attracted better athletes.

The other problem with Sampras is that he didn't have Tiger Woods to compete with either. Woods has motivated Federer to keep winning grand slams.

I still think Sampras could beat Federer if he devoted himself to the sport like today's athletes meaning he would train hard not only on his game but his body as well. I just don't see Sampras doing that. Samras just doesn't have that attitude. He is not going to update his racket or lose weight to gain speed. He wont' do yoga or train hard for 6 months on just his body to get in peak shape.

It's like an Emmitt Smith vs. Barry Sanders debate. Like Emmitt, Federer will get all the trophies but if Barry was 100% devoted to his sport the way Emmitt was, there is no way Emmitt wins the career rushing title. However, I do agree that offseason work ethics and practice off the field/court is part of the equation and an athlete shouldn't discounted because he worked hard off the field.

 

[trickblue]

Federer struggles on clay? Really? I didn't realize making the French Open finals two years in a row (and semifinals before that) was considered "struggling".

Struggles in that he isn't the dominant force he is on fast surfaces...

That has been a problem for many great players...

The serve and volley game doesn't translate as well on clay...

 

[L-O-Jete]

Borg was always my favorite, but Sampras may be the greatest ever. Federer is no slouch either...

Federer is by far a better tennis player than Sampras, if it were not for Nadal Federer would have 2 or 3 Grand Slams by now, IIRC Sampras never won 3 in the same year.

 

[trickblue]

Federer is by far a better tennis player than Sampras, if it were not for Nadal Federer would have 2 or 3 Grand Slams by now, IIRC Sampras never won 3 in the same year.

But that's the point... Nadal is a better clay court player and he isn't going anywhere. It has the makings of a classic rivalry as Nadal has improved a great deal on faster surfaces...

Federer is still better all around, but there could be some classic matches...

If I'm not mistaken, Rod Laver was the last player to win a Grand Slam...

I saw Laver play an exhibition against John Newcombe when I was a kid...

Laver was over the hill but still amazing out there...

On a side note, my kids had Thanksgiving dinner with Andy Roddick and his family... I'll have to post a picture...

 

[DallasCowpoke]

Federer is by far a better tennis player than Sampras, if it were not for Nadal Federer would have 2 or 3 Grand Slams by now, IIRC Sampras never won 3 in the same year.

That's kind of a silly statement. It could be applied to any number of player vs various opponents.

The idea of "competition", is to beat your "competitor".

 

[thekavorka]

Struggles in that he isn't the dominant force he is on fast surfaces...

That has been a problem for many great players...

The serve and volley game doesn't translate as well on clay...

He might not be as dominant on clay as he is on hard court or grass, but he has been improving his clay court game every year.

He may not be "dominant" on clay, but he is still "very good" on clay. I think it's only a matter of time before Federer finally beats Nadal on clay.

 

[DallasCowpoke]

He may not be "dominant" on clay, but he is still "very good" on clay. I think it's only a matter of time before Federer finally beats Nadal on clay.

I don't think so. Nadal grew up on clay. It's a really common surface in Spain.

My late wife's dad has a condo right outside of Valencia, and there's at least 3 in a 10 block radius.

 

[thekavorka]

I don't think so. Nadal grew up on clay. It's a really common surface in Spain.

My late wife's dad has a condo right outside of Valencia, and there's at least 3 in a 10 block radius.

I realize that Clay is the dominant surface in Spain and South America. But after the Australian Open, Federer has pretty much concentrated and focused on clay.

Federer's training and preparation is almost unmatched.