So Nadal, Safin, Roddick, etc are wasters are they?? But they've all won at least 1 G.Slam right? YEAH, that makes them real fukkin wasters, you cake-hole!
Federer does drive and shots which Sampras didn't have in his game. Sampras has admitted this. Overall, when Sampras is in the groove, I think he's a tad in front of Fed :)
I have seen both players play in person and all I can say is that when Sampras plays he is very good, but when Roger plays he is unbelievable. Its like seen something out of this world. His strokes are not only effective they are beautiful to watch in person.
federer never can beat Pete Sampras when he was in his best years pete was going to much to federer who in the present time never has the real oponents only rafa nadal or nalbandian sorry but pete sampras is going to be the best player of all times and he shows in the malasya tournament with 10 years older he was the king he loose the firts but the second 7/6 7/6 and the 3 and final game he won pete easy defeat in the 90's to federer
Since when do u know anything about Tennis, let me tell u something Pete Sampras will always be the best player in the history of tennis and if the best sampras plays against the best federer, pestol pete is going to beat him 6-4 6-1
I say the best SAMPRAS is, until NOW (don't know if Federer or any other player will become better...I can't see the future, you know...), the best player EVER.But He was at his best for 6 years.I Believe Federer will remain at his best for 10 years, for example.
LEARN READING before trying to "teach tennis", moron.
liferiot, so Sampras had harder competition than Federer. Of course he did, bcoz he was only a little better than them, whereas Federer is MUCH better than the competition, hence competition seems less. Muhammad Ali is still seen as 'Greatest Heavyweight Boxer of all time' because in his prime he was miles ahead of the 'competition' &there has been nothing like him b4 or since, similar to Federer toady in tennis! So u think Nadal (best clay courter ever),Roddick,Safin,Baghdatis,etc are wasters?
Galactus, what the f*** makes you think that Nadal is the greatest clay courter ever? Gustavo Kuerten won three French Open titles as well, and Bjorn Borg won 6 French Open titles! Roddick,Safin,Baghdatis and whoever you count as etc. are wasters! Sampras beat Roddick at the USO in 2002 when he was old and out of his prime. In 2001, Sampras beat Safin at the USO in the semis! Andre Agassi at age 36 beat Baghdatis in the USO 2nd round! None of those jokers you mentioned compare to Pete's era!
Sampras just beat Federer, so fuck all of you who think Federer is way better or just better. Federer is great but so is Sampras. Given Sampras was a decade younger I'm sure the greatest rivalry in sports history would have occurred, implying equal greatness from both Federer and Sampras and NOT fucken one-sided like you dumbasses think
No dude, fuck you. Anyone who puts any stock in these matches is a fucking tool. Agassi said these exos were going to be "as close as Roger wants them to be", and he was right. It was clear Federer was out there having fun with a guy he really looks up to. Fed Sampras and Borg are the 3 greatest of all time, and while Borg was better on clay, Federer was the better player across all surfaces than both Borg and Sampras.
ok...Federer is better on clay. Most of the matches that are played in the atp tour are not played on fucken clay. Sampras clearly lacked clay-court game but I know who would have more than made up for that on the other surfaces. So fuck u
Federer giving only 50%? How about Sampras?? He retired 5 YEARS ago. The only sports equipment he's picked up since then was a golf club. Yet he's still able to play quality tennis.
i'm getting tired of all this federer would beat him or sampras would beat him blabla..come on just pay respect to the 2 most greatest players the game ever seen.
ya sampras would win their primes, nah i dont think so, the only time they played while sampras was on tour, was the most amazing game ive ever watched,and it went to a rather young and unexperienced federer, against wimbledon king sampras, now federer is way way better than then
"Young and inexperienced" Federer beat an aging and diminished Sampras in that match. Would Pete have beaten Fed if both were in their primes? Yes, sometimes, but other times it'd go the other way. Who would win more often is pure conjecture no one knows for sure.
for those of you who don't know yet: Pete almost won the second match in Malaysia.. he had set points in the first set and just narowly lost it in tie break (8-6) also the second set went on to breaker and Roger won 7-5..must have been close and amazing, my bet is: Pete wins if they could play in their primes.. Maybe the 3rd match can go Pete's way??
I totally agree because he ha sthe heart of a champion -- indomitable -- Federer has more talent but I dont think he would have won that Correjta match at the US open. Also Federer did not have Agassi at his peak or Ivanisavic or Becker at Wimbledon . His battles there have been withRoddick and nadal who would not shine Sampras' shoes on grass
Comment removed
federerbestclass 1 year ago
Greatest Roger and Pete. love both. This great game of Pete. Roger is tired. and Roger is looking good. love :)
federerbestclass 1 year ago 8
So Nadal, Safin, Roddick, etc are wasters are they?? But they've all won at least 1 G.Slam right? YEAH, that makes them real fukkin wasters, you cake-hole!
Galactus247 4 years ago
Federer does drive and shots which Sampras didn't have in his game. Sampras has admitted this. Overall, when Sampras is in the groove, I think he's a tad in front of Fed :)
yoChris76 4 years ago
I have seen both players play in person and all I can say is that when Sampras plays he is very good, but when Roger plays he is unbelievable. Its like seen something out of this world. His strokes are not only effective they are beautiful to watch in person.
dognskatepark 4 years ago
Federer IS the BEST ang king of tennis.
dognskatepark 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He has no good competition, He's the king of doing cologne comercials.
liferiot 4 years ago
federer never can beat Pete Sampras when he was in his best years pete was going to much to federer who in the present time never has the real oponents only rafa nadal or nalbandian sorry but pete sampras is going to be the best player of all times and he shows in the malasya tournament with 10 years older he was the king he loose the firts but the second 7/6 7/6 and the 3 and final game he won pete easy defeat in the 90's to federer
Luthorcorplex 4 years ago
Pete's forehand is not as consistent or as accurate as Federer but it equals anyone's in terms of power
Kaalex123 4 years ago
when was the match?
enzoalbo 4 years ago
The best Sampras is better than the best Federer.
But the best Federer is and will last more time.
RoChede 4 years ago
That's a tough call. I mean this is only an exhibition, and we all know exhibition Federer and match Federer are two different things.
10splayer 4 years ago
Since when do u know anything about Tennis, let me tell u something Pete Sampras will always be the best player in the history of tennis and if the best sampras plays against the best federer, pestol pete is going to beat him 6-4 6-1
noumouke 4 years ago
I think you are blinded by your own ignorance
10splayer 4 years ago
Did you read what I say ?
I say the best SAMPRAS is, until NOW (don't know if Federer or any other player will become better...I can't see the future, you know...), the best player EVER.But He was at his best for 6 years.I Believe Federer will remain at his best for 10 years, for example.
LEARN READING before trying to "teach tennis", moron.
RoChede 4 years ago
Sampras had much harder competition when he played. Federer has no one.
liferiot 4 years ago
"Sampras had much harder competition when he played. Federer has no one."
100% correct!
LidPing6 4 years ago
There is a reason that he has no competition because he is just way better then the number 2. Sampras wasnt
imfromhollandman 4 years ago
liferiot, so Sampras had harder competition than Federer. Of course he did, bcoz he was only a little better than them, whereas Federer is MUCH better than the competition, hence competition seems less. Muhammad Ali is still seen as 'Greatest Heavyweight Boxer of all time' because in his prime he was miles ahead of the 'competition' &there has been nothing like him b4 or since, similar to Federer toady in tennis! So u think Nadal (best clay courter ever),Roddick,Safin,Baghdatis,etc are wasters?
Galactus247 4 years ago
Galactus, what the f*** makes you think that Nadal is the greatest clay courter ever? Gustavo Kuerten won three French Open titles as well, and Bjorn Borg won 6 French Open titles! Roddick,Safin,Baghdatis and whoever you count as etc. are wasters! Sampras beat Roddick at the USO in 2002 when he was old and out of his prime. In 2001, Sampras beat Safin at the USO in the semis! Andre Agassi at age 36 beat Baghdatis in the USO 2nd round! None of those jokers you mentioned compare to Pete's era!
Samprasisthebest 4 years ago
PETE is the MAN!! He won the final match in China.. Amazing stuff!!
zachary27 4 years ago
Sampras just beat Federer, so fuck all of you who think Federer is way better or just better. Federer is great but so is Sampras. Given Sampras was a decade younger I'm sure the greatest rivalry in sports history would have occurred, implying equal greatness from both Federer and Sampras and NOT fucken one-sided like you dumbasses think
latinoplaya 4 years ago
No dude, fuck you. Anyone who puts any stock in these matches is a fucking tool. Agassi said these exos were going to be "as close as Roger wants them to be", and he was right. It was clear Federer was out there having fun with a guy he really looks up to. Fed Sampras and Borg are the 3 greatest of all time, and while Borg was better on clay, Federer was the better player across all surfaces than both Borg and Sampras.
ActionRadar886 4 years ago
ok...Federer is better on clay. Most of the matches that are played in the atp tour are not played on fucken clay. Sampras clearly lacked clay-court game but I know who would have more than made up for that on the other surfaces. So fuck u
latinoplaya 4 years ago
Federer giving only 50%? How about Sampras?? He retired 5 YEARS ago. The only sports equipment he's picked up since then was a golf club. Yet he's still able to play quality tennis.
miltyu97 4 years ago
i'm getting tired of all this federer would beat him or sampras would beat him blabla..come on just pay respect to the 2 most greatest players the game ever seen.
MMORESLEEP 4 years ago 4
ya sampras would win their primes, nah i dont think so, the only time they played while sampras was on tour, was the most amazing game ive ever watched,and it went to a rather young and unexperienced federer, against wimbledon king sampras, now federer is way way better than then
mvnjuan 4 years ago
"Young and inexperienced" Federer beat an aging and diminished Sampras in that match. Would Pete have beaten Fed if both were in their primes? Yes, sometimes, but other times it'd go the other way. Who would win more often is pure conjecture no one knows for sure.
rjamesyork 4 years ago
u think so? its an exhibition match, thats why federer just gave his 50% best in the game...i've watched it live man...i was there, trust me
oblaktenniz69 4 years ago
for those of you who don't know yet: Pete almost won the second match in Malaysia.. he had set points in the first set and just narowly lost it in tie break (8-6) also the second set went on to breaker and Roger won 7-5..must have been close and amazing, my bet is: Pete wins if they could play in their primes.. Maybe the 3rd match can go Pete's way??
zachary27 4 years ago
Of course, it's probably planned like that.
Pamqnx 4 years ago
retaired ruler
gpp2006 4 years ago
sampras rules
walterwein 4 years ago
I totally agree because he ha sthe heart of a champion -- indomitable -- Federer has more talent but I dont think he would have won that Correjta match at the US open. Also Federer did not have Agassi at his peak or Ivanisavic or Becker at Wimbledon . His battles there have been withRoddick and nadal who would not shine Sampras' shoes on grass
draviddavid 4 years ago