Sampras Vs. Agassi aus open 2000

[yassigole]

the thing with sampras,they always thought hey its going well,i m going to win this match.and bam befor they knew,sampras had won.

[cj397]

@MrAR15USER serve? andre's serve was very mediocre for a top ten player

[delatudela]

@cj397 serve for sampras and returner for agassi, mate. it should not be explained!!

[cj397]

@delatudela I'm not talking to you you idiot i know this already.

[splendid1000]

@cj397

LoL obviously you didn't moron. You specifically said Andre's serve.

[superskwrl]

@MrAR15USER Yeah, Agassi was amazing.

[Edu2503]

I wish i could buy one of those Wilson ProStaff 88's...

[quest8899]

@Edu2503 You need to be really good to use that racquet

[Meshalhasseen]

What people don't understand is the disparity between surfaces when Pete was playing. The real reason Pete lost the French was because he never thought about changing racquets or strings on clay.

The classic ProStaff did it on just about every surface with his style but clay; in an era when players were using progressively better and more flexible racquets. Didn't help that the strings he used were control-centric either.

[spacecowboy95]

@Meshalhasseen You think a pro tennis player would switch the racket they have been playing with since they were juniours to try an win on a different surface? What planet are you from?

[Meshalhasseen]

@spacecowboy95 From the same one as you are on. Of course no one is going to change what they're comfortable with, but perhaps Pete could have though about doing away with natural gut on clay. However, I don't think that the French mattered to him as much as the rest of his slams towards the latter half of his career - perhaps when he could have afforded to do a switch. Even Pete stated during recent exhibitions that he should have considered it. But you're right, no one's gonna switch like that

[TheFuckingDestroy]

Very high speed and powerful shot, the racquet of Sampras. I'm sure it would have dominated the 2000 model rackets today are very powerful and very distinctive control.

[mousavsm]

BTW, I love Agassi and Nadal, and I would have to say that Nadal is the best of his era, and it pains me to say that Sampras was the best of his era (his serve was just too big). That's my opinion at least.

[yoChris76]

when you watch it again.. maybe that shot of agassis was on the line... would it have changed much ?

[rostharan]

@yoChris76 well, if it was me i would be like : "I GOT A POINT I CAN GET MORE THAN MORE SINCE I GOT A NEAAAAT ONE." but you know, that is just me :P

[yoChris76]

bang bang boom.. done. And still poker faced at the end lol

[VPG24]

best rivalry of all time!!

[mariannexdenisse]

both sponsored by nike...i think nike sponsors all the best and the famous tennis players in the history

[SavinoHunnego]

i think you just can't say who's the best

Sampras was amazing in its time, his serve and volley game would still beat most players. Roger is amazing, he's is so allround and is the best player of the new tennis erra, First ther was sampras, than the game changed and federer came.

[niclassj]

I can't really understand how any of you guys can still consider Sampras as the greatest of all time. Roger is just in another league. 16 Slams in 7.5 years, 23 straight GS-SFs. How can you even argue against that?

[mousavsm]

@niclassj Well why don't you consider this niclass. Rafa has now won 7 grand slams in his first 24 tries, better than Federer's 7 in 27 tries. Oh yea, and he did it in Federer's prime, maybe you care to rephrase your statement?? Stats aren't everything, you must consider more than just numbers, like competition, era, etc. 

[juandi2570]

@niclassj , oh really................tell me roger's competition during the first stage of his career: chumps like Roddick, Safin, Hewitt,etc hahahahah. Give A prime Sampras those chumps on his prime and he would've won 25 slams.

[niclassj]

@juandi2570 Your "chumps" actually CRUSHED your champion when he was as old as Roger is right now, so you better keep quiet not to make a fool out of yourself. :)

[juandi2570]

@niclassj , yeah, but Sampras wasn't on his prime. Sampras lost against Hewitt and Safin when Sampras was on clear decline at the age of 30. If Sampras had faced these cumps when he was between 23-27, he would've destroyed them easily.

[Camurgladius]

@juandi2570 Pete would've needed to reach some French Open finals to do that. Which he, y'know, never did.

[goalboy19]

ce meciuri erau intre cei 2,,, UNICE... Go Sampras Forever !!!!

[lagerandapacketcrisp]

agassi did have talent though you can see that by the way he takes the ball so early especially on the return of serve maybe not as talented as a sampras or federer but he still had it!

[scottstorchfan]

both agassi and safin have been blessed with more technical talent that both federer and sampras...they just haven't been able to cultivate it enough and combine it with the mental and physical aspects...both safin and agassi hated tennis for a better part of their career, federer and sampras has been known to love the game. Safin in my opinion was the "diamond in the mud" it's sad he underachieved so...

[Darthkador]

Best tennis ever

[UchihaGege]

just to remember everyone despite of over 25 aces agassi won this mtch because of his incredible game!!!

[tigercrap]

Federer is the greatest. He's has the complete game. Agassi, however, was the inspiration of all the kids growing up. He didn't have the arrogance like Sampras or the natural talent to win easy points. Agassi worked hard for every point and showed us that you don't have to have the rare talent that only a few have to win. He won with heart, against bigger, more talented players. He showed that you can be yourself...in his case, a rebel. He played with passion and left the game with it.

[jtatsiue]

I'm not sure I'd describe him as arrogant. Reserved, guarded, cryptic, maybe a little aloof due to his focused mental approach but not arrogant.

[MaratSafinVideos]

Laver is the greatest, sorry.

[joronamo888]

whats the name of those nike tennis shoes that used to be white on the back and blue tip on the front with this scaley material?

[jfiles000000]

Sorry but Sampras is the greatest ever only lost 4 grand slam finals lost 2 were at the age of 30 and 31 and federer lost WAY more grand slam finals to Nadal so sampras statiscally has a better grand slam finals percentage.Sorry roger federer you lose and i hope you don't cry.

[UchihaGege]

tennis is not about statistic !!! Agassi said: you don't have to be the best player in order to win a match. It's true I saw sometime agassi playing better then sampras but loosing because of his strategy. sometimes is the contrary!!!

[pmo1983]

this is the stupidest reasoning ever.

Fed made more finals.

more SFs. More Consistent.

What about Sampras' horrible record on clay.

What about the fact that Fed has been consistent. it took Sampras 12 years to get 14. Fed did it in 7. the last stat tells me that Fed is twice as good as Samp, but then again i dont read stats i watch and play the game.

PS. are you really 68. the way you wrote this snotty coment about Fed i thought you were 12. Shit man, grow up.

[BrokenRecord14]

I guess we all have our opinions.I just think Sampras was a little better.Pete had harder competitionFed made alot more grandslam finals and lost more than pete so fed has a lower %.

[Thetoughestweight1]

I just love the sound of the ball striked by Sampras' racket, it was different from anybody else's one than or now..

[rostharan]

@Thetoughestweight1 doesn't mean much, because rackets evolved. though his shot are incredible .___.

[brunowalterjp]

that is incredible.

[awesomerepublican]

Part of why it was so hard to play against Pete (besides his awesome serve and the complete tennis game) was that he was tricky to predict how well he is playing.

It's as if he would "hustle" you into believing he is not trying that hard to break your serve, and then out of nowhere, he'll sense weakness or opportunity, and surprise at you by throwing the kitchen sink (at 129 mph) leaving you like a deer in the headlights while he's holding the trophy.

[awesomerepublican]

It must have been so frustrating playing against Sampras! People can play as hard as they want to against him, but Sampras will give you little or no opportunities to break him. Players make one mistake against Sampras and they can kiss goodbye to the set.

[iRanzed]

its funny how agassi actually DID come back to win this match, and the tournament

[Samprasisthebest]

Yeah, that's incredible that he did come back from a deficit to beat Pete. I always thought Agassi was the greatest rebound ace player in the history of the sport- this was his grand slam when he was focused and on.

[yoChris76]

at 0.17.. the forehand. I'll take a page from the judge in the dancing show on channel 10. Loved it, Loved it, Loved it, Loved it, Loved it, Loved it.. truely.. class timing and accuracy.

[mystikr]

Pete is and will remain the greatest player of all times. His aces on the second serve make me dream.

[fcshahzaib]

WOHO. Sampras is THE GREATEST player of all time. Had way more competition than fed and even if fed gets to 14, it wont be as big as Sampras's 14

[CuprousChloride]

Sampras is amazing no doubt but Federer just won the French Open and tied him at 14!

[flashdoom]

Fed will win few more slams without a doubt.He will probably return on no1 place(due to Nadal scratch+weak form) and beat Sampras no1 total lead record.Besides in clashes Fed-Sam Roger leads :) Sorry,but Sampras is only no2 in history

[mystikr]

I don't judge players on their ranking or the number of grand slams they won. In my opinion Roger is the second best player in history because he didn't win his grand slams by using serve-and-volley(except Wimbledon 2003) while Pete won ALL his slams by using serve-and-volley. For example one of the player not well ranked who could have won a slam thanks to his talent is Tommy Haas. Unfortunately he had big personnal problems.....

[Ninety2q]

Why does winning by using serve and volley make him better? Fed is one of the reason that type of game doesn't exsists, because his passing shots make it damn near impossible to play that style.

[sathyaseelann]

@Ninety2q wtf?? how many s&v volley players played against Federer which made you to comment like this? nowadays there are NO s&v players. did you see Sampras playing volley against Federer in the kualalumpur match?

[laser3210]

so you mean to say .. only serve and volley is tennis ? rest is rubbish?

i guess they should scrap all the clay court tennis then....

what a noob !!

[pradeepanisonline]

I started watching tennis because of the server & volley style of the early & mid 90's.. Sampras IMO is the greatest serve & volley player.. I miss that brand of tennis now..

[666412]

only??????

[cam230723]

Wrong- Federer is loads better and I'd also put Laver and Borg ahead of Sampras as well. Sampras comes in at 4th of all time. Sampras was awesome but his weakness is that not only did he not win the French Open, he didn't even get close (with only one semi and alot of early round exits). Although Borg never won a hard court slam, he got a lot closer than Sampras did in the French with lots of appearances in the US Open final and semis so he sqeaks in ahead of Pete at 3rd of all time.

[juandi2570]

@cam230723, First at all , You are not taking into account: Endurance. Sampras was 286 the world's number one. Borg retired too early and Laver won most of his slams on grass and on the weakest era ever. I might agree that Fed is the best of all time but Pete is a close second. You are not factoring that Sampras played in an era of specialists. Sampras didn't go further in the french open because of clay beasts like Bruguera, Muster, Kuerten, Kafelnicov, Courier, etc.

[xexulin20]

@mystikr do you know a player named roger federer?¿?¿?

and rafael nadal...¿?¿?¿?

[mystikr]

@xexulin20 Do you know tennis ?

[xexulin20]

@mystikr because i know tennis i'm sure that the best in the history is roger

[Nigelxman]

@mystikr Yeah so much for Federer's 16 meaningless slams.

[TheKPRZ]

@mystikr hehe, its pretty funny. Federer is the greatest of all time, his grand slams and his elegance sais it all. Federer will always be the best in peoples minds.

No one even talks about sampras no more, its like everyone has forgot him, but it will not be the same with federer. He will always be remebered.

[cortadew]

@mystikr Pete the best of all times??? you sounds like you have never seen Federer in action ;)

[JDMFLiPBOi]

sampras kicked agassi's ass on this tie breaker.

[avoglerprods]

GOOD LORD MAN that Audio conversion TURNED UP LOUD ENOUGH FOR YOU??? If you hear distortion, that would be a hint!!!

[JiggaNigga9]

Agassi > Sampras

[Samprasisthebest]

At the Aussie Open, yes Agassi>Sampras. At the US Open and Wimby, Sampras>Agassi,also on indoor carpet courts.

[splendid1000]

Sampras vs Agassi head to head grand slam record = Sampras 6, Agassi 3.

Sampras>Agassi

[gbsons]

Agassi=Calender Grand Slam

Sampras= never won the french.

Sampras may have more titles but most of them were at wimbeldon. But he was the best american and best in the world at that time.

[mariadiasy]

Agassi won all Grand Slams but not in a Calendar year. Only Rod Laver has won all four Grand Slams in the same year twice. Laver, Sampras and Federer are the only 3 to have won three straight Slams... Wimbledon, US Open and Australian Open.

[robertk2007]

sampras 6-0= US and Wimbledon

Andre 3-0= French and AUS

[splendid1000]

okay

[Mer1945]

I watched that match...What a tiebreak by Pete! 7-0!!!Unbelievable!!!

[syncm]

The first forehand winner makes me sooo happy!

What a shot.

[miggy25]

I'm glad Agassi won this one too...The rebound-ace hardcourts of Austrailia were always good to Andre...Pete got over alot against Andre with all the cheap points he'd get off of his serves...Glad Andre got the best of him here

[pakaburiya]

Well Pete didn't eternally own Andre over tiebreaks. He broke serve and that as by firing winners from the back or setting up for the volley. Put it this way; Pete had the more explosive ground game.

[quiet1234]

He didnt win "cheap points" some of you people say it like pete cheated because he had the greatest serve ever, he was only 6'1 same height as that swiss cow fucker, nadal and djokovic. He EARNED those points through hard work. And then he had the brilliant all round explosiveness nobody came close too.

[spookylukey99]

quiet1234......lmao @ swiss cow fucker...thats no way to talk about martini hingis lol

[robertk2007]

lol

[mariadiasy]

I think what he meant was Federer as the cow F! not Hingis.

[lisek1989lisek1989]

No way!

[miggy25]

i never said Pete cheated...i just hate seeing that kind of tennis, like with Pete and Goran at the Wimbledon finals that one year...3 and 4 stroke points all match....the measure of a great player is proven through stroke-for-stroke rallies IMO...not by having 50 aces during a match...i think Andre had the better ground game--Pete's running forehand was maybe the greatest ever though

[thalivest]

Ignore these buffoons. If it (the serve) isn't a skill then why doesn't everyone hit a serve like that?? It takes tremendous skill and ability to do it under pressure, and many dispise it, cuz they know players can't handle it.

And in his prime Sampras had a excellent ground game (that many foreget). Outside of Laver I don't think there anyone in history who could combine both serve and volleying and baseline as well as Pete.

He was a beast put him in this era and he goes to town!!!

[mousavsm]

@thalivest I agree with you to some degree. This era of tennis we are in now is weak. However, look at how terrible Agassi's serve was and how good he was still. Yes, the serve is a skill. However, Agassi was the most naturally talented ball striker, ever. He hit the ball better than anyone. His service did him in. Had this game had no service, and somehow started some other way, Agassi would have destroyed anyone who stepped in his way.

[thalivest]

@mousavsm This era is weak, but there's a lot of parity. 2 maybe 3 players then the field. Dre did not have a terrible serve. It wasn't great be he served intelligently, and protected it well. He used his serve 2 start pts on his terms and was able 2 dictate. Agassi's issue vs Sampras was on big/clutch pts, Pete had the big serve, which could wipe out mistakes. Dre didn't. So errors would creep in. A much better serve would made him a problem though.

[mousavsm]

@thalivest You forgot to mention Sampras' devastating touch around the net. Sampras (although he pissed me off endlessly back in the day) was, and probably still is, the best serve and volley style player ever. Agassi, IMO, was the best baseline player ever. His angles were incredible, the power he generated was substantial, and the amount of talent was endless. He stood in his own way or we would probably be saying that Andre holds all the records. Regardless, in my book, he's the best!

[thalivest]

@mousavsm I disagree with Dre being the best baseline, his movement takes that from him. But he might be the best groundstroker ever. In terms of fh/bh it'd be hard to find someone better. And Pete was never given the credit for being the great volleyer he was, I agree. Dre had one of the toughest roads, as teen, Lendl & Wilander. Then Edberg, Becker, Courier, Chang and Sampras. Add I'vic and Rafter along with Muster, Bruguera, Kafel, then into his 30's he was beating Roodick, Hewitt and Safin.

[mrbobevans]

@mousavsm You can make a case that Agassi and Lendl were the two greatest ball strikers of all time.

[lagerandapacketcrisp]

thats the best tie-break any individual has ever played that i've ever seen 4 out right winners 7-0 incredible against one of the games greats

[quiet1234]

Yeh it pissed me off that he lost the 4th though, shortly after that he pulled his hip flexor and was out for a few months!!!!!! Pete played a bit stupid against agassi in the 4th and agassi just kept up his amazing play.

[pakaburiya]

Thats Sampras. He used to have so much confidence in his serve that he sisn't mind taking it the distance. No hip flexor tear; Andre would have been shut out in the fifth; period. Sampras was the better player of the bigger points by far.

[thalivest]

Two mistakes with this comment....

1. He didn't "pull" his hip flexor, he actually "tore" it. After the match an MRI showed Pete had torn it 30-40% from the bone and was out for a month.

2. He actually puuled it early in the match, well that's what was reported, and Dre still needed 5 sets plus a net cord in 4th set breaker.

Sampras, you're tuned into the greatest!!!

[quyner]

the POWAAAAAAAAAAH

[jproxursoxoff]

I'm so happy Agassi pulled out this match after being down 2 sets to 1.

[fotsifotsi]

again an amazing video of these two..thx for the upload!!!