who is this old dude playing federer and why the hell r so many people there to watch it????????? the japanese are stupid they will pay to see anything, probably to watch federer take a dump lol
oh man, i can't believe u just called pistol pete 'this old dude'. the man's one of the greatest tennis players of all time and holds the record for grand slam career wins.
its not a fair comparison right now. pete playing one match may have a shot against a top 10 player, but over a week or two his body cant recover like a 20 year old. he can compete with anyone, he cant compete with his body or time however. pete did struggle when the grass slowed down at wimbledon. i think they slowed it down to slow pete down. fuckin limey bastards
idk the man is in ominous form right now. he's on top of the world + ive nevr seen a mor edeadly back-hand than R-fed. evn if sampras wuz in his prime federer has developed into a bettr play. i may stand corrected but thats the way i c it. Dnt be misled sampras was ma first fav tennis player. but its only natural that as the world turns better will emerge
that's not true. although pete has great skill as he shows here in the exhibition match against federer, his stamina and endurance wouldn't compare to the younger players on tour. and that's not pete's fault. he's just old.
It's not really a question of stamina. there's always been much fitter players than Pete. At the end, for a player of Pete's caliber, it comes down to the love of the sports, the burning desire to win which he didnt have. If you take sports such as surfing,and look at Kelly Slater, he's been competing against 4 generations, and now at 36, has won 3 of the first 4 events of the year. No one has ever had such longevity even in surfing, but it goes to show love and desire are most crutial.
Sampras in his prime, serve volly was unmached. Just unreal. It was his serve that set it up and u knew it was coming u just couldnt do anything about it.
A loss to Sampras would simply open more opportunities for future exhibitions between these two greats (a great marketing scheme) as well as assuring that sampras's rep wouldn't be diminished. A 3-0 by Fed thrashing would've seemed pointless and demeaning. Either way I feel Federer has potentially nothing to gain from all of this, either he ends up potentially embarassing his hero or he risks tarnishing his own reputation through an 'unexpected loss'.
i think that we know that the exhibition was pointless. but typicay made it out to be much more. who cares if fed would have thrash sampras cause afterall sampras was past his best.
i dont think tennis is getting weaker, I actually think players are better from the baseline than they were however to beat federer it helps to be good at the net because fed is so good off the ground and there is no-one in tennis at the moment who has a really good net game
I think federer was trying to win all the matches against sampras, by the disappointment he showed when he missed some shots, in all the 3 matches. With federer saying sampras could be in the top 5, federer being honest that he is, realised sampras gave him good competition. But we will never know the truth, only Federer knows.
i'm not saying that federer threw the match , but there has to be a mutual respect that he has for sapras. the guy is years removed from the profession, what could federer honestly get from destroying an aging out of season sampras. they're just two different generations of tennis.
First off to all those saying Federer wasn't playing his hardest during these matches underestimates his love for the sport. Federer has something to prove about himself when compared to Pete. He would never go easy on any match. Pete won the last one legit.
Also Roddick, Nadal, and others are amazing players. People especially don't give Roddick enough credit.
I disagree what u said about Roddick! In my opinion Roddick knows how to serve and other shots are very much weak. It seems like he wins all his matches with his serve. I don't like that, though it completely legal =)
Serving is nearly half the game. His serve isn't his only shot though. You don't get to number one in the world with just one weapon. His style is to end points quickly with his serve and forehand winners or setting up the point with his various slice shots until he opens up the court for a winner.
Other players play differently relying on their own strengths, such as baseline consistency when they have a weaker serve. You base your game around your strengths.
roger is not used to playing against serve and volley thats why he had a hard time and eventually lost in the third match against pete , who is a master of serve and volley.
I meant matches of course, not games. (I know that Federer's fanatics will hate me for this but Roger only won the first two matches because of Pete's unforced errors. I'm sorry, but the only reason that Federer won them was because Pete wasn't well prepared.)
I know that Federer's fanatics will hate me for this but Roger only won the first two games because of Pete's unforced errors. I'm sorry, but the only reason that Federer won them was because Pete wasn't well prepared.
SO..what does this mean? Sampras better than Fed? Certainly not now. In their primes, close.
Pete in his prime lost to: Karol Kucera,Ramon Delgado,Mark Woodforde,Leander Paes,Jason Stoltenberg,Bohdan Ulirach,Magnus Norman,Mark Rosset,Brett Steven,Grant Stafford,Jacco Eltingh,Jaime Yzaga,Magnus Larsson,Karim Alami,Bernd Karbacher,Gilbert Schaller,Fabrice Santoro,Paul Haarhuis,Olivier Gross,Fernando Meligeni,Felix Mantilla,Jan-Michael Gambill.
These were real matches. Are they better than Pete?
He only will breaks his record because he only has NOOB Opponents like this amateur Roddick oder Nadal...Sampras had real opponents like Agassi Edberg Becker Ivanisevic..and so on...10 years ago Tennis was played on a higher level...
Is there not a possiblity that Federer is just so great that there is no competition? If Federer was not around we could easily say we have good competition amongst the other players today.
As more nations begin to have the financial resources to train players and access to technology, the overall competition gets better, not worse. There are exceptions, such as Federer being exceptionally outstanding. But an ENTIRE generation of weak players? Around 2001, players and tennis experts were saying how competitive tennis was getting. Federer starts dominating and suddenly the competition is weak? Makes no sense at all.
Pete still has his serve, if you saw the match today in Malaysia, it was pretty difficult for federer to play against his serve and break him. Pete is a bit slow, so his attackin volley style is crap against fed. The match in mal was nice to watch, Pete did some sik touch volleys and the fawken comentators would say" oh pete got that one from federer"..lol wtf so dumb.
Roger isn't trying if anyone can't notice even in the high-lights. This is a bad attempt at trying to drum up attention. In a real match right now at their skill-set it would be 6-2 6-1 if Sampras was lucky. Sampras in his prime is a different story, this isn't the same Pete.
federer has just kicked ferrer s, roddick and nadal s ass as if they were children...and they are the greatest players on the planet today...so ANYTHING different than federer 6 Sampras "0" is just promotional make believe...WAKE UP man!!
man its kinda sad watching pete play with a balding head...especially against a federer in the latter stages of his prime--but pete looks like hes still got most of his touch--mebbe lacking the intensity and obviously the fitness of his earlier years
those are some awfully few highlights and some of them are crappy. great to see them both try though
deathbombs 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
who is this old dude playing federer and why the hell r so many people there to watch it????????? the japanese are stupid they will pay to see anything, probably to watch federer take a dump lol
poops1 3 years ago
Lol!
PorkChops250 3 years ago
Lol you suck. THAT 'old dude' is Pete Sampras, one of the best players in history. He's a real legend, just as federer is going to be.
coeliejoelie113 3 years ago 5
you mean is..
pian000 2 years ago
oh man, i can't believe u just called pistol pete 'this old dude'. the man's one of the greatest tennis players of all time and holds the record for grand slam career wins.
jackwardjw 3 years ago 2
some people are just a little stupid on tennis history... this is an example of one...
Babolat3216 3 years ago 2
its not a fair comparison right now. pete playing one match may have a shot against a top 10 player, but over a week or two his body cant recover like a 20 year old. he can compete with anyone, he cant compete with his body or time however. pete did struggle when the grass slowed down at wimbledon. i think they slowed it down to slow pete down. fuckin limey bastards
robertk2007 3 years ago
sampres vs federer very mach
gonzauricar 3 years ago
Is he gay?
Prisoner7777 3 years ago
= ="
coffeeYink 3 years ago
The old guy put him down on sheer talent.
oplilium 3 years ago
idk the man is in ominous form right now. he's on top of the world + ive nevr seen a mor edeadly back-hand than R-fed. evn if sampras wuz in his prime federer has developed into a bettr play. i may stand corrected but thats the way i c it. Dnt be misled sampras was ma first fav tennis player. but its only natural that as the world turns better will emerge
ricplay7890 4 years ago
Sampras shouldn't have retired then. If he hadn't he would have defenitely won at least 2-3 Grand Slams by now.
youwanttopieceofme 4 years ago
that's not true. although pete has great skill as he shows here in the exhibition match against federer, his stamina and endurance wouldn't compare to the younger players on tour. and that's not pete's fault. he's just old.
hijohnkim 4 years ago 2
yah but in 03 and 04 he might have been able to
splendid1000 3 years ago
It's not really a question of stamina. there's always been much fitter players than Pete. At the end, for a player of Pete's caliber, it comes down to the love of the sports, the burning desire to win which he didnt have. If you take sports such as surfing,and look at Kelly Slater, he's been competing against 4 generations, and now at 36, has won 3 of the first 4 events of the year. No one has ever had such longevity even in surfing, but it goes to show love and desire are most crutial.
jmminu 3 years ago
Sampras Volley & Serve! No one will NEVER get better than him in that!
SalzerX 4 years ago 6
Sampras in his prime, serve volly was unmached. Just unreal. It was his serve that set it up and u knew it was coming u just couldnt do anything about it.
Bigturns33 4 years ago 2
Go Pete kick his ass with your serve & volley skillz!
Solex00 4 years ago
A loss to Sampras would simply open more opportunities for future exhibitions between these two greats (a great marketing scheme) as well as assuring that sampras's rep wouldn't be diminished. A 3-0 by Fed thrashing would've seemed pointless and demeaning. Either way I feel Federer has potentially nothing to gain from all of this, either he ends up potentially embarassing his hero or he risks tarnishing his own reputation through an 'unexpected loss'.
typicay 4 years ago
what the hell are you talking about
AB5309 4 years ago
no way was Fed trying his best when he lost that third match against Sampras
typicay 4 years ago
i agree with typicay....this exibi. is pointless.....i think it would be much more interesting to see Sampras aginst Agassi...
begi2606 4 years ago 3
i think that we know that the exhibition was pointless. but typicay made it out to be much more. who cares if fed would have thrash sampras cause afterall sampras was past his best.
AB5309 4 years ago
Pete's going bald!
HisCarlness 4 years ago
yes he has also aged, were did he get the rinkles from
AB5309 4 years ago
going... hes been !
Bigturns33 4 years ago
i dont think tennis is getting weaker, I actually think players are better from the baseline than they were however to beat federer it helps to be good at the net because fed is so good off the ground and there is no-one in tennis at the moment who has a really good net game
lagerandapacketcrisp 4 years ago
luckycat2 Federer won 6-4,6-3
nadalroddick 4 years ago
I think federer was trying to win all the matches against sampras, by the disappointment he showed when he missed some shots, in all the 3 matches. With federer saying sampras could be in the top 5, federer being honest that he is, realised sampras gave him good competition. But we will never know the truth, only Federer knows.
monkeybloke 4 years ago
i'm not saying that federer threw the match , but there has to be a mutual respect that he has for sapras. the guy is years removed from the profession, what could federer honestly get from destroying an aging out of season sampras. they're just two different generations of tennis.
luckykat2 4 years ago
guardate lo scambio dal secondo 55 in poi (più o meno)... quello che fa Federer è allucinante.
Comunque, a prescindere dal fatto che questo torneino non conta nulla, sono due fenomeni, di diritto entrambi nel migliori 5 di sempre.
nicluz 4 years ago
il secondo è il 45, non il 55
nicluz 4 years ago
First off to all those saying Federer wasn't playing his hardest during these matches underestimates his love for the sport. Federer has something to prove about himself when compared to Pete. He would never go easy on any match. Pete won the last one legit.
Also Roddick, Nadal, and others are amazing players. People especially don't give Roddick enough credit.
JewJewB 4 years ago
I disagree what u said about Roddick! In my opinion Roddick knows how to serve and other shots are very much weak. It seems like he wins all his matches with his serve. I don't like that, though it completely legal =)
squeeze1988 4 years ago
Serving is nearly half the game. His serve isn't his only shot though. You don't get to number one in the world with just one weapon. His style is to end points quickly with his serve and forehand winners or setting up the point with his various slice shots until he opens up the court for a winner.
Other players play differently relying on their own strengths, such as baseline consistency when they have a weaker serve. You base your game around your strengths.
JewJewB 4 years ago
you should watch ivo karlovic =]
typicay 4 years ago
Pete = Bruce Lee
Federer = Jet Li
Results:
Bruce Kicks dat ass Serve Volley Style !
grega1972 4 years ago
More like
Pete = Bruce Lee
Federer = Jackie Chan the clown
lol
Aodaliyah 4 years ago
Roger, you are the greatest tennis player in
history!
Come on,
Mach weiter so!!!
federer19902006 4 years ago
ZERO EDUCATIONAL VALUE!!!
geniusloch 4 years ago
Pistol Pete.
Pisin3 4 years ago
the news reporter is pretty hot
ArcticMonkeesFan 4 years ago 2
second
IricForset 4 years ago 2
roger is not used to playing against serve and volley thats why he had a hard time and eventually lost in the third match against pete , who is a master of serve and volley.
anoldsalas 4 years ago
I meant matches of course, not games. (I know that Federer's fanatics will hate me for this but Roger only won the first two matches because of Pete's unforced errors. I'm sorry, but the only reason that Federer won them was because Pete wasn't well prepared.)
KaKui007 4 years ago
NOBODY will ever have the serve of Sampras.
mmaakkiinn 4 years ago 2
I know that Federer's fanatics will hate me for this but Roger only won the first two games because of Pete's unforced errors. I'm sorry, but the only reason that Federer won them was because Pete wasn't well prepared.
KaKui007 4 years ago
SO..what does this mean? Sampras better than Fed? Certainly not now. In their primes, close.
Pete in his prime lost to: Karol Kucera,Ramon Delgado,Mark Woodforde,Leander Paes,Jason Stoltenberg,Bohdan Ulirach,Magnus Norman,Mark Rosset,Brett Steven,Grant Stafford,Jacco Eltingh,Jaime Yzaga,Magnus Larsson,Karim Alami,Bernd Karbacher,Gilbert Schaller,Fabrice Santoro,Paul Haarhuis,Olivier Gross,Fernando Meligeni,Felix Mantilla,Jan-Michael Gambill.
These were real matches. Are they better than Pete?
newstatesman1 4 years ago
Roger is younger and at the top of his game..he just won masters..but in the end Pete dominated him.
Jayhawkblue 4 years ago
Correction ; Pete OWNED HIM !
grega1972 4 years ago
before the match Pete kicked Roger in the balls just to slow him down a little
billthestinker 4 years ago
tha's cool man!!!!!!!!!!!!
faaduma 4 years ago
cool how they can laugh throughout the whole match
turtleboy110193 4 years ago
He only will breaks his record because he only has NOOB Opponents like this amateur Roddick oder Nadal...Sampras had real opponents like Agassi Edberg Becker Ivanisevic..and so on...10 years ago Tennis was played on a higher level...
slatz20 4 years ago
Is there not a possiblity that Federer is just so great that there is no competition? If Federer was not around we could easily say we have good competition amongst the other players today.
barajaowen 4 years ago
sorry, but the level of tennis is way up these days. new tech, healthy lifstyles, longer tour. let go of the old days crap. let. it. go.
videostuf 4 years ago
THE COMPETITION IS TOUGHER NOW.
As more nations begin to have the financial resources to train players and access to technology, the overall competition gets better, not worse. There are exceptions, such as Federer being exceptionally outstanding. But an ENTIRE generation of weak players? Around 2001, players and tennis experts were saying how competitive tennis was getting. Federer starts dominating and suddenly the competition is weak? Makes no sense at all.
newstatesman1 4 years ago
sampras is still the better player lol..today federer has only noob opponents...tennis was better 10 years ago..
slatz20 4 years ago
you better except the fact that Federer will soon break Sampras`s record;)
redruster 4 years ago
Pete still has his serve, if you saw the match today in Malaysia, it was pretty difficult for federer to play against his serve and break him. Pete is a bit slow, so his attackin volley style is crap against fed. The match in mal was nice to watch, Pete did some sik touch volleys and the fawken comentators would say" oh pete got that one from federer"..lol wtf so dumb.
khesimkong 4 years ago
Roger isn't trying if anyone can't notice even in the high-lights. This is a bad attempt at trying to drum up attention. In a real match right now at their skill-set it would be 6-2 6-1 if Sampras was lucky. Sampras in his prime is a different story, this isn't the same Pete.
ronpaul4america 4 years ago
i wonder what the result would have looked like if federer playied with full force...sampras would have lost 0-6, 0-6...
wampenmann 4 years ago
federe est le succésseur de sampras,roger c le nouveau patron du tennis,du grand art
chreb54 4 years ago
Pete Sampras managed 6-4, 6-4 and he is old. i wonder how the match would turn out if Sampras played Federer when he was at his prime.
whocareswhatwesay 4 years ago
come on you dreamer!
federer has just kicked ferrer s, roddick and nadal s ass as if they were children...and they are the greatest players on the planet today...so ANYTHING different than federer 6 Sampras "0" is just promotional make believe...WAKE UP man!!
betoortega1961 4 years ago 2
man its kinda sad watching pete play with a balding head...especially against a federer in the latter stages of his prime--but pete looks like hes still got most of his touch--mebbe lacking the intensity and obviously the fitness of his earlier years
spuuradic 4 years ago
yeah cool thanks
bsarnold1 4 years ago
Thanks a lot for this good mixed video clip
giacolove 4 years ago
Thanks for this, it's brilliant though I don't understand French.
Chuchu2709 4 years ago
thanks a ton!
sashankh 4 years ago
thanks i knew someone would come through! I wanna see their next match. I think Pete may get more confident. Still no chance.
nike2cc 4 years ago
thanks!
quentincador 4 years ago
Wow! thanks, I thought that they don't play yet...
canibal04 4 years ago
Thanks!
ryan5050 4 years ago
Thank You so much
:)
chall6666 4 years ago
thank you!
paskoww 4 years ago
thank you for the clips!
PIKACHEWY 4 years ago