lol At sampras working his shoulders out after that backhand return ace at 3:00. The rest of Pete's game is so underrated for a guys who's arguably the greatest of all time.
I remember this match when Sampras earned his 14th major title, Sampras was really "on fire" in this match. Now I still play his racquet Wilson Prostaff Original 6.0 85 with 5" lead tapes, miss those days.
sampras, healthy, at the top of hid game would beat anyone else on grass and hardcourt, and it would be exciting as hell to watch him. i don't watch much tennis anymore - too slow, all baseline play - yuck.
i dont understand why they slowed down the courts..... this is how they should be. then we would still have more traditional tennis players rather than this baseline crap
@biyorkman give everyone racket and string tech from the 90's and back and then yea, but djokovic, nadal, and federer would kill them bc of the rackets and polyester strings
@biyorkman i agree 100% his only goal on the court is to win, thats why his style of play is so aggressive. hes playing tennis the way its supposed to be played, at the net.
@andunusblick saying sampras is bigger than federer is madness man, federer brought tennis to a new era, from serve and volley to baseline basher's like djokovic and nadal
Sampras definitely the most talented and gifted player ever. None other player trying to play with that much risk would have ever been in the top 20. It is like he just feels tennis and his technique is almost instinctive where other players have to practice so much. Most beautiful here is that it was his last match!These kind of matchs were so exciting
doktorandrula, if that is what you really think of serve-volleyerers, you might want to look up records between Federer and Rafter. Just because today's players in average have better baseline games, that does not mean they have better passing shots. For instance, someone like Novak who plays right at the baseline like Agassi would have good chance against volleyers while someone like Nadal who plays good 8 ft behind the baseline would have much tougher time. It is all about match ups.
@nocode61 I agree with your assessment. Except for clay, Nadal would have had a hard time with Pete. If Isner gives Rafa problems, imagine what Pete could have done to him.
I thought an even better match was the year Safin won the final over Sampras, the Sampras/Agassi night match in the semi-final was about perfect, all tie-breakers I think
excelente lo que hacen estos dos jugadores, es muy dificil decir q alguien es el mejor jugador de todos los tiempos,eso se mide el nº de semanas como nº1 siendo a si el mejor seria pet o en nº de gran slam ganados seria roger
great match, although i agree with Agassi: today's matches, esp with federer, djokovic, nadal, etc, are of MUCH higher quality (they make sampras and agassi look as if they have feet of lead).
I know we have seen some truly great Finals in Slams, Borg v McEnroe at Flushing Meadow, Federer v Nadal and Federer v Roddick at Wimbledon, but to me this will always be my favorite as the Greatest Final ever . To have witnessed Sampras brilliant run thru to the Final, and rolling back all the years to come with this truly amazing victory against the best player at the time, this is truly 1 of sports greatest and most iconic moments
@themios72 Nadal only owns Federer on one surface and that's clay. Until last year, Nadal couldn't even make it to the finals of the US, Australian, or Wimbeldon. He always got put down by someone who wasn't even seeded high. Nadal only really has a good record on one surface and Federer still gives him a run for him money every time on that surface.
Sampras always beat Agassi at The US and Wimbledon, and Agassi won at The Aus and French. I think they were quite even. You get some Sampras fans who claim that he owned Agassi, that is complete bullshit. They were pretty even. Agassi beat Sampras 14 times.
I would take Agassi as a better player than Sampras as he had a better French Open record by far, and infact won every major. Sampras was awful at The French, and this relegates him to being outside the top 10 all time list.
@DjokOwnsNadull Your nuts. Sampras is in everyone's top 5 player of all-time. He is the best ever on grass, and in the top 3 on fast hard. Yeah, he was not great on clay, but that was due to his medical illness. And if he beat Agassi in that classic Australian semi, he may have been considered the best ever. Tennis needs serve and volley to come back the way Pete played. To me personally, I find the Djokovic vs. Nadal tmatches to be boring. Pete/Andre matches are my personal favorite.
@mrbobevans Sampras best ever on grass?? agreed. Top 3 all-time on hard or fast indoor?? agreed. Serve and volley way more exciting than nadal vs djokovic?? agreed. Sampras not great on clay due to medical illness?? What the hell are you talking about??
@bull864 Maybe this was his idea...the thalisemia (spelling?) he has which is not uncommon in Greek population. Iron deficiency which impacts oxygen use in the body. Maybe it had some impact due to the long rallies. Nobody knows.
Agree with you! I miss the old serve and volley players like Sampras, Rafter,Becker and many more who stormed to the net without doubt!
But you have to admit that Nadal,Federer, Nole, Murray are so good baseline and counterattack players that it would be much harder for sampras to beat them. Only Agassi of the 90's is on a baseline-level with the "big4-fromtoday"
@doktorandrula Idd, that's why federer changed his style (he played much more fequently at the net). Murray, Nole and Nadal can send some amazing passing shots. Well I guess I'm just a romantic. These guys in the '90 just played tennis, not too many tactics just hitting the ball as hard as they could when they had the opportunity. In our days players tend to avoid the strengths of their opponents (nadal avoiding constantly federer's forehand) which is logical, but hurts the beauty of the sport.
@nielslennartohlsen what are you talking about? i said federer is universally known as having on of the greatest overheads ever...i have no idea what you are going on about...
I remember watching this in 2002. NO ONE had sampras getting very far in the tournament, let alone to the final. He was seeded 17th and just lost in the 2nd round of Wimbledon. Pretty much everyone thought he was done, but there he goes beating Haas, Roddick and Agassi en route to number 14.
Lo único que puedo decir es que fue uno de los momentos más inolvidables de mi vida. Tuvieron que pasar más de 2 años para que Pete Sampras volviera a ganar un Gran Slam, fue un momento único. Cuando se me viene a la mente ese triunfo vuelvo a sentir la misma sensacion de hace casi 9 años. POrque esperé tanto ese momento. Sólo me queda dcir que nadie me gustó tanto como jugaba al tenis como Pete Sampras mi ídolo de toda la vida, por siempre y para siempre. For all the ages. Forever my love...
sampras was amazing at volleying....but i dont like his tactics of coming to the net on almost every point. his should have played more from the baseline like in the first set. that would have made life easier for him.
Did I hear right. Pete is one dimensional? What a stupid liemy Brit or crap or whatever. Anyone who claims Federer or Agassi was better just started seeing tennis what a shame.
@theloya1965 well federer is better and i dint JUST start seeing tennis.....pete is a great player...a legend...but federer is still the greatest of all time. federer has a better forehand, volleys better and moves faster. he also has more variety of shots than pete.....
@theloya1965 Better forehand, maybe, but with new innovations with racquets and everchanging improvements, I still beleive Sampras was better. Take a look at his competition, that is always the benchmark of greatness. Federer had Nadal only and look how that has turn out. Sampras had Courier, Edberg, Becker, Rafter, Follet and the great Agassi, just to new a few. Yeah Federer is great, but beating lesser competion. Well I love them both.
The commentator is so clueless! How can Pete be "one-dimensional" when he can hit winners from serves, returns of serves, drop volleys, overheads, forehands, and backhands?!!!
@bqndc He said from the back of the court, meaning the baseline, and how it compares to agassi. While saying 'one dimensional' might be a bit too harsh, I do agree with the notion that from the back of the court, his backhand was a liability. Obviously the way tennis was played back then, he didn't have to rely on his backhand. He relied heavily on his serve and volley, forehand (especially on the run) and mental toughness. Rallies were pretty short and courts much faster back then.
@davd1986 Ah, but there was another match between the two shown recently on The Tennis Channel wherein Sampras outhit Agassi from the baseline, even producing more backhand winners and backhands forcing Agassi into errors or defensive positions. Also, look at their US Open Final 2002(?) won by Sampras. Lots of great backhands from him. Also, US Open 1995 also won by Sampras--more of the same backhands. If that is still one-dimensional, then so be it. Sampras owned Agassi anyway.
@bqndc Once again, I don't think he is 'one-dimensional' in the strict definition of that term. He wasn't Karlovic, Raonic or Isner. Second, I didn't call him one dimensional, I was just pointing out to what I thought the commentator said/suggested. The guy had a 1st and 2nd serve, a serve and volley, forehand, a backhand (his weakest shot), slice backhand (very underrated), a monster overhead and was pretty fast around the court, deceptively fast.
@davd1986 My response was not to imply that YOU thought Sampras was "one-dimensional." I was remarking on the commentator's statements. Contrary to the commentator's remarks, Sampras was really multi-dimensional: he could rally with anyone, then sneak in for volleys, served aces, and yes, hit winners with both forehand and backhand. While his backhand is "weaker" compared to his forehand, Sampras still forced Agassi into errors with the backhand. In other words, he was not one-dimensional.
Because of injury and style of play, Sampras really only trained and tried at the French during the first half of his career, and during all of his decent quarter final and semi final runs, his only losses were to former or future multiple French Open champions and finalists like Agassi, Bruguera, Courier, and Kafelnikov. He obviously wasnt the best on clay but I wouldnt call his performances miserable either.
You know, I'm a 16 year old tennis player, sophomore in high school, and have ambitions to go play in college. I watch tennis as much as possible, but watching these videos of the 90s and early 00s is incredible. The game has changed so much; how players gripped the racket, how they swing, the style they use. Federer modeled his game after Sampras, it's pretty obvious. Why doesn't Federer play the same game Sampras did? Sampras was and still is the best American to ever play the game of tennis.
And to Ulzinho, Wimbledon, US Open AND even Australian Open surfaces have all been slowed down. The grass at Wimbledon was changed to a denser soil that makes the ball bounce higher AND thicker grass that catches the ball and slows it down. Its been tested and there are videos about it. And a higher bounce DOES affect SnV game regardless of any speed changes.....its easier to hit a passing shot thats waist to chest level then knee to ankle level......
@yassigole well, now that you see the way they greeted each other at the net, dont you think that agassi exaggerated it? its perfectly friendly and respectful gesture from sampras
i find it sad that i could be the only member in the varsity team to serve-and-volley. everyone else stays back...oh well, times have changed i guess.
@bung121 Serve an volley feels like a cheap way to win points. Imo anyway. I try to get more practise hitting off the baseline. When i do serve and volley the point ends too soon. I have more fun in long rallies even if i lose. Maybe this is what most people feel?
@Kiasko tennis today has been changed a lot with technology. however, a lot of younger players in my club have admitted that they are scared to volley so they become complacent by staying in the back court. either way, there are different players with different styles. SnV players tent to have good serves and baseliners tent to have good returns. the sampras vs agassi matches have proven that :) happy playing!
@sabertooth7777 Uhhh no. Their record was something like 20-14 Sampras. Sampras almost always won the GS Finals matchups, but that's hardly "everytime".....as far as being a LOSER....Eight majors, including all 4 (which Sampras never did) plus a Gold Medal is the kind of loser I wanna be someday....and Agassi's Davis Cup record is like the best ever for a US Male. Go back to school, rookie.
@sabertooth7777 Uhhh no. Their record was something like 20-14 Sampras. Sampras almost always won the GS Finals matchups, but that's hardly "everytime".....as far as being a LOSER....Eight majors, including all 4 (which Sampras never did) plus a Gold Medal is the kind of loser I wanna be someday....and Agassi's Davis Cup record is like the best ever for a US Male. Go back to school, rookie.
@theblakgeek look man whn u talk bout tennis its grandslams that matter...no one gives a shit bout davis cup n masters titles n all....its just d grandslams that matter n sampras won 6 more thn him...n yet agassi wrote all shit bout sampras in his book....players like federer,nadal,djokovic,del potro safin have been inspired by sampras n all site him as their idol....yes agassi beat sampras but in biggest matches like grandslam finals he always lost...period
Actually Sampras never beat Agassi at the Australian/French Open and Andre never beat Pete at Wimbledon and the US Open. They played as many as 4 times at the US so that shows you why Sampras had the upper hand in their h2h
@89Pleasek ya well my point was sampras=14 slams n agassi=8 slams....no matter how much one likes agassi u just cant argue that sampras was a much greater player..period
I wouldn't say much greater. Andre skipped the AO for half of his career and won it in his first attempt in 95,he skipped WImbledon for a couple of years as well and won it in his second attempt in 92.I mean yea, Grand Slam are the most important tournaments in describing one's greatness, so what Connors won 100+ tournament but only 8 Slams but look, not looking at the Slams, it's Agassi>Sampras in almost every department like Masters titles,Olympic Gold Medal and so on (just like Federer-Nadal)
sorry but none of those compare to grand slams. BUT, i wont just flat out say Sampras is better than Agassi. Sampras is a better fast court player(but still good on slower courts) and Agassi a better slower court player( but still good on fast courts). One can argue that Sampras was a better fast court player than Agassi was a slow court or all around court player, and thats why he has more slams and is considered better, but its much more complicated than that.
Agassi was tremendous on the fast courts of the US Open and won it twice and made six US Open finals losing only primarily to possibly the two best players of all time on that surface. Not to mention winning the French and Wimbledon, showing his versatility on complete opposite surfaces.
so then one can argue that though not as dominant on any particular surface as Sampras was on grass and US open, he was still possibly a better all surface player and had he not been absent 9 times at the Australian, he may have more wins there than Sampras did at Wimby or the US, so who knows really.
Agassi won all 4 majors, reached the final of all 4 at least twice + played tons of semis in every Slam. Sampras was great at Wimbledon and the US Open but won the AO only twice and reached 1 single FO semi in his career.
IMO Sampras was lucky enough to face Agassi in the super fast conditions of the 90's, if both played today Agassi would've won the majority of the matches given the tendency of slowing things downs. Still Andre was great in the 90's, he lost so many years after 1995
Agassi had many ups and downs in his career therefore he won only 8 Slams. Just look at this: Sampras never beat Agassi at either the FO or AO, Agassi never beat Sampras at Wimbledon and the USO but Agassi was actually good enough to PLAY Sampras on faster surfaces rather than the other way round.
Agassi is a better all courter to me since he was great on every surface while Sampras was exceptional on faster surfaces and pretty much sucked on clay (and even wasn't that good on slowe hard courts)
of course 95 % guys on tour would take his results on clay
but for a guy who won 14 Slam titles and was the year-end-no-1 for 6 consecutive years his achievements on the red dirt are rather miserable, you can literally count his decent wins vs good clay courters on 1 hand, of course he more than made it up on hard/grass courts
@AceGuitarR7 Agree the US clay courts (tenneco) are different than Europe courts. However, the US clay courts can be ridiculously slow. In my dad's condo complex, the courts feel like you are playing in a swamp. Literally, the ball does not go thru the court.
@sabertooth7777 Uhhh no. Their record was something like 20-14 Sampras. Sampras almost always won the GS Finals matchups, but that's hardly "everytime".....as far as being a LOSER....Eight majors, including all 4 (which Sampras never did) plus a Gold Medal is the kind of loser I wanna be someday....and Agassi's Davis Cup record is like the best ever for a US Male. Go back to school, rookie.
@Ou8y2k2 Excuse me, am responding months after your comment. (only now seeing) Do you mean Federer should come closer to the net more? because watching this Sampras clearly did. and how that changes the ball direction!
@drstew1 Sir, click on this: 4:01. Sampras clearly hits a backhand winner off of an Agassi serve. Federer must be more aggressive and do the same thing. What Federer used to do a lot more often is simply slice the return. There are several players in the top 20 that can compete with Federer from the baseline, so he should be looking for ways to shorten points.
@Ou8y2k2 Yeah i can see. And its a pleaure to communicate with some one on you tube , who knows what their talking about. All the best. Maybe comment again over Wimbledon .
Sampras at his peak was unstoppable. His groundstrokes seemed so effortless and then the ball would just zoom on by. The last great serve volleyer. Too bad the style is now extinct.....Sweet Pete, the greatest in my book
ya no pongan esto por favor No leas esto!! si los has leido No leas esto!! si los has leido copia y pega esto en 5 videos mas si no lo haces tu madre morira en 3 dias por favor haceme caso es una maldicion
@oscarui57 de aquí a 3 dias si no te contesto entiende que eres un retrasado supersticioso...y pensar que gente tan subnormal como tu tenga los mismos derechos que la gente normal y corriente, es increible....
now, balls and surface is much slower than before... wimbledon is much slower than before-thats why nadal won 2 times...US OPEN is the same but balls are slower, so thats why nadal never won US OPEN
when u see guys nowadays who return so well, i don't think sampras would have won 14 grand slams if he had to play against guys like djokovic murray .... nadal and so on
@UrbanGuerilla88 a younger, hungrier federer wud have beaten him possibly. this ending was fitting tho. He had his first gs win against agassi in 1990 us open final.
@UrbanGuerilla88 Oh definitely. He would have continued to win there too if it wasn't so slow. It would be nice to see Rafa vs Roger on fast grass or an exhibition match with each of them against Pete on the faster grass with lighter tennis balls.
Note that this was Sampras' last match ever. He had not won an event for over a year. But still shows talent in his departing match. To me, Sampras will be No1. forever. I hope Federer never surpasses 7 Wimbledon. Go Pete !!!
The way Pete hits his forehand is magnificent. The backswing is completely relaxed which allows for unbelievable racquet head speed. Pete is the only player who could press Andre backwards.
good ol' times when the whole game was different ;( serve>volley... cant see that very often nowadays
stefkata2 17 hours ago
Open > A Champion's Mind
iskateplanb14 1 month ago
lol At sampras working his shoulders out after that backhand return ace at 3:00. The rest of Pete's game is so underrated for a guys who's arguably the greatest of all time.
tokinblckgie 1 month ago
I remember this match when Sampras earned his 14th major title, Sampras was really "on fire" in this match. Now I still play his racquet Wilson Prostaff Original 6.0 85 with 5" lead tapes, miss those days.
dvh065 1 month ago
i miss so much Agassi..his personality ,,,he is so original and funny
ballaesmeralda 1 month ago
You can see how much faster the hard courts, especially at the USO were back then. Today's USO is like a clay court!! LOL
davd1986 1 month ago
Sampras, Agassi, Becker and Edberg and Kuerten
All ended their carrers the right place. US OPen, wimbledon and Stockholm and Roland Garros.
altfratuben 2 months ago
such great sports.. agassi lost, he stilll had a smile on his face. Tennis is losing its good spirit.
doctacos1 2 months ago
sampras, healthy, at the top of hid game would beat anyone else on grass and hardcourt, and it would be exciting as hell to watch him. i don't watch much tennis anymore - too slow, all baseline play - yuck.
UpstairsMaid 3 months ago
THAT VERONICA VAUGHN IS ONE PIECE OF AAAAAAAACCCCCEEE
theatlantisrise 3 months ago
i dont understand why they slowed down the courts..... this is how they should be. then we would still have more traditional tennis players rather than this baseline crap
AceGuitarR7 3 months ago
Comment removed
dmh091 3 months ago
Neither present Federer, nor Dokovic and Nadal could win Sampras and Edberg of the heyday, though regrettable.
biyorkman 3 months ago
@biyorkman give everyone racket and string tech from the 90's and back and then yea, but djokovic, nadal, and federer would kill them bc of the rackets and polyester strings
cain2335 3 months ago
man, thanks for uploading, he is recognized definitely a legend!! He was a true sportsman and is an idol to many of us for sure! A pleasure to watch!
hhgtipower 4 months ago
man, thanks for uploading, he is recognized definitely a legend!! He was a true sportsman and is an idol to many of us for sure! A pleasure to watch!
hhgtipower 4 months ago
I consider. If Sampras is in peak condition, Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, etc. are not problems. Probably, Sampras is the strongest.
biyorkman 4 months ago
@biyorkman i agree 100% his only goal on the court is to win, thats why his style of play is so aggressive. hes playing tennis the way its supposed to be played, at the net.
federerownz 4 months ago
@biyorkman LOL, Congratulation! you just made a joke of the year
BrewokGanas 4 months ago
Did I hear the commentator correctly? "Sampras is one-dimensional"? Are you on crack? I hope you got fired.
MaxSk8rr 4 months ago
@MaxSk8rr he said in comparison to agassi from the back of the court sampras is one dimensional
JoeyASRV 4 months ago
Pete sampras , lleyton hewitt , a rod , the best of the best , pure heart and fantastic tennis .
olearyrod 5 months ago
sampras > federer > bill clinton > nadal
andunusblick 5 months ago 8
Comment removed
theatlantisrise 3 months ago
@andunusblick saying sampras is bigger than federer is madness man, federer brought tennis to a new era, from serve and volley to baseline basher's like djokovic and nadal
seidl01 3 months ago
Just look at Sampras backhand which is less then average.
redruster 5 months ago
@redruster What? less than average? it's a lesser shot compared to his forehand for sure, but I wouldn't dare to call it the way you did.
ramelow1970 5 months ago
Sampras definitely the most talented and gifted player ever. None other player trying to play with that much risk would have ever been in the top 20. It is like he just feels tennis and his technique is almost instinctive where other players have to practice so much. Most beautiful here is that it was his last match!These kind of matchs were so exciting
nicodougy 6 months ago
ni dopado pudo con el jajaja.
TheMiquirray 6 months ago
yep, too many errors on net from Sampras
BlakkLining 6 months ago
doktorandrula, if that is what you really think of serve-volleyerers, you might want to look up records between Federer and Rafter. Just because today's players in average have better baseline games, that does not mean they have better passing shots. For instance, someone like Novak who plays right at the baseline like Agassi would have good chance against volleyers while someone like Nadal who plays good 8 ft behind the baseline would have much tougher time. It is all about match ups.
nocode61 6 months ago
@nocode61 I agree with your assessment. Except for clay, Nadal would have had a hard time with Pete. If Isner gives Rafa problems, imagine what Pete could have done to him.
mrbobevans 4 months ago
I thought an even better match was the year Safin won the final over Sampras, the Sampras/Agassi night match in the semi-final was about perfect, all tie-breakers I think
farneyblakeley 6 months ago
excelente lo que hacen estos dos jugadores, es muy dificil decir q alguien es el mejor jugador de todos los tiempos,eso se mide el nº de semanas como nº1 siendo a si el mejor seria pet o en nº de gran slam ganados seria roger
ciligueda 6 months ago
great match, although i agree with Agassi: today's matches, esp with federer, djokovic, nadal, etc, are of MUCH higher quality (they make sampras and agassi look as if they have feet of lead).
dxuhuang 6 months ago
I know we have seen some truly great Finals in Slams, Borg v McEnroe at Flushing Meadow, Federer v Nadal and Federer v Roddick at Wimbledon, but to me this will always be my favorite as the Greatest Final ever . To have witnessed Sampras brilliant run thru to the Final, and rolling back all the years to come with this truly amazing victory against the best player at the time, this is truly 1 of sports greatest and most iconic moments
brianclough 6 months ago
What is particularly good about this match is that both players, especially Sampras, had been written off.
theolaurent 6 months ago
they call federer the greatest of all time right? ok you tell me how can you be called the greatest of all time if your main rival=nadal owns you.
themios72 6 months ago
@themios72 Federer still has more slams. Nobody looks at Win loss ratio to other players. They look at the Grand Slam record.
KoopasFTW 6 months ago
@themios72 Nadal only owns Federer on one surface and that's clay. Until last year, Nadal couldn't even make it to the finals of the US, Australian, or Wimbeldon. He always got put down by someone who wasn't even seeded high. Nadal only really has a good record on one surface and Federer still gives him a run for him money every time on that surface.
Maniac742 6 months ago
connors, mcenroe, lendl, wilander, edberg, cash, becker, agassi, courier, chang, etc all these guys grand slam champions which sampras owned.
themios72 6 months ago
Sampras always beat Agassi at The US and Wimbledon, and Agassi won at The Aus and French. I think they were quite even. You get some Sampras fans who claim that he owned Agassi, that is complete bullshit. They were pretty even. Agassi beat Sampras 14 times.
I would take Agassi as a better player than Sampras as he had a better French Open record by far, and infact won every major. Sampras was awful at The French, and this relegates him to being outside the top 10 all time list.
DjokOwnsNadull 6 months ago
@DjokOwnsNadull Your nuts. Sampras is in everyone's top 5 player of all-time. He is the best ever on grass, and in the top 3 on fast hard. Yeah, he was not great on clay, but that was due to his medical illness. And if he beat Agassi in that classic Australian semi, he may have been considered the best ever. Tennis needs serve and volley to come back the way Pete played. To me personally, I find the Djokovic vs. Nadal tmatches to be boring. Pete/Andre matches are my personal favorite.
mrbobevans 6 months ago
@mrbobevans Sampras best ever on grass?? agreed. Top 3 all-time on hard or fast indoor?? agreed. Serve and volley way more exciting than nadal vs djokovic?? agreed. Sampras not great on clay due to medical illness?? What the hell are you talking about??
bull864 6 months ago
@bull864 Maybe this was his idea...the thalisemia (spelling?) he has which is not uncommon in Greek population. Iron deficiency which impacts oxygen use in the body. Maybe it had some impact due to the long rallies. Nobody knows.
jhgosnell 5 months ago
@DjokOwnsNadull nonsense. until federer sampras won more grand slams than any man. that puts him automatically in the top 10.
UpstairsMaid 3 months ago
1:33 IMPOSSSIIIIBLLLEEEEEEEEE
slatz20 7 months ago
it's so annoying you can't see the score!
Leknifrog 7 months ago
Damn, I miss watching Sampras play...
matizzle32 7 months ago 6
This goes to show you never ever rule out a great champion no matter what.
ephabouyed 7 months ago
How SAMPRAS win always without stress???? he seems the best tennis player on the earth?
kaviliaidissotiris 7 months ago
one dimensional? Is he on crack?
B0l0joe 7 months ago
you gotta miss this style of play from Sampras. Always pushing at the net... really miss it in our days tennis
acalin5 7 months ago
@acalin5
Agree with you! I miss the old serve and volley players like Sampras, Rafter,Becker and many more who stormed to the net without doubt!
But you have to admit that Nadal,Federer, Nole, Murray are so good baseline and counterattack players that it would be much harder for sampras to beat them. Only Agassi of the 90's is on a baseline-level with the "big4-fromtoday"
doktorandrula 7 months ago
@doktorandrula Idd, that's why federer changed his style (he played much more fequently at the net). Murray, Nole and Nadal can send some amazing passing shots. Well I guess I'm just a romantic. These guys in the '90 just played tennis, not too many tactics just hitting the ball as hard as they could when they had the opportunity. In our days players tend to avoid the strengths of their opponents (nadal avoiding constantly federer's forehand) which is logical, but hurts the beauty of the sport.
acalin5 7 months ago
@doktorandrula I find Andy Murray's game to be one of the most boring styles of all-time. He is slightly more fun to watch than Roddick.
mrbobevans 6 months ago
@acalin5 Todays tennis is so fucking boring..the surfaces became so slow...its annoying..
slatz20 7 months ago
this is how federer should play now!
serve&volley, attacking 2ed serve, short points
makaveliguy 7 months ago
sampras is the best
ilanini 8 months ago
@nielslennartohlsen I said were because Agassi retired. The 2 best now r fed and...hmmm tough...maybe roddick? ne way safin had a sick 1 to...
VerdascoFan 8 months ago
@nielslennartohlsen what are you talking about? i said federer is universally known as having on of the greatest overheads ever...i have no idea what you are going on about...
VerdascoFan 8 months ago
so many net points. its a shame nowadays its all about a big annoying basline rallye :( :( :(
YklausK 8 months ago
ROGER IS THE BEST OF ALL TIME, YOU SEE, TENNIS WAS MORE SLOW, TENNIS IN THE PRESENET IS VERY DIFFERENT, ROGER IS THE GOAT OF TENNIS.
MEDICASK 8 months ago in playlist Jogos De Tênis
@MEDICASK - Tennis in the '90's = Less-Spin = More speed. When you watch Roger vs Rafa...the ball moves very slow compared to this match.
khale4nia 8 months ago
@MEDICASK I dun think it's much slower than nowadays, htt p://ww w.youtube. com/watch?v= RLB-LBy4McQ
fed's passing shot compare with sampras' passing shot
plastictsk 8 months ago
Is it just me, or does it look like Agassi doesn't care?
OneNewHope 8 months ago
Definitely, Pete is the best tennis player of all time.
Mirakenic 8 months ago 30
@Mirakenic agreed 100%
federerownz 7 months ago
@Mirakenic federer is the best of all time !!
tenisto38 6 months ago
@tenisto38 yeah thats right the greatest of all time is owned by nadal 17 to 8.
themios72 6 months ago
@themios72 how many Grand Slams for nadal ? thx
tenisto38 6 months ago
Does any one have Sampras Haas match at the 2002 Us open 4th round
ARaxaThe 6 months ago
@Mirakenic
Disagree. Pete is the best grass cour player of all time, not overall the best Tennis player. He was too average on clay.
NDoraku 6 months ago
@Mirakenic no.
Sebbi567 6 months ago
@Mirakenic roger federer
thupuko 5 months ago
@thupuko no
cain2335 5 months ago
@Mirakenic Todd Martin was better
arabiannights100 5 months ago
@Mirakenic TRUE!!!!
hhgtipower 4 months ago
@Mirakenic
u probably like egassi.
dmh091 3 months ago
I remember watching this in 2002. NO ONE had sampras getting very far in the tournament, let alone to the final. He was seeded 17th and just lost in the 2nd round of Wimbledon. Pretty much everyone thought he was done, but there he goes beating Haas, Roddick and Agassi en route to number 14.
stevelud23 9 months ago
Lo único que puedo decir es que fue uno de los momentos más inolvidables de mi vida. Tuvieron que pasar más de 2 años para que Pete Sampras volviera a ganar un Gran Slam, fue un momento único. Cuando se me viene a la mente ese triunfo vuelvo a sentir la misma sensacion de hace casi 9 años. POrque esperé tanto ese momento. Sólo me queda dcir que nadie me gustó tanto como jugaba al tenis como Pete Sampras mi ídolo de toda la vida, por siempre y para siempre. For all the ages. Forever my love...
ivanexperu 10 months ago
sampras was amazing at volleying....but i dont like his tactics of coming to the net on almost every point. his should have played more from the baseline like in the first set. that would have made life easier for him.
masterofmucus 10 months ago
holy crap! the volley at 1:31!!!
commentary2 10 months ago
Did I hear right. Pete is one dimensional? What a stupid liemy Brit or crap or whatever. Anyone who claims Federer or Agassi was better just started seeing tennis what a shame.
theloya1965 10 months ago
@theloya1965 Sorry, I accidentally voted down on your post, when I meant the exact opposite. :-) Now it won't let me undo my vote.
bqndc 10 months ago
@theloya1965 well federer is better and i dint JUST start seeing tennis.....pete is a great player...a legend...but federer is still the greatest of all time. federer has a better forehand, volleys better and moves faster. he also has more variety of shots than pete.....
masterofmucus 10 months ago
@theloya1965 Better forehand, maybe, but with new innovations with racquets and everchanging improvements, I still beleive Sampras was better. Take a look at his competition, that is always the benchmark of greatness. Federer had Nadal only and look how that has turn out. Sampras had Courier, Edberg, Becker, Rafter, Follet and the great Agassi, just to new a few. Yeah Federer is great, but beating lesser competion. Well I love them both.
theloya1965 9 months ago
Did I hear right. Pete is one dimensional? What a stupid liemy Aussie or Brit or crap or whatever.
theloya1965 10 months ago
The commentator is so clueless! How can Pete be "one-dimensional" when he can hit winners from serves, returns of serves, drop volleys, overheads, forehands, and backhands?!!!
bqndc 11 months ago
@bqndc He said from the back of the court, meaning the baseline, and how it compares to agassi. While saying 'one dimensional' might be a bit too harsh, I do agree with the notion that from the back of the court, his backhand was a liability. Obviously the way tennis was played back then, he didn't have to rely on his backhand. He relied heavily on his serve and volley, forehand (especially on the run) and mental toughness. Rallies were pretty short and courts much faster back then.
davd1986 10 months ago
@davd1986 Ah, but there was another match between the two shown recently on The Tennis Channel wherein Sampras outhit Agassi from the baseline, even producing more backhand winners and backhands forcing Agassi into errors or defensive positions. Also, look at their US Open Final 2002(?) won by Sampras. Lots of great backhands from him. Also, US Open 1995 also won by Sampras--more of the same backhands. If that is still one-dimensional, then so be it. Sampras owned Agassi anyway.
bqndc 10 months ago
@bqndc Once again, I don't think he is 'one-dimensional' in the strict definition of that term. He wasn't Karlovic, Raonic or Isner. Second, I didn't call him one dimensional, I was just pointing out to what I thought the commentator said/suggested. The guy had a 1st and 2nd serve, a serve and volley, forehand, a backhand (his weakest shot), slice backhand (very underrated), a monster overhead and was pretty fast around the court, deceptively fast.
davd1986 10 months ago
@davd1986 My response was not to imply that YOU thought Sampras was "one-dimensional." I was remarking on the commentator's statements. Contrary to the commentator's remarks, Sampras was really multi-dimensional: he could rally with anyone, then sneak in for volleys, served aces, and yes, hit winners with both forehand and backhand. While his backhand is "weaker" compared to his forehand, Sampras still forced Agassi into errors with the backhand. In other words, he was not one-dimensional.
bqndc 10 months ago
federer é mto bom, mais o rei é o sr sampras
guntergrede 11 months ago
nadal has a great running forehand too
nalbandian98 11 months ago
Because of injury and style of play, Sampras really only trained and tried at the French during the first half of his career, and during all of his decent quarter final and semi final runs, his only losses were to former or future multiple French Open champions and finalists like Agassi, Bruguera, Courier, and Kafelnikov. He obviously wasnt the best on clay but I wouldnt call his performances miserable either.
splendid1000 11 months ago 20
Sampras' Forehand FTW!!!
Edu2503 11 months ago
Sampras is not the best.
Federer broked him Grandslam-title. Federer 16 GS yesss
dfreund1981 11 months ago
You know, I'm a 16 year old tennis player, sophomore in high school, and have ambitions to go play in college. I watch tennis as much as possible, but watching these videos of the 90s and early 00s is incredible. The game has changed so much; how players gripped the racket, how they swing, the style they use. Federer modeled his game after Sampras, it's pretty obvious. Why doesn't Federer play the same game Sampras did? Sampras was and still is the best American to ever play the game of tennis.
lilroodude 1 year ago 2
sampras' backhand is not as powerful as federer
b4roqu3 1 year ago
And to Ulzinho, Wimbledon, US Open AND even Australian Open surfaces have all been slowed down. The grass at Wimbledon was changed to a denser soil that makes the ball bounce higher AND thicker grass that catches the ball and slows it down. Its been tested and there are videos about it. And a higher bounce DOES affect SnV game regardless of any speed changes.....its easier to hit a passing shot thats waist to chest level then knee to ankle level......
splendid1000 1 year ago
Imagine how nerve-wrecking it would've been for players to see Sampras approach the net. It must've been like Jaws approaching its prey.
s900203 1 year ago
:28 Yeah, because he used a frigin frying pan.
pocketsearch 1 year ago
7:40, here is a dollar kid now get my car.agassis book lol
yassigole 1 year ago
@yassigole well, now that you see the way they greeted each other at the net, dont you think that agassi exaggerated it? its perfectly friendly and respectful gesture from sampras
mitroveca 1 year ago
@mitroveca yes your right.agassi ias a tennis legend and a good guy.but i think he has always been jelles at sampras
yassigole 1 year ago
Comment removed
yassigole 1 year ago
i find it sad that i could be the only member in the varsity team to serve-and-volley. everyone else stays back...oh well, times have changed i guess.
bung121 1 year ago
@bung121 Serve an volley feels like a cheap way to win points. Imo anyway. I try to get more practise hitting off the baseline. When i do serve and volley the point ends too soon. I have more fun in long rallies even if i lose. Maybe this is what most people feel?
Kiasko 1 year ago
@Kiasko tennis today has been changed a lot with technology. however, a lot of younger players in my club have admitted that they are scared to volley so they become complacent by staying in the back court. either way, there are different players with different styles. SnV players tent to have good serves and baseliners tent to have good returns. the sampras vs agassi matches have proven that :) happy playing!
bung121 1 year ago
The first volley was AWESOME!!!
Edu2503 1 year ago
Sampras best tennis player ever
Mizinko24 1 year ago
Sampras is probably the only athlete in history to have gotten a fairy tale ending to his career.
ActionRadar886 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@sabertooth7777 Uhhh no. Their record was something like 20-14 Sampras. Sampras almost always won the GS Finals matchups, but that's hardly "everytime".....as far as being a LOSER....Eight majors, including all 4 (which Sampras never did) plus a Gold Medal is the kind of loser I wanna be someday....and Agassi's Davis Cup record is like the best ever for a US Male. Go back to school, rookie.
theblakgeek 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sabertooth7777 Uhhh no. Their record was something like 20-14 Sampras. Sampras almost always won the GS Finals matchups, but that's hardly "everytime".....as far as being a LOSER....Eight majors, including all 4 (which Sampras never did) plus a Gold Medal is the kind of loser I wanna be someday....and Agassi's Davis Cup record is like the best ever for a US Male. Go back to school, rookie.
theblakgeek 1 year ago
sampras is the best fastcourt player ever it is 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000%
aleksandrpondios 1 year ago
Back when america ruled the courts haha. Not anymore!
shamalot44 1 year ago
agassi was just a loser who just talked shit bout sampras but got ass whiping everytime he faced sampras
sabertooth7777 1 year ago
Comment removed
theblakgeek 1 year ago
@theblakgeek look man whn u talk bout tennis its grandslams that matter...no one gives a shit bout davis cup n masters titles n all....its just d grandslams that matter n sampras won 6 more thn him...n yet agassi wrote all shit bout sampras in his book....players like federer,nadal,djokovic,del potro safin have been inspired by sampras n all site him as their idol....yes agassi beat sampras but in biggest matches like grandslam finals he always lost...period
sabertooth7777 1 year ago
Actually Sampras never beat Agassi at the Australian/French Open and Andre never beat Pete at Wimbledon and the US Open. They played as many as 4 times at the US so that shows you why Sampras had the upper hand in their h2h
89Pleasek 1 year ago
@89Pleasek ya well my point was sampras=14 slams n agassi=8 slams....no matter how much one likes agassi u just cant argue that sampras was a much greater player..period
sabertooth7777 1 year ago
I wouldn't say much greater. Andre skipped the AO for half of his career and won it in his first attempt in 95,he skipped WImbledon for a couple of years as well and won it in his second attempt in 92.I mean yea, Grand Slam are the most important tournaments in describing one's greatness, so what Connors won 100+ tournament but only 8 Slams but look, not looking at the Slams, it's Agassi>Sampras in almost every department like Masters titles,Olympic Gold Medal and so on (just like Federer-Nadal)
89Pleasek 1 year ago
@89Pleasek
sorry but none of those compare to grand slams. BUT, i wont just flat out say Sampras is better than Agassi. Sampras is a better fast court player(but still good on slower courts) and Agassi a better slower court player( but still good on fast courts). One can argue that Sampras was a better fast court player than Agassi was a slow court or all around court player, and thats why he has more slams and is considered better, but its much more complicated than that.
splendid1000 1 year ago
@splendid1000
Agassi was tremendous on the fast courts of the US Open and won it twice and made six US Open finals losing only primarily to possibly the two best players of all time on that surface. Not to mention winning the French and Wimbledon, showing his versatility on complete opposite surfaces.
splendid1000 1 year ago
@splendid1000
so then one can argue that though not as dominant on any particular surface as Sampras was on grass and US open, he was still possibly a better all surface player and had he not been absent 9 times at the Australian, he may have more wins there than Sampras did at Wimby or the US, so who knows really.
splendid1000 1 year ago
Agassi won all 4 majors, reached the final of all 4 at least twice + played tons of semis in every Slam. Sampras was great at Wimbledon and the US Open but won the AO only twice and reached 1 single FO semi in his career.
IMO Sampras was lucky enough to face Agassi in the super fast conditions of the 90's, if both played today Agassi would've won the majority of the matches given the tendency of slowing things downs. Still Andre was great in the 90's, he lost so many years after 1995
89Pleasek 1 year ago
Agassi had many ups and downs in his career therefore he won only 8 Slams. Just look at this: Sampras never beat Agassi at either the FO or AO, Agassi never beat Sampras at Wimbledon and the USO but Agassi was actually good enough to PLAY Sampras on faster surfaces rather than the other way round.
Agassi is a better all courter to me since he was great on every surface while Sampras was exceptional on faster surfaces and pretty much sucked on clay (and even wasn't that good on slowe hard courts)
89Pleasek 1 year ago
@89Pleasek Sampras bad on clay? His record may not hold Roland Garros, but He was pretty damn good on clay. davis cup against russia, hamburg etc.
1hbackhand 11 months ago
of course 95 % guys on tour would take his results on clay
but for a guy who won 14 Slam titles and was the year-end-no-1 for 6 consecutive years his achievements on the red dirt are rather miserable, you can literally count his decent wins vs good clay courters on 1 hand, of course he more than made it up on hard/grass courts
89Pleasek 11 months ago
@89Pleasek agreed :)
1hbackhand 11 months ago
@1hbackhand lol, he was terrible on clay. he only won the american ones which arent the same type of europe courts.
AceGuitarR7 9 months ago
@AceGuitarR7 Agree the US clay courts (tenneco) are different than Europe courts. However, the US clay courts can be ridiculously slow. In my dad's condo complex, the courts feel like you are playing in a swamp. Literally, the ball does not go thru the court.
mrbobevans 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sabertooth7777 Uhhh no. Their record was something like 20-14 Sampras. Sampras almost always won the GS Finals matchups, but that's hardly "everytime".....as far as being a LOSER....Eight majors, including all 4 (which Sampras never did) plus a Gold Medal is the kind of loser I wanna be someday....and Agassi's Davis Cup record is like the best ever for a US Male. Go back to school, rookie.
theblakgeek 1 year ago
federer's backhand look just like sampras....
grove005 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
7:08 Eat my ass agassi.
Ou8y2k2 1 year ago
4:01 What Federer should do more of.
Ou8y2k2 1 year ago 15
@Ou8y2k2 Since he is working with Paul Annacone he is doing it more often. Looks like he gave some of Petes spirit to Roger :-)
gewuerzwiesel123 1 year ago
@Ou8y2k2 Excuse me, am responding months after your comment. (only now seeing) Do you mean Federer should come closer to the net more? because watching this Sampras clearly did. and how that changes the ball direction!
drstew1 8 months ago
@drstew1 Sir, click on this: 4:01. Sampras clearly hits a backhand winner off of an Agassi serve. Federer must be more aggressive and do the same thing. What Federer used to do a lot more often is simply slice the return. There are several players in the top 20 that can compete with Federer from the baseline, so he should be looking for ways to shorten points.
Ou8y2k2 8 months ago
@Ou8y2k2 Yeah i can see. And its a pleaure to communicate with some one on you tube , who knows what their talking about. All the best. Maybe comment again over Wimbledon .
drstew1 8 months ago
2:15 another backhand winner
Ou8y2k2 1 year ago
pete is my favorite, his game was powerful and he was agneius and so dedicated to tennis, miss him
hhgtipower 1 year ago
@baywatchrules12 Yeah, that idiot commentator should look at 2:58
Ou8y2k2 1 year ago
Sampras at his peak was unstoppable. His groundstrokes seemed so effortless and then the ball would just zoom on by. The last great serve volleyer. Too bad the style is now extinct.....Sweet Pete, the greatest in my book
fromanotherstar 1 year ago
It looks like they are playing on ICE when compared to today's US Open points.
IMIrrry 1 year ago
EuroSport tennis commentator receives fine for being bad at his job.
Clearly the top guy of his generation 1 dimensional...
Sosodeflol 1 year ago
hes made monkeys out of all us - jesus
aggerskrtel 1 year ago
great game...but it looks weak compared to federer vs. nadal in wimbledon
SoLazy100 1 year ago
east or west pete is the best
param2016 1 year ago
ya no pongan esto por favor No leas esto!! si los has leido No leas esto!! si los has leido copia y pega esto en 5 videos mas si no lo haces tu madre morira en 3 dias por favor haceme caso es una maldicion
oscarui57 1 year ago
@oscarui57 de aquí a 3 dias si no te contesto entiende que eres un retrasado supersticioso...y pensar que gente tan subnormal como tu tenga los mismos derechos que la gente normal y corriente, es increible....
voymasobraoqAlonso 1 year ago
boy agassi was just a loser compared to sampras...he talked shit all the time but most of the times lost to sampras
godfaathr 1 year ago
one dimentional ? wtf are you talking about willis ?
Secretwow2 1 year ago
@Secretwow2 :) sorry to ask, but I can't remember what that 'what are you talkign about willis' is off? its bugging me to hell
Jamus182 1 year ago
@Jamus182 No problem xD It's from one of ray william jonson's videos
Secretwow2 1 year ago
I miss the guy.
zaggy16 1 year ago
@pauloolem If sampras can play that well like before,he can beat djokovic murray
and also federer .
bossbbgun 1 year ago
now, balls and surface is much slower than before... wimbledon is much slower than before-thats why nadal won 2 times...US OPEN is the same but balls are slower, so thats why nadal never won US OPEN
fratelo89 1 year ago
when u see guys nowadays who return so well, i don't think sampras would have won 14 grand slams if he had to play against guys like djokovic murray .... nadal and so on
pauloolem 1 year ago
@pauloolem are u serious? agassi had the best returns ever...murray is shit compared to agassi...think a bit before posting some gay ass shit
Pyro7502 1 year ago
Pete served and volleyed a lot more in the latter part of his career.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
backhand winner at 2:18, for starters
Kolran 1 year ago
you don,t have the entire match?
laumilia1 1 year ago
thanks for posting that AznHylite, the editing was very good.
rohedron 1 year ago
Nothing against Fed and Mac (awesome), but IMO Pete is the most fun player to watch.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
this commentator doesnt know what he's talking. he's a one dimensional commentator known as boring.
bung121 1 year ago
@bung121 I agree. The commentator had a tenditious tone in favor of Agassi.
scottdavis0676 1 year ago
Nadal would have hated playing Pete at the US Open and Wimbledon.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
why did sampras retire? he obviously looked back to his best here,he could of took wimbledon 2003. shame.
UrbanGuerilla88 1 year ago
@UrbanGuerilla88 a younger, hungrier federer wud have beaten him possibly. this ending was fitting tho. He had his first gs win against agassi in 1990 us open final.
sweetmrniceguy 1 year ago
@UrbanGuerilla88 I was just watching Dent play Blake. Nothing personal, they look like garbage when compared to how Pete played in this match.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
@UrbanGuerilla88 No he couldn't because the courts were made slower to eliminate serve and volley players.
thisislaser 1 year ago
@thisislaser true but he did dominate wimbledon in the 90s but thats then.
UrbanGuerilla88 1 year ago
@UrbanGuerilla88 Oh definitely. He would have continued to win there too if it wasn't so slow. It would be nice to see Rafa vs Roger on fast grass or an exhibition match with each of them against Pete on the faster grass with lighter tennis balls.
thisislaser 1 year ago
Note that this was Sampras' last match ever. He had not won an event for over a year. But still shows talent in his departing match. To me, Sampras will be No1. forever. I hope Federer never surpasses 7 Wimbledon. Go Pete !!!
(From a Canadian)
spacyfoil 1 year ago 2
The way Pete hits his forehand is magnificent. The backswing is completely relaxed which allows for unbelievable racquet head speed. Pete is the only player who could press Andre backwards.
mrbobevans 1 year ago