Sampras Vs Agassi Australia Open 1995

[mrbobevans]

Pete lost the match partly because he was wearing a cap. Pete never wore a cap. LOL, Honestly, Andre was amazing at the Aussie Open - maybe the greatest Aussie Open champ ever. Who knows how many more he could have won if he had played more.

[splendid1000]

There are different degrees of mono lol. If Fed had a case of mono like Ancic had he'd have never played at all and/or wouldnt have won a single point. He'd be in the hospital lol.

[splendid1000]

What a stupid comparison lol. Did Fed have mono every day of his career? Mono sux but it affects you for a couple months and thats it. Ive had it.

[demondayzzz]

@splendid1000 ask ancic about mono

[splendid1000]

Honestly, I dont even think mono affected him at all. Not even 'remotely'. The fact that he didnt even know he had it until a few weeks later tells me it was a mild case. It might have affected him at the AO, thats it. He had a great year lol. He made three finals and a semi and won the US Open lol. About the only thing he didnt do that he normally did was win Wimbledon. But he made the final lol.

[splendid1000]

Just because he was able to win with his condition doesnt mean his condition didnt affect him LOL. Are you seriously that fucking stupid? Even though I could probably beat you easily with my eyes closed, it would be even easier to smash you with my eyes open lol. Get it ?

[splendid1000]

Im replying to all the fucking retards that talk shit about Sampras because they obviously dont know shit about tennis. Bunch of fucken bandwagon nooblets that I could triple bagel with my eyes closed.

[AZIANxPRIDE1]

I used to be one of those youtube users described in jmminu comments, but when I saw sampras and many older tennis matches my view on federer and today's matches changed. Compared to the older tennis, the one today is so boring to watch.

[ruaridh2k7]

@jmminu To true.

But don't you see those type of people aren't TRUE tennis fans.

There's been so many great players that's it's impossible to determine who's the greatest of all time.

Tennis has evolved so much.

[irfanulhaq1]

agassi is a beautiful man

[Meshalhasseen]

Funniest comment of them all: "Sampras did not have as much heart as Federer or Agassi". I don't know where to run and hide.

[BrotherTree1]

agassi = a king of aussie open.

[BrotherTree1]

debut in australian open in 1995 and wins it against his very own nemesis on court - thats a feat in itself. there was no debutant GS winner until rafa did it in 2005 FO. Good stuff.

[koji128]

Regarding Aggasi and Sampras I think Chang said it beautifully in an interview he did around 1995, he said: "if I had to break it down on surfaces I would say that Andre is better on clay, Pete is better on grass, and I would flip for it in a HArd court". There is no doubt Pete was better on grass, but agassi dominated him on clay, their hardcourt matches where always dogfights.

[mrbobevans]

@koji128 US Open Court favored Sampras and Australian Open Court favored Agassi.

[splendid1000]

@koji128

I'd take Pete on a fast hard court(US Open), but I'd take Andre on a slower hard court (Australian). But they would all be good matches no doubt =)

[ronuss]

federer a defence player erm lol? thats gotta be a joke right

[mousavsm]

@ronuss It might have came out wrong. What I meant more so was that his game has become more defensive than it once was. Maybe it's the competition catching up or who knows, but I started seeing it years ago (not just now). Most times on serves, he just chips them back with a slice to the middle of the court. If that's not defensive, I'm not sure what is, and I see him do it a lot, and even in response to other shots.

[mousavsm]

Accomplishment-wise, I'd have to say that Federer is the best ever. Although, I don't think he was the most gifted player ever. Federer is a defensive player, he's extremely boring to watch.

[mousavsm]

Imagine if Agassi played the 8-9 times he missed the Aussie open before this one? He destroyed the competition in Australia, just imagine. I can't help but think that if he hadn't had so many troubles in his life, and played some some of these Aussie and French opens that he missed, he would have so many more slams. He also was part of the most dominant era of tennis. IMO, andre agassi is the best tennis player ever, not because of his accomplishments, but because of the talent he possessed.

[KaitainCPS]

@mousavsm

I agree.

[splendid1000]

@mousavsm

Agassi missed a total of 11 Aussies and he also mixed 6 Wimbies too. I think he'd have at least 11 slams if he played most of those, maybe more.

[Stahlhelmer]

Federer plays different because tennis today is different, I preferred to see 90s tennis and guys like Sampras or Agassi really fun tennis

[cleanplasticchild]

@Stahlhelmer That's why I like to watch college basketball. It's different watching these guys who play at the pro level today.

[tigercrap]

Federer's gram slam total will never be broken. He is the last of a a rare breed...like Tiger, who comes once in a lifetime. Sampras did not have the heart of Federer or Agassi. Federer is a little more solid than Sampras in every way. Federer is stronger, faster, more consistent, and rarely breaks down mentally...like Tiger Woods. Too bad he doesn't have many competitors these days like Sampras or Agassi. Federer is a little lucky to be playing against so many inferior players of today.

[mrbobevans]

I don't completely agree with your opinions. But they do have merit.

I believe Pete was and is a better athlete than Roger. You could get that sense when they played their exhibition matches. Pete just never got himself in amazing condition. I also enjoyed watching Pete more than Roger. Pete's serve and volley game was a blast to watch. Just my opinion.

[tigercrap]

I agree that Pete was an exceptional athlete, but cannot match physical and mental strength of Federer. Not getting into shape is not an excuse when you're a top athlete. I never liked the arrogance of Sampras or his attitude. Federer really understands how great he is, but with humility. He's genuine in his demeanor and how he expresses himself. More importantly, he does hold all 4 Grand Slams! You can only speculate so much, but titles are forever. This is also what makes Agassi great.

[mrbobevans]

Pete did not get in top shape because he has a condition called Thesallia Minor, which effected in conditioning. Check it out - I am right.

And about Federer being such a great guy. He took all the attention out of awards presentation at the 2009 Australian Open by bursting out in tears - yuck. He also threw a tissy fit in the 2009 US Open against Del Potro when he started losing. He is a great guy when he wins, but acts like a jerk when he loses.

[fuckingFIDDLE]

@tigercrap: "The arrogance of Sampras"?? Maybe you talked about another Sampras, because the Sampras I know is a real sportsman, never talked bad about the opponents he lost to, always knew how to behave on the court. Just the opposite to the bottle-thrower.

[sathyaseelann]

what?? Sampras cannot match physical and mental strength of federer!!!! are you kidding me?? did you see the US open 2001 QF between agassi and Sampras? they played when they were 31 and 30. did you see the agility of them in that match? if you like federer then just admire him. dont underrate a player like Sampras. moreover you are not a psychologist to say something about other person's attitude and demeanor. Here just talk about the way people play.

[LightningJanitorial]

Couldnt agree more. Sampras served and volleyed almost every point, and charged the net on almost every short ball he could.

To say the guy wasnt amazingly agile is just ridiculous. He was as good of an athlete as theres ever been in tennis.

Federer is a great player. I wont bash the guy, and he was the better player on all surfaces, but if you put both in their primes on anything other than clay, im taking Pete all day.

The guys he played against IMO were MUCH tougher than Fed.

[splendid1000]

@LightningJanitorial

Federer is no doubt one of the top greats, but its very hard to name just one player the 'all time greatest'. What people always forget is that Wimbledon and US Open court surfaces have both been slowed down greatly since Fed started dominating. That is why S&V is gone and only baseline remains. S&V's disappearance coincides perfectly with these surface changes. So that basically means that the competition has been cut in half... 

[splendid1000]

Sampras had to beat the best baseliners in the world AND the best S&V players in the world every year. That is EXTREMELY difficult to do. S&V is also more taxing on the body in terms of injury because of the extreme angles you have to cover on your way into/at net, and that is one reason Sampras fell into a slump towards the end of his career. He was battling herniated disks and knee injuries because of S&V, something Fed never had to face because of the pure baseline play that exists now

[mariomarcano]

Sorry, but I don't think that Pete is a better athlete than Roger...

[mrbobevans]

To me, Pete was always more fun to watch than Roger. His game is riskier. Roger does have a textbook game.

[mariomarcano]

Perhaps...

[vmntmn]

you guys cant compare different generations of players like that. its like comparing michael jordan to kobe bryant. both are good but you just cant compare those too. they lived during different eras of athletes

[mariomarcano]

Yes... people can compare different generations of players... it's still the same sport that the players that we compare play... by the way, Michael is infinitely better than Kobe... :)

[rangeboyry]

@mariomarcano maybe this will change your thoughts sampras GS finals is 14-4 wins federer GS finals 16-7 wins sampras cursed agassi during their battle of GS 4-1 nadal cursed federer during their battle of GS 5-1 during sampras 12 years initial record breaking 17 GS champions during federer 16 GS record breaking only 4 other GS champion !!!! statistically sampras is the best tennis ever. GOAT = PETE SAMPRAS GLOATAN = ROGER FEDERER as a clue "n" stands for Nadal

[andrewblastoff]

First of all, its 14-4 and 16-6, not 16-7,

moreover, it's 5-2 in the finals against Nadal; Fed lost 3 finals at RG - Pete didn't even make it to the final, so let's forget that 16-6, if we want to compare him to Pete, we have to forget about the RG - it's 15-3 in GS finals for Fed - way better record than Sampras

Nadal is much better clay-court player than Brugera, Courier, Agassi, Kafelnikov, Ferrero or Moya, only Kuerten can be compared to Nadal and still Nadal would beat Guga in 7

[andrewblastoff]

Nadal plays better on hard as well than ball bashers like Rusedski, Ivanisevic, Philipousis, Krajicek or s&v like Henman or baseliners like Korda and Chang

Pete's only opponent on hard was Ederg and Agassi, Rafter won only when Pete was injured

Pete was the best player in the Open Era on grass, but I don't think that Ivanisevic was a bigger challange than Roddick and certainly Nadal was way more dangeorus than Pioline or Courier on grass, Becker was a real challange, but he was old in 1995/96

[splendid1000]

@andrewblastoff

Actually you cant really compare Nadal on fast hard court(US Open) or grass to any players in the 90s. Both surfaces have been greatly slowed down since then and that is why Nadal is able to do as well as he has. Wimbledon grass underwent a second seedling and soil change in and US Open underwent a second modification in 2006, and that is exactly when Nadal started doing well at both. And Rafter was actually a huge threat at US and Wimby... Just not to Pete =).

[splendid1000]

U dont win 2 US Opens and make 2 Wimbledon finals unless you are very very good lol.

[mrbobevans]

Pete is a better athlete than Roger. Roger could never hit those jump slams like Pete. If Pete did not have the Thessalia Minor, he would never have lost those US Open finals to Edberg, Safin and Hewitt. Pete was also much more fun to watch than Roger. Unfortunately, Pete had a health condition that sometimes hampered him.

[mariomarcano]

You're only making excuses for Pete just because he lost those U.S. Open finals...

[mrbobevans]

It is a fact - Pete has a health condition that effected his stamina. I am only saying that there were some losses that can possibly be attributed to his condition.

[juandi2570]

Sampras has been the strongest minded player of all time. He never let anybody get in his head like Rafa has done to Fed. Sampras played the most important points of a match better than anybody in history. Roger is not as strong mentally, he breaks down quite often against Nadal and now Delpo, Did you see the Us open final 09? fed broke down completely mentally speaking.

[sathyaseelann]

Federer is stronger, faster, more consistent, and rarely breaks down mentally... wtf?? have you ever saw Sampras break down in a match just because he lost?? he got seven wimbledon titles, he never ever lost a finals there. but in 2002 wimbledon, he lost in second round to clay court guy. even at that time he is calm and composed. thats champion's attitude. dont talk like an ignorant!!

[MatRat920]

i think that federer plays better defense, the reason their both so good is that they habe ridiculous serves, thats why they won so much, its fair to say their both damn good, the main diff between sampras and federer is that sampras had tougher competition at the top... but federer has tougher competition down the rankings

[splendid1000]

@tigercrap

LoL Federer is not stronger than Pete nor can he jump as high or volley as well.

[diddycoys]

too right, jmminu. in 10yrs time federer's greatness will be obscured by another's. i can't help wonder though whether federer could have achieved same number of grand slams titles WITH Sampras and Agassi around in their best years?!? i mean, the moment nadal came near his peak and beat federer it caused him some tears! at least i didn't see agassi and sampras cry (openly) over losing! it will be interesting to see how would federer will deal with his 'twilight' moment: manly or..?

[tomassocannavaro]

i dont know bout that. I mean i guess it's all possible. When sampras retired I(or anyone else) never thought his 14 slam record would only last less than 7 years. But still...i dont think federer's record will be broken in a long time

[UchihaGege]

federer sampras and agassi are legends

federer is the best, but not far away are agassi and sampras

[RoseEdw]

he ended the match exactly the same in the 2000 final against kafelnikov with an ace in the same place

[guiguitebeka]

agassi was the best forehand EVER

[BrotherTree1]

Agassi is one of the unique players who read Sampras' serve really well

[Wawrinka5]

LOL. he spelled "sampras" wrong

[deltapositive05]

epic battle

[swiv2d]

I love both Pete and Andre but whenever they met I'd route for Agassi simply cause he'd have the serve advantage against him and cause he had to work harder for the points.

[superman11978]

Excuses, excuses...

Being able to stay healthy is part of being a great player. That's one of Federer's many astounding attributes. You never hear of Fed getting gassed because he played a few five setters. Agassi was 35 and played three 5 setters in a row at the US Open and wasn't gassed.

Agassi was just better on slower courts.

[Samprasisthebest]

How about Pete having Thalassemia minor, a form of anemia, which severely limits athletic ability? Even with this handicap Sampras was able to break Roy Emerson's record of 12 GS titles and win 14 and become arguably the greatest player in tennis history. If he had been perfectly healthy, I have no doubt that he could have at least made two or three French Open finals (maybe not win it) and won at least four more Grand Slams.

[demondayzzz]

let's be real here, it didn't "severely" limit his athletic ability, not even "remotely". and his health had nothing to do with his french open "failures" (i can't remember a s/v player winning on clay), he reached the semis once and the quarters 3 times, all before '96. whereas u know how many ao, us, and wimb titles he won in the same period. he just wasn't nearly as good on clay! no shame in that.

[splendid1000]

@demondayzzz

Not even remotely? LOL !! Are you a doctor? The reason he won Wimbledon the same year he lost French is because Wimbledon is much faster and the points much shorter. A blood-iron deficiency causes anemia and the hotter the match(Australian Open) and longer the rallies(Australian AND French) the more you fatigue. He has written about this many times. If Sampras didnt have that condition, he'd have won his US Open against Hewitt and Safin and would have one French at least once.

[demondayzzz]

@splendid1000 haha i wrote that 2 years ago, and ur replying to every post on this old vid you loser

+ bullshit! u don't think he had long matches in the other slams? long rallies? why didn't it kick in then? perhaps it did but he obviously dealt with it, i don't remember him complaining about it every time he lost a clay match back then. and it's not like every clay match he lost was a long drawn out affair in the heat.

his game wasn't (as) suited to clay. end of.

[splendid1000]

@demondayzzz

I dont care when you wrote it you fucking moron. Its utter bullshit and you are retarded now just like you were retarded two years ago. I need to enlighten you obviously because noone else has. You dont seem to understand that the length of the match is NOT the issue here brainiac. Its the length of the actual rallies. Rallies on clay are MUCH longer than rallies on grass you idiot.

[splendid1000]

Yes Pete was able to win some other long matches with long rallies and that just proves what a fighter he is, but he also wasnt facing the best clay courters in the world while doing so like he was during all his French Open losses when he went deep there. LOL you are fucking dumb !!!

[splendid1000]

ALL of Pete's losses at FO when he did well were against the best clay court players in the world. Now couple that with his anemia and the compounded fatigue from previous matches against other top clay courters and you have a serious disadvantage. God damn you are fucking stupid LOL

[demondayzzz]

@splendid1000 wtf? what's ur point? no one is arguing he isn't a fighter. and he didn't go that "deep", he barely had a couple qf's and one sf whereas federer's got i don't know how many finals/sf/qf in an era full of clay courters and baseliners.

anyway, all top players play through injury/illness, i could just as easily say that if federer didn't have mono in 08 he'd have won 3 more slams as he was in his prime. it means nothing.

basically dude just go beat off another dead horse

[splendid1000]

@demondayzzz

Whats my point? My point is that his condition DID affect him lol. You said it didnt affect him. Not even 'remotely'. You are wrong. Yes everyone plays though injuries, just like Sampras did(herniated discs and injured knees) ON TOP of his condition. But a chronic persistent condition that affects you in every match is different. Im not saying he's better than Fed on clay. Hes not. But he doesnt suck on clay either and his condition DID affect him. Period.

[demondayzzz]

@splendid1000 haha u have problems, i've lost track of how much shit u've written here in like ten minutes. u should watch the TMI episode in south park.

[akosh1976]

well i can't remember a lot of five setters from federer either...maybe one from 2005 AO semifinal...i'm sure u know what happened there...;)

[splendid1000]

@superman11978

I do agree Sampras probably didn't condition himself quite as well as Fed though. If Sampras didnt have his condition AND trained harder, he'd probably have like 20 Slams lol.

[naturalmystic4life]

Many critics talk about his 1994 USO loss to Jamie Yzaga but Pete was coming off a lengthy absence & was just gassed but through shear heart pushed that to a 5th set. Add to this Gully's brain tumor situation & the heat of the AO (early afternoon) match & two very draining 5 setters & Pete still almost pulled off a win tie breakers. Agassi was fortunate to win. Pete would get his payback at the USO whose loss was so devastating to Andre it was almost career ending. (part threr)

[naturalmystic4life]

Also remember in 1994 Sampras had numerous injuries (ankle, shin splints, blisters, etc... boy was he fragile) forcing him to miss a lot of the year. (part two)

[naturalmystic4life]

At the 2000 AO Sampras strained a muscle in his right hip early in the match. He did not use it as an excuse but he did pull out of the scheduled Davis Cup (the following week) in Zimbabwe. (part one)

[jmminu]

It seems some of you here know a lot of tennis history. It's refreshing to see as most youtubers only know who Federer is... When you even mention how great Sampras was, you get back a lot of angry messages from Federer's fans... I'm sure 10 years from now, if anyone mention Federer, they'll also get pummeled with angry messages and how his tennis was gay, old, and irrelevant to the current greatness of the game.

[kusta678]

ur so right

[johnsteinbeck]

the anger that often arises in the fed - sampras discussions is indeed as surprising as dumb. especially since federers game is to such big extent inspired by pete. that's why i love both of them! ... and andre, you just have to love andre...

fuckit, i just love tennis!

[iosonodella2i]

@jmminu :) that's the truth... I'm a Federer fan, but I understand their games... everything changes... even laver's tennis was a beautiful tennis, or at least I think so... but, with those rackets they had, they were not able to do play the same tennis that federer plays today, it's normal...

[akosh1976]

i think sampras hated to play on early afternoon or when it was to sunny! that is the reason i think that he lost this game...

[andymaratkimi]

Love Andre 4ever!!!

Though Pete is greater than Andre, but remember Andre is older then pete!

[Samprasisthebest]

Yeah, Andre is older than Pete by a single year!

[pinksyd81]

and dont forget andre beat pete in the 2000 Australian Open SF, fair and square.... so i don't really get what you're trying to say.

[pinksyd81]

what are you disagreeing with ???

this court was perfectly sueded for andres game, thats a fact.

what you are saying about pete being tired and agassi having luck with krickstein retireing, is true, but has nothing to do with it.

[pinksyd81]

this was a great match.

imagine if agassi would have headed down to play the australian open before he did. he would have a couple more of those for sure. those conditions sueded him perfectly to play amazing tennis.

[koslow88]

i disagree.pete sampras barely made it to the final he was a beaten tired man that played agass in in the finals due to his gruelling 5 set marathon matches both down 2 sets to 0.agassi didnt even have to play his semifinal because krickstein pulled his groin in the first game of the first set and had to retire.and krickstein had beaten agassi on hardcourts just the year before in washington not to mention at the us open too.

[chidikaagu]

agassi showing who was the best in rebound ace in that game pete made 28 aces and lost.

[bertyblue]

first time I've ever seen Pete play in a cap! very unusual

[wojtekrzeznikiewicz]

great.keep on your work...

[mbandlamudi]

i agree

[mdelloro]

such an awesome match!