an athletic serve & volley player will always be favored ,on a fast court with hard balls.These conditions are now only found in archive footage pre 2000.
boring? serve and volley is actually the most technically smart way to play. if the returner doesn't hit a good return, then the point is yours. it's a lot better than a player hitting a serve, the other player chipping the return back, and then starting a boring-ass rally
@MattyOyola21 I have to disagree with you. Sampras, along w/ Federer, has the most natural game in tennis history. I would like to see more S&V. The Djokovic/Nadal matches are boing IMHO. Agassi and Sampras had the most entertaining matches of all time.
@mrbobevans I'm not aiming at the point whether his matches were entertainning or not, they COULD be but you cannot deny that Sampras strokes (specially the backhand and the forehand) looked odd and unnatural as if he had to make weird movements and force his arm to hit the ball (do you know the story on Sampras' backhand, right?) Unlike Sampras, Federer stroke look SO clean and natural regarding the movement and ending, it's SOOO wonderful to watch!
@MattyOyola217 Pete's strokes are unique, but that does not mean their unnatural. From a physics point of view, Pete has the most efficient forehand stroke of all time. It is completely relaxed through the backswing, and gains unbelievable velocity as it goes foreward, using an Eastern grip. Pete's backhand is a neutral shot. And you have to admit Pete's serve is the best ever, especially from a technical standpoint. Roger struggled w/ it in their exhibition matches.
@mrbobevans Also, because Pete's swing was so relaxed, it enabled him to have the best running forehand of all-time. He was able to generate more power on the run than stationary. Get over it, Pete is in the top 5 of all-time.
@mrbobevans Obviously you don't even know the story on Pete's backhand, he was made to shift his two-handed backhand when young so his backhand is NOT natural at all. That's the point. The serve? Well, you have to admit that the serve matter is NOT only about first serve but the second as well and Federer has the most efficient second serve, no doubt, just take a watch; combining those two, Federer has the best serve EVER!
@MattyOyola217 Jim Courier mentioned the other night that Pete's serve is the greatest shot in the history of the game. I think he knows more about tennis than you do. Hell, Roger would admit that Pete's serve is superior to his. I don't understand why you have something against Sampras. Every person who has seen Pete play live says he hits a HUGE ball.
@MattyOyola217 A lot of one-handers start out as two-handed. The two hander is easier to hit at young age. As a kid gets older, he/she can decide which type of stroke t fits their style of tennis. Pete switching to a one-hander fits into a natural progression of the style of tennis he wanted to play. Also check Pete's backhand at .26 seconds, not bad.
@mrbobevans All the stuff you just said does not apply to Pete's case. He switched his backhand not when teenager but beyond and was because of a recomendation from his former coach.
@MattyOyola217 Federer has a more efficient second serve than Sampras had? i don't remember Federer serving second serves in the 110-120 range (on average his second serve is between 95-100mph). and i know that he doesn't serve aces off of his second serve either (which Sampras did all the time). and he did all of these things with an old pro staff. and i agree with mrbobevans. Sampras is in the top 5 all time along with Laver, Borg, Rosewall/Lendl, and Federer.
@cain2335 So, according to you, second serve's efficiency is based on speed... (claps) I can know now that you don't know a shit about tennis. If it were like you said Roddick would have the MOST efficient second serve ever (speed) and it's not that way, Efficiency depends on accuracy, ball placement, acceleration, and many other stuff. I can't talk to someone who believes tennis in ONLY about speed. Sick! Greetings, though.
@MattyOyola217 "Efficiency depends on accuracy, ball placement, acceleration, and many other stuff.." you mean like placing the ball perfectly for a second serve ace like sampras did hundreds of times? lol. actually DOING something with your second serve is what you're supposed to do (not like every pro today including federer who just serves a second serve to start the point).
@cain2335 Obviously the word VARIETY is not on your tiny brain dictionary. Federer serving a second serve just to start a point? OMG! This conversation is over, I cannot talk to a person who only knows about tennis from Top Spin 2 ... Lame!
@MattyOyola217 lol i RARELY see Federer serving aggressive second serves. most of the time (which is basically all the time) he really does just serve a kicker and start the rally. and "variety" in a second serve? what does basically every top 30 player do in terms of variety? hit a kicker and basically start the rally. have you watched the last 8 years of tennis?! look i get that you get hard to federer, but stop trolling on vids that have absolutly nothing to do with federer
i am thinking that the times agassi beat sampras, sampras wasnt trying. it seemed he could beat agassi any time he really wanted to. then again, he beat everyone all the time.
Pete Sampras schooled Agassi in this match just like in the 99 Wim. Agassi was hot that year, No1 and at his very best (like in 95), yet Pete´s game was too big despite his recent return from a serious back injury. Unbelievable display of SV, power, quickness and touch.
@zzyzybynsky What the fuck does that have to do with anything? I'm so pissed with Federer fanboys writing about him in videos that don't have anything to do with him.
what a point at 4:30. one of the nastiest slices i've ever seen on a video/tape followed up by one ridiculously sick passing shot. just awesome tennis throughout this whole match.
@federerbestclass Federer best class could you stop spamming all tennis-related videos with stuff like "Love Roger, classic greatest sweetest smartest greatest ever, Love [whoever else is in the video]"
@cain2335 My son is 11 and is really short. He is losing matches partly due to his height. I am teaching him to play as many shots on the rise. The other kids rarely play shots on the rise, so hopefully it will eventually work. Do you recommend hitting on the rise for short kids. ie Agassi.
@mrbobevans he's only 11. he's still going to grow some im sure. but even if he doesn't, hitting on the rise will be good for his game. include a string that gives some good spin
Faggots arguing about Del Potro, Federer and Nadal on a video of Sampras vs Agassi. You people should be punished for this - highlights of a master at work shouldn't be stained with the filth of your irrelevant commentary.
@Meshalhasseen Why can't they discuss Del Potro, Federer, and Nadal? People have a strangely strong desire for control of YouTube message board comments. "Should be punished"...? I'm just surprised that such comments get thumbed up.
@QuantumMaths I'm not saying they can't - but it is totally irrelevant here and highlights ignorance of the game pre Fedal. So many people think the present generation is the be-all and end-all of tennis.
@Meshalhasseen actually most people think todays generation is weak in my experience. i would say previous generations had more creativity and flare around the court. todays generation are very robotic besides federer and nadal but this generation are definately on another level fitness wise. they just seem worse because they dont experiment as much and there doesnt seem to be a big variety of styles like there once was... which is a shame to me.
There's no variety because the surfaces have been slowed down... US Open and Wimbledon were dramatically modified and play much slower with a much higher ball bounce. By slowing down the courts, they practically eliminated serve and volley from the circuit and basically cut the competition in half lol. Its all baseline now because of this and It sucks...
Nadal has more majors than anyone at his age. Fed had 6. Nadal will pass him and Fed can do nothing about it as he hits 30. He couldn't beat Nadal when he was at his peak. None of the current group will challenge him like he challenged Federer. Thumb me down all you want, it's the truth and the truth hurts punks.
@TorgeistLLN Del Potro. Yeah, he may have a low ranking now, but he was injured the entire year! Duh....Delpo's entire game is made for beating guys like Nadal. Rafa's spinning balls fall right into the target zone of JMDP, who is 6'6, not 6-1 like Federer.
More importantly, who will stop Nadal? Himself. He is always injured and as he gets older, his game will decline rapidly.
@3timeMVPNash That's nice. Berdych is the same height and getting smack off the court by Nadal. Nadal has a big serve now and flatter groundstrokes. So let's see the Federer fans last hope in Del Potro handle that. That's if his wrist holds up.
@TorgeistLLN Berdych doesn't have as much talent as Del Potro. By the way, if you wonder if JMDP will have a hard time, then what about Nadal whenever he isn't 100%, and on a fastcourt?
@TorgeistLLN Don't count out Delpo if he can get healthy. I know he played like crap when he came back this year. His game is very suited to playing Nadal. He loves hitting high spin balls.
@TorgeistLLN hahaha, are you kidding? the guys been injured for 10months. he won the us open then has been out all year with a wrist injurie. you cant expect him to come back and start winning straight away. watch his ranking rocket up towards top ten as he has noo points at all to defend next year. he will be back very soon.
hey guys, this is just an idea, tell me if you think its stupid. A shot clock in tennis. I was watching the Aggasi - blake match, and they were almost sprinting inbetween points. The match had rythm and and pace, and you don't get board inbetween points. it' just people who only watch wimbldon asked me about the time between points and so I thought the idea might impove the game, obviously its not gonna come in, but it stops pussy umpires just issuing a warning and nothing else
Andre will always be my favorite. Nothing but class. Also, Pete and Andre's rivalry will always be better than the Rafa and Roger's rivalry. Pete and Andre have never liked each other; Roger and Rafa seem pleasant with each other.
Sampras is one hell of a powerful guy. Those serves and forehands... His shoulders are incredibly powerful. He always reminded me of a superb greek warrior of the ancient.
0:53 and 6:53 are why Sampras is still my favorite player. Often on a fast court, he used all his athleticism and tactics to intimidate his opponents. He brings the hammer down on the first clip, lol. Watch him fake right (in the slow mo) to trick Agassi into passing on his left in the second clip. I will eventually get his Wimbledon finals [7-0] on DVD.
sampras took more risks against agassi than anybody else. Was cracking alot of shots in this match. This was the yr agassi destroyed everyone and nearly did the grand slam only for pete to deny him with one of the greatest performances ever.
If faster courts were brought back, players such as Nadal and Murray would drop out of the top 10 with Federer dominating and Djokovic/Del Potro having a bite of the GS cake.
Comparing Sampras and Federer is very different. Pete is more basketball like, being more explosive, especially jumping and lunging; Roger is more football like - more nimble with footing and more improvisational. I personally liked watching Pete in his prime more than Roger.
The tennis 10 years ago was at a higher level compared to the tennis now. I know that athletes' are getting better and better on the average (with technology and all the other things at their disposal) but I've watched tennis for about 15 years and to me, the matches between the rafters, agassi's, sampras', ferrero, korda, ivanesivic, i mean there was a lot of depth then too. Agassi was my fav so Pete pissed me off lol, but they were both greats. IMO, both better than Federer.
i agree. tht y wen i look at matches of this era i seem to be much more excited and happier. these days wat make tennis matches are amazing thrilling point within a hundred boring points.
I think also what makes a bug player is his strong will to win, Agassi had not always the will to win. We can see that when he is at 100% physically and psychologically, we saw that the difference between them at US Open 2001 was minimal. Agassi lost by maybe 3 points on tie breaks!!!!
Only because Pete was never good enough to get past the QF of the French except one year, while Agassi made at least the French semis 5 times, and won the French in 99. No comparison b/t Pete and Andre on clay in their primes.
sampras n fed both great players would be fancinating to hav seen them both in prime just think fed has way superior fitness to sampras and is more consistent with his performances although pete was great also did he make that running forehand at the end?
Sampras has minor thalassemia which means he doesn't have enough red blood cells. His whole career he had trouble getting enough oxygen to his body, so no doubt Federer has better fitness. It's amazing Sampras was able to accomplish what he did.
Well, just because something doesn't require medical treatment doesn't mean that it won't affect you in a physically demanding tennis match. Although I don't claim to be a doctor or anything so I wouldn't know.
I actually also think that Pete's condition is somewhat overblown. Sampras has a great five-set record, so I don't think his inferior fitness mattered a whole lot. His mental toughness and strategies probably minimised the effects.
I have been watching Tennis for over 20 years now, and Pete really was the best of all. And opposed to other people, I wasn't that sad seeing him losing most of his matches after Wimbledon 2000. That's a normal process when athletes gets older, I was glad that he still was on the tour. And then he won the USO again in 2002... A golden moment.
Will Federer start losing matches the same age Pete did? I don't think so because he has faced the same caliber of talent pete did so he want be as exhausted/beat up.
lol hahha, clearly that wasnt the case when Sampras beat him in straight sets in 07 Macau, exhibition or not, I know Federer would be competitive enough not to lose to a retired pro whose been inactive for 5 years
and you know that how?? LOL you DONT, theyre the two greatest of all time and its ridiculous say who would beat who, its like me saying shaq would beat wilt chamberlain in his prime....again how do I prove that?? LOL
Try Sampras of 97, put him against any Roger Federer prime, and witness a beating, I really do wish Sampras was 26 again as was Federer, then youll just see how many times Sampras would whip Federer of court and teach him a fucking lesson
Come on.. Let's try to retain Pete's dignity. He was definitely a great champion with a couple of amazing weapons, but he would have been no match against Roger of '05.
the only fast surface left in Rog's era is deco turf in Cinci and New York (Roger doesn't play in LA, Washington or Indianapolis), and Rog's been doing pretty well in both, Hannover indoor hard seems even faster than deco turf, unfortunately carpet surfaces disappeared i dunno why they're slowing down the courts
Absolutely. 10 years ago, the courts were so much quicker, and Fed would have a tougher time with the faster serve and lightning quick volley that Sampras puts on, but, I suppose the reason they are slowing them down is because they want baseline rallies, see Nadal's playing style, Davydenko's style, etc.
If the faster courts were to comeback, Roger would actually do better than anyone else....
I guess longer rallys are more appealing to the fans nowadays. Personally, I enjoy watching players duel it out on super fast surfaces. It's all reflexes.
I'm not trying to say anything about Henman... You're just trying to extend my logic to something i HAVE not talked about.
Federer and Sampras played when Sampras was on a 33 winning streak VICTORY: i'm not saying he was playing the best tennis of his life NO! Of course not. He was playing well, that's all. Federer was 19, considered as a next futur champion who didn't confirm his potentiel. And Federer won. So you can not say that Sampras is the real goat and everything.
It's easy to lose a match during a bad day. So can you say Nadal is the GOAT when he is finishing his career when he has 12-13 grandslams just because he has beaten Federer for so many times?
Your argument simply doesn't make sense. It's not like Sampras got owned by Federer when they both are at their prime.
I admire Federer's game very much, and think it is the greatest style he plays.
But Sampras did have a bit better players: Jim Courier, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, Goran, Michael Chang, Pat Rafter, Richard Krajieck, Michael Stich and Andre Agassi...
Federer doesn't have that except for Nadal and when he was on, Marat Safin.
@LDis1 I'm not dissing the players (just hoping for a discussion), but the players you name there are class, but would struggle on the slower courts of this era. Pete was pushed by these guys becasue he was not as complete as federer, I use that phrase very very lightly, Andre, Edberg, Rafter yes, but thoses other players, I doubt would have a chance in a US open final for example. Athletes nowadays are better, so there is more depth to the game ....
@LDis1 ....people who maybe do not posess the skill of an edberg, can more than make up for lost ground by being an amazing athlete, making it difficult to get past them. Look at football, don't take this in the wrong way, George Best use to turn up to games smashed from the night before and burn people all the time, but there is no way he could do it in the modern game like he did. Its the evolution of the player, but more importantly, the evolution of the courts and balls...
@LDis1 all these players Andre excluded, where aided greatly by lighter balls and faster courts, making their awsome serves even better, in this era to dominate, you cannot have a weakness, because it is amplified with the slower courts. Thats just my view, and i'd like to here yours
Would you agree that faster courts takes a bit more skill on all the court? I would say Federer would do absolutely wonderful on carpet (one of the fastest surfaces) yeah sure you can play Serve and Volley, but you can also play baseline tennis on carpet like Ivan Lendl did, and Federer is by far a better player than Ivan Lendl. I reckon that a faster surface, a rather inferior volleyer like Nadal compared to Federer or Tsogna, would do pretty poorly.
@LDis1 i completely agree about the nadal thing on faster courts, and agree that it takes a different kind of skill to play on those court. Timing is obvioulsy more of an issue, but thinking about it now, I think lendle would have done pretty well on the slower courts nowadays, dont know what my point is, ill just sit on the fence if thats K :)
@Jamus182 LOL funny. I don't think he will. Eventhough since 2004, he has missed probably about 3-4 grandslam due to injuries. But i heard he is only planning on playing one hardcourt tournament tune up before the USO. I think it's cincy one he is going to play in the next 4 weeks it will start.
@Thutmosis7 he will have a time out, almost no question, im not dissing the guy, but you do seem quite deluded that he is going to be injury free, and by that i mean not miss another tornament or retire. his best year was either this one, or 08, and what happened in 08, he missed the masters cup. Iv read one of your comments before about fed only having the slam record and that alone doesn't make him the greatest, but defo top 4. it is every thing else.....
@Thutmosis7 .........he has taken the consitancy of Ivan lendl and the prolific winning of sampras and laver, and combined them. One off the record of most consecutive finals, most consecutive final wins, the slam may never be possible, but 2006 in the opem era was proabably the greatest year for a player ever, the only other rivals are other federer years, and macnroes 87-3 season, and I know what your going to say, competition blah blah blah.......
Y does everyone hav to argue? Just watch the great vid guys.
TKTiggz 4 weeks ago
this court played so fast
quest8899 1 month ago
an athletic serve & volley player will always be favored ,on a fast court with hard balls.These conditions are now only found in archive footage pre 2000.
cindygirlification 1 month ago
Sampras AAAAAALWAYS the same game play.... BORE!!!!
MattyOyola21 2 months ago
boring? serve and volley is actually the most technically smart way to play. if the returner doesn't hit a good return, then the point is yours. it's a lot better than a player hitting a serve, the other player chipping the return back, and then starting a boring-ass rally
cain2335 1 month ago
@cain2335 What does 'boring' have to do with 'smart to play'? .. It could be 'smart' but BORING!!
MattyOyola217 1 month ago
@MattyOyola21 I have to disagree with you. Sampras, along w/ Federer, has the most natural game in tennis history. I would like to see more S&V. The Djokovic/Nadal matches are boing IMHO. Agassi and Sampras had the most entertaining matches of all time.
mrbobevans 1 month ago
@mrbobevans I'm not aiming at the point whether his matches were entertainning or not, they COULD be but you cannot deny that Sampras strokes (specially the backhand and the forehand) looked odd and unnatural as if he had to make weird movements and force his arm to hit the ball (do you know the story on Sampras' backhand, right?) Unlike Sampras, Federer stroke look SO clean and natural regarding the movement and ending, it's SOOO wonderful to watch!
MattyOyola217 1 month ago
@MattyOyola217 Pete's strokes are unique, but that does not mean their unnatural. From a physics point of view, Pete has the most efficient forehand stroke of all time. It is completely relaxed through the backswing, and gains unbelievable velocity as it goes foreward, using an Eastern grip. Pete's backhand is a neutral shot. And you have to admit Pete's serve is the best ever, especially from a technical standpoint. Roger struggled w/ it in their exhibition matches.
mrbobevans 1 month ago
@mrbobevans Also, because Pete's swing was so relaxed, it enabled him to have the best running forehand of all-time. He was able to generate more power on the run than stationary. Get over it, Pete is in the top 5 of all-time.
mrbobevans 1 month ago
@mrbobevans Obviously you don't even know the story on Pete's backhand, he was made to shift his two-handed backhand when young so his backhand is NOT natural at all. That's the point. The serve? Well, you have to admit that the serve matter is NOT only about first serve but the second as well and Federer has the most efficient second serve, no doubt, just take a watch; combining those two, Federer has the best serve EVER!
MattyOyola217 1 month ago
@MattyOyola217 Jim Courier mentioned the other night that Pete's serve is the greatest shot in the history of the game. I think he knows more about tennis than you do. Hell, Roger would admit that Pete's serve is superior to his. I don't understand why you have something against Sampras. Every person who has seen Pete play live says he hits a HUGE ball.
mrbobevans 4 weeks ago
@MattyOyola217 A lot of one-handers start out as two-handed. The two hander is easier to hit at young age. As a kid gets older, he/she can decide which type of stroke t fits their style of tennis. Pete switching to a one-hander fits into a natural progression of the style of tennis he wanted to play. Also check Pete's backhand at .26 seconds, not bad.
mrbobevans 4 weeks ago
@mrbobevans All the stuff you just said does not apply to Pete's case. He switched his backhand not when teenager but beyond and was because of a recomendation from his former coach.
MattyOyola217 3 weeks ago
@MattyOyola217 Federer has a more efficient second serve than Sampras had? i don't remember Federer serving second serves in the 110-120 range (on average his second serve is between 95-100mph). and i know that he doesn't serve aces off of his second serve either (which Sampras did all the time). and he did all of these things with an old pro staff. and i agree with mrbobevans. Sampras is in the top 5 all time along with Laver, Borg, Rosewall/Lendl, and Federer.
cain2335 1 week ago
@cain2335 So, according to you, second serve's efficiency is based on speed... (claps) I can know now that you don't know a shit about tennis. If it were like you said Roddick would have the MOST efficient second serve ever (speed) and it's not that way, Efficiency depends on accuracy, ball placement, acceleration, and many other stuff. I can't talk to someone who believes tennis in ONLY about speed. Sick! Greetings, though.
MattyOyola217 6 days ago
@MattyOyola217 "Efficiency depends on accuracy, ball placement, acceleration, and many other stuff.." you mean like placing the ball perfectly for a second serve ace like sampras did hundreds of times? lol. actually DOING something with your second serve is what you're supposed to do (not like every pro today including federer who just serves a second serve to start the point).
cain2335 6 days ago
@cain2335 Obviously the word VARIETY is not on your tiny brain dictionary. Federer serving a second serve just to start a point? OMG! This conversation is over, I cannot talk to a person who only knows about tennis from Top Spin 2 ... Lame!
MattyOyola217 6 days ago
@MattyOyola217 lol i RARELY see Federer serving aggressive second serves. most of the time (which is basically all the time) he really does just serve a kicker and start the rally. and "variety" in a second serve? what does basically every top 30 player do in terms of variety? hit a kicker and basically start the rally. have you watched the last 8 years of tennis?! look i get that you get hard to federer, but stop trolling on vids that have absolutly nothing to do with federer
cain2335 6 days ago
100% TENIS AGASSI VS SAMPRAS RAFAEL NADAL N1
MaLaBeSTiaa 2 months ago
Badasssss point at 0:51
ludtke337 4 months ago
pff la qualité 0
gootierbg 4 months ago in playlist Andre Agassi Corner
Sampras's form of all the shots is forcible, and is beautiful. There is no now such smart player.
biyorkman 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2 legends
sampras19 4 months ago
sampras smashes looks allot like badminton smashes
ore is it justme !?!?
mrSnakeeye20 6 months ago
Playing on a court like this without the doubles alley would thoroughly fuck my mind lol That being said, what an amazing match!
latino6604 6 months ago
naver again tennis like this. c'mon balls are so slow in these days...
ANTE2205 6 months ago
sampras is incredible
Wadupbeyotch1 6 months ago 8
holy shit there's no doubles lines 0_O
CurveIN2 6 months ago
i am thinking that the times agassi beat sampras, sampras wasnt trying. it seemed he could beat agassi any time he really wanted to. then again, he beat everyone all the time.
robertk2007 6 months ago
6:55 is the most insane thing I've ever seen.
charlesneedham 7 months ago
Look at that serve form, one of the best serves in history of the game.
dharmaboy75 7 months ago 3
the last official ATP match of the 90's!
89Pleasek 7 months ago
Strange court.......no double lines!! :D
mikkicar 7 months ago
what do you think about agassis backhand at 2:55?
how hard was it?
maxchen2006 7 months ago
Pete Sampras schooled Agassi in this match just like in the 99 Wim. Agassi was hot that year, No1 and at his very best (like in 95), yet Pete´s game was too big despite his recent return from a serious back injury. Unbelievable display of SV, power, quickness and touch.
picus11 7 months ago
The court looks really wierd :)
1selleergod 8 months ago
Mad respect for the last great serve and volley player, Pete Sampras
Leaving999 8 months ago
WHERE ARE THE DOUBLES LINES?
trannynan 9 months ago
that sampras slam dunk was special
shogold10 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sampras was the most explosive player ever and one of the best sprinters ever.
Agassi was the best baseliner and ball striker ever.
cammpinno 9 months ago
This match is on such a high level! Great play from both
bjarktron 9 months ago
estos partidos eran buenos, no la mierda de ahora
Bribon196 9 months ago
@bjarktron i was responding to the preceding comments
zzyzybynsky 10 months ago
federer in his prime was definitely much better
but these guys are good
zzyzybynsky 11 months ago
@zzyzybynsky What the fuck does that have to do with anything? I'm so pissed with Federer fanboys writing about him in videos that don't have anything to do with him.
bjarktron 10 months ago
@zzyzybynsky
LoL you have no idea what you are talking about.
splendid1000 8 months ago
what a point at 4:30. one of the nastiest slices i've ever seen on a video/tape followed up by one ridiculously sick passing shot. just awesome tennis throughout this whole match.
vaulcan 1 year ago
I love Roger so much. but, I always respect for the Sampras and Agassi. greatest players
federerbestclass 1 year ago 36
@federerbestclass Federer best class could you stop spamming all tennis-related videos with stuff like "Love Roger, classic greatest sweetest smartest greatest ever, Love [whoever else is in the video]"
DestroyerAlexandros 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@federerbestclass Why are you bringing up Federer in this video?
bjarktron 10 months ago
Sampras is the only tennis player who shots close to the line :/
AmirTennis98 1 year ago
@AmirTennis98
Sampras is the greatest ever tennis player world will ever get to watch.
in todays moron tennis competition he would be at least 25 GS winner
rangeboyry 1 year ago 2
@rangeboyry yep agreed 100% federer maybe taking a set, and he would just destroy nadal in straight sets with a huge amount of aces.
federerownz 11 months ago
Yeah your right I have never seen another tennis player hit the ball close to the line before... *cough* sarcasn *cough*@AmirTennis98
XxCQOTDxX 11 months ago
im 5ft 10 is it good for Tennis?
TheLeilisa 1 year ago
@TheLeilisa im 5ft 8 and i play fine. height doesnt matter that much if you know how to play
cain2335 1 year ago
@cain2335 My son is 11 and is really short. He is losing matches partly due to his height. I am teaching him to play as many shots on the rise. The other kids rarely play shots on the rise, so hopefully it will eventually work. Do you recommend hitting on the rise for short kids. ie Agassi.
mrbobevans 7 months ago
@mrbobevans he's only 11. he's still going to grow some im sure. but even if he doesn't, hitting on the rise will be good for his game. include a string that gives some good spin
cain2335 7 months ago
7.32 that ball was in?
jmsbatista 1 year ago
5:50 haa that sounded like aravane rezai...
dorker1992 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Faggots arguing about Del Potro, Federer and Nadal on a video of Sampras vs Agassi. You people should be punished for this - highlights of a master at work shouldn't be stained with the filth of your irrelevant commentary.
Meshalhasseen 1 year ago 39
@Meshalhasseen Why can't they discuss Del Potro, Federer, and Nadal? People have a strangely strong desire for control of YouTube message board comments. "Should be punished"...? I'm just surprised that such comments get thumbed up.
QuantumMaths 10 months ago
@QuantumMaths I'm not saying they can't - but it is totally irrelevant here and highlights ignorance of the game pre Fedal. So many people think the present generation is the be-all and end-all of tennis.
Meshalhasseen 9 months ago
@Meshalhasseen actually most people think todays generation is weak in my experience. i would say previous generations had more creativity and flare around the court. todays generation are very robotic besides federer and nadal but this generation are definately on another level fitness wise. they just seem worse because they dont experiment as much and there doesnt seem to be a big variety of styles like there once was... which is a shame to me.
AceGuitarR7 8 months ago
@AceGuitarR7
There's no variety because the surfaces have been slowed down... US Open and Wimbledon were dramatically modified and play much slower with a much higher ball bounce. By slowing down the courts, they practically eliminated serve and volley from the circuit and basically cut the competition in half lol. Its all baseline now because of this and It sucks...
splendid1000 8 months ago
@Meshalhasseen Haha, well said.
cavaleer 9 months ago
@Meshalhasseen faggot djokovic is undefeated dumbshit
IKnowWereYouSleep 9 months ago
@IKnowWereYouSleep I couldn't be happier, Nole is my favourite - but again it is irrelevant.
Meshalhasseen 9 months ago
@Meshalhasseen fag
IKnowWereYouSleep 9 months ago
Fed fans jumping on Delpo's wagon because they know their guy is too old and over the hill to touch Nadal now.
TorgeistLLN 1 year ago
nice sampras highlights
RetroTennisMatches 1 year ago 2
Nadal has more majors than anyone at his age. Fed had 6. Nadal will pass him and Fed can do nothing about it as he hits 30. He couldn't beat Nadal when he was at his peak. None of the current group will challenge him like he challenged Federer. Thumb me down all you want, it's the truth and the truth hurts punks.
TorgeistLLN 1 year ago
@TorgeistLLN Nadal will not surpass Federer in GS. Nadal won't be the best in the world in two years from now because of his injury issues.
3timeMVPNash 1 year ago
@3timeMVPNash Wanna bet on it? Who's gonna stop Nadal? Federer? Haha! OK.
TorgeistLLN 1 year ago
@TorgeistLLN Del Potro. Yeah, he may have a low ranking now, but he was injured the entire year! Duh....Delpo's entire game is made for beating guys like Nadal. Rafa's spinning balls fall right into the target zone of JMDP, who is 6'6, not 6-1 like Federer.
More importantly, who will stop Nadal? Himself. He is always injured and as he gets older, his game will decline rapidly.
3timeMVPNash 1 year ago
@3timeMVPNash That's nice. Berdych is the same height and getting smack off the court by Nadal. Nadal has a big serve now and flatter groundstrokes. So let's see the Federer fans last hope in Del Potro handle that. That's if his wrist holds up.
TorgeistLLN 1 year ago
@TorgeistLLN Berdych doesn't have as much talent as Del Potro. By the way, if you wonder if JMDP will have a hard time, then what about Nadal whenever he isn't 100%, and on a fastcourt?
3timeMVPNash 1 year ago
@TorgeistLLN Don't count out Delpo if he can get healthy. I know he played like crap when he came back this year. His game is very suited to playing Nadal. He loves hitting high spin balls.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
@mrbobevans Del Potro ranking. 225 in the world. Before you talk about him beating Nadal let him win a match first against anyone.
TorgeistLLN 1 year ago
@TorgeistLLN hahaha, are you kidding? the guys been injured for 10months. he won the us open then has been out all year with a wrist injurie. you cant expect him to come back and start winning straight away. watch his ranking rocket up towards top ten as he has noo points at all to defend next year. he will be back very soon.
AceGuitarR7 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
both are at their very best !!!!
artamerican 1 year ago
Comment removed
federerbestclass 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nadal is already better than Federer so accept it.
TorgeistLLN 1 year ago
@TorgeistLLN Really? how?
that's insane.
cj397 1 year ago
Thanks very much! I really enjoyed that!
TennisStud118 1 year ago
Sampras FTW, most entertaining tennis ever. It was always very fun to watch.
elpoderosobeto 1 year ago
@elpoderosobeto I love Sampras and agree whith what u said , do not forget Miroslav Mecir (the big cat) among the best.
15061952 1 year ago
Sampras is the most natural tennis player to ever pick up racquet.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
this is amazing ... no one plays like sampras anymore
Marindo 1 year ago 6
@Marindo yeah obviously his overall style but he has that weird lendl forehand movement
MultiMaverik 1 year ago
I'm never seen a court without the tram lines. Why is this? No doubles this tournament?
barou07 1 year ago
@barou07 it was a singles only tournament
cj397 1 year ago
@cj397 we have those courts also in holland. i played on it, it's really fun
Josieposie100 1 year ago
Comment removed
yoChris76 1 year ago
yep.. he plays out of this world having just got out of bed lol
yoChris76 1 year ago
Pete is the best tennis player to watch. Awesome.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
hey guys, this is just an idea, tell me if you think its stupid. A shot clock in tennis. I was watching the Aggasi - blake match, and they were almost sprinting inbetween points. The match had rythm and and pace, and you don't get board inbetween points. it' just people who only watch wimbldon asked me about the time between points and so I thought the idea might impove the game, obviously its not gonna come in, but it stops pussy umpires just issuing a warning and nothing else
Jamus182 1 year ago
@Jamus182 I think they actually had one briefly in the 1980s
Scoclamor 1 year ago
holy fucking shit, that point at 6:55 is one of the sickest I've ever seen... Pete is and will always be my favorite player of all time!
TheSjeknek 1 year ago
Nothing, not even Chuck Norris, can match this Sampras.
cammpinno 1 year ago
Andre will always be my favorite. Nothing but class. Also, Pete and Andre's rivalry will always be better than the Rafa and Roger's rivalry. Pete and Andre have never liked each other; Roger and Rafa seem pleasant with each other.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
wow i LOVED the camera angles!!!
SweetAznBro 1 year ago
Sampras is one hell of a powerful guy. Those serves and forehands... His shoulders are incredibly powerful. He always reminded me of a superb greek warrior of the ancient.
GyariSan 1 year ago 2
While Roger may be the GOAT, to me, Pete's game has always seemed more natural.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
federer is one eye king in the world of blind
cant even beat his only rival Nadal second best talent in the game
rangeboyry 1 year ago
You fucking little cunt .... you better shut the fuck up
jonatev00 1 year ago
jonatev00
how would you know ?????????
i very sorry keep fucking your mama's little cunt
ok will shut da fuk it up next time so you will sleep tight upstairs. send my best regards to her please
rangeboyry 1 year ago
jonatev
your mom greatest ever
even superb on grass court
rangeboyry 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
get real my freind federer story is weak on fundamentals...
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
what a loser player getting trashed by his single rival Nadal
all the time.
tennis will never have another Pete Sampras skill level
rangeboyry 1 year ago
@mrbobevans
Roger is the one eye GOAT in the world of blind with GOAT loser players around him
Sampras had 14 hall of fame player like (roger and nadal level) around him and still reached 14 GS
Tennis today makes me watch cricket instead
rangeboyry 1 year ago
0:53 and 6:53 are why Sampras is still my favorite player. Often on a fast court, he used all his athleticism and tactics to intimidate his opponents. He brings the hammer down on the first clip, lol. Watch him fake right (in the slow mo) to trick Agassi into passing on his left in the second clip. I will eventually get his Wimbledon finals [7-0] on DVD.
Ou8y2k2 1 year ago
sampras took more risks against agassi than anybody else. Was cracking alot of shots in this match. This was the yr agassi destroyed everyone and nearly did the grand slam only for pete to deny him with one of the greatest performances ever.
raff23 2 years ago
if faster courts were brought back....roddick and lleyton would be happy
libatako 2 years ago 3
If faster courts were brought back, players such as Nadal and Murray would drop out of the top 10 with Federer dominating and Djokovic/Del Potro having a bite of the GS cake.
89Pleasek 2 years ago
Where are they playing? country
LCGCLCGC18 2 years ago
Hannover, Germany
hubertus35 2 years ago
thanks
LCGCLCGC18 2 years ago
Pete looks like a guy who just woke up:-) But theres an absolute beast inside.
cammpinno 2 years ago 23
Comparing Sampras and Federer is very different. Pete is more basketball like, being more explosive, especially jumping and lunging; Roger is more football like - more nimble with footing and more improvisational. I personally liked watching Pete in his prime more than Roger.
mrbobevans 2 years ago
The tennis 10 years ago was at a higher level compared to the tennis now. I know that athletes' are getting better and better on the average (with technology and all the other things at their disposal) but I've watched tennis for about 15 years and to me, the matches between the rafters, agassi's, sampras', ferrero, korda, ivanesivic, i mean there was a lot of depth then too. Agassi was my fav so Pete pissed me off lol, but they were both greats. IMO, both better than Federer.
mousavsm 2 years ago
i agree. tht y wen i look at matches of this era i seem to be much more excited and happier. these days wat make tennis matches are amazing thrilling point within a hundred boring points.
raphael1245 2 years ago
i agree. they were tenacious and kept attacking. thats the habit i hope to pick up
raphael1245 2 years ago
4:1 for Sampras in Grand Slam Finals.
fuckingFIDDLE 2 years ago
RR, semifinal? or final???
pablotjob 2 years ago
Sampras's winner at 2.34' and Agassi passing shot at 2.56', are superlative examples of one handed and two handed backhand...
matteodinenno 2 years ago
I think also what makes a bug player is his strong will to win, Agassi had not always the will to win. We can see that when he is at 100% physically and psychologically, we saw that the difference between them at US Open 2001 was minimal. Agassi lost by maybe 3 points on tie breaks!!!!
UchihaGege 2 years ago
Sampras seems to always beat Agassi in the important matches except the Australian open.
quest8899 2 years ago 2
You forget that sampras lost 1995 final against agassi in AO. also in miami...etc
But I think sampras was better in grass and hard court play but in clay or tartan (Australien Open) he was always loosing against agassi
UchihaGege 2 years ago
Agassi in 1995 beat Sampras in the Australian Open final, Miami masters final, and the Canadian masters final. I have the last 2 matches.
quest8899 2 years ago
@UchihaGege: Until 2007, the surface of the Australian Open was Rebound Ace. It's the same surface which is used at the US Open.
fuckingFIDDLE 2 years ago
And the French Open...Agassi never lost to Pete at either the Australian or the French (half of the slams!).
drwood04 2 years ago
well.....you said.......aassi never lost to sampras at French Open..........they played only once at French Open, in 1992.....
pablotjob 2 years ago
Only because Pete was never good enough to get past the QF of the French except one year, while Agassi made at least the French semis 5 times, and won the French in 99. No comparison b/t Pete and Andre on clay in their primes.
drwood04 2 years ago
sampras n fed both great players would be fancinating to hav seen them both in prime just think fed has way superior fitness to sampras and is more consistent with his performances although pete was great also did he make that running forehand at the end?
lagerandapacketcrisp 2 years ago
No he didn't look at the line judge.
exile137 2 years ago
Sampras has minor thalassemia which means he doesn't have enough red blood cells. His whole career he had trouble getting enough oxygen to his body, so no doubt Federer has better fitness. It's amazing Sampras was able to accomplish what he did.
QuadrupleTree 2 years ago 2
thalassemia minor does not require medical treatment...many athletes have it.
drwood04 2 years ago
Well, just because something doesn't require medical treatment doesn't mean that it won't affect you in a physically demanding tennis match. Although I don't claim to be a doctor or anything so I wouldn't know.
I actually also think that Pete's condition is somewhat overblown. Sampras has a great five-set record, so I don't think his inferior fitness mattered a whole lot. His mental toughness and strategies probably minimised the effects.
TWKang 2 years ago
I have been watching Tennis for over 20 years now, and Pete really was the best of all. And opposed to other people, I wasn't that sad seeing him losing most of his matches after Wimbledon 2000. That's a normal process when athletes gets older, I was glad that he still was on the tour. And then he won the USO again in 2002... A golden moment.
fullbatterie 2 years ago 3
Will Federer start losing matches the same age Pete did? I don't think so because he has faced the same caliber of talent pete did so he want be as exhausted/beat up.
mljordan123 2 years ago
Somehow I don't get what you want to tell me.
fullbatterie 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Federer would beat Sampras without losing a set on all courts.
tlonsinkie 2 years ago
lol hahha, clearly that wasnt the case when Sampras beat him in straight sets in 07 Macau, exhibition or not, I know Federer would be competitive enough not to lose to a retired pro whose been inactive for 5 years
pistolpete58 2 years ago 2
and you know that how?? LOL you DONT, theyre the two greatest of all time and its ridiculous say who would beat who, its like me saying shaq would beat wilt chamberlain in his prime....again how do I prove that?? LOL
bigbossman999 2 years ago
Interesting prediction, especially considering that they they actually played once and Federer won losing two sets....
Thetoughestweight1 2 years ago
federer needs first need to beat Nadal than jump on next level
rangeboyry 1 year ago
Try Sampras of 97, put him against any Roger Federer prime, and witness a beating, I really do wish Sampras was 26 again as was Federer, then youll just see how many times Sampras would whip Federer of court and teach him a fucking lesson
pistolpete58 2 years ago 3
Come on.. Let's try to retain Pete's dignity. He was definitely a great champion with a couple of amazing weapons, but he would have been no match against Roger of '05.
whatareyoudoinfock 2 years ago
Roger wouldn't stand a chance vs Pete's S & V on a super quick court... none.
LDis1 2 years ago
the only fast surface left in Rog's era is deco turf in Cinci and New York (Roger doesn't play in LA, Washington or Indianapolis), and Rog's been doing pretty well in both, Hannover indoor hard seems even faster than deco turf, unfortunately carpet surfaces disappeared i dunno why they're slowing down the courts
andrewblastoff 2 years ago
Absolutely. 10 years ago, the courts were so much quicker, and Fed would have a tougher time with the faster serve and lightning quick volley that Sampras puts on, but, I suppose the reason they are slowing them down is because they want baseline rallies, see Nadal's playing style, Davydenko's style, etc.
If the faster courts were to comeback, Roger would actually do better than anyone else....
LDis1 2 years ago 3
If the faster courts were to come back, Federer and Del Potro would collect all the trophies, even Nadal wouldn't have a bite of the cake
89Pleasek 2 years ago
Federer for sure. Del Potro, eh, not too sure of him yet....
But Roger would win everything........ and not lose a match.
LDis1 2 years ago
I guess longer rallys are more appealing to the fans nowadays. Personally, I enjoy watching players duel it out on super fast surfaces. It's all reflexes.
CuprousChloride 2 years ago 2
You may be right, but Pete is more fun to watch than Roger.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
get real my freind federer story is weak on fundamentals...
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
what a loser player getting trashed by his single rival Nadal
all the time.
tennis will never have another Pete Sampras skill
rangeboyry 1 year ago
they aint same league my freind
roger is too busy trying to keep up against Nadal
Pete had 11 Nadal on his prime years
he was eating them alive on court
rangeboyry 1 year ago 2
tell me ... who won The first and only Federer/ Sampras match on Wimbledon's center court in the 4th round iin 2001?
Here are the facts:
Sampras is on a 3 winning streak on grass, and is playing pretty well.
Federer is unkown like 16th in the world, and only 19 year's old.
Guess who won ... ho yeah that's right... Federer.
You're funny. You're really funny.
You think you can compare their Competition based on how many grandslams winner there were at that time? It's pathetic.
jonatev00 1 year ago
Yeah the next round he lost to Henman. Are u trying to say that Henman is better that Pete?
cxyian 1 year ago
I'm not trying to say anything about Henman... You're just trying to extend my logic to something i HAVE not talked about.
Federer and Sampras played when Sampras was on a 33 winning streak VICTORY: i'm not saying he was playing the best tennis of his life NO! Of course not. He was playing well, that's all. Federer was 19, considered as a next futur champion who didn't confirm his potentiel. And Federer won. So you can not say that Sampras is the real goat and everything.
jonatev00 1 year ago
@jonatev00 he was not in 33 streak victory in 2001,check it
aleksandrpondios 1 year ago
Because someone who is contending as the GOAT has beaten him fair and square in the only match they played.
Still ,that match doesn't count for much in my opinion, but it's still an argument that's all
jonatev00 1 year ago 2
It's easy to lose a match during a bad day. So can you say Nadal is the GOAT when he is finishing his career when he has 12-13 grandslams just because he has beaten Federer for so many times?
Your argument simply doesn't make sense. It's not like Sampras got owned by Federer when they both are at their prime.
cxyian 1 year ago 2
First of all, Nadal doesn't have 12 GC, he has 6.
Secondly, Rodger FEderer has got 16 grand slams (and couting ...), whichh is more than Pete Sampras. He broke Sampras's record 3 years in advance.
Anyways, I'm not saying anything about owning eachh other. man you are so narrow minded, open your fucking eyes:
Sampras: 31 victories in a row
Federer: Noting
===== > Federer wins in a very good match, where Sampras played well.
IT's a fact, and it proves that Roger is very good thhat's all
jonatev00 1 year ago 2
and it proves that all the people wo say he didn't have competition are fucking wrong ...
He had the best competition OF ALL TIME.
that is wy he is
THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME: THE GOAT
jonatev00 1 year ago
@jonatev00
I admire Federer's game very much, and think it is the greatest style he plays.
But Sampras did have a bit better players: Jim Courier, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, Goran, Michael Chang, Pat Rafter, Richard Krajieck, Michael Stich and Andre Agassi...
Federer doesn't have that except for Nadal and when he was on, Marat Safin.
LDis1 1 year ago
@LDis1 I'm not dissing the players (just hoping for a discussion), but the players you name there are class, but would struggle on the slower courts of this era. Pete was pushed by these guys becasue he was not as complete as federer, I use that phrase very very lightly, Andre, Edberg, Rafter yes, but thoses other players, I doubt would have a chance in a US open final for example. Athletes nowadays are better, so there is more depth to the game ....
Jamus182 1 year ago
@LDis1 ....people who maybe do not posess the skill of an edberg, can more than make up for lost ground by being an amazing athlete, making it difficult to get past them. Look at football, don't take this in the wrong way, George Best use to turn up to games smashed from the night before and burn people all the time, but there is no way he could do it in the modern game like he did. Its the evolution of the player, but more importantly, the evolution of the courts and balls...
Jamus182 1 year ago
@LDis1 all these players Andre excluded, where aided greatly by lighter balls and faster courts, making their awsome serves even better, in this era to dominate, you cannot have a weakness, because it is amplified with the slower courts. Thats just my view, and i'd like to here yours
Jamus182 1 year ago
@Jamus182
Would you agree that faster courts takes a bit more skill on all the court? I would say Federer would do absolutely wonderful on carpet (one of the fastest surfaces) yeah sure you can play Serve and Volley, but you can also play baseline tennis on carpet like Ivan Lendl did, and Federer is by far a better player than Ivan Lendl. I reckon that a faster surface, a rather inferior volleyer like Nadal compared to Federer or Tsogna, would do pretty poorly.
LDis1 1 year ago
@LDis1 i completely agree about the nadal thing on faster courts, and agree that it takes a different kind of skill to play on those court. Timing is obvioulsy more of an issue, but thinking about it now, I think lendle would have done pretty well on the slower courts nowadays, dont know what my point is, ill just sit on the fence if thats K :)
Jamus182 1 year ago
@Jamus182 LOL funny. I don't think he will. Eventhough since 2004, he has missed probably about 3-4 grandslam due to injuries. But i heard he is only planning on playing one hardcourt tournament tune up before the USO. I think it's cincy one he is going to play in the next 4 weeks it will start.
Thutmosis7 1 year ago
@Thutmosis7 he will have a time out, almost no question, im not dissing the guy, but you do seem quite deluded that he is going to be injury free, and by that i mean not miss another tornament or retire. his best year was either this one, or 08, and what happened in 08, he missed the masters cup. Iv read one of your comments before about fed only having the slam record and that alone doesn't make him the greatest, but defo top 4. it is every thing else.....
Jamus182 1 year ago
@Thutmosis7 .........he has taken the consitancy of Ivan lendl and the prolific winning of sampras and laver, and combined them. One off the record of most consecutive finals, most consecutive final wins, the slam may never be possible, but 2006 in the opem era was proabably the greatest year for a player ever, the only other rivals are other federer years, and macnroes 87-3 season, and I know what your going to say, competition blah blah blah.......
Jamus182 1 year ago