sampras best moments

sampras best tennis

www.tanishkavideos.blogspot.com

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• Wimbledon

[jcmt04]

Yeah !!

[Sebbi567]

shitty music...

[rolf85]

your raping pete with this music...

[hhgtipower]

pete would destroy djokovic at his peak, without a doubt, he is an idol, sportsman and simply a legend!

[Fuck8Yeah]

Una verdadera mierda.

Yankees de mierda, festejan cualquier estupidez

[Rimpianto]

@ARKN06 - I'm not a Pete fan, actually I've been an Agassi fan. The problem comparing different eras is that you can't fully understand if a player was great or opponents weak. To respond to your digression about 80s players, Agassi ranked N.3 in 1988@18yo, when Wilander was still 24 and Lendl 28. I would say that in the early 90s Mats was still in his prime and Lendl and Mac on the downhill side of their career. And Fed too had problems in his early career against "old" 90s players.

[ARKN06]

Respond to this video... My asking you what you were at 17 was not an insult. I too was just in High School then. Sampras for years never went beyond R64 till 92. While I like Fed I hate how Sampras fans big him up by naming 80s players in his comp. The truly great era was the 80s and then the 70s. I think choosing between 90s and 00s is splitting hairs. And yes .... Agassi's best surface was RB followed by HC. I was just being a bit pinching. He was however imo better on clay than on grass.

[ARKN06]

Respond to this video... Nole and Nadal arrived long back. You dont see Fed is 30? Prime Sampras and Co were being beaten when in their 20s by a teen Hewitt. Nadal still has a losing overall h2h outside of clay to Fed and in Slams too outside of FO. Well into their 20s they were still losing to Fed on the faster surfaces. If you watched the USO 10 SF you saw how Fed let Djoker get away after winning the first set. He was not beating Fed outside of the AO till then. With Djoker its Fed's decline.

[ARKN06]

@Rimpianto Speaking of Agassi's prime .. WHEN was it? Rather .... WHAT was it? Other than 92 (ONLY Wimby beating past prime Becker/Mac and 1D choker Goran), 95 and 99 what was he doing? R128 exits THREE times in 96/97/98? Outside top 100 for weeks on end? Even in his "prime" which was in installments off and on he lost to past-his-prime Becker at Wimby 95. So 1) WHAT is Agassi's prime? and 2) WHEN was it?

[ARKN06]

@Rimpianto Becker is Nov 67 born; Edberg early (Jan) 66 born; Sampras is 71 born. 71-67 = 2? I see. ALSO Becker won his FIRST Wimbledon at 17. What were you doing at 17?! HA. Your Pete was playing on the Junior circuit at 17 (Played first Wimby at 18). Never went beyond R64 then. And won his first Wimby at almost 22. Becker's prime was EIGHT (93 - 85) years earlier than Sampras'. THAT is VERY important. Agassi was not an early achiever like Borg/Becker or even Edberg. Agassi's prime was later.

[Rimpianto]

@ARKN06 - This is pretty much crap just to make your point. Becker is 1967, 2 years older than Pete. Edberg '66. You say "way past prime" players, so a 35y.o. Agassi who reach the USopen finals what should be, dead? So, to use your own conjectures, Federer had even less competitors in his era! Indeed, it can be true, when Nadal and then Nole arrived Fed started loosing big time! What you say can be true about grass, but overall 90's were much harder. Btw, Agassi a clay player? Get real man!

[ARKN06]

Fed at peak in the 90s would have won 8 to 10 Wimbies. Sampras was lucky to play in such a weak era. All he had was a big serve and a decent forehand. Fed's all-round game would have negated him. Had fed been born 10 years earlier and played in the 90s he gets to face WAY PAST PRIME Becker and the retired 80s gen. He never FACES Stich/Krajicek. He destroys 1D choker Goran, Rafter and Martin are toast and Sampras is a sitting goose at the net as his bombs are returned with interest.