Well, considering his success at Wimbledon makes up the BULK of his GS wins along with his overall stature... I'd say it was a big part of his game. Sure, he wasn't "strictly" that (as the game had started already to evolve into what it is now)... but that was his strength and its how he won the majority of his matches. He's definitely closer to serve/volley than he is to what Federer/Djokovic are now (guys who still have big serves, but don't look to go to the net... now Fed has started bringing some of that back with Edberg coaching him now).
Vitas Gerulaitis Guillermo Vilas Pancho Villa Pancho Gonzales Gonzalo Rubalcaba Spoiler Federer Sampras Laver Nadal Borg Djokovic Budge Tilden Connors Emerson
I don't understand people that try to downplay past athletes. You don't think that if they were playing in this day and age that they would also benefit from better health and nutrition and overall physiological knowledge? You don't think they'd be bigger and faster if they had personal trainers, personal cooks, and team doctors, etc?
I was specifically talking Serena and Martina. Serena is on another world when it comes to genetics and athleticism. Serena serve is faster than half the men that play on the tour including Nadal.
Tennis is one of the hardest sports to master as it requires physical and mental tenacity from an individual. There is also no coaching involved so it's all up to the player to make the best decisions. It is also played on multiple surfaces and technology (racquets, etc) has also changed through the decades. Too many variables. In my opinion, Nadal is king of clay. A prime Sampras would of given Federer a run for his money on grass. Hard court is up for debate. Who really is the best player will never be an unanimous vote.
Nutrition and new training is not that big of a deal to tennis as the new rackets are. Bjorn Borg had a heart rate less then Frank Shorter's -- 28 bpm. You could not outlast Borg. He was a freak. The difference in the game is the technology of the rackets. Not getting stronger; that's a women's tennis thing. To this day, John McEnroe is still the best server ever,,, no one could slice the ball like him. And he's the best serve and volley player ever and best doubles player ever. Now the rackets just allow for big booming flat serves and returns. Rackets have changed the game forever
HP, how do you justify saying McEnroe is the best server? If we want to measure by number of career aces served, than Goran Ivanisevic would be the best server ever.
Again, Ivanescevic did not serve in the wood racket era like Mac. Second, While McEnroe had a very high level of aces, his main focus was to to win the point on the serve or one volley. His serve not only had the biggest curve on it (and he was left handed) but it threw him into the net. No player got as deep into the net as did in his serve. He sacrifed velocity (which requires you to jump straight up) for a still high velocity serve but one that threw him into the court. His speed, accuracy, spin and how his chosen mechanics threw him into the court to get him closer to the net than anyone makes hi the best It's like pitchers in baseball. The fastest fastbAll does not make you the best. McEnrie chose not the hit a flat serve, because it is not good for serve and volley I can also explain this in the mechanics and aerodynamics of . Sampras's serve, with pictures
I can't put Sampras ahead of Nadal. Even Sampras thinks Nadal challenges Federer as GOAT. Agassi agrees.
Make that 3 trick pony. His forehand was lethal. Flat, hard, accurate and on the dead run just nasty. He's also deceptively athletic. covers the court in long strides and can burst to the net with a very fast 1st step. Don't let the curly hair and grandpa outfit fol you. I guess that would make him a 4 trick pony? oh man can we just call the guy great?
There is nothing Sampras did that was historically great, in regards to his skill set. Agassi was the best serve returner of all time. Only he and Connors would take serves within the baseline. Try that. Try to take a powerful serve on the rise within the baseline. It was unbelievable what Agassi could do, and he won 8 grand slams and won on every event. Sampras, Borg and McEnroe never won on every surface. The reason Agassi was able to do what Sampras, Borg and Mac couldn't do, was because he neutralized the serve with his return. Only recently do we have players like Federer and Nadal winning at every Grand Slam event. Agassi was the only one between them and Laver. Stop with this stupid talk that Agassi wouldn't be a top 15 player right now. Since Rod Laver, there are only three players who won every grand slam event: Agassi Federer Nadal Agassi is the most underrated tennis player on this board, apparently. Best return of server ever. Best baseline player ever, because he perfected (and advanced upon Connors' ability) to do the most difficult shot in the game...to hit the ball on the rise. Agassi would shorten the court on you. You are standing a yard or so behind the baseline and Agassi is standing at the baseline and inside it. The ball was coming back to you faster than you would see against any other player because of his ability to hit the ball on the rise.
Folks, let's not sell Pete Sampras short here. While he wasn't as flamboyant as other players, this dude let his play do the talking. He still had one of the best serves out there and dominated the field for years. A beast in his prime and top 5 players of the game.
Who's selling Sampras short? He is number 2 on most people's list, and one person has him 3 after nadal.
Who's selling Sampras short? He is number 2 on most people's list, and one person has him 3 after nadal.
My list Federer . . . . . Nadal Djoker Bjorn . Sampras . . Aggasi Connors etc Murray doesn't even deserve to be in this conversation.
I agree with this. If anything this thread is selling Nadal short not Sampras!!! And I used to "hate" Nadal with all my guts so I can't believe I'm saying this. And by seeing some of these convos here I'm certain some of these posters are from MTF. :grin:
