Sampras on grass and hard court, is among the greatest of all-times. Too bad he never won the Frog Open.
So much for Pete being too old. He did it! What a great match. I really thought Pete had blown it when he lost the third set, but he showed that he has the heart of a champion. It wasn't Andre's day today, but he too showed that he is a champion. It's a shame that someone had to lose.
that was an outstanding match... I thought after the third set that Agassi was gonna take it... he just looked way too fatigued... but i gotta give credit to Pete for playing his way through those LONG games in the third set and coming out on top...
That was just an awesome match. Sampras looked like the Sampras of old the first two sets. Dominant serve(Even against Andre's amazing baseline game), great aggression in going to the net, and a baseline game that rivaled Andre's. If this were it, if he were to call it a career right now, I think that most of his fans would agree that it was a fitting end.
I'm not a tennis historian or anything(I've seen select tape on TV here and there, seem a few old tapes that my coach has), but has there ever been much more competition in tennis than there was in the 90's? Sampras pretty much dominated the hard court as well...He had the most success on the grass, but was good on the hard court as well. It is definitely not fair to make him out to be a one-dimensional(Or court, rather) player. Lacks flair and dimension? Sampras has no glaring flaws...So he can't really lack anything. He is a much better baseline player than your average tennis pro, and is obviously one of the best(If not best) serve-and-volleyers of all time.
I hope you mean personality wise or something. No offense to God (Duncan) but he aint anywhere close to being as good in basketball as Sampras is in tennis.
someone explain how dominating at wimbeldon is turned into a negative for a career? anyways, both those guys are 2 of my favorite athletes ever so it was fun watching them for what could be the last time. hopefully not though.
Well Borg, Conners, Mac and Lendel all beat each other up a lot. In the last 10 years Sampras is the only guy at their level (though I think Sampras will go down as probably a notch better than any of them), and maybe Agassi, at least when he wasn't chasing tail or whatever he was doing keeping him from being focused on his game. Oh, he definetly wasn't one dimensional. He has been an unbelievable grass court player, and an exceptional hard court player. But he hasn't be exceptional in any way on clay, which is what, the surface of 30 or 40% of all pro tennis turnaments. Not having flaws and having flair and dimension are different things. J-Mac was a serve and volleyer but did it with more creativity. Agassi has more creative and improvisional shots also. Not saying either is the better player, they aren't, because Sampras has more power and is more methodical and has the results to prove it. But the latter (power, methodical approach, even if predictable) is just less interesting to watch IMO. The one serve and volleyer who might have been better was Rod Laver, the same guy I have heard tennis historians think was actually the greatist player ever.
While there hasn't been a truly awesome player besides Andre in this era, there have been more second-tier guys these last 10 years than ever before. Guys like Becker, Courier, Kafelnikov, Chang, and Rafter were all very competitive. I don't really think that Pete is a bad clay player(He has worked since the outset to be a better one), but that it is just some kind of mental block, kind of like Wilt's free throw shooting. I happen to like the straightforward approach to tennis that Pete has. The easiest way to score a point is at the net. A monster serve and good volleying will do it for you every time. But, that's just my preference. About this Rod Laver guy, I have never seen him play, and can't recall ever hearing his name(I don't talk to many big tennis fans, though.), but to be thought of as the best ever by anybody is exceptional. Must have been a heck of a player.
