Pete Sampras vs Roger Federer

**Dunder** · 01-31-10, 05:39 PM

At their peak I would have them about even on grass.
On hardcourts and clay, Federer is the better player.

IMHO, of course.

**michalis** · 01-31-10, 05:41 PM

what are u talking about? federer can beat any past, present and future player with ease, he is in a class of his own, he had to have a really bad year or so to even fall from no.1 just for a little while, then he switched the engines back on just to break a few more records and go out as a legend

**dwaechte** · 01-31-10, 05:41 PM

Federer, easy.

**jjgold** · 01-31-10, 05:46 PM

Close

Fed is a better baseliner
Fed better on clay

Sampras much better server
Sampras a much better volly player
Sampras less chance to get tight

Hardcourts/Grass Sampras wins 60% of their matches

**Boner_18** · 01-31-10, 05:47 PM

No contest. They have played exhibitions and Fed wins. Of course people would contest that Sampras in his prime could beat Fed. Not even an issue. The game is more competitive and the top 40 is deeper than it has ever been and Federer is still CRUSHING records. I'm not talking about Grand Slam titles, I'm talking about consecutive Grand Slam Semi-Finals at 23. The nearest contender to that record is Ivan Lendal with 10, less than half. This guy is perhaps the greatest professional athlete of all time.

**flyingillini** · 01-31-10, 05:50 PM

I am having lunch with Jimmy Connors tomorrow. If anyone would like to join me let me know, I will pick up the tab. We will be at The Montecito Cafe, 1:30pm.

Jane Restaurant | Santa Barbara & Goleta

http://www.montecitocafe.com/

**WINGZ** · 01-31-10, 05:51 PM

Federer

**WINGZ** · 01-31-10, 05:51 PM

without a doubt!!

**jjgold** · 01-31-10, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by flyingillini

I am having lunch with Jimmy Connors tomorrow. If anyone would like to join me let me know, I will pick up the tab. We will be at The Montecito Cafe, 1:30pm.
http://www.montecitocafe.com/

**flyingillini** · 01-31-10, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by jjgold

He is a buddy of mine, our mutual friend is our Knee Dr.

**michalis** · 01-31-10, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by flyingillini

I am having lunch with Jimmy Connors tomorrow. If anyone would like to join me let me know, I will pick up the tab. We will be at The Montecito Cafe, 1:30pm.
http://www.montecitocafe.com/

nice man, too bad i'm a few thousand miles away

**MC PICKS** · 01-31-10, 06:42 PM

Sampras.

**EaglesPhan36** · 01-31-10, 06:45 PM

Considering that Federer beat Sampras when he was a young buck at Wimbledon in 2001, I'd say Federer because he's only gotten better. Pete might have been a tad past his prime at 30 that year, but considering he made the US Open final the same year and won it in 2002 - I'd say Federer still got a decent look at Pete the Great.

**RobbReport** · 01-31-10, 07:40 PM

what about Agassi? he said Federer and nadal era is over and Djoker and Murray will soon dominate.

**beefcake** · 01-31-10, 10:22 PM

Originally posted by flyingillini

I am having lunch with Jimmy Connors tomorrow. If anyone would like to join me let me know, I will pick up the tab. We will be at The Montecito Cafe, 1:30pm.
http://www.montecitocafe.com/

Id be curious to know what Jimmy's opinion of Agassi is after Andre slammed him in his book...

**iceminers26** · 01-31-10, 10:27 PM

Originally posted by RobbReport

what about Agassi? he said Federer and nadal era is over and Djoker and Murray will soon dominate.

Ask Murray about that today after his beat down by Feds in straights

**whatsgood5** · 01-31-10, 10:30 PM

Federer, not even close

**Fthenorm** · 01-31-10, 11:00 PM

Keep in mind the Sampras era had far superior competition. The sampras backhand was not considered a weakness as is Fed's. Do you really think a player would ever consider hitting only to the Sampras backhand in a major final? I would give the nod to sampras...the number of majors fed has is an aberration relative to competition at the time...all he had was shitty Roddick in his way for about a third of them. The one guy better than fed beat him in all the major finals in which they met.

**MartinBlank** · 01-31-10, 11:52 PM

If Federer wasn't playing agains the greatest clay court player of the last 30 years (Nadal), he would have another 3 grand slams.

Fed has reached the semis of every grand slam tourney for the last 6 friggin years.

Sampras doesn't come close to that accomplishment.

Fed is the greatest tennis player any of us will see in our lifetime.

**lcf** · 02-01-10, 01:49 AM

Sampras wins on grass and hard court at least 70% of the matches
Federer wins on clay 98% of the matches

**Busterflywheel** · 02-01-10, 08:22 AM

FED baby

**Marginalis** · 02-01-10, 08:24 AM

Federer

**Boner_18** · 02-01-10, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by Fthenorm

Keep in mind the Sampras era had far superior competition. The sampras backhand was not considered a weakness as is Fed's. Do you really think a player would ever consider hitting only to the Sampras backhand in a major final? I would give the nod to sampras...the number of majors fed has is an aberration relative to competition at the time...all he had was shitty Roddick in his way for about a third of them. The one guy better than fed beat him in all the major finals in which they met.

You conception of the previous era's competition and todays lack thereof is completely askew IMO. I feel that the top 50 and certainly the top 20 is deeper with a better game today than it ever has been in the past. Just because the man makes them look like juniors doesn't mean they suck, but that he is far and away superior.

**jjgold** · 02-01-10, 08:50 AM

Most of you guys do not understand match ups but just see stats. Fed has most majors but would be a very difficult match up against Pete.

**Boner_18** · 02-01-10, 08:57 AM

They have played each other JJ back in the day and recently too. Fed always wins. Also, Sampras retired at 32, we shall see how Fed stacks up to this retirement age/remains competitive time will only tell of this measure.

**RobbReport** · 02-01-10, 09:00 AM

Originally posted by iceminers26

Ask Murray about that today after his beat down by Feds in straights

Murray just could deal with the 30+ years of pressure, plus Fed was playing really good for the tournament. The last few tournaments Fed played like shit.

**jjgold** · 02-01-10, 09:01 AM

Fed had a perfect tourney, Murray did a good job and fed had to work his ass off for most points.

**Bootylicious** · 02-01-10, 09:08 AM

Fed is the Tiger woods of tennis w/o the whoring around.

**RobbReport** · 02-01-10, 09:34 AM

yeah, if i was Fed i would only hit models...i think Verdasco has it right.

**aguy** · 02-01-10, 09:42 AM

in their primes, pete would have a good chance on grass and hardcourts. fed would obv win on clay.

**PingPong** · 02-01-10, 09:44 AM

it depends what game federer would use. a lot of people forget he used to serve and volley a lot. wish he would bring that back

**acarmelo1** · 02-01-10, 11:30 AM

Nice Debate

Its Hard to decide

I Say Piston Pete Wins

**Boner_18** · 02-01-10, 01:14 PM

Originally posted by PingPong

it depends what game federer would use. a lot of people forget he used to serve and volley a lot. wish he would bring that back

I'm sure he will when he hits the end of his career.

**jjgold** · 02-01-10, 01:18 PM

Fed is not even close to a good serve and volley player anymore and was not half the serve and volley guy Pete was. Fed could never break Pete's serve but Pete could break Fed's serve.