Sampras circa 2003/4 interview article- link

[Carey]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/last-match-was-best-i-ever-played-says-sampras-83754.html

[Whisper]

On 2/08/2017 12:55 AM, Carey wrote:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/last-match-was-best-i-ever-played-says-sampras-83754.html
>


It's best in 1 way. In absolute terms he said Wim '99 final was the best
match he ever played. Hard to argue with that one.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Shakes]

I think his performance in the 1999 YEC Final tops the 1999 Wim F in terms of level of play. Obviously, the Wim F stakes were much higher.

[*skriptis]

Shakes <kvcs...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

I kinda
"like" the fact he lost RR match to Agassi and them beat
him in the final.

Djokovic won YEC in the same manner in 2015.

Obviously total dominance rules, but these types of scores and
results speak a lot about player's ability to up his game in a
(more) important match vs same opponent only few days later.



--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[Whisper]

Wimbledon '99 is how Sampras woulda played his whole career if he had
higher caliber opposition like Fed/Rafa. He was pissed that Agassi just
achieved career slam after FO '99 & wanted to show who was boss. I also
haven't seen Agassi play better & with more confidence than that final,
yet Sampras won 63 64 75. That version of Sampras is the one I want to
see play peak Fed at Wim/USO. Imo Sampras wins.

[RaspingDrive]

On Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 6:47:47 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> On 2/08/2017 12:55 AM, Carey wrote:
> > http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/last-match-was-best-i-ever-played-says-sampras-83754.html
> >
>
>
> It's best in 1 way. In absolute terms he said Wim '99 final was the best
> match he ever played. Hard to argue with that one.

He beat who, his pigeon Agassi? It is like Fed beating Stan.

[RaspingDrive]

And then loses to the likes of Stan, Querrey, Berdych etc and goes missing after that. Nice dominance.

Dominance is Nadal on Clay. Simply irresistible. Not even Federer is that dominant on grass.

[RaspingDrive]

Agassi on grass. OK.

[*skriptis]

RaspingDrive <raspin...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

I was having winning YEC with a 5-0 score on my mind vs 4-1 score.

[*skriptis]

RaspingDrive <raspin...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

But it was "best Agassi ever" and an easy 3-0 for Sampras.

[*skriptis]

RaspingDrive <raspin...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Unfair comparison. More like Djokovic beating Murray. And we know
that one is never a given one. Murray could and in fact did beat
Djokovic in a couple of very important and high stake matches.

[RaspingDrive]

I thought you seemed to be raving about winning when it matters. Against a dilapidated 34 year old at the end of a long season. Fitness and hard work prevailed, that's it.

[RaspingDrive]

Still it was Agassi the pigeon :) On grass.

[RaspingDrive]

But Agassi? Except at AO? Your comparison is at the other end, also unfair :)

[*skriptis]

Dilapidated at 34, but wins Wimbledon for the first time in his
life without losing a set, at almost 36?

Doesn't compute.

[RaspingDrive]

Factor in natural talent on grass + WoO and it will :)

[*skriptis]

That's ok then. ;)

[RaspingDrive]

Seriously, why be satisfied with a couple of Wimbledon wins? He should be knocking on the door more often. Federer the natural on grass keeps coming back again and again and again and hence deserves the WoO.

[Whisper]

Not really. Rafa made 5 Wimbledon finals in a row. Agassi has a more
grass-friendly game than Rafa no?

[RaspingDrive]

He also had a Sampy-friendly game ;) Seriously, you are talking about a GOAT level on grass (Sampras) doing well versus Agassi? You can surely do better.

[*skriptis]

Of course it does.

[Patrick Kehoe]

At the time of the Pete-Andre W final, I remember my wife and I just saying, 'wow' and 'incredible' a lot... it was a TRULY awesome display by Pete... stamping his court, his mantle at his greatest venue...

P

[TT]

Patrick Kehoe kirjoitti 3.8.2017 klo 22:45:
>
> At the time of the Pete-Andre W final, I remember my wife and I just saying, 'wow' and 'incredible' a lot... it was a TRULY awesome display by Pete... stamping his court, his mantle at his greatest venue...
>
> P
>

Frankly the whole world was awestruck by the sheer boredom of the match.
I probably was not the only one praying that Andre would get a ball back
and A RALLY would ensue..

[Whisper]

Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?

[MBDunc]

perjantai 4. elokuuta 2017 11.10.30 UTC+3 Whisper kirjoitti:
> Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?

Evidences (2-1) show that better than Mac did against Borg (1-1), no?

.mikko

[Whisper]

Yes, *arguably* the best Wimbledon final in open era, in terms of 2 all
time greats playing peak level stuff. Pity it couldn't go 5 sets.

[RaspingDrive]

You clueless one, Nadal is not Fed's pigeon the same way Agassi is Sampras's.
Also, why are you asking me the question when you have already categorically pontificated that Nadal will beat Fed in straight sets on grass in 2017 W?
Take my suggestion and travel with family :)

[RaspingDrive]

Sampras playing his pigeon. OK.

[Whisper]

On 4/08/2017 11:02 PM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:10:30 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
>> On 4/08/2017 2:55 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
>>>
>>> He also had a Sampy-friendly game ;) Seriously, you are talking about a GOAT level on grass (Sampras) doing well versus Agassi? You can surely do better.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?
>
> You clueless one, Nadal is not Fed's pigeon the same way Agassi is Sampras's.

Agassi always played great v Sampras. His problem was Pete targeted him
as his main rival & always brought out the big guns. 'Pigeon' is for 2
guys evenly matched, but 1 always losing due to mental issues. Sampras
was clearly a better tennis player than Andre, so if he played his best
he was going to win most of the time. Fed & Rafa are evenly matched
overall - Fed far more consistent, Rafa better when he brings his A
game. Fed is more of a pigeon for Rafa than Agassi was for Pete,
because they were not evenly matched.

> Also, why are you asking me the question when you have already categorically pontificated that Nadal will beat Fed in straight sets on grass in 2017 W?
> Take my suggestion and travel with family :)
>

Travel is overrated. 90% of the time it bores me to tears & I couldn't
wait to get home - painful exercise. Yes there are some great
experiences, but 90% of it is people doing same stuff I do at home, but
I live in a better place.

In my experience people doing a lot of traveling are sad on the inside,
looking for something more from life. Their normal life is so arduous
they need to get away. Makes me realize how fortunate I am to have an
amazing life I hardly want to run away from. I don't need to sit on a
big mountain or wade through Amazon jungle to find myself/enlightenment.

The very best thing about travel is coming home.

: )

[*skriptis]

Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com> Wrote in message:

Great post.

[AZ]

Bullshit level 10/10 detected.

[RaspingDrive]

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 10:47:02 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> On 4/08/2017 11:02 PM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> > On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:10:30 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 4/08/2017 2:55 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> >>>
> >>> He also had a Sampy-friendly game ;) Seriously, you are talking about a GOAT level on grass (Sampras) doing well versus Agassi? You can surely do better.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?
> >
> > You clueless one, Nadal is not Fed's pigeon the same way Agassi is Sampras's.
>
> Agassi always played great v Sampras. His problem was Pete targeted him
> as his main rival & always brought out the big guns. 'Pigeon' is for 2
> guys evenly matched, but 1 always losing due to mental issues. Sampras
> was clearly a better tennis player than Andre, so if he played his best
> he was going to win most of the time. Fed & Rafa are evenly matched
> overall - Fed far more consistent, Rafa better when he brings his A
> game. Fed is more of a pigeon for Rafa than Agassi was for Pete,
> because they were not evenly matched.

It is all semantics. According to you (i) they are not evenly matched; (ii) Sampras always brought his best guns; (iii) Sampras was clearly a better tennis player. Add to these Agassi and grass. What result did you expect? To me it seems like Fed and Stan. So show some evidence of thought in advance of expressions of undiluted admiration for their duels.

> > Take my suggestion and travel with family :)
> >
>
> Travel is overrated. 90% of the time it bores me to tears & I couldn't
> wait to get home - painful exercise. Yes there are some great
> experiences, but 90% of it is people doing same stuff I do at home, but
> I live in a better place.
>
> In my experience people doing a lot of traveling are sad on the inside,
> looking for something more from life. Their normal life is so arduous
> they need to get away. Makes me realize how fortunate I am to have an
> amazing life I hardly want to run away from. I don't need to sit on a
> big mountain or wade through Amazon jungle to find myself/enlightenment.
>
> The very best thing about travel is coming home.
>
> : )

Me too. Don't like travel too much. My better half is worse, likes home best. In fact, no time for travel, since we (have to) travel to India twice each year.

[RaspingDrive]

Whisper and co are raving about that match up. He he he. Skriptis goes one up and showers accolades. Good for him.

[Guypers]

Needs his proteins, usually booby swallows!

[Whisper]

My wife likes it a little more than me, though she too prefers home. I
make an effort if she really wants me to go, but if she's happy to take
a friend/family member & leave me at home I'm happy.

[John Liang]

2:1 head to head, 8 titles to 2, 11 finals vs 5 finals.

[John Liang]

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 12:47:02 AM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> On 4/08/2017 11:02 PM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> > On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:10:30 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 4/08/2017 2:55 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> >>>
> >>> He also had a Sampy-friendly game ;) Seriously, you are talking about a GOAT level on grass (Sampras) doing well versus Agassi? You can surely do better.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?
> >
> > You clueless one, Nadal is not Fed's pigeon the same way Agassi is Sampras's.
>
> Agassi always played great v Sampras. His problem was Pete targeted him
> as his main rival & always brought out the big guns. 'Pigeon' is for 2
> guys evenly matched, but 1 always losing due to mental issues.

That was clearly what Agassi was to Samrpas on the fast surface like USO and Wimbledon. Remember what you said about Agassi a few years ago, the guy managed to eek a single Wimbledon against a choking Ivanisevic, he barely got a 2nd USO against Martin in 5 sets, winning the FO against 99th ranked Medvedev after been down 2 sets.

>Sampras
> was clearly a better tennis player than Andre, so if he played his best
> he was going to win most of the time. Fed & Rafa are evenly matched
> overall - Fed far more consistent, Rafa better when he brings his A
> game. Fed is more of a pigeon for Rafa than Agassi was for Pete,
> because they were not evenly matched.

Rafa's better on clay but not anywhere else. 18 hard court and grass court slam titles compare to 5 pretty much said it all. If the player is only able to bring his A game once in 10 slams then he isn't better.

[Whisper]

On 5/08/2017 1:12 PM, John Liang wrote:
>>
>> Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
>
> 2:1 head to head, 8 titles to 2, 11 finals vs 5 finals.
>

Now post the same categories for Sampras v Hewitt.

thanks

[Whisper]

On 5/08/2017 1:19 PM, John Liang wrote:
> On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 12:47:02 AM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
>> On 4/08/2017 11:02 PM, RaspingDrive wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:10:30 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
>>>> On 4/08/2017 2:55 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> He also had a Sampy-friendly game ;) Seriously, you are talking about a GOAT level on grass (Sampras) doing well versus Agassi? You can surely do better.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Isn't Fed 'goat level on grass'? How'd he do v Rafa on grass?
>>>
>>> You clueless one, Nadal is not Fed's pigeon the same way Agassi is Sampras's.
>>
>> Agassi always played great v Sampras. His problem was Pete targeted him
>> as his main rival & always brought out the big guns. 'Pigeon' is for 2
>> guys evenly matched, but 1 always losing due to mental issues.
>
> That was clearly what Agassi was to Samrpas on the fast surface like USO and Wimbledon. Remember what you said about Agassi a few years ago, the guy managed to eek a single Wimbledon against a choking Ivanisevic, he barely got a 2nd USO against Martin in 5 sets, winning the FO against 99th ranked Medvedev after been down 2 sets.
>
>> Sampras
>> was clearly a better tennis player than Andre, so if he played his best
>> he was going to win most of the time. Fed & Rafa are evenly matched
>> overall - Fed far more consistent, Rafa better when he brings his A
>> game. Fed is more of a pigeon for Rafa than Agassi was for Pete,
>> because they were not evenly matched.
>
> Rafa's better on clay but not anywhere else. 18 hard court and grass court slam titles compare to 5 pretty much said it all. If the player is only able to bring his A game once in 10 slams then he isn't better.

You always said Hewitt had Sampras's number, yet never the same with
Rafa v Fed?

Curious contradiction.

[John Liang]

Now post your famous Federer winning 1 slam or Sampras on steroid Roddick.

[John Liang]

Players are judged on what grand slams they won not their h2h, curious contradiction from you. One rule for Sampras and one rule for Federer.

[The Iceberg]

On Thursday, 3 August 2017 14:53:49 UTC+1, Whisper wrote:
> On 3/08/2017 5:17 AM, Shakes wrote:

> > On Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 3:47:47 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 2/08/2017 12:55 AM, Carey wrote:
> >>> http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/last-match-was-best-i-ever-played-says-sampras-83754.html
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> It's best in 1 way. In absolute terms he said Wim '99 final was the best
> >> match he ever played. Hard to argue with that one.
> >>

> >> ---
> >> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> >> http://www.avg.com
> >

> > I think his performance in the 1999 YEC Final tops the 1999 Wim F in terms of level of play. Obviously, the Wim F stakes were much higher.
> >
>
>

> Wimbledon '99 is how Sampras woulda played his whole career if he had
> higher caliber opposition like Fed/Rafa. He was pissed that Agassi just
> achieved career slam after FO '99 & wanted to show who was boss. I also
> haven't seen Agassi play better & with more confidence than that final,
> yet Sampras won 63 64 75. That version of Sampras is the one I want to
> see play peak Fed at Wim/USO. Imo Sampras wins.

agreed, it was a crazy final, Sampras served amazing, he invented a new era of serving with that match really.

[The Iceberg]

most of my friends/relatives the same, they always like coming home most of any holiday or travel. I the total opposite, find it fun/exciting seeing new unusual places, things, people and the nice/different weather etc. happy at home, but get bored, although when travelling, do miss playing tennis at my club(even the Fedfans ok sometimes) and working with the burgers! :)

[MBDunc]

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 4:02:00 PM UTC+3, The Iceberg wrote:
> agreed, it was a crazy final, Sampras served amazing, he invented a new era of serving with that match really.

2nd serve win% was pretty low... 39%.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/pete-sampras/S402/overview/match-stats/540/1999/A092/match-stats

But I agree that Pete's USO 2002 final form was superb and maybe his best (remember also that Agassi had switched to next-gen strings Spring 2002).

For to compare, slower USO 2002 (1st year with slower USO) and final stats: http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/pete-sampras/S402/overview/match-stats/560/2002/A092/match-stats

.mikko

[Whisper]

On 5/08/2017 11:58 PM, MBDunc wrote:
> On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 4:02:00 PM UTC+3, The Iceberg wrote:
>> agreed, it was a crazy final, Sampras served amazing, he invented a new era of serving with that match really.
>
> 2nd serve win% was pretty low... 39%.
>
> http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/pete-sampras/S402/overview/match-stats/540/1999/A092/match-stats
>
> But I agree that Pete's USO 2002 final form was superb and maybe his best (remember also that Agassi had switched to next-gen strings Spring 2002).

Imagine if that were true - Sampras played his best ever tennis - in the
very last match of his career.

What a mindfuck.

: )

[RaspingDrive]

You are not working with burgers, are you? :)
The main trouble with travel is the expenses :)

[RaspingDrive]

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 10:35:00 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> On 5/08/2017 11:58 PM, MBDunc wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 4:02:00 PM UTC+3, The Iceberg wrote:
> >> agreed, it was a crazy final, Sampras served amazing, he invented a new era of serving with that match really.
> >
> > 2nd serve win% was pretty low... 39%.
> >
> > http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/pete-sampras/S402/overview/match-stats/540/1999/A092/match-stats
> >
> > But I agree that Pete's USO 2002 final form was superb and maybe his best (remember also that Agassi had switched to next-gen strings Spring 2002).
>
>
> Imagine if that were true - Sampras played his best ever tennis - in the
> very last match of his career.
>
> What a mindfuck.
>
> : )
>

Agassi again!

[Whisper]

Yes Agassi again. He's a great link we have to compare the generations.

You do realize the 2 times Fed beat Agassi at USO were much tougher than
all 4 times Sampras beat Agassi right? Fed labored harder v Agassi at
USO than Sampras ever did. Indeed old Agassi even smashed Federer in
straights at 2001 USO. If Fed was 'too young' in 2001, how come Sampras
won USO at same age, beating 4 world No.1's & smashing Agassi in the final?

Here's another thought - Sampras played peak Agassi while Fed was at his
peak playing geriatric Agassi.

So rather than dismissing Agassi, you should consider yourself very
fortunate to have this direct evidence, rather than just making stuff up
in coulda/woulda land.

[MBDunc]

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 9:07:44 PM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
> You do realize the 2 times Fed beat Agassi at USO were much tougher than
> all 4 times Sampras beat Agassi right? Fed labored harder v Agassi at
> USO than Sampras ever did. Indeed old Agassi even smashed Federer in
> straights at 2001 USO. If Fed was 'too young' in 2001, how come Sampras
> won USO at same age, beating 4 world No.1's & smashing Agassi in the final?
>
> Here's another thought - Sampras played peak Agassi while Fed was at his
> peak playing geriatric Agassi.
>
> So rather than dismissing Agassi, you should consider yourself very
> fortunate to have this direct evidence, rather than just making stuff up
> in coulda/woulda land.
>
> : )

...of course Fed won his last eight meetings with Agassi 2003-2005 and also totally trounced him at their AO slam meeting 2005. You probably cannot do better than that.

Even Sampras was trailing 0-5 h2h against Chang at some point before sorted things right.

.mikko

[jdeluise]

Must have been peakity peak Chang against baby Pete? :)

[Guypers]

LOL, whimpy, like booby gets fukked up his again?

[MBDunc]

Of course Chang is younger than Pete.... :)

.mikko

[soccerfan777]

Good job Mikko

[Shakes]

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 6:58:43 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
> On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 4:02:00 PM UTC+3, The Iceberg wrote:
> > agreed, it was a crazy final, Sampras served amazing, he invented a new era of serving with that match really.
>
> 2nd serve win% was pretty low... 39%.
>
> http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/pete-sampras/S402/overview/match-stats/540/1999/A092/match-stats

You do realize that the ATP stats are erroneous for that time period ? These are the correct stats for the 1999 Wim F.

http://web.archive.org/web/19991122183359/championships.wimbledon.org/scores/stats/day14/0127ms.html

More info here:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/incorrect-atp-stats-a-survey.207411/

[Carey]

...and WRT the mighty Michael Chang? :))))

[Carey]

...and noting too that in those first five meetings with Sampras that Monster
Michael won, he was 11-1 in sets...

[bob]

On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:17:14 -0700 (PDT), Carey <carey...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>...and noting too that in those first five meetings with Sampras that Monster
>Michael won, he was 11-1 in sets...

as teens, i believe sampras lost to chang and a lot of other guys
quite badly while he was fine tuning the s/v game, from the 2h bh.

bob

[Shakes]

The Sampras-Chang dynamic ? Seems very similar to the Fed-Hewitt dynamic to me.

[Shakes]

Well, yes, Fed did not lose to Agassi since 2003. But Agassi did very well overall against Fed's peers as well - Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero etc. So, in a way, he does show that the top players of his era would've held their own against Fed's generation.

> Even Sampras was trailing 0-5 h2h against Chang at some point before sorted things right.
>
> .mikko

Except Chang and Sampras were in the same age group and Sampras cannot be accused of beating a past-his-prime Chang. Sampras-Chang H2H was similar to the Fed-Hewitt H2H in pattern.

[bob]

On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 18:25:11 -0700 (PDT), Shakes <kvcs...@gmail.com>

ahahah...

bob

[Carey]

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 6:30:28 PM UTC-7, Shakes wrote:

> Except Chang and Sampras were in the same age group and Sampras cannot be accused of beating a past-his-prime Chang. Sampras-Chang H2H was similar to the Fed-Hewitt H2H in pattern.

I think this is true. Attacking players often, maybe almost always, have trouble with grinders at first.

[John Liang]

On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 4:07:44 AM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> On 6/08/2017 1:13 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 10:35:00 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 5/08/2017 11:58 PM, MBDunc wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 4:02:00 PM UTC+3, The Iceberg wrote:
> >>>> agreed, it was a crazy final, Sampras served amazing, he invented a new era of serving with that match really.
> >>>
> >>> 2nd serve win% was pretty low... 39%.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/pete-sampras/S402/overview/match-stats/540/1999/A092/match-stats
> >>>
> >>> But I agree that Pete's USO 2002 final form was superb and maybe his best (remember also that Agassi had switched to next-gen strings Spring 2002).
> >>
> >>
> >> Imagine if that were true - Sampras played his best ever tennis - in the
> >> very last match of his career.
> >>
> >> What a mindfuck.
> >>
> >> : )
> >>
> >
> > Agassi again!
> >
>
>
> Yes Agassi again. He's a great link we have to compare the generations.
>
> You do realize the 2 times Fed beat Agassi at USO were much tougher than
> all 4 times Sampras beat Agassi right? Fed labored harder v Agassi at
> USO than Sampras ever did.

You do realize that straight after those matches, an idiot named Whisper said if it was not for the windy condition Agassi would not even come close to threaten Federer. Was that idiot Whisper the same Whisper ? Also Agassi's best performing slam was AO and he beat Sampras twice, Sampras labored hard just to get to five sets and still lost, Federer beat Agassi in straight sets.

>Indeed old Agassi even smashed Federer in
> straights at 2001 USO. If Fed was 'too young' in 2001, how come Sampras
> won USO at same age, beating 4 world No.1's & smashing Agassi in the final?

Federer was near 20, old Agassi was still ranked higher than a young Federer and was a great player with vast grand slam experience, what about Sampras losing to potential Wimbledon great like Christo Van Rensburg or Derrick Rostagno around the same age.

[Carey]

Wimbledon 1991: 19 year old Pete Sampras loses to nobody Derrick Rostagno in 2r.

Wimbledon 2001: 19 year old Roger Federer beats seven-time and defending champion Pete Sampras in fourth round on Center Court, in front of God and
everybody...


Bwahahahaha

[MBDunc]

I had some info about this but I though it applied mostly to early 90:ies. Thanks.

.mikko

[RaspingDrive]

What a wasted effort. I have said Sampras is in the select list of GOAT contenders, so what is the problem? That I should not hold the view that the Sampras vs Agassi match-up was nothing to rave about and that Sampras had all the cards to destroy Agassi every single time at W and USO?

[Whisper]

Fedfuckers are special. They think Fed would beat Rafa on clay 'but for
poor tactics', & Fed achieved more at age 19 than Sampras (light yrs
difference in achievement).

This is how the unmedicated mind works for damaged people.

[John Liang]

On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 9:05:22 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> On 6/08/2017 12:22 PM, Carey wrote:
> > Wimbledon 1991: 19 year old Pete Sampras loses to nobody Derrick Rostagno in 2r.
> >
> > Wimbledon 2001: 19 year old Roger Federer beats seven-time and defending champion Pete Sampras in fourth round on Center Court, in front of God and
> > everybody...
> >
> >
> > Bwahahahaha
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Fedfuckers are special. They think Fed would beat Rafa on clay 'but for
> poor tactics', & Fed achieved more at age 19 than Sampras (light yrs
> difference in achievement).

Fed did not achieve more at 19 than Sampras but with his career still going strong he has 5 more slam than Sampras, more Wimbledon titls, more AO titles and more FO titles and equal number of USO titles. Fedfuckers certainly have a sense of superiority in intelligence to dumb ass like you.

>
> This is how the unmedicated mind works for damaged people.

That is a nice piece of advice more appropriate for you and bob.