I don't like either Nadal or Federer, but I admire the ability of them both.
I prefer Federer slightly, because I prefer hi style of play.
I prefer Federer slightly, because I prefer hi style of play.
Buy on AliExpress.com
The Official Tennis Thread (15 Viewers)
- Thread starter HelterSkelter
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
OP
Nadal has officialy gone to Federer's head now.Here starts Federer's decline,and Nadal's rise to the top.By decline im talking about Nadal getting the better of him in the future.Federer will win more grandslams,provided that he doesnt face Nadal.
But like him or hate him,Federer is pure class.You need more than luck to come back from two sets down in a grandslam final.Still,he does have a lot of Tennis in him,and i do expect him to end up with the highest number of grandslam wins when he retires.12 grandslams in a span of 5 years is freakish no matter how you put it.Perhaps you could argue that Sampras had more comeptition in his time,but you could also argue that Federer has been too good to let anyone challenge him seriously..until now atleast.I think Federer has a more complete game than Sampras though.He is capable of winning the French Open too,but he ends up facing a clay court freak everytime.Sampras on the other hand,couldnt win on clay to save his life.
But like him or hate him,Federer is pure class.You need more than luck to come back from two sets down in a grandslam final.Still,he does have a lot of Tennis in him,and i do expect him to end up with the highest number of grandslam wins when he retires.12 grandslams in a span of 5 years is freakish no matter how you put it.Perhaps you could argue that Sampras had more comeptition in his time,but you could also argue that Federer has been too good to let anyone challenge him seriously..until now atleast.I think Federer has a more complete game than Sampras though.He is capable of winning the French Open too,but he ends up facing a clay court freak everytime.Sampras on the other hand,couldnt win on clay to save his life.
Federer doesn't hold a candle to Sampras Salman, seriosuly. Even though I dislike Sampras (always have) he was a class above Federer. Tennis players today aren't what they were 10 years ago. In that time, to be the 1st in the world was a huge achievement due to competition and Sampras was the best of the lot.
OP
I agree about the compeititon Sampras had in his time.But i dont think he's a class above Federer.Sampras had a very agressive style,a style that allowed him to blow the opponents away on fast surfaces,but then again,it was a style that made him very fragile on clay.Federer has a much more balanced overall game.He excels on virtually any surface.As things stand currently,Sampras has achieved more than him,and he is a bigger player than him,but that might not be the case when Federer retires.Im not underestimating Sampras,but Federer is something pretty special.
No, I don't think so. The difference in class between the current roster of tennis players and past ones is huge. You can't compare the likes of Djokovic, Nadal to Becker, Chang, Edberg, Agassi, Courier, Ivanisevic and the rest of the greats. All those players were in their prime and Sampras was still above them. That was a great achievement. Sampras is possibly the best of all time. I have to admit that and I don't even like the guy.
I don't agree here, Sampras won his first GS in 1990, but then, it took him 3 years before the next GS victory, in 1993, that is when he started to dominate men's tennis for the coming years.
In 1993, Edberg played his last GS final, and Becker also was clearly on his retour.
Chang and Courier weren't better then f.e. Djokovic is now.
Ivanisevic can be compared to Roddick, and he doesn't come close to Federer so that leaves Agassi - Sampras like we have Nadal - Federer now.
I think they both are/were the best of their generation, but it is too early to say Federer won't ever be as great as Sampras was.
Also, maybe Nadal will be greater then both of them.
I suggest we just enjoy matches like yesterday's, that is what the sport is about.
In 1993, Edberg played his last GS final, and Becker also was clearly on his retour.
Chang and Courier weren't better then f.e. Djokovic is now.
Ivanisevic can be compared to Roddick, and he doesn't come close to Federer so that leaves Agassi - Sampras like we have Nadal - Federer now.
I think they both are/were the best of their generation, but it is too early to say Federer won't ever be as great as Sampras was.
Also, maybe Nadal will be greater then both of them.
I suggest we just enjoy matches like yesterday's, that is what the sport is about.
OP
Like Vlakto said..he has a lot of time.Federer's game on clay is only slightly less effective than his game on other surfaces.He has reached 3 consecutive French Open finals.He would have won all 3 had he not faced a clay court monster like Nadal.Sampras only had one French Open semifinal to his name,and he would get owned by much lesser players on clay.Both are great players,but Federer has done well on all surfaces,unlike Sampras.
Chester got it spot on.Whereas i do think that the competition Sampras faced was tougher than what Federer faced,i dont think that the difference is huge.Out of the players you mentioned in your list from Sampras's time,Agassi and Becker are are the only one who qualify as tennis greats.The rest dont.If we're calling Chang,Courier and Ivanisevic greats,then we might call Hewitt,Roddick etc tennis greats too,but we all know they arent ones,just like Chang,Courier and Ivanisevic arent greats.And like Chester's said,the only player amongst the ones you mentioned who saw his peak alongside Sampras was Agassi.Becker's peak was in the late 80's,when Sampras only became professional.Chang only won a single grandslam title,and he was hardly a threat to an onsong Sampras.Courier won his 4 grandslams before Sampras reached his mid 1990's peak,and Ivanisevic,despite being a very lovable player,was too one dimensional to challenge Sampras,let alone be called a Tennis great.Like Chester said,he's a lot like Roddick.Great server,great power,but someone who cannot threaten a truly top quality player.Sampras had other good players in his time too..but only Agassi and Becker can qualfiy as the true greats.It comes down to Agassi alone when you take Becker's late 80's peak years out of the equation.
I know it all sounds like im trying to demean Sampras,but thats not the case.He's a legend of the game,and someone that i respect a lot.But Federer has got all the makings of ending his career as the male greatest player of all time,and im not talking about stats alone here.The difference between Sampras and Federer isnt huge as things currently anyway..and he's only 26.
Chester got it spot on.Whereas i do think that the competition Sampras faced was tougher than what Federer faced,i dont think that the difference is huge.Out of the players you mentioned in your list from Sampras's time,Agassi and Becker are are the only one who qualify as tennis greats.The rest dont.If we're calling Chang,Courier and Ivanisevic greats,then we might call Hewitt,Roddick etc tennis greats too,but we all know they arent ones,just like Chang,Courier and Ivanisevic arent greats.And like Chester's said,the only player amongst the ones you mentioned who saw his peak alongside Sampras was Agassi.Becker's peak was in the late 80's,when Sampras only became professional.Chang only won a single grandslam title,and he was hardly a threat to an onsong Sampras.Courier won his 4 grandslams before Sampras reached his mid 1990's peak,and Ivanisevic,despite being a very lovable player,was too one dimensional to challenge Sampras,let alone be called a Tennis great.Like Chester said,he's a lot like Roddick.Great server,great power,but someone who cannot threaten a truly top quality player.Sampras had other good players in his time too..but only Agassi and Becker can qualfiy as the true greats.It comes down to Agassi alone when you take Becker's late 80's peak years out of the equation.
I know it all sounds like im trying to demean Sampras,but thats not the case.He's a legend of the game,and someone that i respect a lot.But Federer has got all the makings of ending his career as the male greatest player of all time,and im not talking about stats alone here.The difference between Sampras and Federer isnt huge as things currently anyway..and he's only 26.
