The Official Tennis Thread (18 Viewers)

OP
HelterSkelter

HelterSkelter

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2005
19,074
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #521
    I'm not even talking about how good/bad Becker was on grass.All im saying is saying that Becker and Agassi were Pete's rivals werent enough.You need to take the time frame period into accouing.Sampras didnt come across Becker too often at grandslams.Hardly ever if i recall correctly.

    Sampras and Agassi on the other hand,did play each other 7 times at grandslams,but not all of these matches were played with an on song Agassi.This rivalrly can be compared to the frequency Nadal and Federer have played each other at grandslams so far,and Federer has to do with an in form Nadal.
     

    Buy on AliExpress.com
    OP
    HelterSkelter

    HelterSkelter

    Senior Member
    Apr 15, 2005
    19,074
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #525
    Then again what is easier? Beating Becker on grass or beating Roddick?
    What is easier, beating Agassi in the US Open or beating Djukovic?
    How many times did Sampras and Becker play each other at Wimbledon?Only once.

    The Agassi-Sampras argument is there,but you have Federer's equivalent in Nadal.
     

    KB824

    Senior Member
    Sep 16, 2003
    31,671
    Its amazing how people are so quick to discount what Federer has done.

    Level of competition, different era's, yada yada yada.

    Eyeball test, people.

    Watch him play and tell me that Agassi, or Becker, or Sampras in their primes would have beaten this guy.

    They wouldn't have. Everything that they did well, he does as well or better
     

    Ahmed

    Principino
    Sep 3, 2006
    47,928
    Its amazing how people are so quick to discount what Federer has done.

    Level of competition, different era's, yada yada yada.

    Eyeball test, people.

    Watch him play and tell me that Agassi, or Becker, or Sampras in their primes would have beaten this guy.

    They wouldn't have. Everything that they did well, he does as well or better
    all 3 would have beaten him
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    111,484
    Its amazing how people are so quick to discount what Federer has done.

    Level of competition, different era's, yada yada yada.

    Eyeball test, people.

    Watch him play and tell me that Agassi, or Becker, or Sampras in their primes would have beaten this guy.

    They wouldn't have. Everything that they did well, he does as well or better
    See. Unlike Crosby, Federer has earned the right to be mentioned among greats.
     

    Ahmed

    Principino
    Sep 3, 2006
    47,928
    and he certainly doesn't do anything better than those 3 players...

    Agassi was better the baseline
    Sampras was a better sever
    Boris was a better serve-and-volley
     

    JCK

    Biased
    JCK
    May 11, 2004
    123,466
    and he certainly doesn't do anything better than those 3 players...

    Agassi was better the baseline
    Sampras was a better sever
    Boris was a better serve-and-volley
    I am undecided on who has the better serve-and-volley between Sampras and Becker. I think Becker looks better because he had better agility and fitness but technique-wise Sampras was the better player.
     

    Ahmed

    Principino
    Sep 3, 2006
    47,928
    yea that's quite debatable, but to say that Fed was better than those 2 at their specialities, that's just absurd

    IMO Pete would have wiped the floor with Federer, especially at Wimbledon
     
    Sep 1, 2002
    12,745
    Its amazing how people are so quick to discount what Federer has done.

    Level of competition, different era's, yada yada yada.

    Eyeball test, people.

    Watch him play and tell me that Agassi, or Becker, or Sampras in their primes would have beaten this guy.

    They wouldn't have. Everything that they did well, he does as well or better
    I think you are right. His all around game is better than those three players.


    If we throw in Borg and McEnroe then the only thing that could be said for certain is that Federer would not have 15 grandslams, but then again Sampres wouldn't have 14.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,251
    Its amazing how people are so quick to discount what Federer has done.

    Level of competition, different era's, yada yada yada.

    Eyeball test, people.

    Watch him play and tell me that Agassi, or Becker, or Sampras in their primes would have beaten this guy.

    They wouldn't have. Everything that they did well, he does as well or better
    I think Federer is a great player, but I wouldn't go and say the "greatest ever". Even Bjorn, Pete, and Rod were like "woah man" when Johnny Mac asked them.
     

    Ahmed

    Principino
    Sep 3, 2006
    47,928
    Andre? serve and volley? don't think so mate...Agassi only improved his serve late on in his career...and nobody returns the serve like Andre...absolute magic that was
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 17)