Did Sampras play in a weak grass era? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Did Sampras play in a weak grass era?

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-09-2010, 03:22 PM
Edberg and Becker past their primes

Agassi - grass his weakest surface- and yet he still won it!
the clay specialists didn't know how to play on grass

krajicek and Stitch inconsistent, yet still held vital edges over Sampras, and had they been more consistent would have threatened him more

Ivanesevic a hopeless mental midget

John McEnroe going on deep runs because the field was so weak.
from 1985 to 1988 Mac couldn't get past the QFs, the field was so strong during his prime
in 1992, when he was a washed up has been, he made the SEMI FINALS OF WIMBLEDON!!!!!

39 year old loser of the century, connors making the semi finals of the US OPEN in 1991!

only cedric 'the mighty' pioline held the usual french resistence (read: surrendered instantly)

to really emphasis how weak the 90s era was, just look at Sampras prime year

in 2000, Sampras won wimbledon even though he was getting injections, and he made the final of the US OPEN, it probably would have been his best year since 1997

and yet, he got his ass handed to him by a green safin- the same safin who was Federer's pigeon

doesn't this just prove sampras played in a weak era?

Har-Tru
03-09-2010, 03:31 PM
http://i616.photobucket.com/albums/tt246/thebossrules/Capturadepantalla2010-02-21alas0029.png




































http://i616.photobucket.com/albums/tt246/thebossrules/Capturadepantalla2010-03-08alas0144.png

MIMIC
03-09-2010, 03:36 PM
A weak era thread! :cool:

marcRD
03-09-2010, 03:39 PM
No, it was not a weak grass era. However it had grass that suited Sampras playing style, Federer is playing in a weaker grass era but also on very slow high bouncing grass which doesnt suit him as much as fast grass. On fast grass I think Federer would be unbeatable in this era, really unbeatable.

madmax
03-09-2010, 03:56 PM
I Fed played on that low bouncing fast ass grass of the 90's, poor Pete wouldn't sniff a single grass court slam title...I'd feel sorry for him and his tards then

manadrainer
03-09-2010, 04:05 PM
Waiting for SetSampras... the guy just can't miss a weak era thread...

Ivo#1Fan
03-09-2010, 04:20 PM
Obviously it was weak era, there has never been a strong era. That won't happen until all players are at least 6'6" and there are athletic 7 footers who grew up playing tennis at top academies. All records are meaningless until then.

vn01
03-09-2010, 04:30 PM
Federer plays in a weak grass era

Sophocles
03-09-2010, 04:33 PM
Well, whom did he beat? Taking it from 4th round on at Wimbledon, we have:

1993: Andrew Foster (British wild card), Andre Agassi (defending champ), Boris Becker (past peak but still good), Jim Courier (at peak though hardly a grass-courter).
1994: Daniel Vacek (who?), Michael Chang (decent player, not a grass-courter), Todd Martin (good but not great), Goran Ivanisevic (good on grass).
1995: Greg Rusedski (ranked 60th at the time), Shuzo Matsuoka (one for the connoisseurs, shall we say?), Goran Ivanisevic, Boris Becker (past peak, still would win another slam next year though).
1996 he lost to Krajicek in the quarters.
1997: Petr Korda (decent player, hardly a demon on grass), Boris Becker (past it by now), Todd Woodbridge (doubles specialist), Cedric Pioline (decent, far from great).
1998: Sebastien Grosjean (ranked outside Top 100 at the time), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great), Tim Henman (ditto), Goran Ivanisevic (ranked 25th at the time but still dangerous on grass).
1999: Daniel Nestor (?), Mark Philippoussis, Tim Henman, Andre Agassi (resurgent & playing very well on surfaces at the time).
2000: Jonas Bjorkman (doubles specialist), Jan-Michael Gambill (overhyped journeyman), Vladimir Voltchkov (journeyman), Pat Rafter (nearly great).
2001 lost to 19-year-old Federer in the 4th round.

On this evidence, anybody who says Sampras played in an exceptionally strong grass-court era is deluded. On the other hand, you can't call it a weak era: Becker, Agassi, Ivanisevic, Rafter were all very good grass-court players, & guys like Henman, Philippoussis, & Pioline could all play on the stuff.

marcRD
03-09-2010, 04:59 PM
Well, whom did he beat? Taking it from 4th round on at Wimbledon, we have:

1993: Andrew Foster (British wild card), Andre Agassi (defending champ), Boris Becker (past peak but still good), Jim Courier (at peak though hardly a grass-courter).
1994: Daniel Vacek (who?), Michael Chang (decent player, not a grass-courter), Todd Martin (good but not great), Goran Ivanisevic (good on grass).
1995: Greg Rusedski (ranked 60th at the time), Shuzo Matsuoka (one for the connoisseurs, shall we say?), Goran Ivanisevic, Boris Becker (past peak, still would win another slam next year though).
1996 he lost to Krajicek in the quarters.
1997: Petr Korda (decent player, hardly a demon on grass), Boris Becker (past it by now), Todd Woodbridge (doubles specialist), Cedric Pioline (decent, far from great).
1998: Sebastien Grosjean (ranked outside Top 100 at the time), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great), Tim Henman (ditto), Goran Ivanisevic (ranked 25th at the time but still dangerous on grass).
1999: Daniel Nestor (?), Mark Philippoussis, Tim Henman, Andre Agassi (resurgent & playing very well on surfaces at the time).
2000: Jonas Bjorkman (doubles specialist), Jan-Michael Gambill (overhyped journeyman), Vladimir Voltchkov (journeyman), Pat Rafter (nearly great).
2001 lost to 19-year-old Federer in the 4th round.

On this evidence, anybody who says Sampras played in an exceptionally strong grass-court era is deluded. On the other hand, you can't call it a weak era: Becker, Agassi, Ivanisevic, Rafter were all very good grass-court players, & guys like Henman, Philippoussis, & Pioline could all play on the stuff.

Lets do the same with Federer:

2003: Feliciano Lopez (avarage player), Sjeng Schalken (underrated, but quite easy for the big players), Andy Roddick (good on grass), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great)

2004: Thomas Johansson (decent player on grass), Ivo Karlovic (Obviously tricky on grass with his serve), Lleyton Hewitt (A former champ and good grasscourter), Grosjean (decent on grass), Roddick (good grasscourter, nearly great)

2005: Nicolas Kiefer (decent player on grass), Ferrero (quite good on slow grass), Gonzalez (decent on slow grass), Hewitt (good grasscourt player), Roddick (same as above)

2006:Richard Gasquet (can be dangerous on grass), Tim Henman (past peak good grasscourt player), Nicolas Mahut (one of the last grasscourt specialists), Tomas Berdych (decent, dangerous sometimes), Mario Ancic (good on grasscourts), Nadal (very dangerous on slow grass, but had not reached his peak yet)

2007: Del Potro (junior Del Potro), Marat Safin (always dangerous, not very good on grass), Tommy Haas (good talented player on grass), Ferrero (decent), Gasquet (talented but a headcase), Nadal (one of the greats on slow grasscourts, here he was very confident on grass)

2008: Söderling (dangerous on grass), Hewitt (past peak champ), Ancic (always dangerous on grass), Safin (past peak but having a great tournament here), lost to Nadal (a great Nadal at his absolute peak, playing his best tennis and with confidence skyhigh defeats Fed in a marathon 5 set match)

2009: Kohlschreiber (decent player), Söderling (playing great tennis, good on grass), Karlovic (dangerous), Haas (good grasscourt player slightly past his peak), Roddick (at his absolute best almost beats him).

Judge for yourselves, I mean it is not that great distance between them. Becker was the name which maıbe in the end really made Sampras draw look more difficult.

IMO:

Sampras 93>Federer 03
Sampras 94<Federer 04 (Hewitt>Chang, Roddick=Ivanisevic)
Sampras 95>Federer 05 (Becker>anything, Roddick=Ivanisevic)
Sampras 97<Federer 06 (Becker really past prime<young Nadal on slow grass+rest of the draw a joke for Sampras)
Sampras 98=Federer 07 (Ivanisevic on fast grass on level with Nadal on slow grass, rest of the draw quite easy for both)
Sampras 99=Federer 09 (Agassi on grass=Roddick on grass, rest of the draw quite difficult for both)

Result: 2 ties and 2-2, makes it a draw. But we still have:

Sampras 96<Federer 08 (losing in straight sets to Krajicek on gast grass<Federer losing in a heroic 5 set marathon final against an absolute peak Nadal on slow grass)

Giving Federer some advantage

But....

Sampras 00>Federer 2010 (because winning a 7th title against Rafter in the final>a tournament that hasnt been played yet)

So Sampras still is the best grasscourt player of all time, for now....

Sophocles
03-09-2010, 05:25 PM
So Sampras still is the best grasscourt player of all time, for now....

Decent analysis. It's clearly more even than extremists on either side allow. Becker does feel like the difference, though having said that, Becker during Sampras's reign was no longer a Becker who was winning Wimbledon; on the contrary, he made only 1 final. This may be down to Sampras, but then in that case Noughties players' inferior Wimbledon records may be down to Federer.

rocketassist
03-09-2010, 05:27 PM
Edberg and Becker past their primes

Agassi - grass his weakest surface- and yet he still won it!
the clay specialists didn't know how to play on grass

krajicek and Stitch inconsistent, yet still held vital edges over Sampras, and had they been more consistent would have threatened him more

Ivanesevic a hopeless mental midget

John McEnroe going on deep runs because the field was so weak.
from 1985 to 1988 Mac couldn't get past the QFs, the field was so strong during his prime
in 1992, when he was a washed up has been, he made the SEMI FINALS OF WIMBLEDON!!!!!

39 year old loser of the century, connors making the semi finals of the US OPEN in 1991!

only cedric 'the mighty' pioline held the usual french resistence (read: surrendered instantly)

to really emphasis how weak the 90s era was, just look at Sampras prime year

in 2000, Sampras won wimbledon even though he was getting injections, and he made the final of the US OPEN, it probably would have been his best year since 1997

and yet, he got his ass handed to him by a green safin- the same safin who was Federer's pigeon

doesn't this just prove sampras played in a weak era?

Ivanisevic, Becker, Pioline, Henman, Krajicek, Stich >>>>>>> Nadal, Djokovic, Roddick, Murray, Gasquet (on grass).

Now go home dumbass.

ApproachShot
03-09-2010, 05:44 PM
I don't think we have come up with a satisfactory metric that can objectively determine whether or not an era is comparatively 'weak'. Even if Edberg and Becker were past their primes, there were still some very competent players on grass, as the performance of Ivanisevic (1W, 3F, 2SF) and Agassi (1W, 1F, 3SF) show. Even Krajicek (1W, 1SF) and Stich (1W, 1SF) was a formidable threat on the surface and Rafter (2F, 1SF) was unlucky not to win one himself. Honourable mention to Tim Henman as well, who I think was very unlucky to reach the SF 4 times but never progress to the champtionship match. Pioline and Philippoussis - both one time finalists - were unlucky to respectively meet the two men I consider to be the greatest grass court players in tennis history.

As of now, I'd probably rank Ivanisevic a better player on grass than Nadal although that could change very soon, and Roddick a better player at Wimbledon than Rafter. Hewitt has been more consistent at on the grass than Krajicek or Stich - his counterpart single-time Wimbledon champions. I'm not a believer in the weak era hypothesis and there appears not to be any significant difference in terms of quality between the present generation and Sampras'. By the end of their careers, I fully expect Murray and Djokovic (possibly Del Potro also) to have success at Wimbledon which is comparable to that of Agassi.

Of course the change in the composition of the grass complicates matters when we even begin an attempt to comapre eras. But all competitors participating in a given year must play on the same surface so it is a bit futile to talk about what would happen if the grass was not slowed down etc. Surface changes are exogenous variable in an analysis of how strong or weak and era is and hypothetical posturing along with the endless 'what if' questions are irrelevant. You can only conclusively make judgements on the basis of what has happened, not what might have been.

philosophicalarf
03-09-2010, 05:56 PM
Mal Washington in a Wimbledon final. QED.


(more seriously, early 90s was really strong, by 95 weakened a lot, by late 90s it sucked).

DrJules
03-09-2010, 06:28 PM
Well, whom did he beat? Taking it from 4th round on at Wimbledon, we have:

1993: Andrew Foster (British wild card), Andre Agassi (defending champ), Boris Becker (past peak but still good), Jim Courier (at peak though hardly a grass-courter).
1994: Daniel Vacek (who?), Michael Chang (decent player, not a grass-courter), Todd Martin (good but not great), Goran Ivanisevic (good on grass).
1995: Greg Rusedski (ranked 60th at the time), Shuzo Matsuoka (one for the connoisseurs, shall we say?), Goran Ivanisevic, Boris Becker (past peak, still would win another slam next year though).
1996 he lost to Krajicek in the quarters.
1997: Petr Korda (decent player, hardly a demon on grass), Boris Becker (past it by now), Todd Woodbridge (doubles specialist), Cedric Pioline (decent, far from great).
1998: Sebastien Grosjean (ranked outside Top 100 at the time), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great), Tim Henman (ditto), Goran Ivanisevic (ranked 25th at the time but still dangerous on grass).
1999: Daniel Nestor (?), Mark Philippoussis, Tim Henman, Andre Agassi (resurgent & playing very well on surfaces at the time).
2000: Jonas Bjorkman (doubles specialist), Jan-Michael Gambill (overhyped journeyman), Vladimir Voltchkov (journeyman), Pat Rafter (nearly great).
2001 lost to 19-year-old Federer in the 4th round.

On this evidence, anybody who says Sampras played in an exceptionally strong grass-court era is deluded. On the other hand, you can't call it a weak era: Becker, Agassi, Ivanisevic, Rafter were all very good grass-court players, & guys like Henman, Philippoussis, & Pioline could all play on the stuff.

Agreed totally.

Courier's weakest surface was grass.

Rafter did not actually have the ideal serve for grass and his top spin serve was more of a liability on grass and more effective on fast hard courts i.e. US Open.

When looked in detail I sometimes think the differences in calibre of the players Federer and Sampras played was not that much different. Possibly Sampras had slightly better players at the top end of the rankings, but Federer had to deal with greater depth as tennis has become more global and players coming from a wider talent pool.

DrJules
03-09-2010, 06:46 PM
Lets do the same with Federer:

2003: Feliciano Lopez (avarage player), Sjeng Schalken (underrated, but quite easy for the big players), Andy Roddick (good on grass), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great)

2004: Thomas Johansson (decent player on grass), Ivo Karlovic (Obviously tricky on grass with his serve), Lleyton Hewitt (A former champ and good grasscourter), Grosjean (decent on grass), Roddick (good grasscourter, nearly great)

2005: Nicolas Kiefer (decent player on grass), Ferrero (quite good on slow grass), Gonzalez (decent on slow grass), Hewitt (good grasscourt player), Roddick (same as above)

2006:Richard Gasquet (can be dangerous on grass), Tim Henman (past peak good grasscourt player), Nicolas Mahut (one of the last grasscourt specialists), Tomas Berdych (decent, dangerous sometimes), Mario Ancic (good on grasscourts), Nadal (very dangerous on slow grass, but had not reached his peak yet)

2007: Del Potro (junior Del Potro), Marat Safin (always dangerous, not very good on grass), Tommy Haas (good talented player on grass), Ferrero (decent), Gasquet (talented but a headcase), Nadal (one of the greats on slow grasscourts, here he was very confident on grass)

2008: Söderling (dangerous on grass), Hewitt (past peak champ), Ancic (always dangerous on grass), Safin (past peak but having a great tournament here), lost to Nadal (a great Nadal at his absolute peak, playing his best tennis and with confidence skyhigh defeats Fed in a marathon 5 set match)

2009: Kohlschreiber (decent player), Söderling (playing great tennis, good on grass), Karlovic (dangerous), Haas (good grasscourt player slightly past his peak), Roddick (at his absolute best almost beats him).

Judge for yourselves, I mean it is not that great distance between them. Becker was the name which maıbe in the end really made Sampras draw look more difficult.

IMO:

Sampras 93>Federer 03
Sampras 94<Federer 04 (Hewitt>Chang, Roddick=Ivanisevic)
Sampras 95>Federer 05 (Becker>anything, Roddick=Ivanisevic)
Sampras 97<Federer 06 (Becker really past prime<young Nadal on slow grass+rest of the draw a joke for Sampras)
Sampras 98=Federer 07 (Ivanisevic on fast grass on level with Nadal on slow grass, rest of the draw quite easy for both)
Sampras 99=Federer 09 (Agassi on grass=Roddick on grass, rest of the draw quite difficult for both)

Result: 2 ties and 2-2, makes it a draw. But we still have:

Sampras 96<Federer 08 (losing in straight sets to Krajicek on gast grass<Federer losing in a heroic 5 set marathon final against an absolute peak Nadal on slow grass)

Giving Federer some advantage

But....

Sampras 00>Federer 2010 (because winning a 7th title against Rafter in the final>a tournament that hasnt been played yet)

So Sampras still is the best grasscourt player of all time, for now....

In some ways agree although note that Becker served 16 double faults in 4 sets which is seriously excessive:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Match-Facts-Pop-Up.aspx?t=540&y=1995&r=7&p=B028

While Roddick only gave 1 double fault in 3 sets and he was not serving softly:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Match-Facts-Pop-Up.aspx?t=540&y=2005&r=7&p=R485

nobama
03-09-2010, 07:09 PM
I hate these stupid threads because they basically end up denegrating all eras and every player. :rolleyes:

Feketepuss
03-09-2010, 07:11 PM
Watch Sampras against Ivanisovic, and then watch Federer against Nadal at Wimbledon.

It is a quite different surface and all these arguments are frankly pointless.

lessthanjake
03-09-2010, 08:38 PM
Sampras had some joke draws at Wimbledon. He sometimes played some good grass players like Ivanisevic and an old Becker, and Agassi but Roddick, Hewitt, and Nadal are surely equivalent on grass.

Also, people forget that Sampras was not dominant at all at Queens, while Federer has always dominated Halle.

Federer will get another Wimbledon title, and once that happens, he will be the clearly better grass court player than Sampras.

maskedmuffin
03-09-2010, 08:50 PM
People point to becker as if he was an equal of sampras in the mid 90's. Truth is boris became moody and lost it the moment he lost to stich in that wimby final. After that point he was never really the boris we all know and love, if not for that brief stretch in 95 and those classic indoor matches in 96 (?) against pete in Deuschland.
The "passing of keys" to pete during 3 pete in 95 final was symbolic as end of road for boris too, because i dont think he really felt he could beat Pete on a big stage after that match, even though if he had put his mind to it in 93 he was still "physically" speaking all there (92 as well against agassi).

Boris as the barometer in 88-89-90 versus pete in his prime would have been fun.

MacTheKnife
03-09-2010, 09:07 PM
If there was ever a weak era, it is now on MTF..

federersforehand
03-09-2010, 09:32 PM
considering sampras won 7 wimbledons across a lengthy span which included a few tennis eras, then no, he did not play in a weak grass era; he was simply the best grass court player alive while he was on the court. noone could top him if he was on form, similar to federer on grass these days

rocketassist
03-09-2010, 09:33 PM
Sampras had some joke draws at Wimbledon. He sometimes played some good grass players like Ivanisevic and an old Becker, and Agassi but Roddick, Hewitt, and Nadal are surely equivalent on grass.

Also, people forget that Sampras was not dominant at all at Queens, while Federer has always dominated Halle.

Federer will get another Wimbledon title, and once that happens, he will be the clearly better grass court player than Sampras.

Nadal is not equivalent to Boris Becker and Ivanisevic on grass.

:lol:

federersforehand
03-09-2010, 09:40 PM
i know the OP thinks he has a valid point, but to degrade the person who is still the best grass courter ever by saying he essentially had a cakewalk because he played in a weak era is baffling. Its the same these days with Roger, its a false misconception because if you are dominant OTHER PLAYERS CANNOT POSSIBLY WIN. ITS SIMPLE MATHS. Sorry all this weak era shit (now going to the 90's as well!) is really making my left eye twitch.

MacTheKnife
03-09-2010, 10:33 PM
Sampras had some joke draws at Wimbledon. He sometimes played some good grass players like Ivanisevic and an old Becker, and Agassi but Roddick, Hewitt, and Nadal are surely equivalent on grass.

Also, people forget that Sampras was not dominant at all at Queens, while Federer has always dominated Halle.

Federer will get another Wimbledon title, and once that happens, he will be the clearly better grass court player than Sampras.

Now that's some funny stuff. :lol:

Forehander
03-09-2010, 10:42 PM
Federer > Sampras

Forehander
03-09-2010, 10:44 PM
Now that's some funny stuff. :lol:

Funny? I'm in tears for him to quote such truth

marcRD
03-09-2010, 11:08 PM
Now that's some funny stuff. :lol:

Its slow grass, Nadal is a beast on slow grass.

forzamilan90
03-09-2010, 11:49 PM
i agree surfaces were different, and comparing these things is apples and oranges

wackykid
03-10-2010, 12:58 AM
this smells suspiciously like a thread specifically targeted at SetSampras... :lol:


regards,
wacky

rolandgarros
03-10-2010, 01:18 AM
Ivanisevic, Becker, Pioline, Henman, Krajicek, Stich >>>>>>> Nadal, Djokovic, Roddick, Murray, Gasquet (on grass
+1

lessthanjake
03-10-2010, 09:27 AM
Nadal is not equivalent to Boris Becker and Ivanisevic on grass.

:lol:

...do you have analytical skills?

The men are playing on different grass. On TODAY's grass, Nadal is fairly equivalent to those guys on the OLD grass.

It is absolutely idiotic to judge the strength of today's era on grass based on how good you think theyd be on past grass instead of the grass they are actually playing on.

Now that's some funny stuff.

See above.

Apemant
03-10-2010, 09:54 AM
this smells suspiciously like a thread specifically targeted at SetSampras... :lol:


suspiciously? :devil:

This thread is custom-made to make SetSampras mad. I only wonder how come he still didn't take the bait, seeing that he can barely talk about anything except Sampras.

paseo
03-11-2010, 04:58 AM
suspiciously? :devil:

This thread is custom-made to make SetSampras mad. I only wonder how come he still didn't take the bait, seeing that he can barely talk about anything except Sampras.

He's doing in-depth research on how to manipulate statistics so he can destroy the OP's statement.

kengyin
03-11-2010, 05:10 AM
YES, just for setsampras:lol: he sure blabs on about federer being in a weak era, well i wonder what he says about this

Federer=God
03-11-2010, 11:32 AM
Using title wins or rankings in a weak era thread is beyond stupid for obvious reasons.

That said, I would say they are comparable (now and then).

SetSampras
03-11-2010, 01:02 PM
This is one thats tough to argue since the conditions have changed so drastically.. Grass isnt really grass anymore. At least true grass.. The game is played pretty much the same at wimbledon as it is anywhere else today. Primarly baseline bashfests with the influx of racket technology and grass sodded to the moon. Goran, Becker, Krajicek, (Sampras' main contemporaries) were all very very solid on the old grass and all great in their own right. Roddick and Nadal very good in their own right on today's grass.(Fed's main grass contemporaries)


Really this is a tough one and Im not sure very comparable in this regard. I think you can compare certain aspects of various era to each other and you can compare top competition in certain instances. However, I just dont think Wimbledon is one of the them.


How could u compare really? Would Nadal be a 3 time finalist and a one time winner of wimbledon under the 90s conditions? No most likely not ever. And how would say a player like Goran do in today's grass conditions? Again.. Really too hard to compare. Apples and oranges in this regard IMO

HKz
03-11-2010, 02:53 PM
Lmfao, I'm sitting back and enjoying this one.

MacTheKnife
03-11-2010, 03:28 PM
The grass must have been weaker, it was gone by day 4 for the most part. :cool:

Everko
03-11-2010, 03:31 PM
Lmfao, I'm sitting back and enjoying this one.

that's all you ever do. I haven't seen you make one signifigant post about anything. Just sitting back at taking shots at everyone and everything. Leave the forum

HKz
03-11-2010, 09:39 PM
that's all you ever do. I haven't seen you make one signifigant post about anything. Just sitting back at taking shots at everyone and everything. Leave the forum

Did I get under your skin :( oh I'm soooo sorry....not really. I'm quite sure there are more people here that would rather want you to leave than me leave myself.

At least the threads I make bring good discussion. I don't make threads where I cry because a player is achieving so much and that my psuedo-imagino-boyfriend Nadal isn't winning shit.

Everko
03-12-2010, 02:27 PM
Did I get under your skin :( oh I'm soooo sorry....not really. I'm quite sure there are more people here that would rather want you to leave than me leave myself.

At least the threads I make bring good discussion. I don't make threads where I cry because a player is achieving so much and that my psuedo-imagino-boyfriend Nadal isn't winning shit.

I made the fastest player thread which is good discussion and you brought up some horseshit. Every thread I see, there is a comment by you taking a shot at me or other fans of Nadal. Who are you even a fan of?

HKz
03-13-2010, 07:46 AM
I made the fastest player thread which is good discussion and you brought up some horseshit. Every thread I see, there is a comment by you taking a shot at me or other fans of Nadal. Who are you even a fan of?

I'm a fan of anti-Everko which is a sizeable portion of MTF. Count many of them here (http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=154586)

Continue to make piss poor threads.

Echoes
03-19-2010, 11:35 AM
This is one thats tough to argue since the conditions have changed so drastically.. Grass isnt really grass anymore. At least true grass.. The game is played pretty much the same at wimbledon as it is anywhere else today. Primarly baseline bashfests with the influx of racket technology and grass sodded to the moon. Goran, Becker, Krajicek, (Sampras' main contemporaries) were all very very solid on the old grass and all great in their own right. Roddick and Nadal very good in their own right on today's grass.(Fed's main grass contemporaries)

That's obviously true.

We're comparing apples and pears. Sampras' main opponents on grass were all versatile players (even Pioline or Woodbridge)or N°1 "power" players (Agassi, Courier), just like the earlier generation, by the way. Federer's are powerful baseliners.

Probably these players were all the best ones of their era on these surfaces (in the plural form)

Start da Game
03-20-2010, 06:31 PM
Ivanisevic, Becker, Pioline, Henman, Krajicek, Stich >>>>>>> Nadal, Djokovic, Roddick, Murray, Gasquet (on grass).

Now go home dumbass.

most meaningful post of this thread.......

trivfun
04-29-2010, 01:56 AM
When Pete puts his mind into winning Wimbledon, he wins it. I don't care if he played against Laver, Borg, Newcombe, Edberg, Rosewall, Connors, nd others. He really had a way of demoralizing folks. He got to Becker and Edberg on that surface. Likewise, he did the same to Agassi, best returner of all-time. Maybe, Connors could have gotten under his skin a bit but I doubt it. When he lost on grass was due to physical health or mental apathy.

duong
04-29-2010, 09:50 AM
the beginning of his carreer was a very good era on grass, the end was not good, with few good players.

It was better for him than the opposite of course as he was not as good when getting old.

samanosuke
06-06-2010, 10:05 PM
Lets do the same with Federer:

2003: Feliciano Lopez (avarage player), Sjeng Schalken (underrated, but quite easy for the big players), Andy Roddick (good on grass), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great)

2004: Thomas Johansson (decent player on grass), Ivo Karlovic (Obviously tricky on grass with his serve), Lleyton Hewitt (A former champ and good grasscourter), Grosjean (decent on grass), Roddick (good grasscourter, nearly great)

2005: Nicolas Kiefer (decent player on grass), Ferrero (quite good on slow grass), Gonzalez (decent on slow grass), Hewitt (good grasscourt player), Roddick (same as above)

2006:Richard Gasquet (can be dangerous on grass), Tim Henman (past peak good grasscourt player), Nicolas Mahut (one of the last grasscourt specialists), Tomas Berdych (decent, dangerous sometimes), Mario Ancic (good on grasscourts), Nadal (very dangerous on slow grass, but had not reached his peak yet)

2007: Del Potro (junior Del Potro), Marat Safin (always dangerous, not very good on grass), Tommy Haas (good talented player on grass), Ferrero (decent), Gasquet (talented but a headcase), Nadal (one of the greats on slow grasscourts, here he was very confident on grass)

2008: Söderling (dangerous on grass), Hewitt (past peak champ), Ancic (always dangerous on grass), Safin (past peak but having a great tournament here), lost to Nadal (a great Nadal at his absolute peak, playing his best tennis and with confidence skyhigh defeats Fed in a marathon 5 set match)

2009: Kohlschreiber (decent player), Söderling (playing great tennis, good on grass), Karlovic (dangerous), Haas (good grasscourt player slightly past his peak), Roddick (at his absolute best almost beats him).

Judge for yourselves, I mean it is not that great distance between them. Becker was the name which maıbe in the end really made Sampras draw look more difficult.

IMO:

Sampras 93>Federer 03
Sampras 94<Federer 04 (Hewitt>Chang, Roddick=Ivanisevic)
Sampras 95>Federer 05 (Becker>anything, Roddick=Ivanisevic)
Sampras 97<Federer 06 (Becker really past prime<young Nadal on slow grass+rest of the draw a joke for Sampras)
Sampras 98=Federer 07 (Ivanisevic on fast grass on level with Nadal on slow grass, rest of the draw quite easy for both)
Sampras 99=Federer 09 (Agassi on grass=Roddick on grass, rest of the draw quite difficult for both)

Result: 2 ties and 2-2, makes it a draw. But we still have:

Sampras 96<Federer 08 (losing in straight sets to Krajicek on gast grass<Federer losing in a heroic 5 set marathon final against an absolute peak Nadal on slow grass)

Giving Federer some advantage

But....

Sampras 00>Federer 2010 (because winning a 7th title against Rafter in the final>a tournament that hasnt been played yet)

So Sampras still is the best grasscourt player of all time, for now....


Can you explain to me by which criteria Roddick and Ivanisevic are equal on grass ?

Goran won Wimby , Roddick will never do that .
Goran has beaten at Wimby Sampras , Edberg and Becker .. three of six-seven greatest grass court players . And Roddick lost all 4 times to Federer , against other all time great he didn't play

rocketassist
06-08-2010, 05:17 PM
Well, whom did he beat? Taking it from 4th round on at Wimbledon, we have:

1993: Andrew Foster (British wild card), Andre Agassi (defending champ), Boris Becker (past peak but still good), Jim Courier (at peak though hardly a grass-courter).
1994: Daniel Vacek (who?), Michael Chang (decent player, not a grass-courter), Todd Martin (good but not great), Goran Ivanisevic (good on grass).
1995: Greg Rusedski (ranked 60th at the time), Shuzo Matsuoka (one for the connoisseurs, shall we say?), Goran Ivanisevic, Boris Becker (past peak, still would win another slam next year though).
1996 he lost to Krajicek in the quarters.
1997: Petr Korda (decent player, hardly a demon on grass), Boris Becker (past it by now), Todd Woodbridge (doubles specialist), Cedric Pioline (decent, far from great).
1998: Sebastien Grosjean (ranked outside Top 100 at the time), Mark Philippoussis (good, not great), Tim Henman (ditto), Goran Ivanisevic (ranked 25th at the time but still dangerous on grass).
1999: Daniel Nestor (?), Mark Philippoussis, Tim Henman, Andre Agassi (resurgent & playing very well on surfaces at the time).
2000: Jonas Bjorkman (doubles specialist), Jan-Michael Gambill (overhyped journeyman), Vladimir Voltchkov (journeyman), Pat Rafter (nearly great).
2001 lost to 19-year-old Federer in the 4th round.

On this evidence, anybody who says Sampras played in an exceptionally strong grass-court era is deluded. On the other hand, you can't call it a weak era: Becker, Agassi, Ivanisevic, Rafter were all very good grass-court players, & guys like Henman, Philippoussis, & Pioline could all play on the stuff.

:spit:

Henman and Philippoussis are brilliant grass court players, as was Pioline. Besides Fed/Nadal/Roddick, who's as good as these three guys? And you forgot Krajicek. And Bjorkman was excellent on the green stuff as a singles player as well. Must be stronger than recent times seeing as he was like 35 when he reached SF in 2006.

Fed's early dominance had some other strong grass contenders like Hewitt, Scud and Henman were still aboot, Schalken was great on grass as was Grosjean and Nalbandian in his prime. Specialists like Alexander Popp would go deep every year. But since 2006? It's been devoid of quality in the field.

If you think today's grass court players are better than this then I'm booking you in for some counselling.

mcnasty
06-14-2010, 09:07 PM
sampras was agassi's contemporary, one of the greatest players ever to play the game. and yet agassi was outclassed by sampras on grass.

my premise is that great players, if they want it bad enough, will win on any surface regardless of their strengths and weaknesses when their games are applied to a particular surface.

i'm sure sampras would've won a french if he had given it his all. but like mcenroe and connors before him, i'm sure he always had had his reservations about the french: the surface annoyed him and he just wasn't willing to work hard enough to win one.

finally you can't tell me that goran ivanisevic, patrick rafter and mark phillipousis were pushovers on grass.

thrust
07-14-2010, 09:02 PM
the beginning of his carreer was a very good era on grass, the end was not good, with few good players.

It was better for him than the opposite of course as he was not as good when getting old.

True, but Federer never won Wimbledon in a GOOD grass court era. Players today do not play enough on grass to become good or great grass players. Federer's game was well suited for grass court tennis, but he would not have done nearly as well in the Sampras Era.

LazorRamone
01-01-2011, 08:56 PM
...

GlennMirnyi
01-01-2011, 10:22 PM
Quite the contrary.