Mats Wilander's Expert Opinions [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Mats Wilander's Expert Opinions

Certinfy
01-23-2011, 10:58 PM
:lol:

GlennMirnyi
01-23-2011, 10:59 PM
Yeah :lol:

These guys say just about anything to get press attention.

Zagor
01-23-2011, 11:04 PM
I'm pretty sure Mats said best looking not actually the best.

Certinfy
01-23-2011, 11:05 PM
Did he?

Stensland
01-23-2011, 11:07 PM
well, it is fantastic, there's no doubt about. regarding beauty i still think reeshard is unbeatable but in terms of pace combined with relentless power stan is certainly up there with the best, like haas, for example.

Certinfy
01-23-2011, 11:07 PM
"he has certainly the greatest one handed backhand I've ever seen" to be exact.

Pipsy
01-23-2011, 11:09 PM
Although pound-for-pound Henin's is better imo...

Zagor
01-23-2011, 11:16 PM
"he has certainly the greatest one handed backhand I've ever seen" to be exact.

I must have heard wrong then,well that's a controversial statement but then again it is very like Wilander to say something like that.Personally the best one hander I've seen was Guga's.

GlennMirnyi
01-23-2011, 11:18 PM
It can't hold a candle to Kuerten's.

scoobs
01-23-2011, 11:19 PM
Mats with a seriously over-exaggerated sentiment in the middle of a match?

Colour me shocked.

Roamed
01-23-2011, 11:29 PM
I was linked to Mats' blog after R1 was over. Apart from being averse to paragraphing, he noted that Roger's performance in R1 was the best he'd ever seen anyone play and if he played even 10% below it he'd still never lose a set again.

Ok, Fed was good (certainly better than he's been since) but come on, lay off the exaggerations :o

ossie
01-23-2011, 11:33 PM
the best single handed backhand belongs to federer hands down. if you think it belongs to someone else than fed you are just as ridiculous as wilander.

Mechlan
01-23-2011, 11:35 PM
:lol: It's one of the best ones in the game today maybe...

JayR
01-23-2011, 11:36 PM
Mats with a seriously over-exaggerated sentiment in the middle of a match?

Colour me shocked.

:lol:

Steps back in amazement!:eek:

fast_clay
01-23-2011, 11:47 PM
the best single handed backhand belongs to federer hands down. if you think it belongs to someone else than fed you are just as ridiculous as wilander.

:lol: i used to wonder if you knew three fifths of f*** all... now i know :lol:

fed's backhand is nearly wholly responsible for his inability to cement his GOATness, and even more at fault for allowing a tragedy like nadal to own him...

Virtua Tennis isn't a great way to base an argument mate... wake the f*** up...

fast_clay
01-23-2011, 11:49 PM
:lol:

Steps back in amazement!:eek:

yeah i thought steps was pretty good in brisbane too

Action Jackson
01-23-2011, 11:50 PM
:lol: i used to wonder if you knew three fifths of f*** all... now i know :lol:

fed's backhand is nearly wholly responsible for his inability to cement his GOATness, and even more at fault for allowing a tragedy like nadal to own him...

Virtua Tennis isn't a great way to base an argument mate... wake the f*** up...

Knows half of nothing.

Best of all time for Stani, not quite but best all time in Switzerland, then yes.

GlennMirnyi
01-23-2011, 11:51 PM
:lol: i used to wonder if you knew three fifths of f*** all... now i know :lol:

fed's backhand is nearly wholly responsible for his inability to cement his GOATness, and even more at fault for allowing a tragedy like nadal to own him...

Virtua Tennis isn't a great way to base an argument mate... wake the f*** up...

:worship:

yuri27
01-23-2011, 11:55 PM
the best single handed backhand belongs to federer hands down. if you think it belongs to someone else than fed you are just as ridiculous as wilander.

Federer himself disagrees with that and nevertheless,we know how much he loves himself.....

ossie
01-23-2011, 11:59 PM
:lol: i used to wonder if you knew three fifths of f*** all... now i know :lol:

fed's backhand is nearly wholly responsible for his inability to cement his GOATness, and even more at fault for allowing a tragedy like nadal to own him...

Virtua Tennis isn't a great way to base an argument mate... wake the f*** up...
feds backhand is wholly responsible for the way he plays tennis and so far it has brought him 16 slams. if it wasnt for that backhand he wouldnt be able to set up shit for his forehand. just because one player, a great player btw, can exploit it doesnt mean it sucks but i guess you are just too blind to see this since you think hes a 'tragedy' :rolleyes:

fast_clay
01-24-2011, 12:01 AM
feds backhand is wholly responsible for the way he plays tennis and so far it has brought him 16 slams. if it wasnt for that backhand he wouldnt be able to set up shit for his forehand. just because one player, a great player btw, can exploit it doesnt mean it sucks but i guess you are just too blind to see this since you think hes a 'tragedy' :rolleyes:

yeah... ok, ok... you got me... shank is a valid style... too good... :worship:

GlennMirnyi
01-24-2011, 12:03 AM
feds backhand is wholly responsible for the way he plays tennis and so far it has brought him 16 slams. if it wasnt for that backhand he wouldnt be able to set up shit for his forehand. just because one player, a great player btw, can exploit it doesnt mean it sucks but i guess you are just too blind to see this since you think hes a 'tragedy' :rolleyes:

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

ossie
01-24-2011, 12:14 AM
yeah... ok, ok... you got me... shank is a valid style... too good... :worship:you are an idiot if you think fed would be as successful as he is if it wasn't for that backhand.

out_here_grindin
01-24-2011, 12:15 AM
More like Roddick will make any backhand look like the best ever.

yuri27
01-24-2011, 12:23 AM
Gasquet has a better one-handed BH than Wawrinka anyway and not only estheticly.
Why?? Simply because he's been able to achieve more things than Wawrinka so far despite being weaker than Wawkrinka in every other department(serve,forehand,fitness,mental strenght).

Action Jackson
01-24-2011, 12:24 AM
Stop it richie.

GlennMirnyi
01-24-2011, 12:26 AM
you are an idiot if you think fed would be as successful as he is if it wasn't for that backhand.

I guess the sarcastic answers were not enough.

Frauderer would be a lot more successful if he had a backhand and not a shank in its place.

yuri27
01-24-2011, 12:26 AM
Stop it richie.

It's you who should stop me calling richie.
If Wawrinka had really a better BH than Gasquet then how do you explain this latter has had better results than him so far??
-because Gasquet has a better FH?? LOL
-because Gasquet is stronger mentally?? LOL
-because he has a better serve?? No

Also,Federer said he would love to have Gasquet's BH but i've never heard him pay such compliment to Wawrinka's BH.why???

fast_clay
01-24-2011, 12:30 AM
richie21 :lol: it is too :lol:

Haelfix
01-24-2011, 12:48 AM
I'd take Gasquet's over Wawrinka for pure shotmaking prowess, and Federer's for variety sake (b/c he can do anything with it). Also Kuerten's for long distance rallying.
Still, Stan's is an excellent mix and certainly responsible for his success.

Generally speaking the best 1handers i've seen are in no particular order. Kuerten, Haas, Federer, Edberg, Lendl, Gasquet, Wawrinka. You can't go wrong with any of the above.

Henry Chinaski
01-24-2011, 01:08 AM
Mats with a seriously over-exaggerated sentiment in the middle of a match?

Colour me shocked.

this.

Mats "Hyperbole" Wilander

GlennMirnyi
01-24-2011, 01:16 AM
I'd take Gasquet's over Wawrinka for pure shotmaking prowess, and Federer's for variety sake (b/c he can do anything with it). Also Kuerten's for long distance rallying.
Still, Stan's is an excellent mix and certainly responsible for his success.

Generally speaking the best 1handers i've seen are in no particular order. Kuerten, Haas, Federer, Edberg, Lendl, Gasquet, Wawrinka. You can't go wrong with any of the above.

Yeah, Fraud can do anything with his backhand. If by anything you mean shank.

potato
01-24-2011, 01:34 AM
the best single handed backhand belongs to federer hands down. if you think it belongs to someone else than fed you are just as ridiculous as wilander.

I though MTF was going to be less delusional than TF...

guess I was wrong. :lol:

Clydey
01-24-2011, 01:55 AM
Standard Wilander. Talks utter shit in the heat of the moment. He'll contradict himself the next time Gasquet has a good day, no doubt.

The Magician
01-24-2011, 02:00 AM
Wawrinka has one of the most powerful backhands ever. It's a bit limited though, his slice isn't great and his backhand passing shots are actually not that special. Still a good backhand but of course that's a dumb statement from Wilander.

Fed's backhand is underrated, his half volleys and passing shots in his prime were nuts and he has by far the best slice in the game today. It still is crap for being responsible for his losing to Nadull though :o

green25814
01-24-2011, 02:01 AM
Richie is still on the forum? :spit:

fast_clay
01-24-2011, 02:10 AM
Wawrinka has one of the most powerful backhands ever. It's a bit limited though, his slice isn't great and his backhand passing shots are actually not that special. Still a good backhand but of course that's a dumb statement from Wilander.

Fed's backhand is underrated, his half volleys and passing shots in his prime were nuts and he has by far the best slice in the game today. It still is crap for being responsible for his losing to Nadull though :o

agree about wawrinka... his stock standard rally ball is heavy, and can trade heavy ball all day even when in-to-out forehands are being drilled at it...multi-surface shot too... it really is one of the more bulletproof one handers you'll see in general play...

it lacks feel when asked to improvise and doesnt have a flair for anything outside of being relentless, methodical and brutal...

federer's backhand has the flair for ad-lib play, can make uncanny passes and the a flamboyance that fools people into thinking its the greatest, but for exactly the reasons wawrinkas backhand is great, federer's is not... can punch through it...

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
01-24-2011, 02:10 AM
gasquets bh is much better than MM champion stan the man

during wimbledon 06 versus gasquet federer totally owned richie's bh with his own

bh to bh fed just was too good

gasquet and fed were both in their primes and fed's bh in 2006 was one of the greatest bhs of all time

Priam
01-24-2011, 02:26 AM
Oh that's nothing compared to Nalbandian's backhand.

sco
01-24-2011, 02:34 AM
agree about wawrinka... his stock standard rally ball is heavy, and can trade heavy ball all day even when in-to-out forehands are being drilled at it...multi-surface shot too... it really is one of the more bulletproof one handers you'll see in general play...

it lacks feel when asked to improvise and doesnt have a flair for anything outside of being relentless, methodical and brutal...

federer's backhand has the flair for ad-lib play, can make uncanny passes and the a flamboyance that fools people into thinking its the greatest, but for exactly the reasons wawrinkas backhand is great, federer's is not... can punch through it...

Great explanation - variety vs brute force.

Wilander is full of it. Disregard everything he says.

Rosa Luxembourg
01-24-2011, 10:45 PM
I was just wondering whether his analysis/expert opinions are truly his believes or influenced by his role/need to hype up certain matches/players. He seems to be off the mark a whole lot: hyping up Meltzer's chances against Murray, not giving much of a chance to Dolgolpolov against Soderling (even after beating Tsonga), hyping up Sodeling to win it all... And that's just in the apst 24 hours. Whatdoes everyone think? If this is not all TV, then what kind of expert is he? :scratch:

abraxas21
01-24-2011, 10:47 PM
i think mats is intrinsecally a clown/troll whatever. can't really blame his role as tv commentator for it.

bigBOSS
01-24-2011, 10:52 PM
why should anyone listen to that douche, he knows nothing about tennis and his bias gets in the way of his predictions so much, its ridiculous.

sexybeast
01-24-2011, 10:52 PM
I like Wilander, but there is no denying that he is a bandwagoner with a big B, I cant belive he is the expert in eurosport. In 2008 he was drooling for Tsonga:

http://tennisplanet.wordpress.com/2008/05/30/tsonga-is-the-best-player-in-the-world-from-cragger-thanks/

“He is the greatest player in the world. I have never seen anyone play better than he did”

“It is his 5th grand slam. He hasnt sat in the locker room listening to stories about Federer and Nadal, he is completely unafraid. He doesnt care about who they are”

“Tsonga has better physics, tactics and technique than Federer. Federer has history and that counts. But without history Tsonga is better. I hope he can face Federer to meassure how good he is”

Fastforward: Federer-Tsonga 2010 SF 6-2 6-3 6-2. I dont remember what Wilander's comments were like after this match, but he probably had moved on to bandwagon the next big thing in tennis. Bandwagoners dont have a good memory.

ApproachShot
01-24-2011, 10:53 PM
Mats doesn't always see things the way most of us do. But the three things you mentioned are understandable. Firstly, some people did think the Melzer-Murray match would be quite competitive - especially after Melzer's 'the match is on my racquet' comments. Secondly, hardly anyone would have picked Dolgopolov to come this far, so there were low expectations going into the match. Thirdly, Wilander is Swedish and it is only natural he would hype up Soderling's chances to win it all...even Edberg said in a pre-tournament interview that Soderling had a good chance.

Nonetheless, I do agree with you that Wilander's comments are not always the most rational. He is entitled to his opinions though.

Montego
01-24-2011, 10:56 PM
Do we always have to have threads about Wilander when there is GSMats on Eurosport ?

It's been like that since 4 years or something.....

GlennMirnyi
01-24-2011, 11:00 PM
Most of these old guys grab any chance they can to have a little press.

scoobs
01-24-2011, 11:03 PM
Mats reminds me of the frogs in Frogger

okm0VtF2gH8

Dodging the cars of common sense so he can leap from one log of bandwaggoning to the next, making it to the safe haven of yet another tennis season-end filled with his pointless witterings.

sexybeast
01-24-2011, 11:14 PM
Dodging the cars of common sense so he can leap from one log of bandwaggoning to the next, making it to the safe haven of yet another tennis season-end filled with his pointless witterings.

It must be enjoyable though to be hit by lighting everytime you see some guy playing a great tennis match, always beeing stunned by the greatness of some new unknown player, imagining everytime that tennis of such quality as that which is played infront of your eyes today has never been witnessed before. It is the whole struggle between emotions and logic, by reacting merely emotionally you enjoy life much more even if you dont quite understand in depth what is really going on. Wilander is that guy, he is living tennis but not thinking tennis. Strange because he had great tennis brains when he was younger.

Rosa Luxembourg
01-24-2011, 11:23 PM
Mats doesn't always see things the way most of us do. But the three things you mentioned are understandable. Firstly, some people did think the Melzer-Murray match would be quite competitive - especially after Melzer's 'the match is on my racquet' comments. Secondly, hardly anyone would have picked Dolgopolov to come this far, so there were low expectations going into the match. Thirdly, Wilander is Swedish and it is only natural he would hype up Soderling's chances to win it all...even Edberg said in a pre-tournament interview that Soderling had a good chance.

Nonetheless, I do agree with you that Wilander's comments are not always the most rational. He is entitled to his opinions though.


of course he does, but what's the point for ES to pay big buck to him if his knoweldge/expertise is worth than a lot of folks on this board? Hire one of us for a lot less money to get more expertise out

Roamed
01-24-2011, 11:26 PM
Check out his latest blog: http://wilanderonwheels.com/blogs/

Reiterates it with some extra praise: '[Stan's] one handed topspin backhand is simply the most effective and beautiful shot “left” in the tournament. It’s easily the best single handed backhand we have ever seen. '

scoobs
01-24-2011, 11:28 PM
It must be enjoyable though to be hit by lighting everytime you see some guy playing a great tennis match, always beeing stunned by the greatness of some new unknown player, imagining everytime that tennis of such quality as that which is played infront of your eyes today has never been witnessed before. It is the whole struggle between emotions and logic, by reacting merely emotionally you enjoy life much more even if you dont quite understand in depth what is really going on. Wilander is that guy, he is living tennis but not thinking tennis. Strange because he had great tennis brains when he was younger.
True, and if he weren't being paid for that I wouldn't have a problem, but you sorta hope he's being paid to offer insight, put things into perspective, provide trustworthy analysis and not just sit there making the commentary equivalent of drooling noises akin to that of Homer Simpson when confronted with a donut.

Henry Chinaski
01-25-2011, 12:49 AM
"We all thought that Federer and Nadal were good movers on the court but then Andy Murray came along!"

Can't remember when that one was from. Like 2006 or something.

Corey Feldman
01-25-2011, 03:25 AM
what was he taking last night during that commentary of Golden Child v Cilic ?

never heard so much shit from his mouth

Mats Cilic playing his best right now
co-commentator *silence*

paseo
01-25-2011, 03:55 AM
Reiterates it with some extra praise: '[Stan's] one handed topspin backhand is simply the most effective and beautiful shot “left” in the tournament. It’s easily the best single handed backhand we have ever seen. '

We?

Pirata.
01-25-2011, 05:01 AM
Mats and JMac and Brad Gilbert are all a bunch of clowns.

In 2009, they did nothing but talk about how Federer was back and how he was the best ever and how he could go on to win 50 majors and how Nadal was finished, now they can do nothing but lick Rafa's ass and every thing they say about Federer is negative, and then Roger plays a good match and they're back up his ass. Bandwagoners at their worse :o

Kolya
01-25-2011, 05:50 AM
Too emotional with his commentating.

Opposite to how he played the game.

tests
01-25-2011, 05:53 AM
wilanders a weird fellow. First he was ballwashing federer, in his prime years. Now hes ballwashing nadal.


I recall he was very angry when federer did not win all 4 slams in a row, calling him a pussy or someshit. I would like to see him take down nadal on clay.

Puschkin
01-25-2011, 05:56 AM
Most of these old guys grab any chance they can to have a little press.

This.

SloKid
01-25-2011, 07:53 AM
During the Nadal vs Tomic match he said that Nadal winning so much last season and his winning mentality was the reason that Spain won the football World Cup. Clearly he's right, no?

Pirata.
01-25-2011, 08:08 AM
During the Nadal vs Tomic match he said that Nadal winning so much last season and his winning mentality was the reason that Spain won the football World Cup. Clearly he's right, no?

Ahh, brilliant. The real reason Spain lost the ConFed Cup in 2009 was because Rafa got beaten at Roland Garros that year. This explains everything :worship:

pesto
01-25-2011, 09:09 AM
Un-be-lievable.

Bargearse
01-25-2011, 09:30 AM
the best single handed backhand belongs to federer hands down. if you think it belongs to someone else than fed you are just as ridiculous as wilander.

If Fed's backhand is so good, why did he spend the better part of 2009 and 2010 running around it to hit forehands (errors)? :scratch: Clearly even Fed himself didn't think much of his backhand.

Having said that, he seems to be hitting a few more backhands lately and there has been some improvement, but it's still not the best. I'd rather watch Gasguet's backhand myself.;)

ossie
01-25-2011, 09:57 AM
If Fed's backhand is so good, why did he spend the better part of 2009 and 2010 running around it to hit forehands (errors)? :scratch: Clearly even Fed himself didn't think much of his backhand.

Having said that, he seems to be hitting a few more backhands lately and there has been some improvement, but it's still not the best. I'd rather watch Gasguet's backhand myself.;)some great logic there :rolleyes:

if gasquet had a forehand like federer, he would not use his backhand :wavey:

Bargearse
01-25-2011, 10:24 AM
some great logic there :rolleyes:

if gasquet had a forehand like federer, he would not use his backhand :wavey:

Federer obviously has one of the best forehands around - that is not disputed, but for awhile there he tried to avoid hitting backhands at all costs (as you say Gasquet would do if he had such a forehand) & because the shot wasn't always on, he made a lot of errors (think that is where monikers like Errorer and Federror came from). Opponents like Nadal and Murray continue to exploit his backhand & much has been said about it being the weakest part of Federer's game.

scoobs
01-25-2011, 10:25 AM
Mats said today that was the best Djokovic has ever played.

sexybeast
01-25-2011, 10:39 AM
Mats said today that was the best Djokovic has ever played.

I could predict he would say something like this, he said Federer was playing better than he ever has played when he won Australian open last year and that he would go on to win all 4. Tsonga was after he beat Nadal the greatest player to ever hold a raquet. Wilander is the master of all bandwagoners.

finishingmove
01-25-2011, 10:44 AM
:haha:

Corey Feldman
01-25-2011, 10:59 AM
said Berdych usually controls matches v Fed and Fed would have been happy Nole won... but not after tonight, Fed will be scared.

Nole fan
01-25-2011, 11:33 AM
said Berdych usually controls matches v Fed and Fed would have been happy Nole won... but not after tonight, Fed will be scared.

Well that much is true. :lol:

Wilander is epic.

ShotmaKer
01-25-2011, 12:30 PM
lawl he also said at the beginning of the tournament that Djokovic doesn't stand a single chance to win the title, and the mental gap between him and Fedal was still too big.

«Ivan»
01-25-2011, 01:34 PM
wilander.....ex tennis players are usually the worst commentators,far from experts.he's not even funny in his stupid coments like today,yesterday,day before....

Commander Data
01-25-2011, 01:39 PM
Wilander is an idiot.

ossie
01-25-2011, 02:01 PM
Federer obviously has one of the best forehands around - that is not disputed, but for awhile there he tried to avoid hitting backhands at all costs (as you say Gasquet would do if he had such a forehand) & because the shot wasn't always on, he made a lot of errors (think that is where monikers like Errorer and Federror came from). Opponents like Nadal and Murray continue to exploit his backhand & much has been said about it being the weakest part of Federer's game.
the weakest part of feds game is still way better than most of strongest points of all the other players, especially when we're talking about single-handed backhands. You see it doesn't matter how many times federer shanks his backhand because it is not meant to hit winners or to be a tool in his defense, it is meant to set up his forehand. If feds backhand was not perfectly suited for this job he would not have 16 slams.

nalbyfan
01-27-2011, 12:44 PM
I'ld to know what this dear Mats has to say now...he was so sure that Rolex guy would win AO !!!

Corey Feldman
01-27-2011, 12:47 PM
yesterday Muzza said Nole would beat Federer to that brit woman on Mats show

Pirao666
01-27-2011, 12:56 PM
I stopped paying attention to what he says after RG final 2010 "Nadal doesn't believe he can beat Soderling" :lol:

Tuvalu
01-27-2011, 01:54 PM
I stopped paying attention to what he says after RG final 2010 "Nadal doesn't believe he can beat Soderling" :lol:

:rolls:

Consigliere
01-27-2011, 02:01 PM
yeh i remember him pumping up sir'derling at the french, saying he would dominate tennis.

mats walked past me tonight he and another dude were commenting on how the serbian fans were impressive.

Jomp1
01-27-2011, 02:10 PM
I stopped paying attention to what he says after RG final 2010 "Nadal doesn't believe he can beat Soderling" :lol:

Something here doesn't make sense.

Iván
01-27-2011, 03:04 PM
Matts tipped up Henin to win the australian open
Matts said forget about dolgopolov, raonic is the one we should be focusing on.
matts said tomic will be in top 5 in the next 2 years.

matts said

Nole fan
01-27-2011, 03:11 PM
We all know Wilander is a joke, such a genius. :lol:

@CD aka Tom.... nice sig. :eek:

Pirao666
01-27-2011, 03:11 PM
Something here doesn't make sense.

Indeed: it's you :wavey:

e476
01-27-2011, 03:19 PM
:kiss: Mats. The old Swedes are studs.

Orka_n
01-27-2011, 04:10 PM
the weakest part of feds game is still way better than most of strongest points of all the other players, especially when we're talking about single-handed backhands. You see it doesn't matter how many times federer shanks his backhand because it is not meant to hit winners or to be a tool in his defense, it is meant to set up his forehand. If feds backhand was not perfectly suited for this job he would not have 16 slams.Cut it out already. The various aspects of Fed's backhands has already been described accurately countless times in GM:

Federer's BH slice is excellent.
His passing shots are excellent.
His flicks and improv BH shots are excellent.
His regular topspin backhand (which is employed most times) is not very good as it lacks both power and depth.

Fed's footwork brought him to 16 slams. Not his backhand. Never his backhand. And the part about "it doesn't matter how many times Federer shanks his backhand" is just dumb and you know it.

On Topic: Wilander is one of the most annoying commentators out there.

Donnay Quixote
01-27-2011, 07:24 PM
Mats Wilander recently stirred the pot when he inferred that, while on paper and in the record books, Roger Federer may be the best player of all time, the 16-time Slam champ hasn’t necessarily been challenged the way elite players of the past were. Said the Swede: “You have to say that the era when he played was the worst of all time. That’s why he was winning so much…His era had the worst Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 we’ve had‚ the Nalbandians, Roddicks, Hewitts. That’s one of the reasons why Roger dominated so much…That’s the only way I can see it. How can you be that dominant in this day and age? It’s impossible.”

Hall of Famer Pete Sampras, who’s prepping for a Feb. 7 exo match against Frenchman Gael Monfils at the HP Pavilion in San Jose, Calif., concurs. To a point, that is.

“What’s happening to the game is that there’s only a handful of great players,” Sampras told Inside Tennis. “There’s a lot of really good players, but there’s only a number of guys who have won majors. In Mats’ generation, in my generation, there were a lot more major winners — Becker, Edberg, Stich, Courier, Agassi, you can go down the list. With Rafa and Roger being so dominating over the years, there’s not anyone else who really believes they can win majors. If it’s a Soderling or a Robredo, they’re really good players, but I’m not sure they believe.”

“As to how dominant Roger has been, how great he’s been; the competition hasn’t necessarily been as great,” Sampras continued. “I’ve never seen two guys dominate as much as Roger and Rafa have. The competition is the competition — there’s nothing Roger can do about it. If he plays [fellow Swiss Stanislaus] Wawrinka like he did the other night [in the Australian Open quarterfinals], 1, 3 and 3 in an hour and 20 minutes, it’s not his fault. He’s that much better. Guys are pretty content now just getting to the quarters and are not believing in themselves as far as being able to beat Roger and Rafa. They’re clearly the best players in the world, but they’ve mentally got a really big edge on these guys.”

Sampras’ mid-’90s run of six years as the world No. 1 remains an unparalleled streak. That he pulled it off against the likes of nemesis Agassi, Becker, Courier, Chang, Kafelnikov, Rafter, Safin, Ivanisevic, Krajicek, etc., only makes it more remarkable.

“As far as styles of play, I felt in my day there were some players who were dangerous, who had big serves, who could serve you off the court,” Sampras explained. “I’d play one of those guys one day and the next day play a great returner, versus Roger, who never feels scared out there. He doesn’t feel like he’s under that much pressure. Everyone sort of plays the same; it’s just that Roger and Rafa are just better at it. They just move better. They’re better from the backcourt. It’s very clear to me that no major threat comes through like a Krajicek, an Ivanisevic, guys who could potentially blow you off the court with their serve. You have to admire what these guys have been able to do. It’s incredible. That’s the way I look at it. I don’t look at it like, ‘Wow, they’re not playing anybody.’ They’re playing the competition of their generation and they’re dominating. That’s enough for me.”

And how would an in-his-prime Pete Sampras fare against Federer and Nadal today?

“When you get the top guys from your generation, if it’s me or Andre or Becker, I was going to win my fair share of big ones, they were going to win their fair share of big ones. It’s hard to compare the decades. That said, I think we all would have been pretty even depending on the surface. I don’t think one guy would have been 10-1 against someone. It would be pretty even. My game would certainly hold up I believe in any generation, with the serve-and-volley game. Everyone talks about that game being extinct, but I still think it’s an effective way to play. It would have been exciting, and we all want to compare generations, what I’d do against Borg or McEnroe or Laver, for that matter. It’s hard to compare. The game has changed, technology has changed, but in my prime I felt unbeatable, as does Roger, as did Lendl, as did Laver. That’s the way we look at our decades. To say that one is better than the other? It’s hard to compare, but I felt I came out of a generation that was very, very strong, and I feel proud about that.”

With Nadal on the verge of owning all four major titles at once, Sampras said that while it wouldn’t be a calendar year Slam al la Laver (the last man to sweep all four majors in a single year), there would be no taking away from the accomplishment.

“If he does it, it’s incredible,” he said. “It’s one of the greatest achievements in all of sports in this day and age when the competition is a lot more fierce than it was back when Laver was doing it. It’s hard to believe, honestly, that he’s so close to doing it. He very well could do it. It’s mind-boggling to be that consistent, to win on all those surfaces in a day when the competition is very tough. You’ve got to put him right up there with Laver. Like I said, technically, it’s not January through the [U.S.] Open, but in my eyes he’s going to hold all four of them at one time. No one’s done that.”

Of course, Federer may just be the last man standing between the Spaniard and that seemingly superhuman feat. What advice would Pistol Pete give his big-dollars exo counterpart should the Swiss meet Nadal in the final?

“I’ve always felt playing lefties, Nadal especially…you have to use the whole court, you can’t get it just to his backhand. You have to go wide to Rafa’s forehand, open it up, get it to the backhand. That’s something Roger might try. He isn’t going to do it every game, but second serve, run around and smack forehands and chip and charge a little bit. What Roger doesn’t want to get involved in is long, grinding rallies that are tough to recover from that will take its toll over a five-set match. And Rafa can keep doing that. He has to take his chances, serve and volley occasionally, even on the second serve, because Rafa stands so far back. Just giving different looks. And I know that’s a little uncomfortable for Roger just to get out of that. But against Rafa, he’s forced to do some things that he doesn’t have to against other players. Rafa is that tough for him.”

And Federer will need to avoid being pinned down on his weaker side, his oft vulnerable one-handed backhand, by Nadal’s unrelenting, more-than-formidable forehand.

Easier said than done.

“It’s very tough. It’s what makes Rafa as great as he is,” Sampras concluded. “It’s tough to get control at that point. And once Rafa gets that ball to his backhand, it’s hard. I can tell you from one-handers, it’s the hardest shot in the game for us. What can you do? You’ve just got to try to get it back deep and wait for your forehand, and you can try to chip it, but it’s got to be a good chip. He’s returning Rafa’s serve and being pretty aggressive with it. Once you get one short ball, you have your track shoes on and he’s going to get it to your backhand…It’s an uphill battle once those points happen.”

http://www.insidetennis.com/2011/01/sampras-my-game-hold-generat

*Brahmin
01-27-2011, 07:36 PM
Insulting? Not really...all of what they said is true..
Mats Wilander was being harsh about it and an asshole as usual..degrading this era so much and srsly downplaying Fed's achievements..but Sampras was really cool about it
But I think it's true...Our era has been really weak to the past till I think Andy Murray and Novak broke through

Henry Chinaski
01-27-2011, 08:12 PM
"Djokovic hits the ball just as well as Agassi but he moves twice as fast!"

Fuck off Mats you clown.

ShotmaKer
01-27-2011, 08:19 PM
Mats would say that the sun revolves around the earth if that could get him more attention.

Kworb
01-27-2011, 08:40 PM
Agassi, Becker, Courier, Chang, Kafelnikov, Rafter, Safin, Ivanisevic, Krajicek

:lol: Already reaching after the first two names.

KaiserT
01-27-2011, 11:55 PM
Wilander gave an interview saying that Murray would have preferred to face Nadal in the semis as Ferrer is a trickier matchup for him.

fast_clay
01-28-2011, 12:08 AM
the best single handed backhand belongs to federer hands down. if you think it belongs to someone else than fed you are just as ridiculous as wilander.

i know one quote that was just as ridiculous as wilander... and it happened in this thread :speakles:

feds backhand is wholly responsible for the way he plays tennis and so far it has brought him 16 slams. if it wasnt for that backhand he wouldnt be able to set up shit for his forehand. just because one player, a great player btw, can exploit it doesnt mean it sucks but i guess you are just too blind to see this since you think hes a 'tragedy' :rolleyes:

hmmm... ok... it doesnt end here tho...

the weakest part of feds game is still way better than most of strongest points of all the other players, especially when we're talking about single-handed backhands. You see it doesn't matter how many times federer shanks his backhand because it is not meant to hit winners or to be a tool in his defense, it is meant to set up his forehand. If feds backhand was not perfectly suited for this job he would not have 16 slams.

did you catch the match today...? i counted 13 different kinds of shank in there... guys got the shank styles sorted... leading edge... following edge... roundhouse 2 O'Clock special...row 4 Seat AA... 'spank the ballboy'... all the shanks were there... fed showed his full repetoire today... absolutely on fire...

did you catch it...?

Mechlan
01-28-2011, 12:14 AM
did you catch the match today...? i counted 13 different kinds of shank in there... guys got the shank styles sorted... leading edge... following edge... roundhouse 2 O'Clock special...row 4 Seat AA... 'spank the ballboy'... all the shanks were there... fed showed his full repetoire today... absolutely on fire...

did you catch it...?

:haha:

Pirata.
01-28-2011, 12:48 AM
With Rafa and Roger being so dominating over the years, there’s not anyone else who really believes they can win majors. If it’s a Soderling or a Robredo, they’re really good players, but I’m not sure they believe.

Or maybe Roger and Rafa are just much better players than Soderling or Robredo :shrug:

Nole fan
01-28-2011, 01:06 AM
did you catch the match today...? i counted 13 different kinds of shank in there... guys got the shank styles sorted... leading edge... following edge... roundhouse 2 O'Clock special...row 4 Seat AA... 'spank the ballboy'... all the shanks were there... fed showed his full repetoire today... absolutely on fire...

did you catch it...?

You're hilarious. :rolls:

paseo
01-28-2011, 02:58 AM
did you catch the match today...? i counted 13 different kinds of shank in there... guys got the shank styles sorted... leading edge... following edge... roundhouse 2 O'Clock special...row 4 Seat AA... 'spank the ballboy'... all the shanks were there... fed showed his full repetoire today... absolutely on fire...

did you catch it...?

:lol:

Shankerer at full flow.

careergrandslam
01-28-2011, 03:22 AM
this wilander moron ALWAYS gets caught up in the moment.

when rafa won the US open he said rafa is now on the verge of becoming the greatest player ever.

then after the year end tour finals, he said federer is now back and rafa is finished.

he always comes up with the most insane comments, he gets caught up in the moment.

i hate this tool. hate him!

he shows no respect to rafa, he always doubts rafa. then he comes up with his fake rafa praise then a few days laters retreats come those comments and attacks rafa.

careergrandslam
01-28-2011, 03:25 AM
did you catch the match today...? i counted 13 different kinds of shank in there... guys got the shank styles sorted... leading edge... following edge... roundhouse 2 O'Clock special...row 4 Seat AA... 'spank the ballboy'... all the shanks were there... fed showed his full repetoire today... absolutely on fire...

did you catch it...?

:haha: this is absolutely hilarious

careergrandslam
01-28-2011, 03:43 AM
someone put this wilander goon in a mental hospital.
this guy is dangerous to society.

the filth that comes out of his mouth is so ridiculous, i cant believe they havent fired him yet.

gusavo
01-28-2011, 03:47 AM
why are you guys reacting like this and praising jason goodall and koenig or pretty much any other tennis commentator there is? this is so disgusting

careergrandslam
01-28-2011, 04:41 AM
jason goodall is another biased fedtard. always willing to take a snide shot at rafa.
robbie koenig is a massive federer fan, but he also likes nadal and respects rafas play and career.

ballbasher101
01-28-2011, 12:31 PM
Most so called experts can not control their emotions and excitement. Wilander is one of the worst. U would think a one hit wonder is a winner of multiple majors. I'm surprised he did not say Dolgopolov is the next Federer :lol:

Nadull_tard
01-28-2011, 02:40 PM
jason goodall is another biased fedtard. always willing to take a snide shot at rafa.
robbie koenig is a massive federer fan, but he also likes nadal and respects rafas play and career.

It's you who should visit a doctor. Koenig and Goodall are massive Nadulltards, not even mentioning Trollander, who disrespects Federer and takes all the credit from him, explaining that Roger won most of his slams in weak era whereas Nadull era is very strong, which is a total bullshit. Both eras are equally poor and uncompetitive.

Allez
01-28-2011, 03:04 PM
Did Wilander really win 7 grandslams ? I find that very hard to believe.

Henry Chinaski
01-28-2011, 03:17 PM
yeah he took a lot of drugs since then, though.

Slasher1985
11-28-2013, 09:46 AM
The previous troll thread created and deleted should have been merged in this correct thread.

I wanna repost what I have just said there:

Wilander is incorrect. Nadal was number 2 for years during Federer's prime era.

2005: 05.09.2005 (http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx?d=05.09.2005&r=1&c=#)
2006: 21.08.2006 (http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx?d=21.08.2006&r=1&c=#)
2007: 10.09.2007 (http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx?d=10.09.2007&r=1&c=#) - Check who's number 3 here.

Slade
11-28-2013, 09:53 AM
NADULLRECORD :facepalm:

Also clear appeal to authority in the clown topic before inevitable closure

FedererBulgaria
11-28-2013, 09:54 AM
This man must be put in prison and nobody to have the chance to read even his name.He is bad for the sport,i think every night he is crying that Federer is 1000 times better and more successful tennis player than he is!

Kiedis
11-28-2013, 10:44 AM
This man must be put in prison and nobody to have the chance to read even his name.He is bad for the sport,i think every night he is crying that Federer is 1000 times better and more successful tennis player than he is!

Is that what you do in Bulgaria with people who dares to tell the truth?

Castafiore
11-28-2013, 11:19 AM
The previous troll thread created and deleted should have been merged in this correct thread.
Why? Because there is not enough trolling already in GM for your taste?

The article was several years old and only started for trolling purposes so why shouldn't it be deleted? Because you want to troll a troll?

pepita1964
11-28-2013, 11:42 AM
Is that what you do in Bulgaria with people who dares to tell the truth?

This year is the worst year in the game since a long long time,

Avi13
11-28-2013, 11:45 AM
This year is the worst year for a Federer tard in the game since a long long time,

Fixed it.

Houstonko
11-29-2013, 05:25 AM
He was right in the sense that Fed peaked during that timing. His shot making and tactics didn't changed nor improved since Jan 2007.

I mean u get bored watching him trashing opponents using same shots over and over again. Every no.1 will be dethroned, same for Nadal.

Now is the chance for Federer to innovate and find a way, trashing these comments.

mike danny
11-29-2013, 12:41 PM
He did it last year when he won W and got back to no.1 vs the strong era players at 31. Where was Wilander at 31 again? oh yeah.... he disapeared after 24.

He has no right to judge like this. A guy who was non existent after 24 shuld have no right to criticize an era