In which Wimbledon crown that he won Sampras played the best? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

In which Wimbledon crown that he won Sampras played the best?

konyalikartal
06-16-2005, 09:25 PM
Wimbledon is approaching and here is a topic about the best grass player of all time; but what about the best performance of the best? I think in 1999 crown he played the best grass tennis of all time especially in the final against Agassi. What do you think?

mitalidas
06-16-2005, 09:26 PM
against agassi
i think even pete said that he felt he brought out his "zone" game

but the most memorable for me is the final against rafter

PamV
06-16-2005, 09:32 PM
1997 against Cedric Pioline! LOL!

Satanic Pasteur
06-16-2005, 09:41 PM
1994 when he bagelled Goran.

NYCtennisfan
06-16-2005, 10:04 PM
1994. He was almost invincible that year before some injuries during the summer. He only lsot one set to Martin and then gave Goran a bagel in the 3rd set of the final. Goran probably served better than Pete for the 1st two sets and yet he was down two sets.

KoOlMaNsEaN
06-16-2005, 10:06 PM
1997 after losing in 96 he played much better

Denise
06-16-2005, 10:29 PM
All the years he won... LOL

Corey Feldman
06-17-2005, 02:15 AM
1993 beating Agassi, Becker and Courier.
closely by 1998 beating Grosjean, Philippoussis, Henman and Ivanisevic

YoursTruly
06-17-2005, 04:08 AM
1993 and 1999

tennischick
06-17-2005, 04:19 AM
i was asleep. i have no idea. :zzz:

Halba
06-17-2005, 07:31 AM
Fed's better than Sampras on grass
Fed is 1-0 Sampras on grass

He has a better forehand, better backhand and his volleying skill is about same, he can think on his feet and is incredible on half volleys

In terms of Serve they are about par, Sampras having the edge but Fed has great variety with Serve

megadeth
06-17-2005, 07:53 AM
i think a 1-0 is not enough to determine who's better on grass. i like roger, but it's unfair for sampras to be compared to him now...

when roger wins more than 7 wimby's or beats pete's 4 straight wimby's then i can probably call him better..

Halba
06-17-2005, 08:05 AM
Fed also has a more complete game than Sampras

but yeah you are right, its unfair to compare- not just on Sampras but Fed. They are from different eras in tennis anyway

I reckon its just best off to compare Fed to the current crop of players he is playing against

wimbledonfan
06-17-2005, 02:06 PM
Halba , stop comparing Pete with Roger . They are players in 2 different generations and so you cannot make a valid claim as to which player is more dominant . All I know is that when Pete was playing in his prime no one could beat him . Now all the younger tennis fans know the same thing about Roger . We may never know who is truly the better player as the game has already changed since Pete was around . The variety in the game is lacking and more players are playing one dimensional tennis than ever before . I still reckon that Pete is the best grass court tennis player of all time and no one should ever take that title from him unless someone can win 8 wimbledon titles which is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future .

wimbledonfan
06-17-2005, 02:12 PM
Habla , you forget to mention that during their 2001 encounter Pete was coming off the single worst year of his career and almost lost in the second round in 5 sets .

Skyward
06-17-2005, 02:20 PM
In 1999 he didn't play his best up until the finals. In the QF he was down a set and break against Flipper. Then all of a sudden Flipper's knee broke down and he had to retire. Luck never hurts...

Corey Feldman
06-17-2005, 02:23 PM
In 1999 he didn't play his best up until the finals. In the QF he was down a set and break against Flipper. Then all of a sudden Flipper's knee broke down and he had to retire. Luck never hurts...
actually, it was a set and break points down ;)
but certainly his 1999 final was probably his greatest ever match at Wimbledon.

wimbledonfan
06-17-2005, 02:25 PM
I will admit that the way Pete played in the finals of 99 against Agassi was probably the greatest performance ever put on display . I didn't think it was humanly possible to break Petes serve and Agassi being the best return of server of all time simply had no answer for him .

World Beater
06-17-2005, 02:29 PM
Habla , you forget to mention that during their 2001 encounter Pete was coming off the single worst year of his career and almost lost in the second round in 5 sets .

Excuses are worth sh$t..if you come on the court, you better be ready to bring your best or accept defeat.

Lee
06-17-2005, 03:57 PM
Fed's better than Sampras on grass
Fed is 1-0 Sampras on grass

He has a better forehand, better backhand and his volleying skill is about same, he can think on his feet and is incredible on half volleys

In terms of Serve they are about par, Sampras having the edge but Fed has great variety with Serve

Sorry, this thread is asking which Wimbledon Sampras played his best. Has nothing to do with Federer.

If you have problem reading, I will repeat it here. This thread is NOT comparing Sampras and Federer or who's better or who's the best player of the decade, century,.....

Lee
06-17-2005, 04:04 PM
Excuses are worth sh$t..if you come on the court, you better be ready to bring your best or accept defeat.

I don't think wimbledonfan's post is about excuses. He just wants to point out it's not right to say who's better base on a single match when a player was having a terrible year. Federer df Sampras in Wimbledon 2001 and his fellow Swiss Bastl df Sampras in Wimbledon 2002, base on that logic, Bastl is as good a tennis player as Federer?

wimbledonfan
06-17-2005, 04:33 PM
Actually Lee , i think you're right . Pete struggled with Bastle more than any player he played on grass for several years . I must say George Bastle must be the best grass court tennis player because he has a winning record against Pete at wimbledon.

Ahhhh , i'm finally coming to my senses .

Lee
06-17-2005, 04:36 PM
Actually Lee , i think you're right . Pete struggled with Bastle more than any player he played on grass for several years . I must say George Bastle must be the best grass court tennis player because he has a winning record against Pete at wimbledon.

Ahhhh , i'm finally coming to my senses .


Glad you see the light :lol:

Flibbertigibbet
06-17-2005, 04:50 PM
Fed also has a more complete game than Sampras

but yeah you are right, its unfair to compare- not just on Sampras but Fed. They are from different eras in tennis anyway

I reckon its just best off to compare Fed to the current crop of players he is playing against

I'm a Roger fan, but this topic has nothing to do with him, so why bring it up? Besides, it's foolish to compare different generations, as was said - we should just appreciate the tennis that is happening now and reflect on the past without mixing the two together. And one match on grass when neither Roger or Pete were at their peak doesn't really have much value in deciding who's 'better.' Roddick has a 2-1 lead over Sampras, does that make him a better player? No, not really.

Anyway, on topic, I can't really answer the poll, since a lot of his Wimbledon victories seem to have been impressive, and I mainly only started following pro tennis after his retirement.

World Beater
06-17-2005, 05:08 PM
no its unfair to federer, that his win over sampras didnt mean much because sampras played like trash, and was coming off his worst season etc etc, which is what wimbledon fan is alluding to.

On that day federer was better and so was bastl on his day. But did i say anything about whether sampras is better than federer or vice versa, as players? My post was mostly concerned about discrediting federer's win over sampras, which is what wimbledonfan was trying to do by making that comment.

Nobody can come to any conclusions about the prospect of those two, as they played only one match. But to make excuses is not acceptable.

I watched fed-samp match and sampras did not play his absolute best, but played to a reasonable standard, while federer played great.

Anyways, no use discussing this as this has nothing to do with the thread.

I would say pete was at his serving best against agassi, but i felt pete played his best from the baseline against pioline.

Leo
06-17-2005, 05:51 PM
I love how everyone is saying a different year.

I really have no clue; I only saw him play at Wimbledon from 1998 to 2000. That final against Agassi in '99 was definitely amazing, but overall it probably wasn't his best Wimbledon. After all, he lost a set to Henman in the semis (the horror!) ;), and he was a down a set to an in-the-zone Flip when he got lucky and Philippoussis had to reitre.