Roger Federer Beats Pete Sampras 6:4, 6:3
1 - 20 of 152 Posts
Joined
·
3,082 Posts
I didn't watch, some people on the RF boards did and while Pete served aces, there were also several DF as well. Missed a few shots, some UFE. Had some nice shots, but it wasn't a clean match.
Okay, I agree - more routine than a thumpin', but I expected to see something more like the battle of surfaces, long and tight all the way. Maybe Roger tried but Pete didn't play along and gave the match away?
Pete apperantly held serve with some nice volleys, and I believe he also broke Roger once in the first set before Roger broke back to 4:4 and then held and break.
Okay, I agree - more routine than a thumpin', but I expected to see something more like the battle of surfaces, long and tight all the way. Maybe Roger tried but Pete didn't play along and gave the match away?
Pete apperantly held serve with some nice volleys, and I believe he also broke Roger once in the first set before Roger broke back to 4:4 and then held and break.
Joined
·
153 Posts
NICE! Keep it up Roger and thump Samprasss out of here...
Joined
·
1,643 Posts
boring match
like the guy said, sampras had like 6-7 aces and 4-5 DF.
there were a lot of unforced errors from both sides. Federer looked pretty sloppy for most part.
some pretty nice points were played tho, and pete had some very good volleys. It sucked that you could see he didn't arrive well at some balls because of the age.
But still it was very good to see those two against each other.
If anyone wants a good FedSampras match I'd tell them to watch 2001 wimbledon tho.
like the guy said, sampras had like 6-7 aces and 4-5 DF.
there were a lot of unforced errors from both sides. Federer looked pretty sloppy for most part.
some pretty nice points were played tho, and pete had some very good volleys. It sucked that you could see he didn't arrive well at some balls because of the age.
But still it was very good to see those two against each other.
If anyone wants a good FedSampras match I'd tell them to watch 2001 wimbledon tho.
I must say I don't understand whose silly idea was this match.
There is no possible outcome that doesn't look downright stupid. 6-4 6-3 is kinda boring and totally uninteresting. 6-1 6-0 for Fed would be totally unneccessary and unfair thrashing of an old legend. 3rd set tiebreak would appear as completely phony. And if Sampras won, all hell would break loose and people would start suggesting he comes back and wins the next 4 Wimbledons in a row
looks like a no-win scenario to me :shrug:
There is no possible outcome that doesn't look downright stupid. 6-4 6-3 is kinda boring and totally uninteresting. 6-1 6-0 for Fed would be totally unneccessary and unfair thrashing of an old legend. 3rd set tiebreak would appear as completely phony. And if Sampras won, all hell would break loose and people would start suggesting he comes back and wins the next 4 Wimbledons in a row
looks like a no-win scenario to me :shrug:
Joined
·
7,894 Posts
I didn't expect him to take even that many games. Good fight from the old dog.
Joined
·
2,907 Posts
That´s exactly like it is. No result is satisfying for people who think this match actually has some relevance...I must say I don't understand whose silly idea was this match.
There is no possible outcome that doesn't look downright stupid. 6-4 6-3 is kinda boring and totally uninteresting. 6-1 6-0 for Fed would be totally unneccessary and unfair thrashing of an old legend. 3rd set tiebreak would appear as completely phony. And if Sampras won, all hell would break loose and people would start suggesting he comes back and wins the next 4 Wimbledons in a row
looks like a no-win scenario to me :shrug:
Joined
·
969 Posts
The relevance of the match, to me, was seeing Pete Sampras playing again. It was obvious that age difference was a huge factor- specially with Pete's serve! He started off serving some bombs, but as the match progressed he couldnt keep it up IMO. At the net, when he could arrive in time to hit a volley, you could see why he is such a genius- great volleys.
At the back of the court, as expected, Roger took control of the match- even if he lost a bit of focus right on the begining of the match and lost his serve. The second set was pretty routine: Roger broke once Pete's serve and coasted.
I dont think the match was boring: unless you expected it to be some real showdown between those two. As I wrote, my approach to the match was: lets see Pete playing. On that sense, it was fun to watch Pete serving and volleying!
At the back of the court, as expected, Roger took control of the match- even if he lost a bit of focus right on the begining of the match and lost his serve. The second set was pretty routine: Roger broke once Pete's serve and coasted.
I dont think the match was boring: unless you expected it to be some real showdown between those two. As I wrote, my approach to the match was: lets see Pete playing. On that sense, it was fun to watch Pete serving and volleying!
spectacular comeback by Pete! winning 7 games after being 5 years away from serious tennis would be mind boggling even against THE no 1000. That he held his own against the transitional champ of today shows the lack of talent in this weak era. In his prime, no doubt federer would not have won more than 3 games.
he is still capable of winning the next four wimbledons.
he is still capable of winning the next four wimbledons.
1 - 20 of 152 Posts
Join the discussion
