Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Mammoths
Joined
·
4,710 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Sampras vs Becker - 1995 Wimbledon Final





Nadal vs Djokovic - 2011 Wimbledon Final



At the time of these Finals, Sampras and Becker had 5 Slams each, Nadal and Djokovic had 10 and 2 Slams respectively, so the comparative greatness of these players at the time the matches occured are pretty equal.


The 95 Final displays amazing serving as well as some excellent volleys and aggressive game style.

The 2011 Final displays brilliant defense and consistency; an impressively high intensity from the baseline


Which of these matches displays the greater level of grasscourt tennis??


If the top of the game is apparently so strong today, do you feel the quality of this years Wimbledon final really stacks up to one played by two greats of grass in the 1995 Wimbledon final? Has tennis really moved on and evolved into something 'better?'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,768 Posts
The Sampras Era was boring to be honest. Edberg and beckers best years were over and Agassi was clowning around. And Sampras was quite a boring champion himself as well. It was a one way rivalry really with Sampras. All he had were Piolines,Martins etc to thrash around. Ocassionally Corretjas,Krajicek gave him the odd challenge but really that era pales in comparison with the current era.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,217 Posts
The Sampras Era was boring to be honest. Edberg and beckers best years were over and Agassi was clowning around. And Sampras was quite a boring champion himself as well. It was a one way rivalry really with Sampras. All he had were Piolines,Martins etc to thrash around. Ocassionally Corretjas,Krajicek gave him the odd challenge but really that era pales in comparison with the current era.
you can tell great jokes..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,577 Posts
I hate all 3 of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Although I do admire the banana shot Nadal is able to play but that's about it. I am also not a fan of Federer, but greatly admire his skill. Today's tennis is boring, the guys that made it interesting like Blake, Safin etc. are gone. Tsonga was only fun for a while when he first appeared, now he's just a ball bashing clown. Baghdatis has disappeared since 2006. All the players that volley these days suck. I miss the fast reaction volleying and placement tennis where it was all about tactics and skill. Now it's just to keep hitting the ball and outlast your opponent. It's quite sad to see the crowd cheering wildly during a Nadal/Djokovic match, they probably forgotten what real tennis is, what has the world come to :sad: Hoping this mug era ends soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
weird to compare that era unless you are trying to force a compliment towards the current. early 90s and latter 90's were better than today but the in between, 1995 etc, was not that incredible with just dominance from Sampras and either underpowering or burnt out competition. very strange, I'm surprised you didn't compare Courier/Sampras time or Agassi/Sampras, a better few years of tennis than what you did use
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,509 Posts
It's just weird to compare so different surfaces. Back then they had that short and fasz grass now they have longer rallies. How to compare?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,768 Posts
Also it seems to me that the current game is more based on Mental grinding down of the opponent than the pure match of talents. I checked the Sampras-Becker video Near posted and reminisced that it was about hitting the ball and getting on with it, Nowadays its about winning each point as if the whole match depended on it, especially with Nadal and Djokovic, The mental aspect required to win the match has surely gone up a level.

But as some have already pointed it out a lot of it depends upon the pace of the courts which has slowed down quite a lot. An average Djokovic nadal point has 3 or 4 winners as compared to the ones in the past. The Game has surely evolved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,393 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,509 Posts
I personally never liked Sampras - winning a slam and lose your serve only 2-3 times the whole time is boring to me. I know Samprastards jerk off over his serve, but I prefer some drama in matches. When he got a break, you knew the set was pretty much over. You might as well change the channel and wait for the next set. Even Olderer in his peak was forced to rally and there was always a small chance to break him. With Sampras, even at 0-40 down, you knew he'd hold.

90's matches on super-fast courts were not exciting precisely because serve was so dominant and rallies outside of clay were so rare.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,068 Posts
Serve and Volley should be part of one's technique, not part of one's style, it's boring tennis. Players shouldn't be anal like either Agassi (too attached to the baseline) or Sampras (too attached to SV), they need to have variety and adapt depending on the situation. This is why I love Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal, they can utilize almost anything.
 

·
Mammoths
Joined
·
4,710 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Pretty sure Agassi used his net skills more frequently than Nadal or Djokovic, who are both more anal about baseline attachment than Agassi. Sampras played a zillion points from the baseline and had a more varied game which he utilized more dynamically than either Nadal or Djokovic.

For the person who asked why compare these two matches:

2011 was a final representative of recent finals (2 baseliners); somewhat arbitrary choice in 2011. 1995 was between two players who had a penchant for S & V, which is typical of that era (not Agassi or Courier). Plus, it's between two greats of the game who embody the style, as was the 2011 Wimbledon Final for their style.

I do have various thoughts on my original post, which was about presenting a question rather than implying any personal answer, but I'll add them later.

Ciao for now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,711 Posts
Serve and Volley should be part of one's technique, not part of one's style, it's boring tennis. Players shouldn't be anal like either Agassi (too attached to the baseline) or Sampras (too attached to SV), they need to have variety and adapt depending on the situation. This is why I love Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal, they can utilize almost anything.
Sampras is a more all around player than Djokovic and Nadal. Federer is the one that can utilize anything. Djokovic and Nadal are the ones that's too attached to the baseline.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,155 Posts
Difficult to compare. That was faster, slicker grass, and today it is a lot slower, higher bouncing grass. Today's surface is more conducive for heavy baseline tassle, as was the former surface more conducive for S&V kind of tennis.

The kind of surfaces usually determine the style of play for a particular era. You would have more S & V players if the surface was quicker and was beneficial to that style, which is clearly not the case today.
 

·
Motherhater
Joined
·
5,571 Posts
How do they compare?

Let's see; you have different surfaces, different rackets, different balls.

In Sampras and Becker you have the masters of attacking tennis (though both, especially Sampras, had great all court skills), in Nadal and Djokovic you have the masters of baseline tennis and defence (I'm hesitant to say they're good at net, especially Djokovic).

Sampras and Becker never did what Djokovic and Nadal are doing, and given the conditions of back then, and given their weapons, they had no reason to. Nadal and Djokovic can't do what Sampras and Becker did, and given the conditions of play now, they have no reason to.

Like Federer was saying, even the way the ball bounces on grass is different these days. When you add up all the subtle changes, the game has changed enough that I'm not sure we can make these comparisons anymore.

So it all comes down to personal preference. I personally hate the homogenization of surfaces and the homogenization styles. The different surfaces and slams were designed to highlight different styles of tennis, and that's what they did.

Not so nowadays, where you get the same thing over and over and over again. Especially with the "coincidental" homogenization of the draws, it's even more of an issue.

I personally loved S&V and the tennis of the 90s. But would I like to see it at every major? No. The current situation has gotten a bit out of hand in my opinion.

Edit: to provide a better answer to the OP, I would have to pick the Becker-Sampras match. Because it's more representative of what that surface was, and what grass tennis was supposed to be. For me, no one played better grass-court tennis than Sampras. But that was on real grass, which like Sampras, retired a long time ago.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top