2006-06-23 15:30:13 · 16 answers · asked by davidgherron 1 in Sports ➔ Tennis
obviously pete sampras
2006-06-26 00:34:37 · answer #1 · answered by sakthi 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Pete Sampras no doubt.
Sampras' volleys were superb and he arguably possessed the best overhead smash in the history of the men's game. Ok ok his backhand was no great but to counter that he would camp on the backhand side while rallying from the baseline and often baited opponents for his great running forehand.
Sampras won a record 14 Grand Slam titles over his career.
Federer ,so far, won a record of 7 Grand Slam titles .
Sampras was also the only player to finish as No.1 for six consecutive years (1993-98)
Federer is now at No.1 but for only about 2 years now.
Sampras was No. 1 ranked player in the world for a record 286 weeks. He was in the world top ten for 12 years; only Jimmy Connors, Ivan Lendl and Andre Agassi have stayed in the top ten for longer.
2006-06-23 19:03:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pete Sampras
2006-06-23 15:32:38 · answer #3 · answered by Rocky 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think as far as skill wise it is pretty debatable- It's obvious that Sampras was the best serve and volleyer ever but federer has an extremely well rounded game and both know how to use thier talents. I would say Sampras right now is still the best but only because of how long he was good for. He was around for a really long time and great for most of it. The main difference bewteen someone who is good and someone who is great is how long they could be that for. I mean look at someone like Safin who has a tremendous amount of talent and when he's on he's incredible but he can never stay great. If Federer can stay so dominant for a time to come he could be the best ever.
2006-06-27 06:26:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pretending they'd play each other in their prime...
Federer would kill Sampras on clay. I think Sampras would win in a tight 5 set match on grass. And, Federer would beat out Sampras on hard courts.
Sampras was the supreme serve-and-volley player of all times. Unfortunately his breed of tennis is dying out.
Federer is one of the supreme all around court player of all times. This style of play which was very common in yesteryears has actually died out to. If not for Federer, nobody plays an all court game anymore. In the past, everybody did. Many examples include: Nastase, Tom Okker, Rod Laver, Adriano Panatta, Manolo Santana, Nicolas Pietrangeli, etc...
In terms of legacy, Sampras may be truly unbeatable. He has 14 Grand Slam titles. 3 more than anyone in the Open Era. Federer has only 7 (he may get his 8th in a few days if he wins Wimbledon). But, as Sampras would readily tell you the second 7 are a heck of a lot harder to win than the first 7. Winning when you are dominant and in your young mid 20s is very different than still winning when you face the next generation of champions that are stronger, fitter, and 5 to 10 years younger than you are. Sampras did that. We'll have to see if Federer can replicate that. For my part, even though I want Federer to match Sampras record; my knowledge of history of the game suggests it is unlikely he'll win more than 11 Slams.
All I can say, I wish therer were a lot more Sampras and Federer to watch.
If you want any clarification on the above, contact me through "Answer" and I'll update my response.
2006-06-28 10:50:07 · answer #5 · answered by Gaetan 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Pete Sampras has always had a very lop-sided game. His serve and forehand were fabulous, but his backhand and volleys were mediocre. Whenever Pete's serve was on, which was most of the time, he almost always won. Whenever Pete's serve was off, which occured for about a year at the end of his career, he almost always lost, and badly so.
In sharp contrast, Roger Federer has a very balanced, all-court game. The only shot Roger needs to improve, and only slightly so, is his serve which is excellent, but not quite as good as Pete's.
If Roger succeeds in improving his serve, making it as good as Pete's ever was, then there's no question that Roger is not only the best player the world has ever seen, but that he'll dominate men's tennis for many years to come.
As avid tennis players, we should all take a page out of Roger's book. Avoid over-concentrating on one shot, and instead try to develop all of the shots evenly.
2006-06-23 17:52:39 · answer #6 · answered by jeff spin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pete Sampras of course...he is basically the king of tennis....Federer vs. Sampras would be a great match!!
: )
2006-06-29 22:05:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would have to say Pete at his prime, but i think Federer might get better in the next few years and possibly even better the Pete.
2006-06-23 23:11:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sampras.
2006-06-26 02:03:27 · answer #9 · answered by What's up, doc? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Between the two of them Pete is the best. Andre is more fun to watch and has a personality.
2006-06-24 03:23:52 · answer #10 · answered by tensnut90_99 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋