Federer seems to have a better backhand but similar forehand. His volleys and first serve seem less potent than Sampras' but people say Federer is the best ever...what do you think?
2006-07-09 05:16:27 · 9 answers · asked by helper_here 2 in Sports ➔ Tennis
In fact the two have met before Sampras retired.
Sampras vs Federer on Wimbledon 2001:
Some stats about the historic match in the Round of 16. It was the only time they both met and since Sampras has retired, Federer holds a 1-0 lifetime head to head against him. Going into the match,
- Pete had never lost a 5-set match at Wimbledon before he lost to Federer 7-6, 5-7, 6-4, 6-7, 7- 5.
- He had a streak of 31 straight wins at Wimbledon, tying him with Rod Laver.
- Pete had won the seven of the last 8 Wimbledons going into the 2001 Wimby.
- Pete was looking for his 100th win at Wimbledon when he met Federer. He got his 100th win at Wimbledon with his 3-set win over Martin Lee in R128 the next year. It was also his last win at Wimbledon.
2006-07-09 05:40:19 · answer #1 · answered by kasiuleczek 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pretty good question, and I pretty much agree with rammenstein1 (if i got the moniker right)'s answer:
First of all, you have to pre-suppose that they are both at their prime(s), and then you have to look at the various surfaces:
In general, I'd give Sampras a slight edge on both the serve and the volley (and of course, the serve-and-volley game. Return of serve is pretty even, and while they are both strong from the ground, I may favor the versatility of Fed's strokes just a little bit.. I like Federer's movement, agility just a little more as well.
As far as mental toughness, that is hard to choose. I thought that Sampras was a great front-runner (i don't meant that as an insult), and both players make it look so easy, that I don't really consider either player to be a great fighter. But, I may give Federer a slight edge here, as he has more ways to beat you.
If looking at the Majors, I'd make Pete an ever-so-slight favorite at Wimbledon (for now), and give Federer a slightly bigger edge at Roland Garros. It's hard to choose at the US or the Aussie, but gun at my head, for all the marbles, if they played a series of head-to-heads in their prime(s), I'd go with ...........
Federer.
2006-07-10 05:35:46 · answer #2 · answered by Da Whispering Genius 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, I would hope Sampras would win. Man, I wish Nadal won today...oh well. Thing is, Federer is 10 years younger than Pete, so he would have a bigger advantage in reflexes, reactions, etc. But, Sampras has won 7 wimbledon titles and is pretty much the best player in the open era. So, it's pretty hard to guess who would win, but I would think Federer would win. Just like how Nadal beat Agassi (which was really sad).
2006-07-09 05:22:58 · answer #3 · answered by tigepopo_fluffyboo 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
On clay, no doubt, Federer would win. He is more patient and consistent from the baseline and he has more stamina. On grass, I'd still give Sampras the edge. He is more of a natural volleyer, and his serve was almost unbreakable. On hard-courts, it's a coin-toss. They both do everything so well, it's too hard to call. All we can be sure of is that, if they'd arrived on the scene together, it would have been an incredible rivalry. One of the best ever.
2006-07-09 06:50:45 · answer #4 · answered by rammsteinfan-1 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I too cannot exactly comment but I would support Sampras & I personally feel that Sampras has a better chance of winnig.
Too bad Nadal lost to Federer tonight.
2006-07-09 08:27:37 · answer #5 · answered by Cerebral Assaassin 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Feds would win some, Sampras would win some. I can't see one player really dominating the other.
2006-07-09 05:38:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pete Sampras, all the way. Roger is slow.
2006-07-09 05:19:32 · answer #7 · answered by silentknight64 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Federer. Sampris didn't have the serving percentages as Federer has today.
2006-07-09 05:25:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
obviosly Federer will wim. and Why ? simple because is younger and he moves and swing that racket really fast baby,
2006-07-09 05:39:12 · answer #9 · answered by veronica 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋