Many of you are aware of the only match Roger Federer and Pete Sampras had in the 4th round at Wimbledon in 2001. Federer won the bloody match in 5 sets. But my question is, if Federer and Sampras were at their peak during the SAME year, and they faced in Wimbledon, who do you think would win and why? And just for fun, what do you think the score would be?
2007-01-09 10:10:03 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Tennis
I want to first say that I believe that Federer is the greatest player of all time. And what I'm about to say will sound contradicting; but I believe that Sampras would win.
One reason is that he had a true intangible ability to pull out big matches. Another reason is that the highest stage of the game was more populated during Sampras' career. During Sampras' career, he had epic battles with Agassi, Rafter, Courier, Safin (at his peak), and Muster (and I believe Muster would hand Nadaal his lunch on clay). These guys battled regularly, and almost always upheld their end of the draws, meeting on big stages in the big tournaments. This made Sampras a true warrior in the biggest of big matches. Again, it sounds contradicting, but Federer is SO good, he really hasn't shown what his abilities will be against a true peer. And right now, he has no peer.
And honestly, the game is not that different from when Sampras was playing. The greatest evolution of the game came in the early 90's on the men's tour. It was like overnight the average player was 6" taller! The serves were 20mph faster!
Oops, forgot the score. And this will support my answer too, since Sampras was almost unbeatable in tiebreaks. And their match would DEFINITELY consist of tiebreaks.
Sampras, 7-6, 6-7, 7-6, 7-6
2007-01-10 08:32:58 · answer #1 · answered by Jeff K 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
obviously Federer, its crazy cauz he has like the most perfect strokes ever, and sampras was good but he was that perfect
the score would be maybe a 5 set match Federer- 6-2 5-7 6-4 6-7(5) 7-5
2007-01-09 20:51:11 · answer #2 · answered by aloha9980 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I simply love Roger Federer. He by far is the most gifted all around tennis player. He can do it all. He can serve, he has a terrific backhand/forehand, and he can cover the court. All things considered, Pete Sampras is also a terrific player. I think that Roger Federer would win in straight sets.
2007-01-09 21:29:35 · answer #3 · answered by Special K 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's a tough decision and every thing can make the difference, but Pete sampras never trained like federer has done, it think federer wins, and i think it may be 4-6, 7-5 (7-6), 6-4, 5-7 (4-7), 5-7 (6-7)
2007-01-09 18:22:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Federer would win 6-4, 6-7 (5-7), 6-4, 6-3
Federer at his peak is unbelievable. If Nadal can get a set off of him on grass then so can Pete. So Federer wins in 4.
2007-01-09 18:15:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was just thinking about this a moment ago before I found your question. I think they both great players in the world of tennis. I like Roger so I would pick him. I think it would be very tight games of 5 sets match 7-5, 6-7, 7-6, 6-7 and 6-3 for Roger Federer.
Because Roger has his best Australian coach Tony Roach !! Ha...ha...ha...
2007-01-10 04:08:51 · answer #6 · answered by Meike 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's hard to answer this question because the game is totally different now than it was for Sampras during his peak. The question is not whether who would win in one faceoff, but who would win more consistently in many faceoffs. All things aside, my guess is that it would always be a tough match, and that either player could win it, depending on the circumstances.
2007-01-09 18:21:14 · answer #7 · answered by ccccc12345 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I kind of think it would have been a similar match to the one they played in 2001. very tough to pick on grass. you have sampras's serve power ( particuarly his second which won him so many cheap points) against federer#s overall slightly superior all court shotmaking. both very tough mentally ofcourse, sampras less so overtly but he was. i think if they were both at their peak at the same time they might have met in three or finals with fed winning two or three and all of them being really close epics. i think fed's all round shotmaking would just wear dwn sampras's power just enough to take it most times - a bit like the match they played in 2001.
2014-10-19 03:31:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sampras. They are the same level, but Sampras had better serve, an Andy Roddick serve.
2007-01-09 20:42:12 · answer #9 · answered by tennismaster 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
although i like federer much more than sampras,but i'd pick sampras to win that match in 4 sets.6-3,7-5,2-6,7-6!=D
2007-01-10 07:42:47 · answer #10 · answered by musicloverboy88 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋