Quote:
Originally Posted by gshock
You can't say he is the best there every will be. Pete Sampras was better then Federer is.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by gshock
You can't say he is the best there every will be. Pete Sampras was better then Federer is.
and he's a rolex ambassadorQuote:
Originally Posted by gshock
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk2KKi98MWo
For me he is certainly much better than Pete. He equalled Pete's record of 156 consequtive weeks being no.1 this week and will most certainly overhaul Jimmy Conners record of 160 weeks.Quote:
You can't say he is the best there every will be. Pete Sampras was better then Federer is.
Black beauty Serena is a wonderful athlete and very glamorous too :thumbsup:
http://www.aftonbladet.se/sport/0307/19/serena.jpg
I always preferred Agassi.
Federer has beaten Pete at Wimbledon well before he became number one, at a time where Pete still won most of his matches, especially in Wimbledon where he made most of his slam victories. Since than Federer has incredible improved, worked on all his weaknesses. Federer has now one slam more than Sampras at the same age, with the difference that Pete started much earlier to achieve them.Quote:
Originally Posted by alty29
Oh and Federer may not have the fastest serve, but he has a serve that is incredible hard to read for his opponents and with a lot of spin in them. On the other hand he has a huge talent to read the opponents serve, just have a look at the head to head with Roddick. The best Sampras would have no chance to win against Federer right now. Federer would return most of Sampras serves and his groundstrokes are much better ... volleys about equal.
Fredi
To be fair... he didn't play against Sampras at his apex. He got him at the end of his career basically.
But that's the risk you run when you say "the best"... I always think that the qualifier "at this time..." applies quite well.
True, but you can compare their playing styles and how it would match up. Everyone out there that plays a little bit like Sampras has a clear negative record against Federer, mostly because a good serve just does'nt mean much against Federer, same for volleys as Federer is really the master of passing shots. So I think it's pretty clear who would win.
Btw, here are some stats that compare the two: http://www.tennis28.com/studies/Federer_Sampras.html
Fredi
yeah, and here we go into the discussion about who'd win batman or spiderman...
i just heard that roger federer is really what powers the ps3. any truth to the rumors?
Chuck Norris would still win, regardless.
because it's tennis?Quote:
Originally Posted by alty29
i think its cause he looks like quinten tarintino. oh and he beats andy roddick.....
oh wait those are reasons to like him.
I've always thought that, my family never agreed. Thank you silver, now I know I'm not TOTALLY insane.
Wait. I'm using your opinion to determine whether I'm sane or not.... ****.
meh everyone thought einstein was insane... till he started kicking asses.
Yeah, but he contributed to society.
he had a cooler 'do, too.
i contribute, hell just yesterday i let a lady cross the street.. she then got hit by traffic going the other way:( i felt bad at first, but then i got mcdonalds and i was loving it.
Way to go Gandhi.
batman would win. no doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by argonauta
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbick
Yeah, Parker is a wang.