Pete Sampras vs. Roger Federer... in their primes??
Who wins on each of the three main surfaces?
Answers:
1. A style he played the best at
2. A style that is the quickest and most efficient way to end a point
Roger Federer may have a style that can adjust depending on the situation he is in, but Sampras just knows how to win in a better and simpler way.
Clay:
Roger Federer should have the advantage on this one since he fine tuned his baseline game more than Sampras did. Pete's volleys would just get slowed down.
Hard:
This is the hardest to tell, but Sampras would probably use either his serve or his aggressive groundstroke winners to get the games in this surface and probably win the match.
Grass:
This is definitely Sampras' home field advantage. Grass is usually a fast-paced surface so Pete can just rip his overheads and running forehands faster than Roger can say "ATP".
Why is the match between Hewitt and Lee suspended?
Sampras hands down!Does changing rackets effect how one plays tennis?
Pete was an exceptional player but he did not have the endurance for Clay nor the backhand versatility of Roger for fast surfaces. Roger at his best is the best ever.Do you think Federer has peaked on clay and will be unable to defeat Nadal at the French Open?
ClayFederer would most likely. Federer right now is the second best player on clay, while Sampras seemed to struggle more on clay.
Hard
This would be a close match. It could have gone either way.
Grass
The only time they met was on grass, with Federer winning on a thrilling 5th set. Sampras was going for his 5th staright Wimbledon title, but was defeated by Federer in the 4th round. If they were both at their prime, I think Federer would win.
Who will win the single titles at the French Open this year?
Clay- Federer would win just because of the versatility of the way he plays and his endurance is better than petesGrass- this one would be really close but I believe that Pete would win this one because Federer is not use to people serve and volleying
Hard-Federer would win because of his loopy strokes that really help him on this surface.
What new Wilson tennis racket would be the closest equivalent to the old Wilson Hammer 5.9?
This is hard to answer simply because of the assumption that Federer is past his prime. I believe he's still got some years to further develop his game, we have recently seen an improvement in his backhand, and few can deny his ability to play smart meat-and-potatoes tennis, with room to add some flash.So in terms of the best we've seen from him:
Clay- Federer
Grass- Sampras
Hard- depends on temperature, and venue
On grass, it is hard to say. They were both exceptional grass court and Wimbledon players. That is a toss-up. On hard it is the same thing. On clay, Federer totally wins. But still, Federer has only made it to the Finals of the FO!
i would say alot would consider Federer. But as far as i remember, during the times of Sampras, the caliber of opponents are far more better (and durable) than today.
Who do you think will win Roland Garros this year?
I say Sampras had always the faster serves. If you compare his first serve and Federer's serve its not much difference. But, If you compare their 2nd serves sampras has the advantage. Clay- Roger Federer Grass-Sampras Hard- Sampras and Carpet- Sampras. Yes its true roger federer has the #1 in atp history for almost 3 years now but consider this. You Pete Sampras 1990 all players are basicallly serve and volleyers would you rather stay in the baseline or attack first before they do? And back then there was no power in tennis it was all Speed and Encurance and Control. So sampras was warn out from all the running during his time + His 2 handed back handed was swithced to 1handed for serve and volley and wimbeldon because 1handed are good for groundstrokes. Think if Sampras had 2 handed backhand his natural more powerful back hand who would win?roger
More Questions & Answers...