go back to espn...you are just making yourself look stupid

9/9/2007 11:15:20 PM

Quote :

"Federer would have no chance against Sampras."

I beg to fucking differ. 12 titles already and he is nowhere near done. This is not just pure luck.

9/9/2007 11:18:55 PM

ok way to read my post.

feds titles are out of intimidation. sampras's were out of skill.

federer pretends he's about to play at another level. Sampras played at another level.

Sampras wouldnt be intimidated because he can play at the level federer makes his opponents believe he's about to play at. Then it would be skill vs. skill and Sampras wins that easily.

9/9/2007 11:30:07 PM

Quote :

"Age : 18"

9/9/2007 11:31:11 PM

^^My friend I am going to take a guess and say that you are in the minority there.

We are watching the best tennis player of all time in Federer.

[Edited on September 9, 2007 at 11:34 PM. Reason : damn]

9/9/2007 11:33:42 PM

Sampras isn't even in the conversation imo. The only people you could really place at or above Federer's level are those who won career grand slams. Then you have a guy like Rod Laver who won 2 calender grand slams. Sampras never even reached a French Open final. Sampras may have been the best player of his generation, but he doesn't stack up to Federer in the GOAT discussion.

9/9/2007 11:41:31 PM

ummmmmmmm... you are aware Federer has never won the french either? people love to gloss over the facts when saying Fed is the GOAT but his skillset would not work against Sampras or even his top rivals of the era because they wouldnt be suseptible to his acting job and intimidation. Federer is lucky he jjoined during a changing of the guard from old players to young players which is why there was no experienced players to call his bluff. instead they get scared and choke it away even if he doesnt play well

9/9/2007 11:48:23 PM

Quote :

"Age : 18"

9/9/2007 11:49:29 PM

hahahaha this guy cracks me up!
this is a message board of opinions, but his is just NOT true or acceptable

9/9/2007 11:55:14 PM

9/10/2007 12:01:57 AM

yep clearly Federer only won because of his attire. It was too intimidating.

Tiger Woods sucks too.



You've gotta be fucking kidding me. The guy loses a handful of matches a year and can win on any surface.

You could probably put him on slate and Sampras on hardcourt and he'd still give him a good match.

9/10/2007 12:06:07 AM

michael jordan ain't shit

9/10/2007 12:07:24 AM

Federer and sampras would probably split fifty-fifty,

However, the only time they ever played was won by Federer in five, AT WIMBELDON

9/10/2007 12:41:14 AM

Well i guess we'll see who's gonna be better during the exhibition matches between them in November

9/12/2007 1:55:29 PM

ha what the hell is this about Fed's acting jobs? I was not aware personal fouls and penalties were a part of tennis

if Fed wins a french open then this discussion is over, Fed is clearly the best, heck prob already he is, he's going to win 16+ grand slams

9/12/2007 4:56:54 PM

erer

9/12/2007 5:06:34 PM

Has anyone ever noticed if the us open shop puts items on sale after the tournament? I like alot of the t-shirts, but they are kind of pricy.

9/12/2007 5:35:22 PM

well the kid has a point about federer keeping his composure and putting off the vibe that he is about to play at a different level. Because well he does. I think Sampras and federer would split although i would give the edge to sampras. If they played in their prime years that is.

The mental game is huge in tennis though. If things are not going quite your way and the guy across the net does not seem to let anything get to him and acts like he can keep bringing it. you will think twice. However, these people are professionals and given that are able to get passed that and usually play at the level they are capable. Which in the case of federer is just not good enough at times.

9/12/2007 5:43:12 PM

I put Sampras more on the level of Tiger Woods and I put Roger about a half step above them both, let's not forget how Federer is virtually unchallenged in three grand slams a yr, pete at least had an arch nemesis in andre agassi who could really get the better of him,

on hard court/grass I have yet to see anyone challenge Roger like agassi and a handful of other players did to Pete, especially with pete's endurance issues, usually if andre or a some of pete's more fit rivals got the match to five sets they won

[Edited on September 12, 2007 at 6:44 PM. Reason : k]

9/12/2007 6:44:11 PM