Federer plays tennis like Kobe/Jordan played basketball it's so aesthetically pleasing and how one would imagine the best player playing that sport. Nadal is more Lebron with power and brute force, may not look as sexy but it works to the highest degree. He has been injured more than Federer but it certainly didn't shorten his career like many predicted.
That's why I think Borg was the best talent/player ever! He won 6 and 5 on the two most contrasting surfaces, on fast grass! He did not have a long enough career, but his career win percentage is the best and he still had more slams at 25 than the big 3 and that's without playing in the Aussie open save once as a 17 year old.
It's always difficult to compare eras. Now this is going to sound like I've had one too many concussion, but this is an era lacking depth. When you have 31 year old journeymen making it to the French open finals without dropping a set, what does that tell you of depth of todays field? Wawrinka won all his slams after turning 29, couldn't win anything in his athletic prime. Federer won Wimbledon at 35 without dropping a set! He did not do that in his prime. Nadal almost broke Borgs record of dropping the fewest games at the French at 31, not quit in his athletic prime. I think Lendl was a better clay court player than Fed or Nole
good point-- either these 3 r that good or has the tennis talent pool fallen off the map?
i remember the yrs when the clay court season was exciting, lots of good players/competition- Costa, Coria, Moya, Kuerten, Gaudio. Bruguera, Juan Carlos Ferreira.......now its like one guy crushed the clay game . where r the new S American elite clay courters? Spanish?
of course the American tennis era is sadly gone, not sure wtf happened
I'm a huge Agassi fan too, I got his autograph in one of his first tournaments ever, in Stratton Mountain Vermont - must have been
about 1986.
Do I think he would have won Wimbledon w/out the grass change? Maybe not... Hard to say, the technology has changed so much
over the years - racquets, strings, balls... I was the number 1 player in my high school, back when we used wooden racquets (1982).
I played some on the lower tournament circuit from 1983-1986, and at that time people started using non-wooden racquets. I stopped
playing competitively when my kids were young (15 years ago), I haven't even followed the latest racquet technology.
give me Sampras at Flushing Meadows under the lights
grass ? cant make a call with fed having joked so many times , really hurts his legacy. Match point 5th set on serve Vs Nole after rallying and he blows it. It would have been better if he retired after beating Nadal at melbourne in that epic thriller. The way he lost to Nole leaves a bad taste in my mouth
i agree, never see another Nadal on clay-- freak show. lets not forget he mauled fed in a Roland Garros final , ridiculous. He's 34...i think he can win Roland Garros the next 5 yrs. Only covid can stop him
is there another more dominating perforamnce over an extended period than rafa on clay........ in all of sport? Phelps in swimming is the closest i can thing of
rafa did not lose a set at Roland Garros this yr.....
More like Sampras at the fast grass at Wimbledon. Remember he beat Federer five years after retiring on the fast carpet at Venetian Macao. Federer won the first two matches 6-4 6-3 and 7-6 (6) 7-6 (5) Sampras won the last match 7-6 (8) 6-4. Sampras was ten years older and playing Federer in his absolute prime! As much as I hate to say it, that cheap bastard Sampras belongs somewhere in the top 3 of all time. I don't think any of the big 3 would be able to beat an all time great in their prime, five years after retiring! And ten years older to boot! If the grass wasn't slowed Sampras wins double digit Wimbledon and Nadal doesn't get any, less wins for the Joker too. Federer probably has the same. That's why I got pissed when they slowed the grass.
Sampras was younger then Federer is right now who is world number #3. (I believe he might have fallen to #4 with him taking off most of this season for surgery and to be fresh next season)
The big 3 beat guys 10 years younger in their prime week in and week out. Hard to beat an all-time great since those 3 are still the best in the game, at an age when Sampras was well retired and even when he was playing he had fallen out of the top 10. Sampras retired on top, but he was done after winning that last major and he knew it.
Don't get me wrong though, Pete was an all-time great obviously and without a doubt the greatest american tennis player of all-time.
What is still a big subtraction on Pete was he is not very good on clay. Never even made a semi at rolando garros, let alone winning 1.
edit: my mistake. I guess he made 1 in 1996.
What is still a big subtraction on Pete was he is not very good on clay. Never even made a semi at rolando garros, let alone winning 1.
edit: my mistake. I guess he made 1 in 1996.
True. Remember though, it was an exhibition. I am sure Federer wanted to win but it's not like he is going out looking to steam roll the guy.
If it's anything like the other exhibition i have watched. They wear microphones and goof around with each other. I remember when Agassi made a joke about Sampras being cheap during a match and Sampras took none to kinda too it.
