woooof...you mean 'underrated'...you are in a youtube comments section after all where literally almost everything that exists is 'underrated'. never forget that fetish.
I had forgotten how good of a commentator McEnroe was in his first few years on the job, before he started mailing it in sometime around the mid-'00s. Mac really knew his stuff back in the 90s.
Nous sommes en 2023 et jusqu'à cette date pete sampras reste l'unique joueur ayant le service le plus dévastateur au monde. Je suis fan de novak Djokovic mais le service de sampras est monstrueux tellement il frappe fort
Gran vídeo muchas gracias 👍... Recuerdo haber grabado ese partido y a Sampras no le ganaba nadie ese día estaba en la zona.. 4 de julio de 1999..❤❤ recordar es vivir ❤
Pete Sampras is underrated in hindsight, because he didn't win the French, and because three players from this era now have more majors than him. But when it was still true lawn tennis on grass in the 90s, in the Super Bowl off tennis that is Wimbledon, he was the greatest ever! All-around, it's Roger Federer, but on true lawn it was Pete.
Arson Hakobyan I agree. Also, while the Big 3 have overshadowed Sampras in recent years with their incredible haul of majors, if you look at Pete's resume not just on grass but on all fast surfaces -- with 7 Wimbledons, 5 US Opens and 5 ATP YECs -- you'd have to say that there is only one player who it can be reasonably argued is a better fast court player and that's Federer. I can't imagine that Pete in his prime, with his unreturnable serve, would have much trouble with baseliners like Djokovic or Nadal on a fast outdoor or indoor court. Pete never struggled with that type of player in his prime.
@@arsonhakobyan yes absolutely, carpet included. Remember that 4 out of 5 YECs that Sampras won were on indoor carpet. There is no question that Nadal and Djokovic -- as well as Federer -- are better all around players than Sampras, taking clay and slower hard courts into account. But on truly fast surfaces -- grass, fast outdoor hard (USO) and indoor hard/carpet -- I still think Sampras is up there with Federer and ahead of everyone else. I think Pete in his prime would torch Nadal (and possibly even Djokovic) on a fast indoor court with his serve.
@@mashencia1 I've never actually played on carpet, but the bounce of the ball gets retarded more than on hard, and much more than on clay from the matches I've watched on it. It is more predictable however than grass.
@@arsonhakobyan indoor carpet, like they used to have in the 90s and prior, was the second fastest court surface after grass. Of course when we talk about carpet we also have to mention McEnroe (who won a huge number of indoor titles) and Lendl (who won 5 YECs himself). But I think Federer's and Sampras' record across all fast surfaces surpasses those two.
It’s similar to Navratilova vs evert. One knew the serve and volleyer should win on grass especially at Wimbledon where the grass then played fast and bounce was low ( today the grass plays slower and ball bounces slightly higher) but it wasn’t a good bet to bet against Agassiand Evert because if they had a great day they had best return of serve , best passing shots, and above all played from pride until the last point.
Big 3 are way better all around player than Pete ever was. Pete was historically overrated because of his slam count. He never dominate his era (with winning % only 77) unlike big 3 or like peak Connors, Borg, McEnroe & Lendl. They all have over 80% of winning & over 90% at their peak.
@@wheel631 he was overrated in the 90's because of his slam lead. He was never the GOAT. Because of his slam count media forget about that if Pancho Gonzales, Laver, Rosewall didn't turned pro then they could have over 18 or 20 slams. Tilden won 10 slams by playing just 1 slam every year because of lack of transportation in 20's. Borg retired with 11 slams by the age of 25 despite playing A.O just once. Despite playing all 4 slams in a year Sampras never won more than 2 slams per year, fail to win F.O. Stop winning hard court slams after the age of 25 till 2002 us open. That's means from 1997 A.O to 2002 US open he just won Wimbledon.🤔🤔. Never won 90% of his matches in a season.
@@wheel631 in the 90's USA biased media overrated him for breaking bogus Roy Emerson records of 12 slams which nobody cares in the past but once big 3 surpassed his records by mile, once the media knew that number isn't that big the same USA media underestimate him now. 😂😂😂
I'm pretty certain that the day on which this match was played, was the specific date that Nostradamus had predicted Armageddon to befall mankind. I remember hearing of his prophecy constantly, in the days leading up to this match. I woke up terrified, but my mother greeted my pained, weary visage with the reassurance that humanity remained preserved.
Man, those three big serves in the 1st set are demoralizing. Agassi must have been pretty frustrated at watching his 3 break points vanish. You could tell he was rattled; his following loose service game showed it. This is about as well as I've ever seen Sampras play on grass.
How many matches that if Agassi wins a set it’s the third set but Pete wins the fourth. When it’s Sampras all the way it’s tie breaks for 3 sets or he wins by one service break against Agassi .Sampras knew he could beat Agassi if he met him in a slam final except at the AO. Sampras had a thing for not losing to Andre. In the same that Navratilova felt she should never lose to Everton grass the way evert felt she shouldn’t lose to Martina if she played near her best on clay.
Thank allah that this primitive, overly-serve reliant style of play was forced into extinction by the very next generation who completely eclipsed all the meaningful records several times over and erased Sampras from any GOAT discussions with grrat haste.
The only thing wrong with Pete's game was that god-awful topspin ralleying backhand of his! Oh, Pete - yuk..... Strangely, when forced to hit passing shots or going for it big, it was actually a decent shot. But just awful - technique and shape/form - when trading strokes in baseline rallies.
I would have loved to have his backhand, even though my one hander was my best shot at the local club. Of course, having Wawrinka, Conners, Safin, Laver, Budge, and few other's backhand would have been even better. You can't have everything in life.
Maybe not a thing of beauty like his serve..volley...overhead ...movement ......But Pete was all about effectiveness , and the topspin backhand forced his opponent back so he could get in with his forehand .......the end 😃
@@mikemoggerson6651 Pretty sure he would ....but Nadal and Novak would not on fast grass and fast carpet of the 90 `ties ......That was again pretty clear yesterday against Hubert Hurkacz 7-6(6), 7-6(6), 5-7, 6-4 And this is SLOW 2023 grass 😀 Novak said : He was serving incredibly well. I don't recall being so helpless on the return games, to be honest ! And here from January 2023 Novak said “Just difficult to play in this kind of court that is really fast. It kind of favors the server. If you’re serving well, it’s tough to break the serve of a big server like him, so two tiebreaks were probably the most realistic score of today’s match. Just glad to overcome the tough challenge.” 7-6(3), 7-6(5) against 61 ranked Quentin Halys in Adelaide International ! Pete Sampras , Boris Becker , Goran Ivanisevic ; Richard Krajicek are on a whole other level than Hurkact and Quentin Halys , and would have no problem on fast court with Nadal and Novak . But put them out on clay and its the other way round !
@@hassehougaard5120 but then how would they win on Novak’s service games? It was easy playing bums of the 90s. They had no baseline game and it would be easy to expose them from there.
Man Pete’s technique was quite awful from the baseline. How could he compete with a modern legend like Djokovic or Fed even on grass if he loses most rallies? On their serve, they wouldn’t go to net and he would be hopeless. It’s a problem a lot of modern “serve bots” have had against the big 3. Even if he served and volleyed to perfection…they would eat him alive from the baseline with pace and depth. The fast courts would actually benefit them more than Sampras in that regard, since he didn’t have many reliable “weapons” from the ground. I mean his technique is just pretty ugly. I mean just look at his backhand…what is that? Any modern player would pound his backhand over and over again lol It would be interesting to see if he could’ve evolved his game with (even more) modern racquets and conditions.
What are you talking about 😀😃🤣 Pete beat all the French Open winners on clay , and won almost single handily Davis cup in Russia on clay , beating FO winner Kafelnikov ....and that was the 90`ties clay , which was much slower than now ! And he have what most expert says is one of the best forehands ever in the game ! But maybe you are just biased and cant see clearly 🤓
UA-camr user whose name ends with 6651 : Please stop trolling, change your profile photo, and start writing stuff that is at once intelligent, knowledgeable and humble if you want to be taken seriously.
This match is forgotten greatness and too understated...one of the greatest, if not the greatest, display of grass court tennis
woooof...you mean 'underrated'...you are in a youtube comments section after all where literally almost everything that exists is 'underrated'. never forget that fetish.
This is how grass court tennis should be played! Pure perfection from Pete! His second serve was the same as his first serve!
1999 Sampras at Wimbledon is probably the greatest player ever.
1999 Sampras in the Wimbledon final, yes.
Hard to believe this match was 25 years ago, life sure is short.
Ya it's crazy
Thank you! How nice I get to watch Sampras again! Since no UA-cam during his time, if I miss the game -sorry😊
I had forgotten how good of a commentator McEnroe was in his first few years on the job, before he started mailing it in sometime around the mid-'00s. Mac really knew his stuff back in the 90s.
Pete is the best!
Sampras was superhuman. No player since has come close to his brilliance. Not even Federer.
Ahhh Fedal before Fedal. Miss watching these legends play
Nous sommes en 2023 et jusqu'à cette date pete sampras reste l'unique joueur ayant le service le plus dévastateur au monde. Je suis fan de novak Djokovic mais le service de sampras est monstrueux tellement il frappe fort
Gran vídeo muchas gracias 👍... Recuerdo haber grabado ese partido y a Sampras no le ganaba nadie ese día estaba en la zona.. 4 de julio de 1999..❤❤ recordar es vivir ❤
Always good to see a classic matchup
More Sampras from 1999 and 2000 please
Pete Sampras is underrated in hindsight, because he didn't win the French, and because three players from this era now have more majors than him. But when it was still true lawn tennis on grass in the 90s, in the Super Bowl off tennis that is Wimbledon, he was the greatest ever! All-around, it's Roger Federer, but on true lawn it was Pete.
Arson Hakobyan I agree. Also, while the Big 3 have overshadowed Sampras in recent years with their incredible haul of majors, if you look at Pete's resume not just on grass but on all fast surfaces -- with 7 Wimbledons, 5 US Opens and 5 ATP YECs -- you'd have to say that there is only one player who it can be reasonably argued is a better fast court player and that's Federer. I can't imagine that Pete in his prime, with his unreturnable serve, would have much trouble with baseliners like Djokovic or Nadal on a fast outdoor or indoor court. Pete never struggled with that type of player in his prime.
@@mashencia1 I agree! What about carpet??
@@arsonhakobyan yes absolutely, carpet included. Remember that 4 out of 5 YECs that Sampras won were on indoor carpet. There is no question that Nadal and Djokovic -- as well as Federer -- are better all around players than Sampras, taking clay and slower hard courts into account. But on truly fast surfaces -- grass, fast outdoor hard (USO) and indoor hard/carpet -- I still think Sampras is up there with Federer and ahead of everyone else. I think Pete in his prime would torch Nadal (and possibly even Djokovic) on a fast indoor court with his serve.
@@mashencia1 I've never actually played on carpet, but the bounce of the ball gets retarded more than on hard, and much more than on clay from the matches I've watched on it. It is more predictable however than grass.
@@arsonhakobyan indoor carpet, like they used to have in the 90s and prior, was the second fastest court surface after grass. Of course when we talk about carpet we also have to mention McEnroe (who won a huge number of indoor titles) and Lendl (who won 5 YECs himself). But I think Federer's and Sampras' record across all fast surfaces surpasses those two.
The bast sampras 👍👍❤️❤️
It’s similar to Navratilova vs evert. One knew the serve and volleyer should win on grass especially at Wimbledon where the grass then played fast and bounce was low ( today the grass plays slower and ball bounces slightly higher) but it wasn’t a good bet to bet against Agassiand Evert because if they had a great day they had best return of serve , best passing shots, and above all played from pride until the last point.
Pete could call up a second serve down the T in ad. Court with consistency. , his serve was the best.
At his imperious best, Pete was better than the big 3 on grass and on hard courts. On clay Nadal is the all-time greatest.
Big 3 are way better all around player than Pete ever was. Pete was historically overrated because of his slam count. He never dominate his era (with winning % only 77) unlike big 3 or like peak Connors, Borg, McEnroe & Lendl. They all have over 80% of winning & over 90% at their peak.
@@rajusaha855 Sampras overrated? You obviously know nothing about tennis... Sampras is one of the greatest ever enough said
@@wheel631 he was overrated in the 90's because of his slam lead. He was never the GOAT. Because of his slam count media forget about that if Pancho Gonzales, Laver, Rosewall didn't turned pro then they could have over 18 or 20 slams. Tilden won 10 slams by playing just 1 slam every year because of lack of transportation in 20's. Borg retired with 11 slams by the age of 25 despite playing A.O just once. Despite playing all 4 slams in a year Sampras never won more than 2 slams per year, fail to win F.O. Stop winning hard court slams after the age of 25 till 2002 us open. That's means from 1997 A.O to 2002 US open he just won Wimbledon.🤔🤔. Never won 90% of his matches in a season.
@@wheel631 in the 90's USA biased media overrated him for breaking bogus Roy Emerson records of 12 slams which nobody cares in the past but once big 3 surpassed his records by mile, once the media knew that number isn't that big the same USA media underestimate him now. 😂😂😂
No he wasn’t. Not even close to their level. Pretty one dimensional compared to them
I'm pretty certain that the day on which this match was played, was the specific date that Nostradamus had predicted Armageddon to befall mankind.
I remember hearing of his prophecy constantly, in the days leading up to this match.
I woke up terrified, but my mother greeted my pained, weary visage with the reassurance that humanity remained preserved.
最后一个二发竟然是压在T点上的ACE，真是绝了。
Man, those three big serves in the 1st set are demoralizing. Agassi must have been pretty frustrated at watching his 3 break points vanish. You could tell he was rattled; his following loose service game showed it. This is about as well as I've ever seen Sampras play on grass.
Whats the shot when Sampras dives for a Agassi return at the net and Agassi looks on in disblief?
How many matches that if Agassi wins a set it’s the third set but Pete wins the fourth. When it’s Sampras all the way it’s tie breaks for 3 sets or he wins by one service break against Agassi .Sampras knew he could beat Agassi if he met him in a slam final except at the AO. Sampras had a thing for not losing to Andre. In the same that Navratilova felt she should never lose to Everton grass the way evert felt she shouldn’t lose to Martina if she played near her best on clay.
Sampras really ruined the game on grass with his serve for most of the 90s. Such a shame.
And Ivanisevic....
Wanna sampra’s white oil
Thank allah that this primitive, overly-serve reliant style of play was forced into extinction by the very next generation who completely eclipsed all the meaningful records several times over and erased Sampras from any GOAT discussions with grrat haste.
The only thing wrong with Pete's game was that god-awful topspin ralleying backhand of his! Oh, Pete - yuk.....
Strangely, when forced to hit passing shots or going for it big, it was actually a decent shot. But just awful - technique and shape/form - when trading strokes in baseline rallies.
I would have loved to have his backhand, even though my one hander was my best shot at the local club.
Of course, having Wawrinka, Conners, Safin, Laver, Budge, and few other's backhand would have been even better. You can't have everything in life.
He would not have survived today. But in fairness, MANY players from his day had embarrassingly bad ground strokes.
Maybe not a thing of beauty like his serve..volley...overhead ...movement ......But Pete was all about effectiveness , and the topspin backhand forced his opponent back so he could get in with his forehand .......the end 😃
@@mikemoggerson6651
Pretty sure he would ....but Nadal and Novak would not on fast grass and fast carpet of the 90 `ties ......That was again pretty clear yesterday against Hubert Hurkacz 7-6(6), 7-6(6), 5-7, 6-4
And this is SLOW 2023 grass 😀
Novak said : He was serving incredibly well. I don't recall being so helpless on the return games, to be honest !
And here from January 2023 Novak said “Just difficult to play in this kind of court that is really fast. It kind of favors the server. If you’re serving well, it’s tough to break the serve of a big server like him, so two tiebreaks were probably the most realistic score of today’s match. Just glad to overcome the tough challenge.” 7-6(3), 7-6(5) against 61 ranked Quentin Halys in Adelaide International !
Pete Sampras , Boris Becker , Goran Ivanisevic ; Richard Krajicek are on a whole other level than Hurkact and Quentin Halys , and would have no problem on fast court with Nadal and Novak .
But put them out on clay and its the other way round !
@@hassehougaard5120 but then how would they win on Novak’s service games? It was easy playing bums of the 90s. They had no baseline game and it would be easy to expose them from there.
Man Pete’s technique was quite awful from the baseline. How could he compete with a modern legend like Djokovic or Fed even on grass if he loses most rallies? On their serve, they wouldn’t go to net and he would be hopeless. It’s a problem a lot of modern “serve bots” have had against the big 3. Even if he served and volleyed to perfection…they would eat him alive from the baseline with pace and depth. The fast courts would actually benefit them more than Sampras in that regard, since he didn’t have many reliable “weapons” from the ground. I mean his technique is just pretty ugly. I mean just look at his backhand…what is that? Any modern player would pound his backhand over and over again lol
It would be interesting to see if he could’ve evolved his game with (even more) modern racquets and conditions.
What are you talking about 😀😃🤣 Pete beat all the French Open winners on clay , and won almost single handily Davis cup in Russia on clay , beating FO winner Kafelnikov ....and that was the 90`ties clay , which was much slower than now !
And he have what most expert says is one of the best forehands ever in the game !
But maybe you are just biased and cant see clearly 🤓
UA-camr user whose name ends with 6651 : Please stop trolling, change your profile photo, and start writing stuff that is at once intelligent, knowledgeable and humble if you want to be taken seriously.
@@kextrz I bet you’re 50 years old.
@@hassehougaard5120 the clay isn’t slower. You just spread myths around without any proof.
@@hassehougaard5120 Sampras was a bum from the baseline.