Pete Sampras vs Andre Agassi | US Open 1995 Final
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi lock horns in the US Open 1995 final as two of America's finest ever players go head to head!
Twitter: / usta
Facebook: / usta
Website: www.usta.com
Sampras was such a breath of fresh air among American tennis players back then with a one handed backhand and serve and volley game
Tennis fans today who weren't around to see these guys play live have no idea how good these guys were.
They think that Fed, Nadal, and Djok are the only contenders for best ever because of Slam count and because they see the long topspin rallies of today.
Agassi and Samprass could've beat the "big 3" on a given day though, all things being equal. There isn't some big gap in skill, if any, contrary to what people think.
@F5 Anabolic I don't know. Agassi and Sampras played mostly in a completely different era. Courts were MUCH faster in the 80's and 90's. Also, the competition was a lot tougher. Agassi on a fast hard court wouldve been a test for any of the big 3 with his incredible ability to hit closer to the baseline and drill laser like groundstrokes deep into the corner. I've seen all these guys live except Nadal and I've never seen anything like the way Agassi struck the ball. That being said no way Agassi could beat Djok and Nadal on clay or the slow hard courts of today. They move too well and are more consistent. They would grind him to a defeat like they do to Fed.
Sampras beats Nadal and Djokovic on grass courts which used to be ridiculously fast. His serve and athleticism were beyond anything. Look at the way Sampras could leap into the air for those slam dunk overheads. He was like a gazelle, simular to Djokovic, but he could move forward better than Djokovic and could volley extremely well.
Nadal beats everyone on clay and him and Djokovic are neck and neck on medium-slow hardcourts. Finally, there's Federer who is the best all around when he was playing well. Not as mentally tough as Djoko or Nadal which cost him some huge matches. One of the best serves ever. Only Fed and Sampras were proficient and athletic enough to play a true all court style. Fed beats Nadal and Djokovic on a fast grass court and most of the time on a fast hardcourt. He loses to Agassi on a fast hard court some of the time.
The problem I have with Nadal and Djokovic is that their games are only suited well to today's slow courts. They simply are not all court tennis players. Neither was Agassi. They don't have the ability to transition forwards and backwards and their volleying skills are not close at the level of Fed and Sampras.
Volley's and serve and volley, actually used to be a big part of singles. Today it's literally a liability. Nobody bases their game around it because guys like Nadal and Djokovic or any other great baseline has time to get to the ball before the all court player can close off the net. That makes what Fed can do against them even more impressive. He was the only player that could play an all court style against those guys but even then he would get punished half the time for it.
Being able to play a true all court style of tennis has always been the hardest thing to do in tennis. Only the most skilled could do it. That's why I don't like the way tennis has evolved after 2008. There was a concerted effort to slow down hard and grass courts by the Usta, because they believed longer rallies were more exciting to watch. I think because of that Fed was in effect punished for it. Nadal and Djok I'm sorry but I don't see them having the amount of slams they have had the usta not made this change. You can even find interviews of Fed protesting this a bit and other pros acknowledging it. I'm not making this up. It was evident just watching matches on TV as well.
100% agree
@@CC42_Novak has 7 wimbledons, 4 shanghais and 10 australian opens
those are basically the fastest courts in modern tennis lol
also novak is the only one out of the people you mentioned who won every big title multiple times, the man is literally amazing on every type of surface and condition
I love Sampras and Agassi, but it's hard to say that they were better than the big 3, especially a couple years after your comment, since Nadal and Djokovic have continued to win slams. Look, Federer beat Sampras at the 2001 Wimbledon championship in their only matchup, and he led Agassi 8-3. Federer wasn't even close to his prime when he beat Sampras, and Sampras was still 29 years old with another slam victory coming in 2002. Maybe we can say Pete was having an off year, or having injuries, I don't know. I can't really consider that too much because then someone like Del Potro suddenly could be the greatest of all time, because when he was healthy he could've beaten anyone. But he wasn't healthy.
@@machineofadreamif you followed Sampras career, he was already teetering in his late 20s - he seemed to lose focus and interest in tennis. I blamed it on his marriage. Lol he just had different priorities. He wanted to ended his career with one last good run and it was like a fairytale ending at the US open. Agassi was the perfect opponent (anyone else I think he would’ve lost). He was lacking confidence in his shots during this time, especially his backhand. And there was something very comfortable and familiar about playing against Agassi.
Pete always was my absolute favourite player. It can`t be true that these matches and my youth are so lang ago. Unfortunately a look in the mirror tells a different story. Anyway, by watching this video there are coming so mutch great remembrances, tensions and good feelings onto the surface! It`s overwhelming, thanks!
Pete Sampras, forever a legend. What's your favourite match of his?
God bless , Julian
@@Vaisin For me, it would be the 1999 Wimbledon final. He played his best.
He was the last of true serve and volley players. I love his game
@@Vaisin first USO final win
Never gets old watching these two play! I miss this tennis! Comeback U.S. Tennis.
When both faced each other playing at their best Sampras always seemed to have a little bit more than Agassi, truly a master at work
@@allthekingshorses7178 Watching this and other mattches, jjust shows you how Well, Andre did just to compete. Pete is is better than him at everythinng, Except backhandd skill and consistency based topspin; and this last one is only because Pete chose to flatten out his shots more from an early age. Every Leveel of Athleticism, plus volleying, serving, forehand and variation, Sampras was far better.
The most exciting Matchup of thiis generation, was definitely Sampras versus Becker. Pete was dominant in those as well, but the level, Dynamism, skill and athleticism in the play, especially indoors, was truly sommething to behold, and will never be seen again
Prime Pistol here. What a joy to watch. Loved his quick assassins' game.
The clothes make them look like they are just there for a friendly weekend match.
When nike had 5+ designs per year
Why Agassi thought it would be a good idea to wear an oversized cotton polo to a Grand Slam final is beyond me
Dear youth welcome to the 90s
@Ron P That's right, not just the 1990s though, that trend continued right up to around 2005, just look at the crazy baggy kits footballers used to wear in the Premier League in the early 2000s.
@@mrcid572 1970s, tight shirts and tight shorts. 1980s, slightly tight shirts but well fit, mid 1990s, to mid 2000s, ridiculously baggy clothes, literally falling off sportsmen and women.
The rally to end the first set has to be one of the greatest and most significant in the history of tennis.
If Agassi's 6th shot was longer, he would have won that point and the set, and probably the match. The history would be different ...
Not really, it looks imppressive at first glance, but Andre wasn't athletic enough, for it to be in the all-time list; brilliant player in skill level, but always appears awkwaard in motion, definitely not a natural athlete.
Try watching sampras, versus Becker at the year-end championship indoors, a couple of times in the 90s.That point's quality was played multiple times just in these matches.The quality of this matchup at the UN championship is easily the best of this generation of tennis.Becker simply wasn't consistent enough throughout the season, but was a beast at the year-end championship
@@Rowlph8888 I absolutely love those two matches you're referring to between Becker and Sampras. Astounding tennis from 2 Titans. Becker was the sentimental favorite for me and it was just insane the level that they played.
It was unheard of long rallies during that time. I remember newspapers going ga ga over the first set winning point by Sampras. For me, Sampras remains the best ever. Maybe Roger, Rafa and Novak overtook him but boy, he was my childhood hero.
@@pareshmokani This is true, for the most part, because the courts were so fast.Although, still get some pretty decent rallies on clay, back then, but that is in general didn't get enough attention, like it does now on all surfaces. as4
however, the best points of all time in my opinion are in the matches between Pete and Boris the end of year championship in 1994 and 1996.Boris was a major underachiever outdoors even though he won 6 slams.When you see him play indoors, without needed to predict the effects of the elements, he is arguably, unplayable by anyone except Pete, who is likewise nearly unplayable.But when they came together, they were not only explosive offence, major risk-taking brilliance, but also some incredible 14/15 shot rallies, with each player Mullering the ball from the back of the court, with incredible accuracy, only to be picked up by the other player and Mullered back.Check out some of their matches at the end of year championship. It is truly something to behold, and that type of swashbuckling, offensive tennis at such a high level of skill, will never be seen again
Interesting, but, not so long ago, Andre admitted to Becker, at the beer festival in Munich (I think), that after the 3rd time. they played in the circuit and Becker beat him mostly outside, he noticed, in video, a pattern of Becker putting his tongue in different positions outside of his mouth just before he served, indicating where he was going to serve on the court.Andre said that Boris nearly fell off his chair i, mostly n shock.
It's no coincidence that after the 3rd match, Andre dominated Boris for the rest of his career
I taped this when I was 15 and watched it couple times a week for the next year or so. Was hard to find tennis on tv in those years. Waited all summer for this matchup. Andre using a yet to be released radical twin tube racquet was also a big deal. Took months for tennis magazine to tell us what it was.
I was a similar age at the time. This was by far and away (to my memory) peak 90s tennis. The hype around pete and Andre was huge, they were both playing as well as they ever would in their careers. Pete was still an all courter who would rally from the baseline. Andre could still move. Either of these guys would compete and win their fair share against the big 3.
Same.
I used to tie a rubber band to my strings like agassi instead of using string vibration dampener. I loved those denim nike shorts,,also. I had a pair of them back in the 1990s. Brings back alot of fun memories
I can’t believe he played with kevlar strings until the final few years of his career.
Regulat TV didn't show jack for tennis. US open golf, oh yeah, that you saw.
Sampras's shot placement was amazing. His volleys are a pleasure to see too.
I forgot how great Sampras moved on the court when he was young. Later in his career he slowed down significantly, but still kept winning with his big serve and volley game
What year did you first notice that he slowed down?
Sampras wasn't the same after hurting his back in 1999
@@2badger2 I’d say 01’ he was a shade of his former self movement wise. He wasn’t even hitting his serves big anymore. He was coming into the net on 90mph second serves and his opponents would just kill them
@@2badger2 I think Sampras played well in 2000. His quarterfinal against Krajicek and semifinal against Hewitt was both very high quality. But that defeat by Safin in the final shocked the world, and shocked him, that's where things really started to go wrong.
@@BurnsTennis but Pete had the last word at 2002 US Open, he played great tennis there👏
Andre was so nasty that summer. To see how much better he was as a player here than in 1990 when they met, and to still get relatively handled by Pete, is a testament to how insanely good Pete Sampras was.
I was heartbroken as a kid watching this match. God, Agassi had the prettiest groundies ever, didnt he? There are better players, sure, but there is no wasted motion, and hes just crushing the ball. Gorgeous.
Agassi was better than Sampras.
@@ciaronsmith4995 Cant say that bro. Look at their head to head. I think both were equally as talented as players in their own ways, but Pete was so much more mentally stronger than Andre.
And thats coming from someone who worshipped Andre Agassi as a kid.
Andre freed himself when he got rid of the wig.
@@ciaronsmith4995 When?
@@ciaronsmith4995Because he had a better bh?Sampras had such superior movement Agassi couldn't even expose Sampras' backhand.
That Sampras serve is the greatest shot in tennis history. Period.
Fast court merchant, couldn’t adapt to the likes of RG
@@Sticktothemodels I think he just wasn't interested in winning RG as he did Wimbledon. I love pete but he really symbolized American's disdain for clay
Hell he was interested in. Who would not especially when it's the only grand slam title missing. Having watched him playing on TV in the 90s, I can say that he hadn't had it to win the French open. Sampras was my hero of all sports and of all times but I was always very stressed watching him play clay and when Agassi intentionally played only his left... but despite all that, he was the best back then. Such a powerful but also beautiful player he was.. I had his posters all over in my room (from the tennis magazine!!!) !
His second serve was always the best, too. Many experts say having a great serve is essential, but you need to have an excellent second serve to be called a master, and Sampras had both, as well as wonderful disguise, because the ball toss was the same, so you didnt know where he was going to hit.
@@Sticktothemodels Well, considering that tennis was originally played only on grass, his style is traditional.
what a point at 3:16
Sampras will always be one of the greatest. He's no longer a tennis player, but a legend.
Nope. Didn't even win the French open and he plays an extinct form of tennis that wouldn't even work today. At least Pete wouldn't make it work.
@@ciaronsmith4995 he was considered the best of his era. I watched him win Wimbledon live. Best athlete ever to pick up a racquet. Your comment exploded the douchebag meter. FYI, the French Open is the bastard child compared to the other Majors.
@@paulserafini Pete Sampras didn't even win all the slams, and got beaten by a baby Federer. A guy who can only play serve and volley on fast courts, with a GARBAGE backhand the best ever? DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH. You are just a nostalgic fool. On-form Agassi, Federer, Djokovic and Nadal beat Sampras with a margin. Deal with it...
@@paulserafini No it is not. I don't think you watch tennis. It requires a better physical strength and position
@@JohnDouille its a garbage tournament that is a cure for insomnia.
How can anyone watch this and think these two couldn't compete today? Insane.
He with his serve volley make djokovic federer nadal sweat alot except on clay
These two greats could easily hold their own with the big 3, and with the exception of Clay Courts I see Pete Sampras beating them all!!
@@shansenaniall three of them would do decent on the return and Sampras certainly couldn't just skate by on the serve alone. They all could more than handle him from the baseline.
@@codycuppy5107 its extremely difficult to have good returns on old Wimbledon court that was quick back then..
lmao of course they could. Look at the speed of the courts. Nadal or Djoko would definitely struggle with their timing of swings etc.
As a Sampras fan, I remember looking forward to this so much. Agassi had started the season well, but Sampras picked up steam after Wimbledon. This was for all the marbles, to decide who would finish the year ranked number 1 and have more slams won in the year. The icing on the cake to Sampras' 1995 season was his Davis Cup final performance.
Yes and not. No 1 spot was decided not by Agassi's lost in this final but by Agassi's giving up on the rest of the season. Agassi had huge advantage over Sampras in the ranking even after loosing this final. Had Agassi mentality been better Sampras would not have finished No 1 in November of 1995. No way. Sampras had points to defend in the fall. So did Agassi but giving the quality of his game in 95 he should have stayed ahead of Sampras.
Hey, but this was Andre. BUt here is the match where his fall to 141 in the world began
@@HKtravel « He should have » : easy to say. He didn't. Sampras did... With "if-es", I'd be better than Nadal.
@@HKtravel I was about to write the same comment also he left out that agassi went crazy during winning everything after wimbledon
@@Blinkncali21 Which made the USO F loss all the more devastating to Agassi. After that loss, Andre quit the rest of the season because it was No. 1 or nothing. And his great rival winning 2 GS to his 1 lone slam didn't cut it to be the No. 1 (even if he won more lesser titles). So this is why Agassi's motivation (95 season's end) went to shit. His book "Open" pretty much says the same thing. HIs '96 season wasn't too bad (2 GS semis) but his '97 season was atrocious (Methhead Andre). But he turned his life around in '98 and had a great end to his career.
@@boke75 Right? The thing that bothered me about his reaction is he said he was badly hurt so what did he expect from himself? I loved his book the opening was hard to read but by the time I finished it was amazing
Sampras's record of 6 year end number ones from 1993 to 1998 will never be broken ! Mental toughness king !
A bold prediction given that Djokovic just equaled that record this year.
@@thorium222 Wrong... 6 years in ROW number one ranking .. Rafa was number one in the world in 2019 at year's end... Rafa also has the longest timespan between 1st and last year-end #1 titles, 2009 to 2019 . He is the only player to be world number 1 in three decades..... as far as total weeks at the number one the joker just past Sampras with 289 to 286 With Federer on top at 310 but not year end ranking number one player.
That will never be broken ! USA #1 🇺🇸
@@KeyofDavid5778 Ah, ok, didn't know that in a row was so important.
@@thorium222 No biggie, Being number one at the end of the year means you're number 1 for that year.
Even though other players can take the number 1 ranking throughout the year.
@@thorium222 hahahahahaha
6 years in a ROW is NOT important???
Hahaahahahaahahaha
Man, please stop following tennis. You dont understand a shitttt.
3:16 One of the greatest points in tennis history!
Really?
It’s the point that defined their rivalry. Pete was the better player after that point.
That was such an awesome point 👏👏👏
Amazing point!! Love how AA laughs to himself, knowing that Pistol can rally from back of the court. The look on Pete's face is classic. First set Sampras!!
Street fight set point
Wow 1995 was a different time. You had grown man as ball boys, you have spectators under the umpire, a lines person to check the net cord during serves, and are those family members on each side of the corner of the court? Crazy how we don’t have that anymore
spectators?
@@DanTuber are they some sort of judge? They look like spectators
@@allanyang21 no idea. first i've ever seen it. The adult size ball boys is odd too. lol how times change.
@@allanyang21 camera man most likely
3:00 one of the best points I have ever seen. What tennis is all about
It would help if they showed the score.
I've given up on asking the people who post tennis vids, to PLEASE show the score. Matches are
broadcast with the score shown on screen, so I don't know what the problem is. Unless they catch the commentator giving the score, you don't know what stage the match is at.
@@michelez715 A lot of the older videos are taken from the network broadcasts. And especially back in the 90s, a lot of them didn't have permanent scoreboards on the screen. The broadcast of this match was from CBS, and they didn't start showing the scores permanently until 2005, I believe.
@@JD-jc8gp Don't show highlights then, upload the entire match.
Those old vids are always so lame and annoying for that very reason
Sampras .....6 year in a ROW finish nr one ................... That`s the REAL GOAT material ...................beat that record and we can talk again ! Thats dominance on a whole other level !
6 year in a row in the end of the year...but he didn't hold that crown for that long...in terms of weeks and months...
Djokovic currently also has 6 end of the year as no1 too
Really? He usually did just enough to regain the first position at the end of the year, while losing it during the season.
While he was clearly the best player of his era, that's far from the dominance displayed by Fed, Djokovic or even Nadal. And Sampras other records have been crushed by the big 3.
@@igorgnus But not in a row .....that is the point here ! I'm pretty sure he would like that record better !
@@livingbeing1113 Goat talk is a lot about what kind of dominance you show in your own era !
Sampras left his era with 6 GS between him and number 2 ....
And the 6 year in a row 1.
And i got to say......this era where guys in there twenties cant beat 3 guys in there thirties ..almost fourties dont strike me as strong...
USTA...Thank you. Just a couple of requests- 1. Scores please at the end of each set and the match and 2. More matches involving McEnroe and Connors.
Watching tennis and golf during the 1990s and early 2000s was just amazing. Sampras.Vs Agassi and Tiger Woods. Amongst the greatest spectacles in sport. Mouthwatering, couldn't wait for the slams to watch these guys bring sheer magic to the screen
He had the best and strongest serve of all time, plus he dominated all strokes and the speed and mobility of movement on the court, put his game and his career as the best tennis player of all time.
If it wasn't for a serious spinal injury, a herniated disc in 1999, he still continued to win, especially grand slams, although he couldn't win Roland Garros, which is what he wanted. There would be no doubt that Pete Sampras was the greatest tennis player to ever step on a tennis court, had he not had the injury.
Injuries r part of game. Coulda woulda shoulda. He got surpassed easily
@@deepakmahajan170 - That’s a pretty stupid and ignorant comment to make…..Sampras is one of the Iconic Players of the Sport, and definitely one of the Greatest that’s ever lived!!
On Fast Grass, and Indoor Carpet he was virtually unplayable!!
Could say that about a lot of players…including Nadal who has had a lot of injuries throughout his career, resulting in several misses slams. But yah it’s part of the game.
That s a ridiculous statement. Witrh 14 slams, he s far behind Djokovic 24 and Nadal 22 grand slams.
@@dupontgerard8217 prime Pete with that Armageddon serve against prime Djokovic would have been an epic encounter
Pete was so good with his running forehand
His "money shot" as Mary Carillo pointed out here.
Sampras is so good here. I think this Pete wins a fast court match against anyone all time
Agree totally. No one else was better on fast courts. Pistol Pete : 1-2 serve-volley combo stiffled all opposition.
Many mention the terrific point at 3:02, but few also mention it was a set point for Pete. What a way to win the opening set in a GS final!
Andre was the slight favorite after entering the final with 26 wins in a row, his career-best streak that started after losing in the semi-final of Wimbledon, conquering Washington, Montreal, Cincinnati and New Haven, edging Becker in the semi-final to set Sampras clash.
Agassi couldn't solve the rival's first serve but he did enough on the second to create six break points, converting two but suffering three breaks from seven chances he gave to Pete and hitting the exit door in four sets.
Sampras lost just two sets en route to the title match and he did everything right against Agassi as well, staying in touch with a great rival in the longer rallies and outplaying him in the shortest points with those booming serves that Andre failed to control.
Andre was emotionally drained after Becker clash. Sampras yet again got the easier draw to the final.
I don't recall AA being the favorite, but if he was, the odds-makers oofed. I picked Pete.
Agassi had a rib injury after the becker sf , go read the open book
Very difficult to beat Sampras on this surface. Agassi had his number on the slower hard courts that year - 3:1 I think, but Pete during this phase of his career was close to unbeatable on fast surfaces.
@@meshalsinnen5917 Yes i can only agree with you.
Ya just can't miss re-living seeing these two titans, both in their primes playing against each other. Classic tennis right here 👍🏻👍🏻
Sampras had the GOAT running forehand 11:23
The running forehand was Pete's trademark shot aside from his serve throughout his career
Yeah, but the truth is it was always, always going cross court. So it was totally predictable - you knew it was coming. Takes away a bit of the glory.
Love watching these two.
Man I miss this rivalry. Tough going for Andre, he really hit the ball sweetly than anyone off the ground even better than Pete. But without doubt Pete’s serve was the dealbreaker.
And his volleys
their H2H is 20-14 in pete's favor so andre has fared pretty well I'd argue. pete's serve was ofc a dealbreaker for anyone but andre also had one of the best return of all time so I would also say that he probably had the most ideal game to take on pete
Agassi bought his clothes at Big & Tall Goodwill. He could actually make a tent out of that shirt.
The difference most don't understand is Sampras' second serve was better than anyone who has ever played. He was dominant in his era and I would be willing to bet Nadal and fed would not have 20 slams apiece during Sampras' reign.
No shit - the thought of Nadal winning 4 USO and 2 Wimbledons in the 90s makes me fucking lol
Agreed. That is the reason Sampras is still in the argument for greatest ever despite the slam number difference. These modern commentators forget that sometimes. The 90s era was the most competitive in tennis history. Great points!!!
Nadal can only win French open in Sampras time,not others.
I used to walk my tongue out side my mouth while playing cricket😂
I don’t care what anybody says. This was and remains the greatest match played in the history of tennis.
@John BUI Ah, I'll have to check those out. Thanks!
Not even in the top10
Court seems much faster than today's times
NO
One of my favorite match in my life.
Je te regarde souvent Champion ! D’autant plus aujourd’hui ! Bon anniversaire Pete 💜💜
Pete Sampras when at his best was simply unplayable…..In my lifetime he was the greatest most complete Grasscourt, Indoor Carpet , player that I’ve ever seen, but Boris Boom Boom Becker comes in as a very close second behind him, he too was truly awesome!!
Just read André's book, you'll look at this match completely different...
Love these matches. Watched live. Pete was amazing. I'll never to GOAT status though. Simple reason: Never won on Clay. Ever. That alone excludes him. He hated it, and his game was suited for grass first, and the courts in NY. Even the Aussie gave him issues. But you can't be the GOAT if you can't conquer them all. Andre isn' that, but was first in the Open Era to win on ALL surfaces . surfaces.
Correct. Who in their right mind wouldn't choose Agassi's qualitative superiority over Sampras numerical superiority? All 4 slams on 4 surfaces Olympic gold year end tournament world #1.
Pistol Pete wasn't really that tall (6'1") but his serving position and his amazing, incredibly fluid motion made him look 10 feet tall, for some reason.
The key to his serve were those insanely wide shoulders of his. Supposedly, Pete was able to throw a football on the level of NFL players.
he has a really large WINGSPAN... so basically he has a 7 th foot wingspan ... that made him look huge and in reality he was
@@danilomarvel5657 exactly.
Fed is the same height with also a potent serve.
@@owenbeharry8478 it’s all about the shoulder width.
Thanks a lot for this!
For all the matches that happens in any tennis tournaments, the matches between Pete Sampras and #AndreAgassi had always been the most matches that I used to look forward to watch.
Especially the Wimbledon match on a number one center court.
❤❤❤
"Peak" Sampras here. Not sure I've seen a better player...unstoppable serve, wicked groundstrokes off both sides, attacking volleys, super-human overheads. Who could beat this version of Pete?
Agassi.
@@stephenglasse9756 When it mattered most, Sampras beat Agassi.
@@EndoftheTownProductions well Agassi beat him at French, US and Australian. Those count surely.
Pete always played the way he was.The BEST ONE.
With his serve, speed on court, volley, overhead play, that big forehand Sampras is easily the best ever.
Sampras wasn't even as good as Agassi on Andre's best days, and Pete would get destroyed by Nadal, Federer and Djokovic. Playing serve and volley the way he did with such a weak backhand would result in getting annihilated in today's game.
@@ciaronsmith4995 never... Courts weren't slow those days as today... Sampras would have blasted them off court on those super fast surfaces.
@@MohsinSir Yeah that's the point. Pete has an incomplete game. Never won the French. He needs a certain climate and court speed to perform at his best. Very one-dimensional. That's why I rate Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Agassi higher. Their games stand the test of time.
@@ciaronsmith4995 how? When they never played in that era at all... On the contrary Pete even after many years of retirement could compete and even beat a Prime Federer
@@MohsinSir Pete never beat a prime Federer. Andre beat Federer 3 times in a row. Sampras lost to a 2001 Federer. Sampras vs Federer in an exhibition match is a JOKE not real competition.
The court was so fast at time... Pete was stronger in a so fast court, the GOAT in that surface.
same pace nothing changed.. maybe other tournaments but not us open.. watch nadal medvedev or nadal thiem or medvedev djokovic..
Sampras is pure perfection
दोनो का खेल देखकर मजा आ गया अगासी का बेसलाइन खेल ओर पासिंग शाट लाजवाब है उधर सैम्प्रास पूरी तरह से समर्पित और परिपक्व चैम्पियन की तरह खेल रहे हैं लाजवाब खेल रहा है इन दोनो खिलाड़ियों का।
Serving clinic by Sampras in the final set...stupendous
Quality generating of players...Pete will always be the best for me.
Pete’s “slam dunk” was a sure winner.
Verle a estos 2 era increíble
Andre was tearing up Pete’s backhand and all year long, and in this match Pete finally started ripping it and took away Andre’s go to strategy. As a result, Andre started choking.
Sampras was the very best attacking player of his generation - he had great feel on the volley and off both single backhand & forhand - Agassi s game seemed talor made for Sampras - able to pull Agassi all around the court ; even with his single handed backhand, could often out rally Agassi
Pistol Pete ALWAYS had that serve...but once he developed that running-forehand-hook shot, the whole men's game was dead ☠️
Very fast courts and very fast balls. What you see seems a bit slow, but it aint at all. They were great players and athletes do be able to play like this. We the spectators have no idea.😆👍
Pete Sampras;simplemente impresionante;emocionante;👏👏👏👌🍌🇪🇦👍
America had some amazing tennis stars back then
Really hate these old games for the lack of scoreboard, either on the court or on screen gfx. The players/games themselves are fantastic though 🙂
So many years watching these guys play. Funny, I have given Agassi so much credit for Nadal's game because of his influential baseline power. But there are things I forgot, like how soon Agassi could be to quit on a point. With 15 years of Nadal on tape now, I see balls Rafa would definitely not let past that Agassi just watches.
And yet... on the other side of the net, I see Sampras running down those balls.
I think Sampras doesn't get ENOUGH credit for so much of what we now recognize as part of Nadal's game: the determination to run down every ball, then place it tactically when he gets to it, the baseline running forehand winner from outside the court (Sampras even uses the lasso topspin swing). It was Sampras being so relentless that used to take the spirit out of me as I rooted for Agassi to pull it together and make it a match.
Part of that was by design... Sampras knew that the biggest edge he could give himself in matches was to beat Agassi at his own game.. you also have to take into account that the surface was alot faster than it is today.. so some of those balls you think Nadal would have ran down might now be so cut and dry as you think.. the ball was going Deceptively fast when it was coming off the racket of sampras.. just like Sampras was deceptively fast.. in his best years EVERYONE said "He's like a jackrabbit.. he gets to everything and just DOESN'T MISS" later in his career as he struggled with injuries that wasn't the case as often as it used to be but he still had that burst speed that was incredible.. so in the first set Sampras would do something that not many others could against Agassi.. break his will.. and then the rest of the match would be him trying to keep Agassi in that Struggle mode... but yeah... Sampras always put a little extra on every ball when he was against Agassi... 2001 Australian Open when they faced off was probably some of the hardest hitting in a match I've ever seen TO this day.. but yeah if you want to watch grinding Agassi and Chang were both definitely grinders and could probably still be relevant if they were playing their style in today's game as it's very much like a more modern style.. Nadal I'd say is somewhat of a combination of Chang and Agassi as he has the movement of Chang but also the groundstroke power like Agassi... I loved Agassi and I also LOVED Sampras as Sampras was my idol(and the person I most modeled my game after when I was still competing.. not professional but tournament play and Highschool and such) there was 1 positive that you could take away from any Agassi vs Sampras match... nomatter who won... the crowd was in for a show that drove Tennis to new levels.. was like Ali vs Frasier... puncher vs counter puncher...
This echo bothers me so much, OMG!
Sampras was bossing it from the baseline as well ,He seemed very motivated for this match
This match really hit Agassi's mentality pretty bad.
I don't know about that. Agassi has always admitted that Sampras will always be the favorite whenever they met. He once said that if they were both on, that he'd lose. You have to be mentally strong and patient as a defensive player. Agassi did good with his career.
@@exfolios I don't think Agassi was necessarily a defensive player. He seemed to have pretty aggressive groundstrokes.
Sampras' baseline game was highly underrated. He started off aa more of an all court player who would often serve and volley. It was in his mid & latter years he became more of a compulsive volleyer like Edberg, Becker or Rafter, cutting short points thanks to him realizing potential of his all time great serve & advancing age
Back before prime time.
Love Agassi's game of setting up power shots and just going for winners. He kind of expects to hit winners and as a result gets flat after some of his shots enabling Sampras to counter.
Pete's serve was ridiculous!!
Any Agassi Vs Chang and/or Sampras vs Chang would also be great :)
Sampras still has the GOAT serve amongst the top 10 winningest players ever. I wish Fed developed his net game more, he’s nowhere near Pete in the serve and volley department.
Slowing down of surfaces made up for that, fed was forced to adapt progressively. He is still very good at the net.
@@user-cy6xl3vd3f nowhere as good as Pete is the point. He's good but Pete does a drop volley like no one else.
Yes although Fed is not the natural volleying wiz Sampras was - Federer has a stronger back court game than Sampras did ; a better more lethal single handed backhand , and forhand shot ; and Fed moves just as well if not better than Sampras did i believe ; but - Sampras s serve and his volley is unmatched even today
The sound for this video is like listening to a genesis song
Please upload full agassi matches 👍
Agassi was unfortunate here after being so dominant during the summer. Semis and finals used to have no day of rest in between, which was just ridiculous. Agassi played the night match against Becker and injured a rib during the match and woke up in pain. His serve and forehand were compromised.
Pete suffered from the super Saturday scheduling in '00 and '01, paying dearly in both finals, especially against Hewitt who he owned the year prior.
From 1992 to 1995
He won 3 major titles
From 1999 to 2003
He won 5 major titles
This loss gutted Agassi the most ! Took him 4 years to get to another GS final !
Sampras was and still is the most complete player ever!!!
No he wasn't the most complete player
Correcto! It's true.
How many times did he win the French open ?
both phenomenal players.
This is the match I always point people to watch in its entirety whenever they try to tell me Agassi had a bigger or better forehand than Sampras. There was a reason Agassi played keep away from Sampras's forehand. Because he could not hang with it and he knew it. And quite honestly... I think Sampras always looked better from the baseline anyway
Sampras had the better forehand by far. Agassi was better on the backhand but the Sampras backhand was world class till about 1998. The whole chip and charge constantly play detracted from his baseline game even though there was a spectacular revival during the summer of 1999.
Baseline tennis... a joy to watch
Only gripe is these old games don't show the scores on the screen.
Why is there an echo / reverb to the audio?
Loved that racquet Agassi was using. I could rip with that stick
Pete was on fire.
Amazing points. Could easily stand up to today’s tennis. Bar none
I've played for over 40 years and the biggest difference to occur in the pro sport is the dominance of the serve in the men's game. Only clay counters it to a degree and personally I'd like to see it 's effect dampened on other surfaces so we can see more great play and points. How should this be done? IMO for pros experiment with limiting racquet head size or string tensions and explore what effect having a 'serving line' set back at various distances from the baseline could have...3 inches, six inches, etc. I want to see more strokes and points played.
That Sampras serve....wow!!
Sampras best serve ever
So incredible!!
Sealed with an ace!
That was the time when tennis was fun to watch🤔
Well, Pete got him back for the rest of his career & beat him ever time. Pete is the best of that generation
94-95-96 Agassi outfit was omg
What a great service exhibition. Wait -
The two greatest!
Agassi definitely one of them. All 4 slams on 4 surfaces+ Olympic gold+ year end tournament+ world #1
Funny how memory plays tricks on you. I first saw Sampras play the second half of 1999. When I saw this match afterwards, I thought both played poorly.
That is what happens when you see Sampras in god mode.
sampras had abigger serve then fed and a potent forehand.. agassi clean striker of the ball.. u have to wonder these men in there twenties vs fed or djoko nadal would have been great match ups.. plus the faster surfaces back thne were alot more dangerous
Agassi lost that match due to physical condition and his incapability to develop more often passing shots. Pete's net game was unbelievable, he won most of the points that could go either way and pushed Agassi to a very attacking approach that comes together with errors that usually cost the win.
Watch Agassi play Becker or Rafter....he had good passing shots....Pete was just that good.
Andre is dressed as if he was going to a vacation spot and on the way his manager asked him, hey Andre! the US open is just on our way to the vacation spot, how about couple of hits
At AO he usually looked even more ridiculous in 90’s with that bandana! He looked like a ranch worker! Lol
Andre rocking the Charlie Brown look
Today Andre Agassi would be undisputed number 1 and would have many GS
I dont know how Andre played against Pete who was so dominant its a credit to Andre what a match just a true heavy weight title fight for the belt. Both players crushing the ground strokes, Pete was so good normally it was serve and volley he was a tremendous player complete no weaknesses again a credit to how good Andre was to force so many ground stroke rallies, both great players. Also both class acts.My only complaint...the clothes brown for the stylish Andre, prob last time earth tones were in, lol.