Tennis Channel 20th Anniversary: No String, 2004 Pete Sampras

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 26 сер 2024
  • --
    Tennis Channel is the only 24-hour network dedicated to tennis: both sport and lifestyle. It’s the number one destination for breaking news, live scores, pop culture, entertainment, and travel-all to help fans stay on top of the game.
    Subscribe to Tennis Channel Plus to stream over 4,500 live and on-demand matches from over 100 ATP & WTA events buytcplus.com.
    Watch live and exclusive content at: tennischannel.com
    Read the latest at: www.tennis.com/
    Stay on top of on-and off-court tennis content: baseline.tennis...
    Twitter: / tennischannel , / tennis , and / tennischanneli
    Instagram: / tennischannel and / tennischanneli
    Facebook: / tennischannel , / tennismedia , and / tennischanneli

КОМЕНТАРІ • 33

  • @thetennistalk
    @thetennistalk Рік тому +19

    Love this! Great to see Pete behind the scenes and deserves more recognition as an all timer!

  • @michelez715
    @michelez715 11 місяців тому +4

    Sampras is a phenomenal champion, as well as being a nice guy, totally genuine. He never did any stunts, or tried to get attention. His tennis spoke for him.

  • @ark28
    @ark28 Рік тому +5

    My idol and the man that made me fall in love with Tennis! ❤

  • @Ultimate.Tennis
    @Ultimate.Tennis Рік тому +7

    Thank you for this. Pete is such a legend.

  • @kasyasify
    @kasyasify 10 місяців тому +2

    King of The tennis

  • @MariaE99
    @MariaE99 10 місяців тому +1

    Thank you for this! He is my favorite player!

  • @andreasalexandridis
    @andreasalexandridis 27 днів тому

    The greatest!!!

  • @juancarlosloes1820
    @juancarlosloes1820 Рік тому +3

    Simple THE BEST

  • @Bombay1618
    @Bombay1618 Рік тому +3

    Pete is legendary! Yet, we should be so grateful to live in the era we do in men's tennis. As the big 3 wind down, there is no other consensus than that we've been treated to the highest level of play, bar none, since roger started losing to Rafa. Can you imagine if you take away one of the big 3? Or 2? You could have someone with 30-35 majors!
    One thing about Pete that he has over any of the big 3:
    His serve. No. It isn't as powerful as Roddick's (a rival, not a part of the big 3). But it was stealthy and consistent. The toss was always in the same spot, and his opponent never knew where it was going.
    Great post. Great man.

    • @hassehougaard5120
      @hassehougaard5120 7 місяців тому

      6 year in a row number one
      In a era with very slow clay and very fast hardcourt
      A record for the ages

  • @leecherlarry
    @leecherlarry Рік тому +1

    Thanks for the share. Wonderful pic.

  • @fla2359
    @fla2359 Місяць тому

    ❤❤

  • @westonmeyer3110
    @westonmeyer3110 Рік тому +1

    It is so weird to see a 90s style behind the scenes video in 2004.
    I could have sworn these kind of series died in 2002.
    This definitely didn’t age well for Roddick because Federer was just about to dominate everything.

  • @el6023
    @el6023 Рік тому

    Thank you

  • @theradiogram87
    @theradiogram87 9 місяців тому

    Who is the Aussie Joker at 14:25

  • @jonm2522
    @jonm2522 10 місяців тому

    The greatest player yes, I love how he's encouraging Roddick, he's game is mor developed than mine @9.28, unfortunately Roddick didn't have the talent or determination to go far, he kept loosing to Federer and that must have felt like schit. Greatest server ever. Just remmember he lostto better playersin the final 3 years prior to 2002, Safin, Hewit and Raffter.

  • @Beth0126
    @Beth0126 Рік тому +1

    Kinda makes you think how greatness can really come from anywhere, and every record has a chance to be broken, whether its a big chance or a small one. I didnt watch tennis back then, but from this video, it really looks like people didn't believe tennis would get greater after Pete and the rest. As in in terms of grand slams, weeks at number 1, etc. Goes to show that although some of the Big 3's records seem so impossible to beat, such as Nadal's win-loss record at RG, we should keep an open mind at the very least. Only time will tell. Alcaraz could be it, or the actual GOAT of tennis could be born in 2050 and earn 35 slams. We just never know. No matter how many slams Djoko and Nadal get or the records they break, I still feel there is no definitive GOAT and never will be until there is. There is such a good argument for all three, and all three played such a big role in aiding, bettering, and worsening the other's careers it seems impossible to pick one. My ideal GOAT would be someone who has the likability and class of Federer, absolutely destroys the slam record, like getting 45, beats every individual slam record getting more than 14 RG's more than 10 AO's, more than 8 Wimbledon, and beats whatever the record for the us open is, gets calendar slam like 3 times or more, golden medal at least twice, 450+ weeks at no.1. It sounds so insanely impossible, i know, but that's the bar that the big 3 set, so only a player who reaches those heights would, at least to most eyes, would be a definitive goat, with little to no doubt. But to me, and I feel like to many others, its not really clear right now. Like when I think of the GOAT of the Olympics, Michael Phelps stands so far above the rest, who has 23 gold medals, and the second most is 9 golds. I guess that's my interpretation of GOAT. Someone who is very, very clearly better than every other player that came before them. Someone where there is little to no debate about who is better than them. And with the Big 3, I dont see one absolutely insanely better than the other, at least when using the Michael Phelps analogy. ANd of course it's just fun and games, as the GOAT debate varies from person to person which makes it fun to talk about. We honestly might never see that player, but we never know; anything is possible. Interested to hear anyone else take on this. Im bored and its fun to talk about these things sometimes ha.

    • @Bombay1618
      @Bombay1618 Рік тому +2

      It seems you fail to recognize what a treat we are privileged with, considering the big three and their unprecedented high level of play. Also don't bring swimming onto the court; it soaks the clay and floods the grass.
      First, the fact that each man, individually took Sampras out of the conversation of the best of all time, while competing against each other, is a testament to just how good each of them are. And just how good Pete was!
      The Phelps analogy is a bit silly. It's just not the same thing, due to the nature of the sport, specifically, how the sport is competed. Phelps was definitely the best there ever was in swimming, but, and follow me here, the schedule is so important. Swimmers' schedules aren't as *constant* as tennis players'. He would have lost random races here and there, on the global stage. Just like tennis players do. Also, the nature of the sport allows swimmers more opportunities for medals than just about any other athlete! You can enter in free, butterfly, back, breast, and team medleys of various distances of aforementioned strokes! It's *extremely predictable* that a swimmer would and should have the record in Olympic medals. Does this take anything away from Phelps? No. But his on-paper-dominance belongs nowhere in a video about the GOAT in tennis. Or any different sport (maybe track is OK).
      I agree with you about who of the big three can be considered the best. I think if you just look up that stats, and didn't grow up/experience for yourself just how invincible Roger was, then Nadal was, then Nole was, then kind of all three were, you wouldn't understand.
      I do think there are some records that won't be broken. Rafa's at RG won't be. That might be it.
      But your lofty goals for a future GOAT with the ludicrous stats you mentioned do have some hope. If you look at the women's game, you'll see people like Martina (both of them), like Serena (injured/pregnant at the end of her career). Like Steffi. Like Chrissie. Like old-timers such as Helen Wills (my pick for women's GOAT), or Suzanne Lenglen. Or even the first, best GOAT, Lottie Dodd. It is possible for sheer dominance, by one player, to overwhelm a sport.
      In the case of the big three and Matina vs. Chrissie, they just ran into an equal force. Maybe that's what kept them going.

    • @rajusaha855
      @rajusaha855 Рік тому +3

      Alcaraz not gonna win 35 slams that's for sure.🤣🤣🤣 Big 3 are special it's difficult to win even a 10 slams let alone 20.

    • @Bombay1618
      @Bombay1618 Рік тому +1

      @@rajusaha855 Nobody will win 35 slams in singles. That''s for sure. Look back on history, and it;s possible, probable, including doubles and mixed. But what would that take? You'd need someone with an all-court game. Serena already has 39 (if you include doubles and mixed) grand slam titles. 43 if you include dubs and mixed.

    • @rajusaha855
      @rajusaha855 Рік тому +2

      @@Bombay1618 Martina Navratilova has 59 grand slams & Margaret Court has all time lead with 64 slams (by adding singles, doubles & mixed).

    • @rajusaha855
      @rajusaha855 Рік тому +2

      @@Bombay1618 i always believed Steffi Graf had great chance of winning more than 25 slams, remember after 1996 us open she had 21 slams at the age of just 27, many thoughts she would easily have broken the record of Court 24 slams but injury took her toil & she just won one slam after that.

  • @rajusaha855
    @rajusaha855 Рік тому +3

    Frankly he is not the GOAT now & he was neither the GOAT when he was retired in 2003. USA biased media overrated him just by his slam count. They publicize his slam record pursuit too much. 14 slams was not a big number if you considered Laver, Rosewall & Pancho Gonzales turned pro at their peak (they each would have would have won 18 or 20 slams) just like big 3, Tilden won 10 slams in his career by just playing 1 slam per year because of difficult of traveling in pre flight era otherwise he could have won many, Borg retired at the age of 25 with 11 despite skipped A .O in his whole career. Fact of the matter is Sampras was the first to targeted the bogus records of Roy Emerson slam's records (which nobody cares before him), he never won more than 2 slams despite playing all 4 slams in a year, being a non factor on clay, have so many loses outside Wimbledon, us open, never won 90% matches in a year & his low Elo rating.