Wild how Federer's career spanned so many different generations and he had to change his playstyle and adapt to others so much over the course of it. Started off as a serve-and-volleyer, pioneered an all-court all-surface game, and ended his career with S&V dead, and tennis played mostly through long baseline rallies with heavy topspin. Not to mention how the surfaces changed as well. He did it all.
@timothychung4811 there is no way Novax would have won Wimbledon with the kind of grass used on this match. The ball bounced very low by today's standard. They should go back to it. Too many rallies from the backcourt today. And no top player, except for Alcaraz can come close to volley like Federer or Sampras.
@@mrxman581 you are right about the current style of Novak. He plays like this because, the courts are conducive for his style. If the grass were like this, he would have adapted to that condition. One cannot disprove that. Didn't Federer make changes in his game and play baseline well. Otherwise, how he would have won French and also beat Novak in 2011 French open. One cannot say like Nick that Sampras couldn't play well as he was if he had played in big 3 era. Its wrong analysis.
His serve carried him far, except not so much on clay as it blunted his best shot. Still the best serve I've seen, and I've seen them all from Roscoe Tanner up to today.
Sampras was the consummate champion. He fought tooth and nail against a young and motivated Federer. Some of the shots like the diagonal placements when Federer was at the net were sublime. Just shows how mentally strong both players were. At 19, Federer showed great composure against a 7 time champion and Sampras, though he knew that age wasn’t in his corner, played tremendous tennis. The changing of the guard in a way I believe. Both of them gave us great joy and many unforgettable memories didn’t they?
@@timetheory84 Pete definitely retired early given his calibre, but he went out like an absolute boss by winning the US Open in 2002 (defeating Agassi no less) and then just mic dropping the tour. His exhibitions vs Federer in 2007 prove he could have stayed on tour if he really wanted to put the work in.
I remember watching this live on TV. Seeing Federer play a mirror game to Sampras' brilliance and beat him was incredible. At the end of that match, it was clear that a changing of the guard had occurred and Federer was on his way to being the most sublimely brilliant tennis player ever. Yes, at his peak, Nadal was wonderful, and at his peak, so is Djokovic, but neither are sublime. Witnessing Federer in his prime was witnessing a maestro at work.
both goat of tennis ! the palmares don't make the goat ! orelse, the goat is jimmy connors with 109 titles ! the goat is the most talented player ever ! so, 1rst roger, 2nd sampras, 3rd nadal
Federer 40-15, which puts his GOAT status is jeopardy, Novak same Wimbledons as Sampras, at 37, Alcaraz saved Federer, if Novak wins 8 this year, Farterer will see another record go, before his eyes.😪
@@jimleveilleur2510 what does "most talented" mean...? Of course Palmares play a key role regarding GOAT status, in every sport. Connors is not with only 8 Grand Slam wins obviously Sampras is not, even with his meaning for the sport. He has never one in Roland Garros, he even did not reach the final, semifinal only once. Djokovic, Federer and Nadal all have won 20+ grand slam titles and ~100 titles total. They have dominated 2 decades and had many legendary matches between them. I would argue, that theire huge success, together with their dominance over the rest of the field, is only there because they were present all at once. To be a GOAT, i think a career Grand slam is a MUST, to show mastery of all surfaces. and then you have to have a long reign both in No1 ranking as well as top 5 overall. Taking all that into account there are only 4 men who can be considered goat in my opinion. The BIG 3 and Rod Laver. The latter has much less grand slam titles, even less than Sampras, but under present day ruling would probably have won many more. ( He was not allowed to play at the grand slams between 1963 and 1968 because he was a professional) 2 Calender Grand Slam are still a pretty good argument in his favor. Regarding who is the actual GOAT it comes down to personal preference. in terms of success it is easily Novak Djokovic. Most Grand slams and 3 career grand slams and a non calender grand slam. If you value the influence on the sport itself, Federer and Nadal have strong arguments, given there legendary duels raised the bar for years to come. However this obviously takes two to tango. One player, being very dominant, might be the best player ever, but it would be boring as hell. Nobody wants to see 6:1, 6:2, 6:1
I liked the Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl era, then the Sampras, Agassi one. Then the Federer, Nadal, Djokovic one. I do not care which countries the players come from, though.
Sampras is so underrated and doesn’t get remembered enough. He and Agassi basically were 90’s tennis. He had the sweetest serve down the tee. Great serve and volley, just a dominant force not to be forgotten. I loved his play style.
@@carkod Maybe. He would be forced to improve his ground strokes and even his serve and volley if born in this era. He’s such a talent, I think he could have
before playing this wimbledon he was already contemplating retirement, despite his talent he did *not* dedicate his entire adult life to tennis and was certainly as capable as any of winning 20+ grand slams. if they played all majors on grass like in laver's day, Sampras would currently have the most slams and most calendar year grand slams (and probably the Graf Golden Slam as well) @@Sanctified57
Here is a young 19-year-old Federer playing a relatively old Sampras and Sampras is holding his own although he loses. When I hear people like Nick Kyrgios saying Sampras could not play today, I think it is so wrong. Sampras could play in any era in his prime.
@@dirkiedoos8577 In the 1980's and 1990's things were very different than now where you have players age 33+ winning many of the slams. Back when there was better competition, those that did win slams won almost all of them in their 20's. John McEnroe, Mats Wilander and Stefan Edberg all played in 11 slam finals, none after age 26. Boris Becker played in his last slam final at 29. Ivan Lendl was in 19 slam finals, won his last slam at age 29 and was in one additional final at age 30. Even the great Jimmy Connors, who had the best longevity of the players of that time, was only in 3 of his 15 finals after hitting age 30, and none after age 31.
Federer's serving kept right up with Sampras's. After that it was just a mistake here or there that decided the match; they were pretty much even. What a great match!
When Sampras won 14 grand slams it was seen as an amazing achievment that would last for decades, as Roy Emerson's previous record of 12 had. Amazing to think that three players coming up following him would all substantially break his record.
Roy Emerson won all his grand slams, when Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, etc. were playing on the professional tour and were not allowed to play the grand slams.
@vanlendl1 You can only defeat the players in the field. Emerson still had to win those matches in the events in which he competed, and if you look at the draws a number of his opponents were future hall of famers.
@@mr.b.9890 compared to at least 5 top players of the Sampras era who were able to win Grand Slams. Maybe that is why 14 wins could be regarded equally amazing.
means no grunting like an animal, extremely efficient shots. Sampras had the heaviest racket at 385g and the highest string tension on the tour, yet he was able to generate insane speed, without even trying hard. Hitting flatter forehand was a factor, but for serve he was generating more spin than most big servers AND lot of speed, with basically a wood plank, mostly due to his insane motion. you wouldn't even clear the net with his racket 😂 Federer had also the same way of making even the most difficult shots look easy.
It's sooo refreshing to see two greats going at it and not once looking towards their box for encouragement/validation. That's all you see in today's matches.
You can say whatever you want. Sampras in 2001 with 29 years was a monster and remained one until his career end at 32. It's an insane achievement of a 19 year old "school boy" (compared to expereinced master like Sampras) outplay such beast of a player!
Wow, I just watched Roger Federer beat Pete Sampras - Sampras Style 😮😮 I have watched Pete play for many years, but Roger, I've watched from his early days... Well, this match was like watching twins, identical swings, chips, slices, Aces, BACK HAND excellence 👌🏽 👏🏽 ❤ I miss Roger on the circuit 😢 so now I have to watch old matches ❤❤❤❤
Two tennis legends near the moment where one started to take over the other... Such talent on both sides. Roger is just so well rounded already. Always liked Sampras but Federer took it to a whole other level. Incredible rythm, cohesion, regularity, a true mental of steel with wonderful game intelligence and incredible physique.
@@dwpalme2670 are you stupid or something? Sampras was world #1 for 6 years, a record which was only surpassed by Djokovik in 2021. He holds an incredible number of titles, Grand Slam, Masters, Grand Slam cups... He is one of the most titled players of all time. You sound utterly clueless, and/or malevolent.
Sampras' backhand was a thing of beauty. So elegant, precise and efforless. No wonder why Federer acknowledged that the reason why he always played with a one-handed backhand is because he was inspired by his previous idols such as Sampras.
Interestingly, Sampras had a two handed backhand when he was a junior and played more of a baseline game. He worked hard on his one handed backhand, but it was always the weakest part of his game. One of the reasons Federer switched to a larger headed racquet later in his career is because Sampras told him he wished he had as it would have helped his backhand.
I was just about to type - did Sampras actually (at least, asking myself after watching this match) ever use classic backhand as one of his stronger weapons? As far as I can see, he constantly used backand slice or variants of it, so I guess that's why Federer was able to return so many "close to the net" balls. Besides (but that's, perhaps, how they played in Sampras' era), Pete's backhand looks so weird compared to today's players - he looks like he wants to push (away) the ball with the racquet, istead of hitting it...
One handed backhand is so much more efficient as a striking tennis tool with any version of spin available. Such a better stroke than a limited two hander which obviously ruins backs too.
I was a huge fan of both over the years. For Federer to beat Sampras at 19 years old is very impressive. What a great game that was played right out to the end.
Federer is all times the best in the history of games. Many shots and style are still unique, more than that excellent person in total. His charity knew no bounds😊
@@brendaclarke4893 The stats say Novac is and he's still playing, he just made it to the finals of Wimbledon 2024. In 2023 he won 3 of 4 grand slams at 36 years old, Novok Djokovic is the greatest all round tennis player the world has ever seen. Federer is better on a grass I'll give him that.
Sampras was only 29 here not an old man but what makes it even more interesting is that the 2001 tournament was played on the new grass surface with a higher ball bounce. Making it easier for bassline players like Federer.
Here I am in 2014 relishing this beautiful game of two of my favourites.. Tennis is not the same without the play style of either Federer nor Sampras. I was counting on Dimitrov but he didn't live up to his natural gift on time. Thank you for sharing this ❤
Federer continued to enhance his game over the years of course but that's an outlandish statement. You can't bagel someone with the amount of talent that both Federer and Sampras had and showed in this match. It would have been a great match no matter who or what hypothetical age they played against each other.
As a Sampras fan, it was this match that set me on the path to be a Rafa fan. The way Roger played this match, I could not see anyone in that men's roster that could beat him. So I started looking to the youngsters. That's how I found Rafa. Though entertaining, he did not look anywhere near beating Roger. But I started watching whatever matches I could of his.
This match and the 2008 wimby final and Miami final of Krygios vs Roger are my most loved matches in tennis since i started watching in 2002.. Roger imo is the most graceful athlete ever for me in many sports i have watched..
7:19 1st set tie breaker - 9:45 Set 1 Breaked 16:49 2nd set Breaked 22:05 3rd set breaked 27:04 4th set tie breaker - 28:48 set 4 Breaked 33:06 Final Game of Match - 34:03 Match Point - 34:19 Final Serve of Match - & History Created
@granardgroup6315 Slowing the Wimbledon courts and changing the balls made the event just another boring baseline slugfest. We don’t need homogeny across tennis. Having variety of surfaces made the tour more interesting.
This match is how tennis should be played. Also a tiebreak set in under 50mins, fast pace attacking tennis. Now, a tiebreaker is at least 70min long because of the baseline bashing with no variety but ripping the ball crosscourt with occasionally a SLICE backhand, and that, they call variety nowadays😂😂
Tennis It's so much better when the players are willing and able to go to the net. Wow there is undeniable skill in smashing the ball back and forth from baseline to baseline, it's at the net where the excitement comes. It also shows another dimension to your ability to strategize the game with a broader array of tactics.
This kind of tennis - with more net approaches, more volleying, more all-court points - is so much more exciting to watch than the predominantly base-line game of today. If Wimbledon hadn't slowed down the grass over the subsequent years we'd still have more of it -- not to mention that Federer would probably have won ten titles there rather than "only" eight.
I couldnt disagree more. The grass is so fast there's hardly any rallies. It's 3 or 4 sequence of strokes at best. Some of the rallies between Federer/Nadal, Nadal/Djokovic are some of the craziest rallies I've ever seen, and kept me glued to the screen. Not this serve/volley bang bang over in 3 shots.
@@oivindification Disagreed, feel like that would be better suited to hard or clay courts then, grass courts were unique in this way where volley’s were more valued, nowadays with grass so slow, barely any players are comfortable going up to the net, all three surfaces essentially play the same now with winners being mostly baseline rockets, players used to have such interesting play styles now it’s all mainly just baseline strokes
When Sampras was at his peak, he'd easily give today's players a hell of a tough time. His serve & volley was top tier, his focus was unbreakable and his second serve was and still is considered one of the best. I miss watching him play competitively..he was damn near unbeatable in my eyes, and this loss to the future #1 Roger Federer is like a passing of the torch, really.
He did it a lot even as late as 2003/2004. It kinda phased out from being the optimal strategy due to court and racket technology changes so he started sticking closer to the baseline around the tail end of 2004.
To be honest roger is the best player tennis ever the guy is a proper legend even though he doesn’t have the most grand slam wins but the style of how he played was exceptional
I was 15, and I lived 3 mins walk from Wimbledon (which is actually in Southfields) back then and every year my bro and I would get to go to one match with my Grandad (who's been at every Centre Court match since 1974) and in 2001, this was the match I got to go to. I was a huge, huge Sampras fan and still remember hating Federer for beating him. Then Federer happened and I don't think we'll ever see tennis played more elegantly again.
The commentator was spot on. That one missed overhead cost Sampras the match. Boy, Sampras's serve and game are phenomenal. I had forgotten how lethal he was.
Sampras, the champion that he was, must have thought "Oh Boy" in the first game itself. He played his hardest but its not easy to keep up as one ages..
This match has incredible serving. There are so many aces and service winners from both players. Sampras was such a natural, so many great shots from all over the court and at the net - but also a good number of unforced errors at bad moments. It went right down to the last game in the last set when Sampras failed to hold. An even match down all the way to the end, but a very quick and abrupt ending. Spectacular tennis, spectacular athletics.
Federer die hard fan here, but the way Sampras played in this match is really amazing especially the first set where he was trailing against Roger 0 - 40 in the 4th game.
I think I had forgotten just how great a shotmaker Sampras was, although I remember his serve being fantastic. Federer's serve wasn't as great yet at only age 19, but his overall game was allready good enough to beat Sampras in this match. The way he held off those two break points at 4-4 in the 5th set was just indicative of how hard it would be to beat him in the coming years.
Younger world champions Pete Sampras and Roger Federer. Both have proven to be tennis magnates in more than one way. Roger Federer strived with a determination that fatherhood has proven with a days work. Success on the court. ❤❤😊
Used to have newspaper cutouts from Sports page on my folders and books in HS 94-95 my favorite player. So many great players in that era before and after but 😬 Sampras 👑 🎾 🐐 and look what that 19yr old became 🐐
He changed (and improved) it sometime afterwards (I"m not a Fed nerd, so I don't know the timeline). I can see that later he removed the trophy pause, and adopted more of a 'birthday-hat-knock-off' loop over his head. Sampras still is the best server of all-time, esp. counting his 2nd service. Interesting to note, these two players--arguably the best servers in the modern era--both used the platform stance, but today across both men's and women's tours, the pinpoint is much more popular. (fwiw, I'm old school, and my service is the best shot of my game, along with my 1HBH, and I use platform.)
@@aceyman Interestingly enough, in terms of service points won percentage (first and second serve aggregated) Fed is slightly ahead of Pete but only 0.2% ahead; basically, tied at positions #6 and #7. When you consider Fed played until he was 40, and stop counting Fed's stats from age 32 (the age Sampras retired), he'd have a more comfortable lead over Pistol Pete Karlovic is best of all time, but he can't do much else than serve
I believe that if Pete Sampras and Ivan Lendl had played in today's era - with its superior equipment, physical therapy, training, and nutrition - they would play AT THE TOP of today's tour. Pete's serve and mental toughness is among the best ever. And Lendl's work ethic - his amazing dedication to his talent off the court - would have easily put him on a par with ANY of today's players because he would have taken full advantage of today's pro sports resources and come out on top. Of all the top players of the 80s and 90s, I think Sampras and Lendl would be among the tops today, because they had complete games. If Pete and Ivan played today, do you really think they'd be ranked below #10? I can't even enjoy typing "below 10..." they'd be TOP FIVE some of the time, #1 a LOT of the time. 😊 Maybe Nick K. needs to watch more tennis from past eras. I sincerely think he'd enjoy watching them! 😊
Amen. When I tuned into tennis, Federer had been winning for so long, I just wanted anyone else to win. He left a great legacy while ruining, no, altering the course of a career like Roddick, truly a fabulous player, surely one of the best 25 ever, but only won 1! major. Roddick is still the only player with a winning record against Djokovic, though maybe some of today 2024's "kids" will join him.
Watching the 5th set. Both Fed and Pete are worn out. Yet, no growls and grunts. Just forceful shots, artistic volleys, laser focused serves and crisp finishes to end the points. Much in contrast to the Djokovian orgasmic sounds that became the norm in the generations that followed.
Love them both playing 1 handed backhands. Those were the days. REAL tennis. Also love all the volleys, don't see many players coming in to attack anymore. All baseline and power but no more finesse anymore
Sampras was always my favourite, but what a great match to pass the baton. I’d still love to see them both at their peak. I think Federer became a monster and would be quite untouchable, but that would be the match I’d ask for.
Comes to show how much this era depended on having a great serve. A game like this isn't really seen now a days, matches go way longer with equally strong returns and rallies that go for ages, and depends heavily more on athleticism, consistency and strength.
@@thefridgeman It's the opposite actually, courts are much slower today, favoring long points instead of these quick ones that relied much more on a good serve.
Wild how Federer's career spanned so many different generations and he had to change his playstyle and adapt to others so much over the course of it. Started off as a serve-and-volleyer, pioneered an all-court all-surface game, and ended his career with S&V dead, and tennis played mostly through long baseline rallies with heavy topspin. Not to mention how the surfaces changed as well. He did it all.
No different than any other greats.
Just like Ronnie O'sulivan has done in snooker
@@timothychung4811 I don't think so.. None of the other greats had the court surface changed on them so the opponent had a chance.
@timothychung4811 there is no way Novax would have won Wimbledon with the kind of grass used on this match. The ball bounced very low by today's standard. They should go back to it. Too many rallies from the backcourt today. And no top player, except for Alcaraz can come close to volley like Federer or Sampras.
@@mrxman581 you are right about the current style of Novak. He plays like this because, the courts are conducive for his style. If the grass were like this, he would have adapted to that condition. One cannot disprove that. Didn't Federer make changes in his game and play baseline well. Otherwise, how he would have won French and also beat Novak in 2011 French open. One cannot say like Nick that Sampras couldn't play well as he was if he had played in big 3 era. Its wrong analysis.
I know that the video is meant to be about Federer...but what a player Sampras was. And that serve!!!
You really appreciate how good federer's dominance knowing he still had to beat monsters along the way
was this with bouncier balls?
His serve carried him far, except not so much on clay as it blunted his best shot. Still the best serve I've seen, and I've seen them all from Roscoe Tanner up to today.
Why one hand backhand is less and less common nowadays?
J❤q❤
Sampras was the consummate champion. He fought tooth and nail against a young and motivated Federer. Some of the shots like the diagonal placements when Federer was at the net were sublime. Just shows how mentally strong both players were. At 19, Federer showed great composure against a 7 time champion and Sampras, though he knew that age wasn’t in his corner, played tremendous tennis. The changing of the guard in a way I believe. Both of them gave us great joy and many unforgettable memories didn’t they?
CHAT gpt detected
yes! absolutely correct! THE 2 Guys ARE GOOD AND MY FAVORITE!
Sampras was 29
Does the body really change that much at 29 from 19? I feel like maybe the mid-30's is when one might slow down a tad. Am I wrong?
@@timetheory84 Pete definitely retired early given his calibre, but he went out like an absolute boss by winning the US Open in 2002 (defeating Agassi no less) and then just mic dropping the tour.
His exhibitions vs Federer in 2007 prove he could have stayed on tour if he really wanted to put the work in.
I remember watching this live on TV. Seeing Federer play a mirror game to Sampras' brilliance and beat him was incredible. At the end of that match, it was clear that a changing of the guard had occurred and Federer was on his way to being the most sublimely brilliant tennis player ever. Yes, at his peak, Nadal was wonderful, and at his peak, so is Djokovic, but neither are sublime. Witnessing Federer in his prime was witnessing a maestro at work.
So why did Nadal beat Federer in 2008 at wimbledon if he wasn't sublime?
💯
Who is here watching this in 2024
Me
Meeeee
Meeeeeee
Yo
Me..❤
Sampras and Federer are my most admired, nobody can play forever, so enjoy the moments❤
both goat of tennis ! the palmares don't make the goat ! orelse, the goat is jimmy connors with 109 titles ! the goat is the most talented player ever ! so, 1rst roger, 2nd sampras, 3rd nadal
@@jimleveilleur2510 Aaah, he forgot Agassi.
@@fetusofetuso2122 i think there is more talented players before agassi, djoko, alcaraz, ....but i loved andré
Federer 40-15, which puts his GOAT status is jeopardy, Novak same Wimbledons as Sampras, at 37, Alcaraz saved Federer, if Novak wins 8 this year, Farterer will see another record go, before his eyes.😪
@@jimleveilleur2510 what does "most talented" mean...? Of course Palmares play a key role regarding GOAT status, in every sport.
Connors is not with only 8 Grand Slam wins obviously
Sampras is not, even with his meaning for the sport. He has never one in Roland Garros, he even did not reach the final, semifinal only once.
Djokovic, Federer and Nadal all have won 20+ grand slam titles and ~100 titles total. They have dominated 2 decades and had many legendary matches between them. I would argue, that theire huge success, together with their dominance over the rest of the field, is only there because they were present all at once.
To be a GOAT, i think a career Grand slam is a MUST, to show mastery of all surfaces. and then you have to have a long reign both in No1 ranking as well as top 5 overall. Taking all that into account there are only 4 men who can be considered goat in my opinion. The BIG 3 and Rod Laver. The latter has much less grand slam titles, even less than Sampras, but under present day ruling would probably have won many more. ( He was not allowed to play at the grand slams between 1963 and 1968 because he was a professional) 2 Calender Grand Slam are still a pretty good argument in his favor.
Regarding who is the actual GOAT it comes down to personal preference. in terms of success it is easily Novak Djokovic. Most Grand slams and 3 career grand slams and a non calender grand slam. If you value the influence on the sport itself, Federer and Nadal have strong arguments, given there legendary duels raised the bar for years to come. However this obviously takes two to tango. One player, being very dominant, might be the best player ever, but it would be boring as hell. Nobody wants to see 6:1, 6:2, 6:1
these two guys play some beautiful tennis. this game is so much different now
I started to love tennis with Agassi and Sampras, and then it was so good as a Swiss to watch Federer climbing up. Sampras was an absolute warrior.
I liked the Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl era, then the Sampras, Agassi one. Then the Federer, Nadal, Djokovic one.
I do not care which countries the players come from, though.
@@antonboludo8886 indeed great champions
After this match the world knew that a legend was about to rise 🔥🔥🔥
Actually they knew before that but Federer was too lazy and stubborn to train hard and develop his physique faster.
Well Federer on end just basic man.That Legend too much said
Petes serve and volley game was a thing of beauty. Lost art. All time great probably my favorite behind Roger.
Yeah, same with the serve/volley game of McEnroe from '79 - '84. What touch and with an economy of motion too.
@@DexterHaven Don't forget about Edgar.
Sampras is so underrated and doesn’t get remembered enough. He and Agassi basically were 90’s tennis. He had the sweetest serve down the tee. Great serve and volley, just a dominant force not to be forgotten. I loved his play style.
Yeah but all he plays is serve and volley, he wouldn't be able to compete with the groundstrokes that people hit these days...
@@carkod Maybe. He would be forced to improve his ground strokes and even his serve and volley if born in this era. He’s such a talent, I think he could have
Who the hell thinks Sampras is underrated... 😂😂😂😂
@@love4lust7301 younger people who only grew up with Federer, Nadal, and Jjokovic etc.
I do. @@love4lust7301
Oh i miss the good old days when tennis was played so beautifully especially when players like Sampras make volley shot look so easy! Love it
The good old days were Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, LOL.
@@antonboludo8886 Nah, the good old days were Emerson, Laver, Ashe, Newcombe, LOL.
Mmm, the old good days were Federer, Nadal, and Djocovic....
I forgot how great Sampras was. The incredible net shots and backhands.
Amazing fast-court player. Federer is such a power player though. Federer's assentation reminds me of Lendl v. McEnroe. Rather the same dynamic.
And this is a vastly declined Pete.
@@soultalksolutions7424Not really. He was still only 29 and went on to win the US open a year later
before playing this wimbledon he was already contemplating retirement, despite his talent he did *not* dedicate his entire adult life to tennis and was certainly as capable as any of winning 20+ grand slams. if they played all majors on grass like in laver's day, Sampras would currently have the most slams and most calendar year grand slams (and probably the Graf Golden Slam as well) @@Sanctified57
@@soultalksolutions7424 neither was this a prime Federer.
I watched this match and this was the beggining of the making of Roger Fed the legend and my GOAT.
23 years later and still one of the most enjoyable matches we'll ever see
boring af
Most enjoyable? It's just serve galore, no rallies whatsoever
@@pietrocerrina614 yes boring .. tennis is far better now
uhh not really
Djokovic would destroy both of them if they play like that against him.
Here is a young 19-year-old Federer playing a relatively old Sampras and Sampras is holding his own although he loses. When I hear people like Nick Kyrgios saying Sampras could not play today, I think it is so wrong. Sampras could play in any era in his prime.
Pete with new racket strings even shoes 😅would crash all of them ,he should retire after 35,unlucky that he have retire early...
How can you be “relatively old” at 29? 😂 Most players win Slams in their 30s.
29 is old only for a gymnast,bro
Yeah Sampras hitting 121mph 2nd serves says a lot.
@@dirkiedoos8577 In the 1980's and 1990's things were very different than now where you have players age 33+ winning many of the slams. Back when there was better competition, those that did win slams won almost all of them in their 20's. John McEnroe, Mats Wilander and Stefan Edberg all played in 11 slam finals, none after age 26. Boris Becker played in his last slam final at 29. Ivan Lendl was in 19 slam finals, won his last slam at age 29 and was in one additional final at age 30. Even the great Jimmy Connors, who had the best longevity of the players of that time, was only in 3 of his 15 finals after hitting age 30, and none after age 31.
Wow. Don't forget how incredibly good Pete Sampras was. Amazing tennis talent!!
This commentary is one of the best. No statistics! No silly metaphors. Just respect for the players and the game.
SHE PLAYED LIKE A GORILLA
Federer's serving kept right up with Sampras's. After that it was just a mistake here or there that decided the match; they were pretty much even. What a great match!
I am watching in July 2024. I watched this match 10 times already. I am always amazed by the footwork of Federer. And the great tennis IQ of Sampras.
federer has iq too!
When Sampras won 14 grand slams it was seen as an amazing achievment that would last for decades, as Roy Emerson's previous record of 12 had. Amazing to think that three players coming up following him would all substantially break his record.
Roy Emerson won all his grand slams, when Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, etc. were playing on the professional tour and were not allowed to play the grand slams.
@@vanlendl1Which is part of the reason people thought that his record would be difficult to beat
@vanlendl1 You can only defeat the players in the field. Emerson still had to win those matches in the events in which he competed, and if you look at the draws a number of his opponents were future hall of famers.
3 players in the same Era. I'm glad I had the privilege to see it.
@@mr.b.9890 compared to at least 5 top players of the Sampras era who were able to win Grand Slams. Maybe that is why 14 wins could be regarded equally amazing.
Two of the purest tennis players that ever played the game.
IN ALL FAIRNEE=SS, YET ONE OF THEM I S BETTER, THAN THE O T H E R!!
What does that mean?
means no grunting like an animal, extremely efficient shots. Sampras had the heaviest racket at 385g and the highest string tension on the tour, yet he was able to generate insane speed, without even trying hard. Hitting flatter forehand was a factor, but for serve he was generating more spin than most big servers AND lot of speed, with basically a wood plank, mostly due to his insane motion. you wouldn't even clear the net with his racket 😂
Federer had also the same way of making even the most difficult shots look easy.
@@geemy9675 Humans are animals. Why so many people don't seem to understand this?
I've hit with the racquet that Sampras used. I was a pretty good player and coach, but his weapon was too heavy for me. @@geemy9675
I like this editing…quick and right to the points and a few replays here and there. Great!
I agree- 5 sets in 35 minutes WOW
One is the reason I started watching Tennis and the other is the reason I started loving tennis
Watching Pete Sampras serve a tennis ball will always be iconic to me. Fantastic champion.
It's sooo refreshing to see two greats going at it and not once looking towards their box for encouragement/validation. That's all you see in today's matches.
You can say whatever you want. Sampras in 2001 with 29 years was a monster and remained one until his career end at 32.
It's an insane achievement of a 19 year old "school boy" (compared to expereinced master like Sampras) outplay such beast of a player!
But didn't 29 year old Federer suddenly become an old man when Djokovic entered his prime😂
Wow, I just watched Roger Federer beat Pete Sampras - Sampras Style 😮😮 I have watched Pete play for many years, but Roger, I've watched from his early days... Well, this match was like watching twins, identical swings, chips, slices, Aces, BACK HAND excellence 👌🏽 👏🏽 ❤ I miss Roger on the circuit 😢 so now I have to watch old matches ❤❤❤❤
The era of single backhands! Yeah
Players still use it. Probably not as well though.
Yeah I am using it till today cos i am from the 70s. 😊
Two tennis legends near the moment where one started to take over the other... Such talent on both sides. Roger is just so well rounded already. Always liked Sampras but Federer took it to a whole other level. Incredible rythm, cohesion, regularity, a true mental of steel with wonderful game intelligence and incredible physique.
Pete Sampras, a legend in his own mind.
@@dwpalme2670 are you stupid or something? Sampras was world #1 for 6 years, a record which was only surpassed by Djokovik in 2021. He holds an incredible number of titles, Grand Slam, Masters, Grand Slam cups... He is one of the most titled players of all time. You sound utterly clueless, and/or malevolent.
Sampras' backhand was a thing of beauty. So elegant, precise and efforless. No wonder why Federer acknowledged that the reason why he always played with a one-handed backhand is because he was inspired by his previous idols such as Sampras.
Interestingly, Sampras had a two handed backhand when he was a junior and played more of a baseline game. He worked hard on his one handed backhand, but it was always the weakest part of his game. One of the reasons Federer switched to a larger headed racquet later in his career is because Sampras told him he wished he had as it would have helped his backhand.
I was just about to type - did Sampras actually (at least, asking myself after watching this match) ever use classic backhand as one of his stronger weapons?
As far as I can see, he constantly used backand slice or variants of it, so I guess that's why Federer was able to return so many "close to the net" balls.
Besides (but that's, perhaps, how they played in Sampras' era), Pete's backhand looks so weird compared to today's players - he looks like he wants to push (away) the ball with the racquet, istead of hitting it...
not at all
Indeed, yet Roger perfected the single-hander and rewrote the tennis manual on what is possible with it.
One handed backhand is so much more efficient as a striking tennis tool with any version of spin available. Such a better stroke than a limited two hander which obviously ruins backs too.
Both Sampras and Federer are legends. Both have distinctive style of playing. I always enjoyed watching both of them play win or lose.
Federer is my favourite sport hero .
Roger is my all time favorite tennis player. A good choice as he is a classy fellow and greatest tennis player ever. The GOAT!
Great edits. Very efficient. Thankyou.
Some of the best tennis ever played.
Tennis in this era was the finest and most beautiful match between Sampers and Roger Federer, a match of legends
You only say that because that 'era' didn't involve Djokovic.
I was a huge fan of both over the years. For Federer to beat Sampras at 19 years old is very impressive. What a great game that was played right out to the end.
Wow, never saw this game. This really is exceptional tennis by two greats. Classic.
I love their one-hand top spin shots. They are beautiful.
The changing of the Wimbledon guards.
What a match between these two legends!
Classic tennis 🎾
I so miss seeing Roger play today - a class act ♥
Pete allowed Roger to hang around too many times. This was a terrific match and a passing of the torch in some ways.
Pete would have won Wimbledon that year had he won that match!
Federer was still developing and became a superstar 2 years later.
Both have great serves, great backhands! One of the greatest matches ever watched!
Federer is all times the best in the history of games. Many shots and style are still unique, more than that excellent person in total. His charity knew no bounds😊
Absolutely agree. Roger Federer is the utmost Greatest of all Times.
@@brendaclarke4893 The stats say Novac is and he's still playing, he just made it to the finals of Wimbledon 2024. In 2023 he won 3 of 4 grand slams at 36 years old, Novok Djokovic is the greatest all round tennis player the world has ever seen. Federer is better on a grass I'll give him that.
Lol.. what nonsense. His career compared to Djokovic's is quite inferior on every level.
Die Blütezeit des Tennis. Serve-and-Volley beeindruckend. Es wird wieder kommen.
One of the BEST matches I've ever seen! Loved Pete!😊
Sampras was only 29 here not an old man but what makes it even more interesting is that the 2001 tournament was played on the new grass surface with a higher ball bounce. Making it easier for bassline players like Federer.
The best match of all time. A proper grass court match.
Here I am in 2014 relishing this beautiful game of two of my favourites.. Tennis is not the same without the play style of either Federer nor Sampras. I was counting on Dimitrov but he didn't live up to his natural gift on time.
Thank you for sharing this ❤
Amazing duel by an amazing duo! Wow! Pete sampras was incredible. At that age to compete at that level! Incredulous!
Damn 29 year old fed would probably bagel 19 year old fed. Thats crazy how the game evolves
No, your 'bagel' comment lacked the cream cheese of reality; that's an illusion; this Fed was great and could rise to the challenge.
@@DexterHavenhe was great but Federer aged like a fine cheese or fine wine
@@silvershadowjsh When did he peak, in your view?
Federer continued to enhance his game over the years of course but that's an outlandish statement. You can't bagel someone with the amount of talent that both Federer and Sampras had and showed in this match. It would have been a great match no matter who or what hypothetical age they played against each other.
@@rtd9153 Anyone who says 'bagel' is donuts.
As a Sampras fan, it was this match that set me on the path to be a Rafa fan. The way Roger played this match, I could not see anyone in that men's roster that could beat him. So I started looking to the youngsters. That's how I found Rafa. Though entertaining, he did not look anywhere near beating Roger. But I started watching whatever matches I could of his.
One of the greatest tennis match of all time.
sampras' jump at 14:03 is so insane. If you watch closely he body moves so far. a powerful athlete
The Pete Sampras Slam dunk! He has a lot of those
Today the umpire would stop the point calling: "hindrance". Sad but true.
@@Marc-uw4mt Why? I am not familiar with tennis but that seems like super clean shot with nothing wrong with it.
It was a great fight!👍👍👍👍....What is more both of them with one - handed backhand!👍👍👍👍....
This match and the 2008 wimby final and Miami final of Krygios vs Roger are my most loved matches in tennis since i started watching in 2002.. Roger imo is the most graceful athlete ever for me in many sports i have watched..
4-4 in the 5th Pete had a backhand look pass and a running forehand chance on those two break points. As a Sampras fan, those missed chances hurt!
7:19 1st set tie breaker - 9:45 Set 1 Breaked
16:49 2nd set Breaked
22:05 3rd set breaked
27:04 4th set tie breaker - 28:48 set 4 Breaked
33:06 Final Game of Match - 34:03 Match Point - 34:19 Final Serve of Match - & History Created
Had Wimbledon left the courts at this speed, Federer wins 12 titles at SW19...
@granardgroup6315 Slowing the Wimbledon courts and changing the balls made the event just another boring baseline slugfest. We don’t need homogeny across tennis. Having variety of surfaces made the tour more interesting.
This match is how tennis should be played. Also a tiebreak set in under 50mins, fast pace attacking tennis. Now, a tiebreaker is at least 70min long because of the baseline bashing with no variety but ripping the ball crosscourt with occasionally a SLICE backhand, and that, they call variety nowadays😂😂
Or more!
The speed has been exact same in wimby since 2004 if you have seen matches rather than seeing people spam "court speed slowed"
Tennis It's so much better when the players are willing and able to go to the net. Wow there is undeniable skill in smashing the ball back and forth from baseline to baseline, it's at the net where the excitement comes. It also shows another dimension to your ability to strategize the game with a broader array of tactics.
This kind of tennis - with more net approaches, more volleying, more all-court points - is so much more exciting to watch than the predominantly base-line game of today. If Wimbledon hadn't slowed down the grass over the subsequent years we'd still have more of it -- not to mention that Federer would probably have won ten titles there rather than "only" eight.
I couldnt disagree more. The grass is so fast there's hardly any rallies. It's 3 or 4 sequence of strokes at best. Some of the rallies between Federer/Nadal, Nadal/Djokovic are some of the craziest rallies I've ever seen, and kept me glued to the screen. Not this serve/volley bang bang over in 3 shots.
@@oivindificationI very much agree with you. All-court tennis to me doesn’t mean you serve and volley at every single opportunity you get.
@@oivindification Disagreed, feel like that would be better suited to hard or clay courts then, grass courts were unique in this way where volley’s were more valued, nowadays with grass so slow, barely any players are comfortable going up to the net, all three surfaces essentially play the same now with winners being mostly baseline rockets, players used to have such interesting play styles now it’s all mainly just baseline strokes
When Sampras was at his peak, he'd easily give today's players a hell of a tough time. His serve & volley was top tier, his focus was unbreakable and his second serve was and still is considered one of the best. I miss watching him play competitively..he was damn near unbeatable in my eyes, and this loss to the future #1 Roger Federer is like a passing of the torch, really.
Never realised Federer served and volleyed that much back then.
He did it a lot even as late as 2003/2004. It kinda phased out from being the optimal strategy due to court and racket technology changes so he started sticking closer to the baseline around the tail end of 2004.
Back then most players served and volleyed on grass.
@@TheTopspin77 Yes. I think they wanted to keep the points shorter.
What a match. So closely matched, both legends of the game. Well played by both of them.
To be honest roger is the best player tennis ever the guy is a proper legend even though he doesn’t have the most grand slam wins but the style of how he played was exceptional
This is such a great example of editing. Thank you so much. Subscription guaranteed.
What an EPIC match that was. Amazing from both players.
I admire Federer was so cool,not showing any bit of nervousness at all at age 19 ,at Gram Slam tennis. ❤❤❤
Great! Great game and great editing. Incredible aces, both.
Most Epic victory of this Century. Changing of the guard
ชอบสไตล์ เสริฟ>วอลเลย์ ของ Sampras.
เบื่อยุคใหม่ ที่สู้กันแต่ท้ายคอร์ต
Great old-school tennis.
I was 15, and I lived 3 mins walk from Wimbledon (which is actually in Southfields) back then and every year my bro and I would get to go to one match with my Grandad (who's been at every Centre Court match since 1974) and in 2001, this was the match I got to go to. I was a huge, huge Sampras fan and still remember hating Federer for beating him.
Then Federer happened and I don't think we'll ever see tennis played more elegantly again.
it was so intense, the 30min video felt like watching a 3 hours game, amazing game !
The commentator was spot on. That one missed overhead cost Sampras the match. Boy, Sampras's serve and game are phenomenal. I had forgotten how lethal he was.
Sampras, the champion that he was, must have thought "Oh Boy" in the first game itself. He played his hardest but its not easy to keep up as one ages..
This match has incredible serving. There are so many aces and service winners from both players. Sampras was such a natural, so many great shots from all over the court and at the net - but also a good number of unforced errors at bad moments. It went right down to the last game in the last set when Sampras failed to hold. An even match down all the way to the end, but a very quick and abrupt ending. Spectacular tennis, spectacular athletics.
These two were so well matched
Federer die hard fan here, but the way Sampras played in this match is really amazing especially the first set where he was trailing against Roger 0 - 40 in the 4th game.
Two of the best one handed backhands ever…now not one in the ATP top 10
The best match of all time!
I think I had forgotten just how great a shotmaker Sampras was, although I remember his serve being fantastic. Federer's serve wasn't as great yet at only age 19, but his overall game was allready good enough to beat Sampras in this match. The way he held off those two break points at 4-4 in the 5th set was just indicative of how hard it would be to beat him in the coming years.
Sampras was my favourite when he played. Then it was Federer. The beautiful one handed backhand😢..Does anyone even use it now?
Younger world champions Pete Sampras and Roger Federer. Both have proven to be tennis magnates
in more than one way. Roger Federer strived with a determination that fatherhood has proven with a days
work. Success on the court. ❤❤😊
The Rise And Fall, Every King Shall Taste A Fall, A New King Keeps Coming.
The Golden days of Sampras and Agassi.
Used to have newspaper cutouts from Sports page on my folders and books in HS 94-95 my favorite player. So many great players in that era before and after but 😬 Sampras 👑 🎾 🐐 and look what that 19yr old became 🐐
Fed's serve was a thing of beauty even at age 19
He changed (and improved) it sometime afterwards (I"m not a Fed nerd, so I don't know the timeline). I can see that later he removed the trophy pause, and adopted more of a 'birthday-hat-knock-off' loop over his head. Sampras still is the best server of all-time, esp. counting his 2nd service.
Interesting to note, these two players--arguably the best servers in the modern era--both used the platform stance, but today across both men's and women's tours, the pinpoint is much more popular. (fwiw, I'm old school, and my service is the best shot of my game, along with my 1HBH, and I use platform.)
@@aceyman Interestingly enough, in terms of service points won percentage (first and second serve aggregated) Fed is slightly ahead of Pete but only 0.2% ahead; basically, tied at positions #6 and #7.
When you consider Fed played until he was 40, and stop counting Fed's stats from age 32 (the age Sampras retired), he'd have a more comfortable lead over Pistol Pete
Karlovic is best of all time, but he can't do much else than serve
I believe that if Pete Sampras and Ivan Lendl had played in today's era - with its superior equipment, physical therapy, training, and nutrition - they would play AT THE TOP of today's tour. Pete's serve and mental toughness is among the best ever. And Lendl's work ethic - his amazing dedication to his talent off the court - would have easily put him on a par with ANY of today's players because he would have taken full advantage of today's pro sports resources and come out on top.
Of all the top players of the 80s and 90s, I think Sampras and Lendl would be among the tops today, because they had complete games. If Pete and Ivan played today, do you really think they'd be ranked below #10? I can't even enjoy typing "below 10..." they'd be TOP FIVE some of the time, #1 a LOT of the time. 😊
Maybe Nick K. needs to watch more tennis from past eras. I sincerely think he'd enjoy watching them! 😊
Though I have never been a Federer supporter, I am going to miss seeing this man playing so much.
Amen. When I tuned into tennis, Federer had been winning for so long, I just wanted anyone else to win. He left a great legacy while ruining, no, altering the course of a career like Roddick, truly a fabulous player, surely one of the best 25 ever, but only won 1! major. Roddick is still the only player with a winning record against Djokovic, though maybe some of today 2024's "kids" will join him.
this is highlights done right capturing the flow of the match perfectly ... Kudos !!!
Watching the 5th set. Both Fed and Pete are worn out. Yet, no growls and grunts. Just forceful shots, artistic volleys, laser focused serves and crisp finishes to end the points. Much in contrast to the Djokovian orgasmic sounds that became the norm in the generations that followed.
nadal is even worse than djokovic...
2 best player ever to play the game
Love them both playing 1 handed backhands. Those were the days. REAL tennis. Also love all the volleys, don't see many players coming in to attack anymore. All baseline and power but no more finesse anymore
So true, players glued to the baseline, no variation just bish bash bosh across the net
Sampras was always my favourite, but what a great match to pass the baton. I’d still love to see them both at their peak. I think Federer became a monster and would be quite untouchable, but that would be the match I’d ask for.
The courts then used to be amazing. Sampras plays great tennis here. We see the rise of Federer at Wimbledon here. His volleys are simply superb.
No one has ever enchanted me to watch him playing like Roger
Rare to see such big services nowadays. Even Nadal/Djokovic doesn't have this level of services
Lol. Kyrgios, etc.
@@thefridgeman I meant legends. Otherwise there are many including isner , roddick, goran and all.
@@thefridgemanof course 😂. When he said "even great legends can not", fully mean every other tennis players.
It's well known djoko and nadal ain't even top 10 server lol they are known for their returns and defense
Sampras...just wow.
What amazing resilience and persistence against a very young and upcoming star, Federer.
Both are legends.
Comes to show how much this era depended on having a great serve. A game like this isn't really seen now a days, matches go way longer with equally strong returns and rallies that go for ages, and depends heavily more on athleticism, consistency and strength.
You mix and match. Tennis back then was a lot slower than today.
it also was much faster court back then. so much more viable
@@thefridgeman It's the opposite actually, courts are much slower today, favoring long points instead of these quick ones that relied much more on a good serve.