I can't wipe this goofy smile off my face after watching this... Incredible skill and class from both players, something we may never see again ❤

@tyrone1544

5 ай бұрын

What kind of stupid, inhibited adult would write something as idiotic as this? Get some dignity freak.

Sampras had arguably one of the best serves of all time in tennis at his peak! Sick!

@tyrone1544

5 ай бұрын

Gee, ya think? You am really smart….duh.

@quentincrisp6933

5 ай бұрын

Wha ya talkin' bout Tyrone⁉😂@@tyrone1544

@barryschwarz

5 ай бұрын

Yes, it's a pleasure to see it again.

@sasook

5 ай бұрын

.......arguably?

@jaaklucas1329

5 ай бұрын

Best second serve all time for me. Under pressure, most important shot for pros.

So aesthetically pleasing to watch these two play against each other !

The change made to the balls and racket technology really handcuffed the truly talented players that had all-court games. Today's baseline grinders put me to sleep. This one of the reason why Carlos Alcaraz has gotten such a following. His volleys and drop shots make the game much more enjoyable to watch.

@donaldbraugh2314

5 ай бұрын

String tech as well. Poly changed the pro game starting in 1997 French Open Finals and the amateur game.

2 très grands Champions . C'est fabuleux de voir ce niveau de tennis .

Amazing how Federer returned these big serves from within the baseline.

Супер матч мастеров! 👍👍👍

Thing is these 2 were so close at the end. A Post Prime retired Sampras facing a peak Federer. Sampras had serious power, serve and net play. He was only badly let down by his average backhand. But his cross court forehand on the run was better than Roger's. Federer at his prime was moving like a Cheetah and could hit mind boggling winners from anywhere. They played one more exhibition where Sampras won. I seriously think on the faster surfaces Fed couldn't have beaten a younger Pete.

@maciejzniebuszewa8077

5 ай бұрын

You don't have to guess. In 2001, in the fourth round of Wimbledon, Federer, who was 7 years younger and therefore less experienced, defeated Sampras, who was 7 years younger. On grass, which is the fastest surface, he defeated the King of Wimbledon!

@srinitaaigaura

5 ай бұрын

@@maciejzniebuszewa8077 Sampras at that point had numerous injuries and wasn't near his peak. The previous year, in Wimby 2000 he'd somehow won with anesthesia to his leg, walking to the court on crutches and not being able to practice even 10 min. In fact after he sustained a major back injury the year before, he slowed down noticeably (he has back issues till date). He trained hard and peaked again for 2002 and retired after winning the US Open. Even that match with Federer was extremely close - if Sampras hadn't botched a volley at a crucial point in the decider he might have won. Fed in 2006 and 2007 was nigh invincible, with cheetah like movement, an omnipotent forehand and a backhand that worked against everyone but Nadal. But still, Sampras pushed him hard here, and almost won.

@maciejzniebuszewa8077

5 ай бұрын

@@srinitaaigaura Sampras, of course, a brilliant player, with an elegant and effective style of play. But we have no other measure of sporting greatness than direct fights and titles won. In all possible categories, objective and subjective preferences, Roger wins in my opinion.

What a match, amazing and wonderful, both of them exciting their best

Super intense match, amazing showcase of truly amazing serves, volleys, forehands and beautiful one handed backhands! Pete gave prime Roger a good match and battle!

@stephenroger4527

5 ай бұрын

7 year Retired sampras almost beat world no.1 federer.

What a great match, definitely not the first time I've seen this but so amazing to see it again :)

@tyrone1544

5 ай бұрын

Gives lonely nobodies a boner every time.

So cool to see Roger's (Modern) aggressive style go against the last really successful player w/an older tennis approach. People will say what about Agassi, but he was sort of a hybrid pre-cursor to Hewitt. Also, let's remember this is an exhibition match. There is def unspoken or spoken agreement on the score not getting out of hand and playing an entertaining match.

@captainbryce1

5 ай бұрын

Agassi was not a pre-curor to Hewitt. Agassi was an aggressive baseliner who dictated play off both wings. His strengths were power and accuracy off both wings, while his weakness was speed. Hewitt was a baseline counter-puncher who lacked weapons, but used his superior speed and consistency to grind and frustrate opponents. They were completely different kinds of players. If anything, you might describe Hewitt as the watered-down version of Agassi. The only thing they really had in common were they were both outstanding returners of serve, but neither of them were great servers. Agassi had a good first serve, but a weak second serve. Hewitt had a tendency to foot fault and double fault. Hewitt was a better volleyer than Agassi, but he hardly ever came to net because of his weak serve and lack of approach shots. Agassi was able to accomplish more because he could hit winners when necessary off forehand and backhand. Agassi was arguably the only baseline player to ever win Wimbledon when it was being played on a fast surface. Hewitt winning Wimbledon in 2002 happened the year after they slowed down the surface by changing the grass. Since then, baseliners (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray) have dominated there and the serve & volley went the way of the dinosaurs. Hewitt also won against a largely depleted field, avoiding Sampras, Agassi, Safin, and Federer who all lost in the 1st or 2nd round. Agassi's 1992 win had him go through several seeded players who outranked him, including Boris Becker, John McEnroe, and Goran Ivanisevic in the final. Hewitt could not have won Wimbledon on fast grass, to say nothing about his lack of clay court prowess compared to Agassi.

That's amazing !

Absolutely magnificent

This exhibition was an exclamation point on the changing of the guard that occurred at their Wimbledon meeting. Sampras and Federer played, in one way of looking at it, at least one too many Wimbledons. They each were chasing one more Wimbledon victory but weren’t at their best for the last ones. As a player, the decisions were logical. For both men, the grass represented such specialized surfaces and they each brought peerless reputations on grass, that giving it one or two more goes was reasonable but their best days were behind them, they carried too many dents and dings from years on the tour and the competition had learned too much from them. The separation between the two at their Wimbledon meeting was a matter of a few points (Sampras nets a sitter overhead in the first set breaker that could have swung the first set his way). By the time of this exhibition, Federer had gotten much better (Look at his serve motion in the Wimbledon match vs here; his legs are somewhat ‘dead’ in his delivery when he was 19. This is the much improved version of his serve.) Federer was a better player here and Sampras had been retired.

I personally felt federer was not trying his best when sampras was at the net..any modern player from this era including nadal and Djokovic would beat this net game of sampras because they simply have a solid baseline game and accuracy of hitting passing shots

@jdm839

5 ай бұрын

He definitely let up on a few points to keep it relatively close

27 year old pete VS 27 year old Federer...wouldnt have been match. Sampras was an step above fed. More power, more fast, better serve and destroying forehand

@donaldbraugh2314

5 ай бұрын

If Pete had played poly strings, who knows?

I always thought Sampras retired too early. Last match winning the US Open final then just stops. You would have thought he might have wanted to try and get an 8th Wimbledon and break the record. But no he'd obviously just had enough!

Though masterclass from veteran to prime world number 1. It shows us how Pete was strong when played his best. I think, he was stronger then Roger on grass at least.

Sampras is not the volley king. Stephen Edberg is.

@edster0398

5 ай бұрын

I've Watched a lot of Stephan Edberg's matches and I think as serve and volleyers him and Mcenroe made it an absolute artform. Edberg was just amazing.

How many of us think Pete would have destroyed Novak and Nadal in his prime on a real court. This is 2008 and Federer had to bring magic

@pbalajiusaf

5 ай бұрын

Novak would've negated that serve and the minute that ball was in play, Djoker would own him. And I'm saying this as a guy who grew up idolizing Sampras and Agassi

@h-dawg1876

5 ай бұрын

@@pbalajiusaf Novak wouldn’t be able to touch Sampras who serves better then Federer who hits harder then Federer and better hands at the net. Not to mention Novak isn’t somebody who is use to having somebody attacking all the time. You didn’t grow up watching Sampras because of you did you’d know this. Also didn’t Novak loose to a serve and volleyer? Oh yeah he did against Mischa Zverev. And he Sampras is probably the greatest serve and volleyer ever. Not to mention Sampras could out hit players from the baseline. He would do it all the time to Andre, and Becker.

samoras prime vs federer prime sampras > Fed

@AaravYadav-em5tj

5 ай бұрын

Prime Federer is better than Prime Djokovic.

@vgr112261

5 ай бұрын

Depends on the surface.

@jatkaler5735

5 ай бұрын

Sampras for me

Pete could have pulled this out. Easier said than done, though I realize. I noticed he always went cross- court on his backhand passing- shots until the last shot of the match which he missed. I wish he had practiced that shot earlier and it would have changed things up a bit. Too predictable imo

Federer was truky in his best yearsbhere, before mono started running his perfect tennis

Should hav won pete !! 2 breaks still lost

Fed seemed to hit passing shots at will whenever Sampras went to the net. I think Fed was trying about 60%.

@vgr112261

5 ай бұрын

Nonsense

@jatkaler5735

5 ай бұрын

I do not think Sampras was trying either

This match really showed that while Sampras was a brilliant player, tennis had become an entirely different sport at this point from what he originally learned.

@lawrence1318

5 ай бұрын

It showed nothing of the sort. In fact it showed the opposite.

Pete still had the better and stronger forehand. 2nd GOAT of modern tennis!

Love Sampras but it’s clear Federer didn’t take the match too seriously.

@vgr112261

5 ай бұрын

Huh?

Federer's backhand i think was weak was due to the fact he adapted it more to block fast serves.

Der Federer war mir vom ersten Tag an unsympathisch.... Gott sei dank ist der nicht mehr aktiv!!

^

Sampras siendo joven y en su mejor momento, le hubiese dado una paliza a federer.