PDA

View Full Version : Venus, Serena and Pete


spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:42 PM
For years the Williams Sisters have been saying nice things about Sampras.
Has he ever uttered a word of thanks or acknowledgement for them? I have never heard him say anything about Venus or Serena.
He's a great champion, but he is an azz.:wavey:

Wolverines08
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:45 PM
He said "Venus just hits her serve, she doesn't know where it's going".

Tennisstar86
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:46 PM
Petes pretty much an ***. Ive always said that.......People hate Serena because of her EGO. Petes is much bigger than hers....

kiwifan
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:48 PM
Its definitely a one way love affair. :shrug:

I think its cute that they still like him. :angel:

I don't like him all that much, he and Agassi are dorks.

spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:49 PM
He said "Venus just hits her serve, she doesn't know where it's going".

oh yeah, I remember that. He also asked Venus one time if her hair was real or fake.:tape: What a jerk.

DA FOREHAND
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:49 PM
Its definitely a one way love affair. :shrug:

I think its cute that they still like him. :angel:

I don't like him all that much, he and Agassi are dorks.

It def. says something about thier character

supergrunt
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:52 PM
I just don't like his attitude.

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:52 PM
I've never really liked Pete. He's always come off as very pompus and full of himself. He can't stand the fact that Roger might take over his record of majors won prob less than a decade since he got the record himself, so he tries to belittle it by saying that Roger doesn't have the competition that he did. Pete, he beat you when he was 19 on your best and favorite court, so stfu!!! And competition, HA!!!! I really don't remember too much of his later on through the years. Andre was in and out the game all the time. Boris was at the end. Rafter was just a mediocore player all-around. Chang was a one-slam wonder. McEnroe and Connors were retired. Lendel was at the end. Edberg was finishing up his career. Courier was burnt out after only 2-3 years. So really, his competition wasn't much different. And when people look back on Rog, they won't say he was all serve.

Onto the Williams sisters. That comment he made about Venus was a while ago. Back then, Venus had even worse mechanics on the serve and sometimes it really didn't look like she never where it was going. But, there was no need to say that when Venus could make the same comment about Pete's backhand. Anyways, no he really hasn't said anything nice about and much less anything nice about anyone other than maybe Laver and little compliments about Roger and Andre. No-one else really.

starin
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:53 PM
Wasn't he the one who refused to dance with Venus at the Wimbledon ball?
Or was it that douche Hewitt?

spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:54 PM
I bet the Sampras family would have something to say if Serena decided not to play in their tournament at the Home Depot Center in Carson.
I am surprised Richard has not called Sampras out. :lol:

DA FOREHAND
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:55 PM
I've never really liked Pete. He's always come off as very pompus and full of himself. He can't stand the fact that Roger might take over his record of majors won prob less than a decade since he got the record himself, so he tries to belittle it by saying that Roger doesn't have the competition that he did. Pete, he beat you when he was 19on your best and favorite court, so stfu!!!

Onto the Williams sisters. That comment he made about Venus was a while ago. Back then, Venus had even worse mechanics on the serve and sometimes it really didn't look like she never where it was going. But, there was no need to say that when Venus could make the same comment about Pete's backhand. Anyways, no he really hasn't said anything nice about and much less anything nice about anyone other than maybe Laver and little compliments about Roger and Andre. No-one else really.

He also made some jackass comment about Serena's hair...I can't wait for Roger to eclispe pete's career.:wavey:

spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:58 PM
That's right. I can't wait till Roger busts his record. Roger says, "I like it when the Williams Sisters win." From class (Roger) to azz (Pete)

nhissan
Jul 7th, 2007, 07:59 PM
I think Agassi have a good relation with the Williams right?

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:01 PM
Wasn't he the one who refused to dance with Venus at the Wimbledon ball?
Or was it that douche Hewitt?

Well, Hewitt would've prob danced with Serena. Prob Pete in 2000 with Venus.

supergrunt
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:01 PM
Wasn't he the one who refused to dance with Venus at the Wimbledon ball?
Or was it that douche Hewitt?

Really? Hewitt wouldn't really suprise me because... oh never mind. :haha: :p

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:02 PM
He also made some jackass comment about Serena's hair...I can't wait for Roger to eclispe pete's career.:wavey:

Now look at him balding. HAHAHA!!

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:02 PM
Really? Hewitt wouldn't really suprise me because... oh never mind. :haha: :p

Just say it, Lleyton is racist. We all know that.

supergrunt
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:02 PM
Pete acts like women's tennis isn't worth his thoughts. I remember when they asked him about Venus pulling out of Indian Wells and then he rolled his eyes when asked about the incident.

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:03 PM
I think Agassi have a good relation with the Williams right?

I think that there is respect between the two. Def. no animosity or lack of respect like Pete.

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:04 PM
Pete acts like women's tennis isn't worth his thoughts.

And pretty soon all those majors he won when he was the only big server other than Goran in tennis will be not worth many people's thoughts either.

laurie
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:04 PM
For years the Williams Sisters have been saying nice things about Sampras.
Has he ever uttered a word of thanks or acknowledgement for them? I have never heard him say anything about Venus or Serena.
He's a great champion, but he is an azz.:wavey:

What's an azz?

This is what Sampras said about Serena after winning the Aussie Open in January:

On Serena Williams reclaiming the No. 1 ranking: "I don't know the ladies game that well, or Serena that well. What I have heard and seen, got herself back in shape, moving a little better. I think it's not a matter of her talent, it's just a matter of her heart, to really focus on tennis. I know she gets involved in a lot of extracurricular activities. To be a top-ranked player, as Jim will tell you, you really need to be pretty focused on it. It's tough to have your cake and eat it. I think she will gain confidence from Australia. I'm sure the sport is fun for her again when you win a major. She can sustain it as long as she wants to. Depends on her heart. If she wants to be the best player in the world, she can certainly do that. It's just working hard and focusing. "

http://www.sportsmediainc.com/tennisweek/index.cfm?func=showarticle&newsid=16490

What's the problem with that statement?

ico4498
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:04 PM
i'm a big Pete fan but yes, he has been an ass where the sisters are concerned. but then, its a much shorter list if yah look at it from the opposite perspective ... more like, who hasn't?

K-Dog
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:06 PM
What's an azz?

This is what Sampras said about Serena after winning the Aussie Open in January:

On Serena Williams reclaiming the No. 1 ranking: "I don't know the ladies game that well, or Serena that well. What I have heard and seen, got herself back in shape, moving a little better. I think it's not a matter of her talent, it's just a matter of her heart, to really focus on tennis. I know she gets involved in a lot of extracurricular activities. To be a top-ranked player, as Jim will tell you, you really need to be pretty focused on it. It's tough to have your cake and eat it. I think she will gain confidence from Australia. I'm sure the sport is fun for her again when you win a major. She can sustain it as long as she wants to. Depends on her heart. If she wants to be the best player in the world, she can certainly do that. It's just working hard and focusing. "

http://www.sportsmediainc.com/tennisweek/index.cfm?func=showarticle&newsid=16490

What's the problem with that statement?

He was being very PC there. How could he have turned that question around anyways?

Jewelz
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:07 PM
I can't stand Pete Sampras. He is one of the most boring, self-centered and egotistical player to ever play the game of tennis. I am so looking forward to Roger dismantling Pete's grand slam record. I bet Pete is happy that Roger hasn't won The French Open yet since that is also the only grand slam missing from Pete's mantle or resume. But mark this down today, I predict that Roger Federer will finally win that French Open next year.

Kart
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:07 PM
I love Sampras but I seem to recall that there have been some dubious comments he's made about Williams sisters.

Though it's been years now since he made them that I can't remember them.

I do remember thinking at the time I read them though that it was a shame because Venus particularly frequently made out in the early days of her career that she idolised him.

spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:10 PM
azz=a--- (I am trying not to cuss)

First he says, he doesn't know Serena very well, then he goes on to semi-criticize her. :rolleyes:

harloo
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:32 PM
He also made some jackass comment about Serena's hair...I can't wait for Roger to eclispe pete's career.:wavey:

Yep he did make some flip comment about Serena's hair and claimed that she didn't say anything to him in the locker room after he asked her a question.:rolleyes:

Pete was such a douchebag. He had no personality either, just a dull sack of shit.:lol:

Tennisaddict
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:51 PM
I have all the more respect for Venus and Serena that they stand by their opinion of Pete Sampras while he has treated them more than ridiculous. Venus and Serena really have really great personalities.

Jasmin
Jul 7th, 2007, 08:56 PM
Well there's a reason even before the sisters that I've never been into Pete.

Andre was my favorite. Didn't matter how many slams that Pete had. Hopefully one day they will see the Pete for who he is.

Not a Borg fan but even he didn't want Pete to match his record. He even called Fed to thank him. He doesn't mind Federer because he's actually a good guy.

azinna
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:02 PM
I have all the more respect for Venus and Serena that they stand by their opinion of Pete Sampras while he has treated them more than ridiculous. Venus and Serena really have really great personalities.

...yeah, it's sort of like with madonna and joni mitchell... (:cool:)

LudwigDvorak
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:16 PM
Sampras was an amazing player. Just youtube anything with him involved, and he was pretty much one of the most fluid, spectacular sportsmen in his day. He wasn't overexcitable like morons like Hewitt, but he still fistpumped and said "c'mons," kind of similar to most players ja? And he was WAY more than just serve, he was dazzling at net and had without doubt the best smashes anyone's ever had, not to mention he had a killer forehand too. The backhand went off in the latter half of his career, but it's still better than your backhand. And it's not fluff to say he could still beat anyone in the top 100 in a best-of-three match aside from the top two on a consistent basis. He may have been indifferent or even dismissive to the sisters, and that's not right, but it's just like with Navratilova: they've both accomplished so much they can pretty much say whatever they want and I'll still respect them for it since they've done a hell of a lot for the sport instead of us armchair critics.

It does speak tons on Venus and Serena's character how much they still like him, but it's for the reason I said. His quality of play overrides any minor insult Pete dished on the sisters. It's possible to love someone's game and not be fond of their personality.

spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:19 PM
^^^would it kill Pete to be a little gracious towards the sisters?

Mr. Magassi
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:34 PM
Pete's a big jerk and he never respected his fellow top players (unless they were American)... I always hated the way Serena and Venus idolized him... Roger and Rafa are the classiest 1 and 2 we have had on the men's side for a long time...

LudwigDvorak
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:36 PM
No, I definitely understand Pete should be kinder to them, but has he spoken ill of them since the early part of this decade? I can't say until just this thread that I've heard of apparently such awful things he's said of them. And even then, what I have heard, him rejecting the offer to dance with Venus, etc, it doesn't sound like...THAT bad. Although asking if Serena's hair is real or not is kind of fucked up.

spokenword73
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:40 PM
Wimbledon tradition is that the Women's Champion and the Men's Champion share a dance at the post-tournament ball.
If he did refuse to dance with Venus he is an azz and a jerk and he prolly has two left feet. :lol:

Jameka, Forever!
Jul 7th, 2007, 09:56 PM
oh yeah, I remember that. He also asked Venus one time if her hair was real or fake.:tape: What a jerk.

Let us all try to guess what's real, or fake with his wife.

Pureracket
Jul 7th, 2007, 10:06 PM
Well, I'm sure Rafa won't mind dancing with Venus @ the ball this year.

Tylane
Jul 7th, 2007, 10:17 PM
It's not a personal critic, it's just that Sampras doesn't like women tennis, he's always admited it. He doesn't find it interesting, so I don't remember to hear him to make good comments about any tennis woman ...
It's not because the sisters Williams are (were) fans of him that he has to be fan of them... it doesn't mean he doesn't like them.
Don't be paranoiac.

nicco
Jul 7th, 2007, 10:23 PM
It's amazing how people can defend someone so easily who is so rude yet jump at the chance to say how rude the sister's are. He should thanks the William's for keeping his name relevant. He is one of he best of all time and Agassi still got more attention. Pete was never able to take his court success and transfer it to the general public like, Agassi, the Williams and Maria. The Williams show how classy they are by paying respect to him even though he can't respond. What a loser. If the Williams are supposed to be more than great tennis players by having class and humility then we should expect the same of him.

Tylane
Jul 7th, 2007, 10:49 PM
Make a poll "pete sampras or the sisters williams ?" in europe, in france, in UK, in the world.... Pete wins easily, cos he's really respected for his talent, his game and his palmares, whereas the sisters are not liked in general, cos people don't like their rude game without any class, and dislike their arrogant and unpolite personnality.
I don't dislike them, but in general that's what people think about them.

DemWilliamsGulls
Jul 7th, 2007, 10:53 PM
oh yeah, I remember that. He also asked Venus one time if her hair was real or fake.:tape: What a jerk.

OOOOO thats a big no no to a black woman..had that been any other black woman Pete's ass would have gotten cussed out! lol Man I didnt know Pete was like that....I always liked Andre Aggassi better anyway ;)

Radix2
Jul 7th, 2007, 10:56 PM
The sisters never said they liked Pete. They admired the way he played and wanted to perform just like him.

Yes, Pete is an AZZ. Can't stand him.

woosey
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:02 PM
Yep he did make some flip comment about Serena's hair and claimed that she didn't say anything to him in the locker room after he asked her a question.:rolleyes:

Pete was such a douchebag. He had no personality either, just a dull sack of shit.:lol:

i've read about him asking a question about their hair. and i just thought, black women don't really like to answer questions about their hair. and don't even think about touching it.

so, he was in the wrong without really knowing it i suspect.

but, i've never been a huge sampras fan.

cheesestix
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:02 PM
It's amazing how people can defend someone so easily who is so rude yet jump at the chance to say how rude the sister's are.

Hmmm, kinda like the way some people can defend Serena's comments yet jump at the chance to say how rude Pete is? :rolleyes:

Max565
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:03 PM
Pete just doesn't watch tennis anymore, let alone women's tennis. He said so himself that he doesn't bother unless it's Grand Slam men's singles. I hate male players who freely say that they don't like women's tennis. It's disgraceful for tennis in general...

nicco
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:09 PM
nv

nicco
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:10 PM
Hmmm, kinda like the way some people can defend Serena's comments yet jump at the chance to say how rude Pete is? :rolleyes:


So we both agree, it's not right. Interesting how someone tries to defend a wrong by bringing up another wrong. Thanks for proving my point, makes my job so much easier;)

thrust
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:14 PM
You people are pathetic! How do you know what the relationship between Pete and the williams sisters is? Why would Venus keep praising him if he was as bad a person as you think he is. Grow up idiots!!

nicco
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:17 PM
You people are pathetic! How do you know what the relationship between Pete and the williams sisters is? Why would Venus keep praising him if he was as bad a person as you think he is. Grow up idiots!!

Interesting how you wasted a minute of your precious life responding to "idiots." You need to put down the diet coke and bag of oreos and step away from the computer. :wavey:

cheesestix
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:18 PM
So we both agree, it's not right. Interesting how someone tries to defend a wrong by bringing up another wrong. Thanks for proving my point, makes my job so much easier;)

Who's defending anything? Just pointing out your hypcrisy. :wavey:

nicco
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:20 PM
Who's defending anything? Just pointing out your hypcrisy. :wavey:
who would be you. And it's interesting how "pointing out your hypocrisy" is very similiar to "avoiding the issue":kiss: also don't remember defending anyone's bad behavior, but I'm sure if I wait long enough you can pull up a quote from me and prove me wrong. I'll be waiting

Jameka, Forever!
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:26 PM
Make a poll "pete sampras or the sisters williams ?" in europe, in france, in UK, in the world.... Pete wins easily, cos he's really respected for his talent, his game and his palmares, whereas the sisters are not liked in general, cos people don't like their rude game without any class, and dislike their arrogant and unpolite personnality.
I don't dislike them, but in general that's what people think about them.

whereas the French are not liked in general, cos people don't like their rude smell without any class, and dislike their arrogant and unpolite personnality. I don't dislike them, but in general that's what the whole world think about them.

Thanx4nothin
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:26 PM
LOL after one of the commentators told him it took him like a set and a half one time at wimbledon to reach Vee's fastest serve the other day, he was apparently really Pissed Off, ever since, he's just been a bastrad to them, who cares about him anyway...he's only the greatest male tennis player ever....but certainly not the greatest person ever.

littlebin
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:36 PM
Great! not everyone kiss Williams' ass.

Sampras like serve & volley, he just doesn't like Willimas' baseline power game.


For years the Williams Sisters have been saying nice things about Sampras.
Has he ever uttered a word of thanks or acknowledgement for them? I have never heard him say anything about Venus or Serena.
He's a great champion, but he is an azz.:wavey:

nicco
Jul 7th, 2007, 11:39 PM
What Sampras likes or doesn't like is irrelevant. He is the past and the William's are the present. Ultimately any slight diss others may feel over him possibly snubbing them is easily insignificant compared to Venus' victory today. I'm sure Venus forgot his name as soon as she uttered it. she gave him a nod, so to speak and went on with the show. The VENUS WILLIAM'S SHOW that is.

laurie
Jul 8th, 2007, 11:06 PM
No, I definitely understand Pete should be kinder to them, but has he spoken ill of them since the early part of this decade? I can't say until just this thread that I've heard of apparently such awful things he's said of them. And even then, what I have heard, him rejecting the offer to dance with Venus, etc, it doesn't sound like...THAT bad. Although asking if Serena's hair is real or not is kind of fucked up.

That's interesting. In 2000, Pete injured himself in the 2nd rd against Kucera and was diagnosed with shin splints. He took pain killers and had an injection and didn't practice for the rest of the tournament. He virtually won the event with one leg because by the final he was limping quite badly against Rafter though he lifted his game real well in the 3rd and 4th sets. He was limping after the match was over which was 9pm and went to the dinner not properly dressed as the match finsihed so late.

I'm speculating but maybe if he did refuse to dance maybe it's because he was injured and I remember from the photos he wasn't suitably dressed for that particular dinner.

Sampras was a fan of Steffi Graf. That's well documented.

Volcana
Jul 8th, 2007, 11:44 PM
For years the Williams Sisters have been saying nice things about Sampras.
Has he ever uttered a word of thanks or acknowledgement for them? I have never heard him say anything about Venus or Serena.
He's a great champion, but he is an azz.:wavey:

Sampras has had plenty to say about Venus especially. All of it negative. I used to admire the guy. But after the fourth or fifth nasty comment toward Venus, I totally turned him off. It's not a word I throw around idly, but Sampras simply lacks class. The whining about how he wasn't lasuded enough for his accomplishments is a bit annoying too. A far better player than Agassi, but Agassi grew up, and matured into somebody I really admired for how he handled himself.

Volcana
Jul 8th, 2007, 11:47 PM
How do you know what the relationship between Pete and the williams sisters is?I don't know that there IS a 'relationship'. What I know is that virtually every word I've read as a Sampras quote about Venus is negative, and everything I've seen him say about Venus on TV is negative.

Whereas, Venus and Serena grew up watching and admiring his game.

Why would Venus keep praising him if he was as bad a person as you think he is.She isn't praising HIM. She's praising his tennis. You can be a wonderful tennis player and a nasty person. He is.

Craigy
Jul 8th, 2007, 11:51 PM
Great! not everyone kiss Williams' ass.

Sampras like serve & volley, he just doesn't like Willimas' baseline power game.

Yeah, that's it. :weirdo:
Go put a little bin over your head or something.

!<blocparty>!
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:00 AM
Sampras dislikes the Williams sisters?! Wow, I really can't think why.

Morons. :rolleyes:

darrinbaker00
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:05 AM
That's interesting. In 2000, Pete injured himself in the 2nd rd against Kucera and was diagnosed with shin splints. He took pain killers and had an injection and didn't practice for the rest of the tournament. He virtually won the event with one leg because by the final he was limping quite badly against Rafter though he lifted his game real well in the 3rd and 4th sets. He was limping after the match was over which was 9pm and went to the dinner not properly dressed as the match finsihed so late.

I'm speculating but maybe if he did refuse to dance maybe it's because he was injured and I remember from the photos he wasn't suitably dressed for that particular dinner.

Sampras was a fan of Steffi Graf. That's well documented.
Pete just came off the court, Pete was hurting, and Pete wanted to spend time with his parents, who rarely came to see him play; I can excuse him for not dancing with Venus. The next year, Lleyton Hewitt purposely avoided dancing with Serena and bragged about it; I cannot and will not excuse him for that.

supergrunt
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:10 AM
You do have some sense. I'm shocked. I have also completely lost all respect for Hewitt.

darrinbaker00
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:19 AM
You do have some sense. I'm shocked.
Funny, my wife says the exact same thing to me at least twice a week.... :silly:
I have also completely lost all respect for Hewitt.
You had some to begin with? Why? :shrug:

spokenword73
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:51 AM
Lleyton Hewitt is scum. Good thing Kim got away from him.

If I were Pete Sampras, knowing how much the sisters admired his game, I would at least thank them for that. He doesn't have to "like" them to be polite. He's a fool and it would serve him right if the WS pulled out of his tournament (only then I wouldn't get to see them in person, so maybe not. :lol:)

blackflip
Jul 9th, 2007, 08:38 AM
I too have been annoyed at the Williams' love of Pete Sampras....he was always so negative and mean toward them. They even had a dog named Pete in his honor. Agassi was fascinated by Serena and used to always try to practice near the Sisters.....I saw a video one time and he was REALLY into Serena's......play,LOL(it WAS in the catsuit era!) But Pete never refused to dance with Venus that I remember. Hewitt used his romance with Kim as an excuse, and got the organizers to go along with CHANGING the freaking rules! So much for tradition! It seems to be selective!

Now, Pat Rafter danced A TON with Venus, so he is not a racist.....but Hewitt, yeah, I consider him a racist. I don't know if Pete is one, but he seemed to REALLY dislike 2 talented girls who paid him the ultimate compliment as a sportsman....they based their GAME on his....how small is Pete for not acknowledging that? Even if he is not a true racist,he is CLASSLESS as he## for that stuff....as far as I am concerned, Roger is the ULTIMATE upgrade on Pete in this matter, and on the court! Roger, get the record and GOAT!

V-MAC
Jul 9th, 2007, 10:15 AM
Damn I didn't know Pete has said so many negative comments about Vee in the past :(

PamShriverRockz
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:05 AM
I used to quite like Sampras when he was playing, but I just went off him the last few years of his career. He was an awesome player, no doubt about that. But I never found him to be a particularly likeable guy.

Who knows what he thinks of the Williams sisters, to be honest, I don't think I care! So many of the men are completely sexist and patronising towards the women's game, it pisses me off.

Roger though :worship:

Chunchun
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:30 AM
Not Surprising for Hewitt to be a racist. Look at him and the Latin-Americans! :o

tonythetiger
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:32 AM
I understand Pete was known for making ball boys and girls cry.

laurie
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:41 AM
I understand Pete was known for making ball boys and girls cry.

He was?

VRee_Willario
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:41 AM
Luckily Pete is past in tennis.
Ding dong the witch is gone

frontier
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:51 AM
After Roger breaks his record what will he be remembered for,probably just for being a jackass.I never warmed to Sampras he came off as dull/dull but I loved Aggassi because of his warm personality and humility.He should be glad Venus mentioned his name otherwise nobody cares anymore because Roger is the top dog.

alfajeffster
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:06 PM
I've never really liked Pete. He's always come off as very pompus and full of himself. He can't stand the fact that Roger might take over his record of majors won prob less than a decade since he got the record himself, so he tries to belittle it by saying that Roger doesn't have the competition that he did. Pete, he beat you when he was 19 on your best and favorite court, so stfu!!! And competition, HA!!!! I really don't remember too much of his later on through the years. Andre was in and out the game all the time. Boris was at the end. Rafter was just a mediocore player all-around. Chang was a one-slam wonder. McEnroe and Connors were retired. Lendel was at the end. Edberg was finishing up his career. Courier was burnt out after only 2-3 years. So really, his competition wasn't much different. And when people look back on Rog, they won't say he was all serve.

Onto the Williams sisters. That comment he made about Venus was a while ago. Back then, Venus had even worse mechanics on the serve and sometimes it really didn't look like she never where it was going. But, there was no need to say that when Venus could make the same comment about Pete's backhand. Anyways, no he really hasn't said anything nice about and much less anything nice about anyone other than maybe Laver and little compliments about Roger and Andre. No-one else really.

Where do you dig up this kind of propaganda? In reality, Pete Sampras has had many good things to say about Roger Federer, and in in the past few years both he and Martina Navratilova have accurately explained that Federer really doesn't have anyone who is pushing him and attacking his game the way they both had, and that no one (save Nadal on clay) is taking it to Roger- they're all playing into his hands by staying on the baseline. Sampras did play Lendl, Becker, and Edberg when all three were still at the top of their games, and with Becker, Edberg, Stich and Kuerten (and many others), had much more in the way of all-court attacking players with games that could, on occasion beat his own, and still he usually came out on top. His competition was much better than what Roger is dealing with, and Pete Sampras was (and is) a better volleyer than Roger Federer. People forget that Sampras actually beat Sergi Bruguera on clay at Roland Garros one year. He was that good.

He was also very accurate in his assessment of Venus Williams service. Yes, it has gotten better since then, and I'm glad to see it. It's still got a long way to go before it's even in the same league as the Sampras serve- Serena is much closer in terms of variety, spin, and placement (especially on second serves) to Sampras. Both Serena and Pete are masters of hitting a wide array of serves from the same kind of ball toss, making it virtually impossible for the opponent to read where the serve is going. I agree with your assessment of Rafter, but even Patrick had the balls to take it to Pete and force him to pass, and he eeked out a few wins by doing just that. There is no one right now who is taking that same attack to either Federer or VWilliams, and it's a shame, really. Their tennis would be better for it.

laurie
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:32 PM
Where do you dig up this kind of propaganda? In reality, Pete Sampras has had many good things to say about Roger Federer, and in in the past few years both he and Martina Navratilova have accurately explained that Federer really doesn't have anyone who is pushing him and attacking his game the way they both had, and that no one (save Nadal on clay) is taking it to Roger- they're all playing into his hands by staying on the baseline. Sampras did play Lendl, Becker, and Edberg when all three were still at the top of their games, and with Becker, Edberg, Stich and Kuerten (and many others), had much more in the way of all-court attacking players with games that could, on occasion beat his own, and still he usually came out on top. His competition was much better than what Roger is dealing with, and Pete Sampras was (and is) a better volleyer than Roger Federer. People forget that Sampras actually beat Sergi Bruguera on clay at Roland Garros one year. He was that good.

He was also very accurate in his assessment of Venus Williams service. Yes, it has gotten better since then, and I'm glad to see it. It's still got a long way to go before it's even in the same league as the Sampras serve- Serena is much closer in terms of variety, spin, and placement (especially on second serves) to Sampras. Both Serena and Pete are masters of hitting a wide array of serves from the same kind of ball toss, making it virtually impossible for the opponent to read where the serve is going. I agree with your assessment of Rafter, but even Patrick had the balls to take it to Pete and force him to pass, and he eeked out a few wins by doing just that. There is no one right now who is taking that same attack to either Federer or VWilliams, and it's a shame, really. Their tennis would be better for it.

Good points - Nadal took the game to Roger yesterday and almost beat him on his favourite surface.

A lot of people seem to be basing their opinions on hearsay and nothing else. As for Sampras making ballboy and ballgirls cry, that seems fantasy comments. I've never seen Sampras horrible to ball kids at all. Bizarre comment.

K-Dog
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:52 PM
Where do you dig up this kind of propaganda? In reality, Pete Sampras has had many good things to say about Roger Federer, and in in the past few years both he and Martina Navratilova have accurately explained that Federer really doesn't have anyone who is pushing him and attacking his game the way they both had, and that no one (save Nadal on clay) is taking it to Roger- they're all playing into his hands by staying on the baseline. Sampras did play Lendl, Becker, and Edberg when all three were still at the top of their games, and with Becker, Edberg, Stich and Kuerten (and many others), had much more in the way of all-court attacking players with games that could, on occasion beat his own, and still he usually came out on top. His competition was much better than what Roger is dealing with, and Pete Sampras was (and is) a better volleyer than Roger Federer. People forget that Sampras actually beat Sergi Bruguera on clay at Roland Garros one year. He was that good.

He was also very accurate in his assessment of Venus Williams service. Yes, it has gotten better since then, and I'm glad to see it. It's still got a long way to go before it's even in the same league as the Sampras serve- Serena is much closer in terms of variety, spin, and placement (especially on second serves) to Sampras. Both Serena and Pete are masters of hitting a wide array of serves from the same kind of ball toss, making it virtually impossible for the opponent to read where the serve is going. I agree with your assessment of Rafter, but even Patrick had the balls to take it to Pete and force him to pass, and he eeked out a few wins by doing just that. There is no one right now who is taking that same attack to either Federer or VWilliams, and it's a shame, really. Their tennis would be better for it.

I still really don't agree with the things you said about his competition. He played all those players when they were ending their years of good play. Sampras didn't become dominant until after they all pretty much faded. I'm not quite sure who besides Chris pushed Martina. Sure, Tracy was around for a blip and Hana was a talented player. Steffi didn't come around until later in Martina's career and Seles was much after that. Really, no-one pushed Martina but Martina herself. Martina eventually figured out Chris' game to a better extent. Hana was very talented, but ultimately an underachiever because she wasn't mentally that strong. As I said, Tracy wasn't around that long, but in most cases she was a Chris Evert with more power and less consistency.

Back to Pete. Pete was maturing his game at a time when all the greats were moving out. From 1994-2000, no-one was a consistent threat to him, not really even Andre. Andre was not the work-horse and was not as dedicated as Pete until later in his career, right before Pete retired. To me, the reason why Pete won so much was that his serve carried him. The men were afraid of his serve because no-one really served as well as he did. Pete was more inconsistent off the ground than Roger and w/o the serve, wouldn't have had such an easy time up at net. Plus, the technology, courts, and balls have changed. The racquets make it easier to return and pass, the courts at Wimbledon are much slower and take topspin now, and the balls are different for each surface. Pete played on this Rye grass that they use now at Wimbledon once and lost badly in the second round. Believe me, if Pete played Rafa on this grass, he would not has won as many Wimbledons. That tournament made him. His career outside really Wimbledon and the USO was good, but not as stellar as Roger's has been up to this point. For me, I just don't believe the arguement that Roger's competition isn't as good or doesn't push him. Roger wants to stay ahead of them. He works hard to do that with all the talented players that are out there and could beat him. Not enough credit has been given to Roger for making the competition look ordinary. These guys are all good players and most players in the top ten can win a slam here or there. Roger's consistent dominance of them even when he isn't playing his "A" game is amazing. Federer's consistency on clay is something that Pete will never have. The clay court game is even tougher now imo with the new technology and all the topspin that some many of these grinders have.

Finally, to pushing Roger by coming in. Pete and Martina played in the days when there were more serve and volleyers because that style worked well. Players can return SO mucb better now and that doesn't exclude Roger. When are people suppose to attack Roger? They really can't on his serve because the first serve is so good. If they tried to on the second, Roger would just mix it up more to make it difficult, come into the net himself to take the net away, or pass them at will if their approach was just ordinary. To me, a player that can challenge the backhand of Roger from the back is more dangerous than someone constantly coming in. Roger loves a target and he even his is backhand better when someone approaches the net on him because the target becomes clearer in his head and he just hits the ball where it needs to go.

Well, that's my 2 cents. Have fun trying to pick it apart because I know you will.

spokenword73
Jul 9th, 2007, 12:53 PM
Sampras plays a big part in Williams' success
July 8, 2007
By Frank Malley Special to PA SportsTicker

Venus Williams (http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/players/87/;_ylt=AvRbMn27AI6hNDPAtpckzzXRB7cF) served so hard to win her fourth Wimbledon singles title that opponent Marion Bartoli (http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/players/354/;_ylt=AuAHIRGAX9Zxpry2IKCbSInRB7cF) was left nursing a painful wrist.
Williams' power was epitomized by the winning shot, a 126 mph unreturnable serve straight into the midriff of the 22-year-old Frenchwoman.




Venus and sister Serena studied tapes of Sampras in his prime when he was recognized as the world's most consistent server. And as they practiced in Compton, California, they vowed that they would dominate the women's game as he did the men's game.
"Serena and I were inspired by anything and everything and we always tried to have something to be an example to us," Williams said after she defeated Bartoli, 6-4, 6-1, in a final to parade her fourth Venus Rosewater Dish around the Centre Court.

"We would always say we needed to hold serve the way he (Sampras) did. Look, he didn't lose serve all summer. C'mon why are we losing serve? We would pump each other up, do whatever it took to get to the next level. For a few years when he was playing, obviously, we would try to study it."
The power Williams generated is all the more remarkable considering she had been months out of the game with a damaged wrist last year and struggled in the first half of this year to regain the form which once made her the most intimidating player on the women's tour.

She had even struggled in her earlier matches at Wimbledon.
"She served 120 miles on first serve," Bartoli said. "Sometimes it was hurting my wrist so bad because the ball was coming so fast to me.

"It was a little tight because when you receive a ball at 120 miles you get some shock into the wrist which I'm not used to, because I don't play against girls every day hitting the balls like this."
That's because, other than Serena, no other woman comes close to Venus' power on a regular basis.
The intriguing question now is whether Williams, who joined the four-time Wimbledon champion club inhabited by Martina Navratilova (http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/players/214/;_ylt=AgEMYNJrBjIvwnRNC3x2K_7RB7cF), Steffi Graf and Billie-Jean King in the Open era, can go on to win more Wimbledons and more Grand Slams.


At 27, she is young enough, given health and fitness, but the desire and concentration has sometimes been lacking in the Williams sisters.
At times they have appeared to get bored with tennis and been unwilling to do the hard yards required of a champion, preferring instead to pursue other challenges such as acting and fashion.
Venus, however, insisted that possessing more Wimbledon titles than Serena, who has three, will act as an incentive for them both.


"It's not necessarily a competition," Venus said. "But we do motivate each other to get more. When she sees me win here, she's just going to go for it.
"When I saw her win in Australia I knew I could do it. We inspire each other like that."
As it was, Venus saved her best tennis for the final, her telescopic arms and legs allowing her to get to the punishing groundstrokes of an opponent who battled for every ball.
The first set might have gone either way until Williams pulled out a brilliant 10th game and one sublime backhand drive volley.


The second was when Williams dominated, before and after the bizarre 11-minute medical timeout at 3-0, during which both players had treatment from the trainer, Williams for a strained adductor muscle and Bartoli for blisters.
When they returned it was routine for Williams who received a generous tribute from her opponent.
"When she plays like this on grass, it's not possible to beat her," Bartoli said. "She's just too good."

laurie
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:14 PM
I know this site for women players but it's nice to talk about Men's Tennis for once.

What's fascinating is how Federer and Sampras' career went in different paths although their numbers are incredibly similar up to this point http://www.tennis28.com/studies/Federer_Sampras.html

Sampras started as a baseliner and changed to a net player as a teenager. Was very much an all court player with very good groundstrokes up to around 1998. By 2000 had pretty much metamorpasised into a full time serve and volleyer on all surfaces. 1999 was a transition, he still liked to stay back a lot. In late 1999 he suffered a couple of serious back injuries, and after that seemed to lose a step so decided to rush the net at all times.

In Federer's case, he volleyed incredibly well on grass in 2001 and 2003, but has stayed back more and more since sacking Lundgren in 2003(who incidentally wanted Federer to be a more attacking player). One thing is for sure, Sampras' groundstrokes got worse from 2000 to 2002. Even though his forehand is up there are as one of the best groundstrokes of all time, his backhand got worse. Federer decided that staying back made more sense and he was more comfortable with that. Both playing to the conditions of their time. Ironically the Aussie Open was played on a slower surface in the 1990s then now and Wimbledon now is slower than the 1990s, interesting.

It's true after 1994 Becker and Edberg were not the same players but Pete played Stefan 14 times and Becker 19 times. He faced them both in slam finals, semifinals, ATP championships, super nines (Masters) so they were both very competitive rivalries. Becker and Sampras played one of the great matches of all time in the 1996 ATP final in Hanover. Becker is only 3 and a half years older than Pete so there is not much age difference but Becker came through so early. However, Pete played Krajicek only 10 times and Rafter 17 times (13 wins to 4 for Pete).

DemWilliamsGulls
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:16 PM
Yeah I saw where yahoo news created a WHOLE article on Venus comment about Pete's bald head ass. They've said the same thing about Monica Seles too...(who i have way more respect for)

spokenword73
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:23 PM
Yeah I saw where yahoo news created a WHOLE article on Venus comment about Pete's bald head ass. They've said the same thing about Monica Seles too...(who i have way more respect for)

:lol:@ bald ass. Sho you right!

alfajeffster
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:34 PM
I still really don't agree with the things you said about his competition. He played all those players when they were ending their years of good play. Sampras didn't become dominant until after they all pretty much faded. I'm not quite sure who besides Chris pushed Martina...

...Well, that's my 2 cents. Have fun trying to pick it apart because I know you will.

I wouldn't couch the conversation we're having as me "picking it apart" as much as I would say I enjoy this debate- so many people don't take the time to really think about players that have gone before. We live in a tennis world that now values the instant gratification of slap-shot winners, and the many intricacies and opportunities that the complete game of tennis offers are rarely seen, much less developed.

True, Martina Navratilova didn't have a contemporary to attack her game (during her prime 83-86), and force her to make passing shots the way she forced those around her. They played into her game very nicely. You'll notice that when Marti came up against an attacking player who was playing well- she struggled and sometimes lost (see Sukova/Mandlikova and a few lesser known net rushers). The same can be said of Roger. Who consistently attacks him and forces him to play passing shot after passing shot for an entire match? From Hewitt to Roddick to Nadal to Safin to virtually every other player he's faced in the past 4-5 years, no one has taken it to him, and I fault the system that developed their style of play. When attacking players like Henman and Haas had control of their attacking games, they gave Federer lots of trouble. Roger is an anomaly of sorts, in that he didn't come up in that western-grip baseline mould, and he's reaping the success for it. It also must be pointed out that Federer grew up playing on red clay, and Sampras on the hardcourts of Los Angeles. I agree that Roger's clay-court results have and will continue to eclipse Pete's- it's a natural. Pete Sampras played at the top of the game from 1990-2002, and in comparison, faced a much wider array of styles of play than we've seen Roger come up against. Some of the best tennis I've ever seen was between Sampras and Edberg at Indian Wells in the 94-95 time frame, and when Michael Stich was at his best, he had the game to beat Sampras by attacking him and using the complete game of tennis. Becker was still on top of his game, and played some really tough matches against Sampras on indoor carpet and grass in the mid-90s. He wasn't afraid to attack Pete and make him play.

I've been glad to see Venus and Serena wanting over the years to develop an attacking and variety of serve like what Pete had. Too bad they haven't really developed the net game to back it up, but unfortunately, neither of them has had to- the competition isn't attacking or forcing them to hit passing shot after passing shot over the course of an entire match. Brad Gilbert explained the attacking game perfectly when he described Stefan Edberg a few years ago "you can pass him 100 times in a match, and on the 101st point, here he comes again, forcing you to pass". Technology isn't to blame, it's far more simple than that- it's how players are being developed at the fundamental stages of learning how to play. It takes longer to develop a really great net game. Much longer than the average flash-card commercial player we're seeing more and more of cares to devote the time for. Federer is a breath of fresh air. Can you imagine how great (and unbeatable) Venus Williams would be if she'd been taught to attack the net at a very early age, and become comfortable with doing it on virtually every point?

thrust
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:35 PM
K-Dong- I don^t know what Pete ever did to you for your irrational hatred of him. Your comments concerning Pete^s carrer are blindly ignorant. Alfajeffster knows what he is talking about. What do you really know of the relationship between the Sisters and Pete? Have you been speaking to Venus and Serena about this? Would they really speak so well of him if he had been unkind or rude to them? I doubt it, you should too.

Kunal
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:51 PM
i dont think this thread is called for.....has he ever been put on a platform off late to make any comments about the williams sisters??? I dont think so....

so just cuz the williams sisters said something nice recently doesnt mean that sampras is straight away obliged to give a compliment back....

spokenword73
Jul 9th, 2007, 01:54 PM
How about a thank you? That's what you normally say when someone pays you a compliment.

K-Dog
Jul 9th, 2007, 02:08 PM
First of all thrust, butt out. I am having a debate with alfajeffster, not you. Secondly, learn how to proof read or type.


I wouldn't couch the conversation we're having as me "picking it apart" as much as I would say I enjoy this debate- so many people don't take the time to really think about players that have gone before. We live in a tennis world that now values the instant gratification of slap-shot winners, and the many intricacies and opportunities that the complete game of tennis offers are rarely seen, much less developed.

True, Martina Navratilova didn't have a contemporary to attack her game (during her prime 83-86), and force her to make passing shots the way she forced those around her. They played into her game very nicely. You'll notice that when Marti came up against an attacking player who was playing well- she struggled and sometimes lost (see Sukova/Mandlikova and a few lesser known net rushers). The same can be said of Roger. Who consistently attacks him and forces him to play passing shot after passing shot for an entire match? From Hewitt to Roddick to Nadal to Safin to virtually every other player he's faced in the past 4-5 years, no one has taken it to him, and I fault the system that developed their style of play. When attacking players like Henman and Haas had control of their attacking games, they gave Federer lots of trouble. Roger is an anomaly of sorts, in that he didn't come up in that western-grip baseline mould, and he's reaping the success for it. It also must be pointed out that Federer grew up playing on red clay, and Sampras on the hardcourts of Los Angeles. I agree that Roger's clay-court results have and will continue to eclipse Pete's- it's a natural. Pete Sampras played at the top of the game from 1990-2002, and in comparison, faced a much wider array of styles of play than we've seen Roger come up against. Some of the best tennis I've ever seen was between Sampras and Edberg at Indian Wells in the 94-95 time frame, and when Michael Stich was at his best, he had the game to beat Sampras by attacking him and using the complete game of tennis. Becker was still on top of his game, and played some really tough matches against Sampras on indoor carpet and grass in the mid-90s. He wasn't afraid to attack Pete and make him play.

I've been glad to see Venus and Serena wanting over the years to develop an attacking and variety of serve like what Pete had. Too bad they haven't really developed the net game to back it up, but unfortunately, neither of them has had to- the competition isn't attacking or forcing them to hit passing shot after passing shot over the course of an entire match. Brad Gilbert explained the attacking game perfectly when he described Stefan Edberg a few years ago "you can pass him 100 times in a match, and on the 101st point, here he comes again, forcing you to pass". Technology isn't to blame, it's far more simple than that- it's how players are being developed at the fundamental stages of learning how to play. It takes longer to develop a really great net game. Much longer than the average flash-card commercial player we're seeing more and more of cares to devote the time for. Federer is a breath of fresh air. Can you imagine how great (and unbeatable) Venus Williams would be if she'd been taught to attack the net at a very early age, and become comfortable with doing it on virtually every point?

Okay, but I still feel that at Pete's peak, there wasn't really anyone at their peak to push him that much. To me, the reason Pete lost was due to the fact that he has more weaknesses than Roger, less variety, and didn't always put forth 100% effort into non-slam/non-Davis Cup matches. One of the big reasons that Pete was vunerable against attacking players was that his return of serve wasn't what Roger's is. He also didn't have the feel from the baseline to hit all the types of shots that Roger does from the back. Pete was for sure better from the net. He made all the low volleys that Roger has trouble with. Since Roger left Lundgren, he's lost a bit of his technique and feel on the volley. He's too wristy and not firm enough when volleying.

To the subject of how players are brought up. Yes, I agree that we (speaking of my generation) are brought up to play from the baseline and volleying is almost an afterthought. During tennis practice, either at the tennis club or at high school team practices, volleying was only touched on once in a blue moon. We spent so much time hitting groundstrokes in practice and maybe once a week getting drilled by our double's coach on the volleys. I'd say that 3 of the 10 varsity players on my tennis team could volley worth anything (and I wasn't one of them). 30% is low. The commentators are all saying that now the guys are going to emulate Rafa and try to play like him and that there is going to be a girl who plays similar to Rafa as well. I game is going backwards literally and figuratively. I wish I could volley like the players of yesteryear. I was just never taught it and that goes the same for most of the upcoming pros. So yes, I also agree that part of the fault with the way that players are staying back has to do with the style of game that is being taught at a young age.

To your point about Venus. If she was taught to be an aggresive player from day one, I don't know if her career would've spanned out the way it has. Those types of games take longer to develop and Venus might now getting into her prime instead of 6-7 years ago. For me, Venus is suppose to play like this. Her reach and speed wouldn't be on display if she wasn't a baseliner. Her backhand wouldn't be talked about the way it is. I'm not completely convinced that she would be a better player. Venus comes to the net and is pretty efficient up there. But the part of her game that sets her apart is her ability to hit tremendous shot on the run. She frustrates players to no end when she gets that extra ball back or when her opponent thinks that they are ahead in the point, and the ball comes back to them faster than they hit it in the first place. I wish that volleying was more natural for Venus, but I'm not complaining with her style of play. For me, Serena should be attacking more. She was at a time very fast. Not so much now. With her serve, she should be serving and coming in as much as she can. Serena should either hit the serve and attack or take a rip at the return and come in. I feel that with all her power and her excellent serve, a net rushing game would benefit her more than Venus, who prefers to rally more from the back.

You do make a good arguement I might add. I guess I just see things a bit differently.

laurie
Jul 9th, 2007, 02:37 PM
First of all thrust, butt out. I am having a debate with alfajeffster, not you. Secondly, learn how to proof read or type.




Okay, but I still feel that at Pete's peak, there wasn't really anyone at their peak to push him that much. To me, the reason Pete lost was due to the fact that he has more weaknesses than Roger, less variety, and didn't always put forth 100% effort into non-slam/non-Davis Cup matches. One of the big reasons that Pete was vunerable against attacking players was that his return of serve wasn't what Roger's is. He also didn't have the feel from the baseline to hit all the types of shots that Roger does from the back. Pete was for sure better from the net. He made all the low volleys that Roger has trouble with. Since Roger left Lundgren, he's lost a bit of his technique and feel on the volley. He's too wristy and not firm enough when volleying.

To the subject of how players are brought up. Yes, I agree that we (speaking of my generation) are brought up to play from the baseline and volleying is almost an afterthought. During tennis practice, either at the tennis club or at high school team practices, volleying was only touched on once in a blue moon. We spent so much time hitting groundstrokes in practice and maybe once a week getting drilled by our double's coach on the volleys. I'd say that 3 of the 10 varsity players on my tennis team could volley worth anything (and I wasn't one of them). 30% is low. The commentators are all saying that now the guys are going to emulate Rafa and try to play like him and that there is going to be a girl who plays similar to Rafa as well. I game is going backwards literally and figuratively. I wish I could volley like the players of yesteryear. I was just never taught it and that goes the same for most of the upcoming pros. So yes, I also agree that part of the fault with the way that players are staying back has to do with the style of game that is being taught at a young age.

To your point about Venus. If she was taught to be an aggresive player from day one, I don't know if her career would've spanned out the way it has. Those types of games take longer to develop and Venus might now getting into her prime instead of 6-7 years ago. For me, Venus is suppose to play like this. Her reach and speed wouldn't be on display if she wasn't a baseliner. Her backhand wouldn't be talked about the way it is. I'm not completely convinced that she would be a better player. Venus comes to the net and is pretty efficient up there. But the part of her game that sets her apart is her ability to hit tremendous shot on the run. She frustrates players to no end when she gets that extra ball back or when her opponent thinks that they are ahead in the point, and the ball comes back to them faster than they hit it in the first place. I wish that volleying was more natural for Venus, but I'm not complaining with her style of play. For me, Serena should be attacking more. She was at a time very fast. Not so much now. With her serve, she should be serving and coming in as much as she can. Serena should either hit the serve and attack or take a rip at the return and come in. I feel that with all her power and her excellent serve, a net rushing game would benefit her more than Venus, who prefers to rally more from the back.

You do make a good arguement I might add. I guess I just see things a bit differently.

Both of you guys make interesting points. Regarding Pete'sgame against attackers, he only has a losing record against Krajicek and Stich:

v Rafter - 13:4
v Becker - 12:7
v Edberg - 8:6
v McEnroe - 3:0 (granted McEnroe was over the hill for sure)
v Goran - 12:7
v Stich - 4:5
v Krajicek 4:6 (won their last two meetings)
v Martin - 14:4
v Henman - 9:1
v Rusedski - 9:1
v Phillipousis - 6-3

Sampras' return game is underated. Not as good as Federer's but his mentality was to hit the returns when they counted at key moments in the set, that's when he didn't miss, that's what the commentators call raising his game. His passing shots off both wings were superb, plus he had a great lob, that's why he had so many winning records against fellow attackers.

I wish the youngsters could train to volley more. It seems like before all court players gravitated to serve and voplleying, so someone like Gasquet could become a great all court player for instance. Now limited players like Mryni, Dent, Karlovic, Wayne Arthurs are called serve and volley specialists, but they don't have all round games like attacking players from the past. Nicholas Escude had great potential but injuries ruined his career. He was an all court player who liked to serve and volley, just like the previous generation.

serenafan08
Jul 9th, 2007, 03:00 PM
I never liked Pete because he was always so cocky and full of himself. He has no room to talk about anyone's ego becuase his is ridiculous! I think it's nice that Serena and Venus give him such high praise despite his attitude towards them. They might have a new idol though because it looks like Roger is going to break Pete's record!

Pamela Shriver
Jul 9th, 2007, 03:29 PM
You guys have got it wrong. It aint PETE the Williams sisters adored/idolised. It was PAM. Me.

alfajeffster
Jul 9th, 2007, 09:48 PM
You guys have got it wrong. It aint PETE the Williams sisters adored/idolised. It was PAM. Me.

I've missed you- please don't keep us hanging like that again. To hell with pregnancy and has-been husbands and Pamentary, you belong to us here on the WTAworld board, and this will always be your home.:worship:

Much love,

Alfa

alfajeffster
Jul 9th, 2007, 09:58 PM
...To the subject of how players are brought up. Yes, I agree that we (speaking of my generation) are brought up to play from the baseline and volleying is almost an afterthought. During tennis practice, either at the tennis club or at high school team practices, volleying was only touched on once in a blue moon. We spent so much time hitting groundstrokes in practice and maybe once a week getting drilled by our double's coach on the volleys. I'd say that 3 of the 10 varsity players on my tennis team could volley worth anything (and I wasn't one of them). 30% is low...

...To your point about Venus. If she was taught to be an aggresive player from day one, I don't know if her career would've spanned out the way it has. Those types of games take longer to develop and Venus might now getting into her prime instead of 6-7 years ago...

And my argument is that Venus Williams has the natural hand-eye coordination to be not just a good serve-and-volley player, but one of the all-time greats. She has a good volley, and incredible reach at the net, and the big, loping footwork to be able to hit the split-step and punch a detonating first volley with a (when and if it comes back) second and very deadly second volley put-away. Tennis is still, in many ways a microcosm of life- the really great things, the things worth holding onto and nourshing, are very much worth the time and effort to make them grow. She is very much like Althea Gibson- technically wanting from the baseline, but potentially deadly on any given point with a little experience and proficiency and comfort around the net. She's already tough to pass, and could win a few more Wimbledons if she'd make that commitment and be her own player instead of sucking into that Chris Evert baseline mould. Yes, I said it- she plays so much more powerfully and hits bigger serves and groundstrokes than Chris ever did, but she's not a natural baseline tennis player. She is a natural volleyer who is so far from being developed. At 27, I don't think it's too late- it's simply a matter of prioritizing.

tennisbum79
Jul 9th, 2007, 10:12 PM
For years the Williams Sisters have been saying nice things about Sampras.
Has he ever uttered a word of thanks or acknowledgement for them? I have never heard him say anything about Venus or Serena.
He's a great champion, but he is an azz.:wavey:

I have always been curious why he has never acknowleged this.
Is it just his aloof personality or there is something more to his silence.

I rememeber he said once that Venus was just a big girl with a big racket
who does not know where here balls are going when they leave her racket. Could this be why?

spokenword73
Jul 9th, 2007, 10:16 PM
I have always been curious why he has never acknowleged this.
Is it just his aloof personality or there is something more to his silence.

I rememeber he said once that Venus was just a big girl with a big racket
who does not know where here balls are going when they leave her racket. Could this be why?

tennisbum79-remember to update your sig, now that Vee has six.:worship:

tennisbum79
Jul 9th, 2007, 10:21 PM
tennisbum79-remember to update your sig, now that Vee has six.:worship:
Thanks.
I am still savoring the victory.

I feel like I played myself, I have not recovered from being on cloud nine

LudwigDvorak
Jul 9th, 2007, 10:28 PM
Federer and Nadal are the best of this generation. Sampras and Agassi were the best of theirs. Lendl and McEnroe were the kings of the '80s. Connors and Borg were the best in the '70s, along with Ashe and Vilas. I'm sure I'm forgetting others too.

I just hate "Federer v. Sampras" arguments, since they're from separate generations. To me, Sampras is the best player I've ever seen. Federer is not. But I know he is to quite a few, and who am I to say they're wrong? I just wish this "GOAT" discussion would go away, since arguably Laver should be the GOAT, but who's actually seen him play? I just wish everyone would stop obsessing.

Venus Williams is one of those rare talents that didn't need to serve and volley to be an all-time great simply due to her mercurial talent, same with Serena. Both can do it when they want, and they have. Kind of the same with Federer, except he S&Vs more. Some players are just so good they don't need to S&V, and that birthed the baseline era, so now no one S&Vs. I personally prefer watching baseline matches (if they're actually interesting :o ), but Sampras, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Henman in his prime, sublime players to watch, especially against baseliners.

To keep in track of the original topic thread, Sampras won 14 singles slams. That's the amount both sisters have together. He can basically say whatever the fuck he wants as far as I'm concerned about any player as long as he doesn't threaten or majorly insult them. I think he knows the game better than all most people here. I still haven't seen anything wrong he's said to either sister, unless that hair question thing was for real. And if he doesn't like women's tennis, why does it matter? A lot of people don't and for good reason. His not watching women play doesn't affect you watching them I hope.

jbone_0307
Jul 9th, 2007, 10:30 PM
Could somebody provide some articles about Pete's comments on the William's Sisters as well as Lleyton Hewitt and the whole Wimbledon Ball event or could somebody explain it in detail.

thrust
Jul 9th, 2007, 11:57 PM
k-dong- Excuse me idiot, but this is a public forum. If you just want to talk to one particular person, then e mail them privately.

TheShrike
Jul 8th, 2013, 09:45 PM
Not Surprising for Hewitt to be a racist. Look at him and the Latin-Americans! :o


This article summarises Hewitt nicely

http://tvnz.co.nz/tennis-news/lleyton-hewitt-s-foot-in-mouth-outbreaks-2803079

tennisbum79
Jul 8th, 2013, 09:58 PM
This article summarises Hewitt nicely

http://tvnz.co.nz/tennis-news/lleyton-hewitt-s-foot-in-mouth-outbreaks-2803079
Hewitt has quite a resume

S_Fahad
Jul 8th, 2013, 10:22 PM
I wouldn't couch the conversation we're having as me "picking it apart" as much as I would say I enjoy this debate- so many people don't take the time to really think about players that have gone before. We live in a tennis world that now values the instant gratification of slap-shot winners, and the many intricacies and opportunities that the complete game of tennis offers are rarely seen, much less developed.

True, Martina Navratilova didn't have a contemporary to attack her game (during her prime 83-86), and force her to make passing shots the way she forced those around her. They played into her game very nicely. You'll notice that when Marti came up against an attacking player who was playing well- she struggled and sometimes lost (see Sukova/Mandlikova and a few lesser known net rushers). The same can be said of Roger. Who consistently attacks him and forces him to play passing shot after passing shot for an entire match? From Hewitt to Roddick to Nadal to Safin to virtually every other player he's faced in the past 4-5 years, no one has taken it to him, and I fault the system that developed their style of play. When attacking players like Henman and Haas had control of their attacking games, they gave Federer lots of trouble. Roger is an anomaly of sorts, in that he didn't come up in that western-grip baseline mould, and he's reaping the success for it. It also must be pointed out that Federer grew up playing on red clay, and Sampras on the hardcourts of Los Angeles. I agree that Roger's clay-court results have and will continue to eclipse Pete's- it's a natural. Pete Sampras played at the top of the game from 1990-2002, and in comparison, faced a much wider array of styles of play than we've seen Roger come up against. Some of the best tennis I've ever seen was between Sampras and Edberg at Indian Wells in the 94-95 time frame, and when Michael Stich was at his best, he had the game to beat Sampras by attacking him and using the complete game of tennis. Becker was still on top of his game, and played some really tough matches against Sampras on indoor carpet and grass in the mid-90s. He wasn't afraid to attack Pete and make him play.

I've been glad to see Venus and Serena wanting over the years to develop an attacking and variety of serve like what Pete had. Too bad they haven't really developed the net game to back it up, but unfortunately, neither of them has had to- the competition isn't attacking or forcing them to hit passing shot after passing shot over the course of an entire match. Brad Gilbert explained the attacking game perfectly when he described Stefan Edberg a few years ago "you can pass him 100 times in a match, and on the 101st point, here he comes again, forcing you to pass". Technology isn't to blame, it's far more simple than that- it's how players are being developed at the fundamental stages of learning how to play. It takes longer to develop a really great net game. Much longer than the average flash-card commercial player we're seeing more and more of cares to devote the time for. Federer is a breath of fresh air. Can you imagine how great (and unbeatable) Venus Williams would be if she'd been taught to attack the net at a very early age, and become comfortable with doing it on virtually every point?

:awww: RIP Jeff.

moby
Jul 8th, 2013, 10:38 PM
:awww: RIP Jeff.

What?! This is so sad. :sad:

Thiudans
Jul 8th, 2013, 10:45 PM
This article summarises Hewitt nicely

http://tvnz.co.nz/tennis-news/lleyton-hewitt-s-foot-in-mouth-outbreaks-2803079

Anyone, is there any truth to Hewitt's not wanting to dance with cerena at the Champions' dinner?

RVD
Jul 8th, 2013, 10:57 PM
Anyone, is there any truth to Hewitt's now wanting to dance with cerena at the Champions' dinner?Yep, it's true, unfortunately.
I remember it very well, but you will of course never find an article about it because that's just how the media was at the time.
In other words, they didn't really think it was all that big of an issue because it was Serena.

Helen Lawson
Jul 8th, 2013, 11:50 PM
Stefan Edberg didn't want to dance and did not dance with Martina either. Is it because she's Martina? Sorry.

tennisjunky
Jul 8th, 2013, 11:54 PM
because of pete refusing to dance with venus the committee abandoned the dance altogether and because of that one jerk the men and women are no longer required to dance together. he single handedly killed tradition. always hated pete he was such a bore.

Helen Lawson
Jul 9th, 2013, 12:03 AM
Wrong. The tradition was long over by 1990 when Stefan Edberg did not want to do it, and learned it was no longer a tradition.

qqgeoxxh
Jul 9th, 2013, 12:05 AM
because of pete refusing to dance with venus the committee abandoned the dance altogether and because of that one jerk the men and women are no longer required to dance together. he single handedly killed tradition. always hated pete he was such a bore.

Did he dance with other ladies at champions balls?