Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
i know its abit early and unlikely in saying this but do you guys think that if agassi wins all four grand slams this year, do you think that this will eclipse sampras' achievement of 14 grand slams as Agassi is 33 and will end up oldest year end number if he achieved the feat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,449 Posts
Not according to Werthiem;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,234 Posts
agassi's wins in his "old" years are really amazing but still Sampras is the better, heads to heads better, more slams, six consecutive years as no.1, the longest weeks as no.1 :)

Sampras rules the decade :worship: :worship:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39,486 Posts
that really annoys Agassi - he might be more popular then Pete but he will never be as sucessful as Pete. And that makes him angry, believe me! Whenever those two played each other the loss always hurt Agassi more than Sampras
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
The reason Agassi can still play so well being 33 is that he wasn't good as long as Sampras. Those lows Agassi had allowed him to rest more - that's why he fell down the rankings.

Sampras was #1 for 6 years in a row - that's a lot of matches and mental concentration. He was also top 10 for like 10-11 years straight. His body and mind needed a break...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,940 Posts
jrm said:
that really annoys Agassi - he might be more popular then Pete but he will never be as sucessful as Pete. And that makes him angry, believe me! Whenever those two played each other the loss always hurt Agassi more than Sampras
Muah ha! I'm with Treu Freund--hehe. I love "Sampass!"

Personally, I do think that Andre deserves just as much recognition--he's the one with ALL FOUR Slams, not Pete. But Pete has the numbers and the record!

So... I'm not complaining!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13 Posts
"He still spanked Agassihole in the US Open last year, and could do it again. Agassi is just lucky."

PUL-LeeZ! More like Sampra$$ was the lucky one that didn't have to face Hewitt b4 meeting Dre. What a better gift that get three chokers in a row= Rudeski, Haas, + Roddick. ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13 Posts
Sampras might have had a more prolific career but Andre had the *more complete* career. I still say Pete's inability to win at FO does not conclusively make him the greatest of all time. FO is probably the hardest surface to win and the fact that Andre did it, makes his achievements that much more spectacular, considering that he's not even a *clay specialist*. Pete's a *grass specialist* so what's so great about winning on a surface you're supposed to win on?
 

·
psychotic banana
Joined
·
3,022 Posts
esther kim said:
Sampras might have had a more prolific career but Andre had the *more complete* career. I still say Pete's inability to win at FO does not conclusively make him the greatest of all time. FO is probably the hardest surface to win and the fact that Andre did it, makes his achievements that much more spectacular, considering that he's not even a *clay specialist*. Pete's a *grass specialist* so what's so great about winning on a surface you're supposed to win on?

Yes, but Pete's is still seen as greater than Andre because his achievements still far outweigh Andre's achievements including the FO or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miranda

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,112 Posts
also sampras has a MUCH BETTER H2H against Agassi. I know it is not the DETERMINING FACTOR but when you consider that he beat Andre most of the time and beat him two years in a row at the US Open (2002, 2001) and was number 1 much longer and has more grand slam titles it is hard to argue in favor of Agassi. Also Agassi had an out of shape Medvedev in the finals of the French. Kinda lucky that year.
 

·
Team WTAworld, The Martian Llama
Joined
·
20,264 Posts
I think it's always difficult for an Andre or a Pete fan to discuss this because obviously each person thinks their one is the best. So as an Andre fan, I'd better say nothing ;)

Fact is though, they will always be two of the best ever and no one certainly in the current game will ever have the success that these two have had or leave their mark on the game, the way they have.

Treufruend, that's a bit harsh to say that Medvedev was out of shape in the French Open of 99 considering that he crushed Guga in straight sets that year and only lost 3 sets going into the final.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13 Posts
My argument isn't that Andre is better than Pete or viceversa. It's comparing apples to oranges. They are great in their own right. BUT the achievement of Andre's winning on 3 different surfaces completing a career slam seems a more difficult feat to repeat than dominating on a specific specialized surface (e.g. grass + hc) like Pete did. Guga won on clay 3 times...but who now has won on all 3 surfaces other than Andre? ;)
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top