Sampras - Roddick - US OPEN 2002 - Highlights

Sampras - Roddick - US OPEN 2002 - Highlights

[@isavin1730]

There will never be another Sampras. His touch and understanding was out of this world.

[@1nalh]

yep. the serve was completely unreadable. and a complete gentleman on the court.

[@philippeterson7503]

What a tremendous net man Sampras was. Just wow.

[@ProgressingMedia]

actually he had to be, nothing else left to do after his serve....

[@gertorretello1657]

@@ProgressingMedia try watching any other sport you can understand

[@golfmaniac007]

not taking away from his superb net play, but his serve is his strongest weapon. i think sampras has the best serve ever.

[@worawatsr9803]

golfmaniac007 His serve is strong because of his mutated shoulder muscles. It was explained in his biography.

[@dewianthony4991]

pistol Pete was awesome !

[@amb817]

I had forgotten how good Sampras was at net

[@timlamiam]

+ambdance00 Sampras was a god....

[@Krisboy666]

+ambdance00 I will never never never forget how good was Sampras at net, on forehand, on backhand, on wolleys, on serve, on moving and on mental strenght. The true GOAT of the game of tennis.

[@franbatista9062]

+Krisboy666 Dont even compare him to Federer

[@tatpans]

+ambdance00 that because everybody sucks at net in 2016

[@Turbominchia2]

+Fran Batista Right, Shankerer can't even touch Pete's amazing S&V abilities... the one and only true GOAT (Pete, not Roger).

[@darkdoctor417]

Sampras is the true GOAT of the strongest era. After defeating Roger Federer in their 3rd exhibition match in Asia, Roger said Pete could still beat the top 5 players on a fast court.

[@dick391]

Correct.

[@georgemavrides3434]

No such thing as the strongest era, it's all relative. Pete is definitely up there with the best.

[@nickalousmalakar5237]

@@georgemavrides3434 the 90s was the hardest

[@Divvy21]

@@nickalousmalakar5237 big three era was the toughest in my opinion. especially years such as 2012. I would say about from 2007-2014 was the hardest years of the tour. Those years at least 2/3 big three were at their peak, and the rest of the field were also good

[@nickalousmalakar5237]

@@Divvy21 ok

[@janaksubramanian1701]

Pete is so good at dictating points from the baseline. He moves in the moment an opportunity arises. He's so athletic and fast. He's quick at the net and the control over his body and the way he feels the ball is remarkable.

[@jab1720]

Beautiful display of tennis. Sampras was a surgeon.... Too good. I always felt he had another gear in him he never used.

[@sittingfool2727]

Exactly! :)

[@mandiganal]

Sampras is so beautiful to watch, Awesome control.

[@bruin4937]

Pete had such a tremendous, balanced, all-around game. He was strong in every way. Very nice to revisit his greatness through videos like this one. Thanks for posting.

[@giholste123]

As someone who's too young to have seen Sampras play, his net play is phenomenal!! Seems unparalleled honestly; there's nothing like it today (ESPECIALLY in singles).

[@jayteegamble]

By today's standards yeah he's incredible. But he wasn't actually all that strong of a net player by the standards of his day. Check out Edberg, Rafter, Hennman.

[@zenastronomy]

change in courts and balls

[@holymackenaw]

@@jayteegamble i think you are right and a little bit wrong. i guess John McEnroe once said: "Pete's volley isnt the best looking, but very effective." So there may have been a few slightly better players at the net, but he was pretty damn good.

[@NewEnglandViews]

Sampras: Think I’ll serve and volley on this point 🤔

[@Eliath1984]

for alot that would be risky... for Sampras it was a high percentage play..

[@RobertHurleyJr]

contrary to public thought: I find Sampras' play very exciting.

[@frasermacdonald6256]

said no one ever. sampras widely considered one of the most athletic players to have ever picked up a racket and of course his serve and volleys are ridiculously dynamic.

[@LinusFeynstein]

Those people don't know anything about tennis. Pete was sooo elegant.

[@magnusandersson1875]

His running forehand was out of this world!

[@kikaa1884]

But he gave up quickly for sure at the age of 32 only Andre Agassi played 4 years than Pete 🔫

[@budg.6094]

Same here. Also, there are other ways to show emotion besides screaming. For one thing, if the man didn’t care, he wouldn’t have put the work in that he did. Also, he had a killer’s type of glare, in my opinion. Huge fan of Pete.

[@axes2videos]

I feel like Sampras is the Goat. Retired at 30, 14 Grand Slams and a sense of like Dad's confidence at the net and everywhere if you really think about it.

[@tennisjiujitsu]

Petes game is made to win. Period. The weapons he has and strategies he uses at certain times in a match is uncomparable. Who cares about numbers. The technique and build of Pete allows him to hit as hard as he can on every shot. He also has balls of steel and ice in his vains to hit 2nd serve aces that no players today even try and do. He forces you to play an extremely fast paced match who forces you to consistently come up with amazing shots to beat him. The Pistol forever!

[@pathikritbasu7813]

Don't think his style of play would have got him more than 4-5 grand slams in today's much slower grass and hard courts.. He wud be passed on a regular basis by Nadal and Djokovic.. He made the most of fast courts of his time but his game was far from being all round.. Federer on the other hand started with a serve and volley game modelled around Pete early in his career but had the ability to adapt to slower courts.. Given Pete's record on clay, very unlikely he would have succeeded in todays time.

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ Pathikrit Basu. Many tennis fans erroneously believe that the terms "all-around" and "all-court" are synonymous. They are distinctly different! "All-around" means that a player can play well at all the different styles of tennis play including serve-and-volley, baseline, and chip-and-charge to the net. "All-court" means that a player has the ability to play well on every surface. Sampras was an "all-around" player but clearly was not an "all-court" player as evidenced by his absolutely abysmal record at the French Open on red clay courts. Of his 13 appearances at the French Open, Sampras lost 9 times in the 3rd round or earlier of the tournament. For such a great champion to have such a horrible record like that on clay courts is mystifying! Especially when one considers the facts that (1) Yannick Noah , a serve-and-volleyer won the French Open in 1983 and (2) John McEnroe got to the finals of the French Open in 1984 (and should have defeated Lendl in that final) and Stefan Edberg got to the finals of the French Open in 1989 (and should have defeated Chang in that final).

[@Eliath1984]

@@michaelbarlow6610 It wasn't that Pete struggled with the stamina to get through a match on clay so much as it was the stamina to get through a whole tournament consistently.. He actually DID win the Italian Open in 1995 which was clay and held a Clay court Record of 62-24 between 1990-1998... so it wasn't that he was BAD on clay.. he just wasn't as comfortable on clay and so he for the most part stayed away but did have a certain level of success when he did go(outside of the French Open). We also tend to over exaggerate a little bit as seeing as how there are only 4 Grand Slams per year and there are 1000s of professionals fighting for even the chance at getting into the 1st round of those tournaments the fact that he made it to the Semifinals is astounding in itself in my opinion... He's certainly good enough on Clay to even at 49 years could probably still handily destroy any of us on Clay without breaking a sweat.. lol.

[@1nalh]

@@pathikritbasu7813 probably zero GS- as he is a S&V and the above courts with their low bounce simply dont exist. S&V dont exist in todays game- there is simply no place for that style. every court is super slow- the us open is really a lot slower than the above, almost like a high bouncing clay court! the fastest court is actually the australian open.

[@rmep1975]

Due to entertainment we have slower courts nowadays. That’s pity. That’s the only reason players like Nadal and Djokovic were able to obtain 20 or more Slams. In faster courts Sampras would simply destroy both of them.

[@Scott1433]

What I loved about Sampras was that he never tried to be flashy, always wore very plain basic gear, just let his tennis do the talking. Great Pro

[@michaelbarlow6610]

The only times when Sampras was flashy in his tennis is when he would hit the jump smash which was usually unnecessary because a standard feet-on-the-ground overhead would suffice to win a point.

[@farid1406]

Sort of like Gandalf the Grey.

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ Scott1433. The only flashy aspect of Sampras' game was his jump overhead smash which frequently was unnecessary and show-offish. The jump overhead smash which Sampras mishit on a key point in the 4th set (or perhaps it was in the 5th set) cost Sampras his 2001 Wimbledon match against Federer. That unnecessary jump overhead smash gave Federer the momentum in that match. If Sampras has hit a standard overhead smash with his feet on the ground , he would have been less likely to mishit that ball on that critical point in that match!

[@SuperBajack]

@@michaelbarlow6610 You're talking about the missed overhead he hit on break point in the third set against Fed, and he didn't jump. He was sort of running through it, which is never ideal and missed it long. He did miss a jump overhead in that match, though it was in the first set and didn't cost him anything. He won that game. And if it matters, he did hit a jumping smash in a tight service game in the 2nd set, and it won him the game :)

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ Farid. I stand corrected that it was the 3rd set not the 4th or 5th set in which Sampras overhit or mishit the overhead smash to lose that critical break point. I do remember Sampras running through that overhead and it appeared to me at the time that he jumped when he hit that overhead smash. But I will have to look at that point again. But the point is that that missed overhead was a critical point in that match and swung the match in Federer's favor because Sampras lost his serve that game and lost the third set giving Federer a 2 sets-to-1 lead in that match. Sampras was unable to overcome that missed overhead even though the match went the 5 -set distance. If Sampras had hit a regular overhead on that point instead of running through it , he would probably not have missed it!

[@Fontsman]

Samps was a great mover and a brilliant volleyer. Both first and second serves were immense and his running forehand was legendary.

[@michelez715]

First time I saw Sampras was on tv, and the thing that stood out for me was his movement, the most graceful player I'd ever seen. Later, I met people who'd seen him play live, and they said the same. They said you actually had to be there to appreciate his movement, and also the fierce intensity with which he played, not apparent on a tv screen. As for that running forehand, a shot you dream about!

[@Fontsman]

Yes, his movement was panther like. I didn't think I'd see that level of fluidity until Federer came along, who had the same level of gracefulness.

[@Eliath1984]

@@Fontsman Pete's movement was always deceptive. when watching him move he's so graceful that it looks almost in slow motion.. but the dude had some serious Burst Speed... even Agassi had said "He moved like a Jackrabbit... and he just didn't miss"

[@robbiechandler7858]

I have to have my rant now!!! I'm fed up of people not mentioning what a great Sampras was...by far my fave player ever. He has finesse ,his backhand, serve, cross court forehand was amazing and volleying was tops. Samps was class... All I hear is Fed this, Fed that... Try playing in his era mate then come back to me!!!!!!!

[@vlaco1984]

Sampras = King! The Pistol is the greatest.

[@dewianthony4991]

well said Robbie , much better than Federer

[@CardsharpChris]

Robbie Chandler Hey, I’m with you man...Pete could do it all. My favorite player and my favorite way to play. Volleying is the best! Go to net people.

[@michelez715]

Thanks, Robbie, for yr excellent points. I've been an avid tennis fan since the 70s, and seen them all. Sampras is unquestionably the greatest I've seen, in every department. Fed is a milk and water player in comparison, imo. For a start, he has nowhere near Sampras's mental strength, we've all seen the numerous times he's choked in big matches. He's considered phenomenal because of the length of his career, but there again, that's pure luck, because he has had far fewer injuries than any top player I can think of, let alone chronic injuries, like Nadal has had to bear. His 2 biggest rivals, Nadal and Djoko, both lead in their head 2 heads with him, and I believe he has only beaten Djoko once, in abt 6 yrs, at the season end finals, when Djoko was exhausted. Compare this to Sampras, who had to beat several OTHER Grand Slam champs, like Agassi, Courier, Chang, Becker, Lendl, Rafter. And yet the great Fed CANNOT dominate his TWO great rivals. Sampras had 6 consecutive yrs as world no.1, don't think anyone's done that since. Perhaps it's just that most Fed supporters think tennis only started when Fed appeared, and have no idea that there were great players before him!

[@dick391]

It fairness, it's only low IQ millenials and other assorted retards that struggle with Pete's greatness. People that don't matter, basically.

[@Longshore79]

Sampras was incredible to watch, easily top 5 greatest of all time

[@gonzobatano5352]

Sampras's net game is just a beauty to behold. The half volley at 5:06 is just amazing.

[@miguelaranda1169]

5:05 absolute crazy half-volley

[@KaptainK59]

True that. Incredibly difficult and he makes a winner out of it.

[@qzrnuiqntp]

Yes, I think that if McEnroe is the king of the volley, Sampras is the king of the half-volley!

[@kyleklontz3214]

It was wide

[@adamblister6005]

How did he play with that tiny racket? It still amazes me to this day. Returning Roddick's 140 mph bombs with a 85 sq in racket and then bombing serves and forehands of his own. Truly amazing.

[@leolight5369]

+Pete Agassi Wilson Pro Staff is not a "tiny" racquet

[@adamblister6005]

Leo Light 85 square inches IS tiny, fucktard.

[@woutdezeeuw1604]

+Pete Agassi Yeah amazing, I play with 95 sq in and I find it hard already.

[@adamblister6005]

Wout de Zeeuw Same here. 95 seems tiny nowadays.

[@victorp9575]

+Leo Light Do you play with a 75 sq in?

[@martinjacobs5537]

will never forget that day, when little andy had probably the best tennis lesson of his life. The teacher... "Pistol" Pete Sampras.

[@Onmysheet]

Then you must also have very fond memories of the lesson Federer gave Roddick at the 2007 Aussie Open.

[@CognizantCheddar]

Sampras here faced Roddick at close to the latter's career peak form. Roddick was briefly world no. 1 the next year after winning the US Open, the only GS win of his career. It was a slow downhill ride from there for Roddick.

[@mrbobevans]

Interestingly enough, Roddick did well against Safin. And he dominated Hewitt in the latter part of their rivalry, with Hewitt dominating the first half.

[@spirg]

If Sampras was around today , in his prime , after that slop from Sunday’s final , 2 guys standing 12 feet behind the baseline to return serve , Sampras would’ve KILLED either guy with that out wide serve !!!! Not to mention his net game , and yes , you STILL can play the net !!!!

[@mgirardi1]

spirg he would’ve made Nadal look like a damn fool with how far back he stands. Pete kept the ball too low for Nadal’d style to do anything with.

[@reynaldbonilla4784]

Pete Sampras simply the best!!! Very entertaining to watch.

[@steveturner609]

Absolutely unbelievable Sampras !!

[@innosanto]

Despite all the talks these days, Sampras could be the GOAT. He is a contender for that.

[@dick391]

He's more than a contender. He was objectively more dominant of his competition than modern day big 3.

[@srinitaaigaura]

That was some of the most brutal volleying I've seen from Sampras.

[@JL-fx5cm]

Pete was the King of Swing. Easily the greatest American to hold a racquet.

[@kyleklontz3214]

Uh Agassi has entered the chat

[@JL-fx5cm]

@@kyleklontz3214 That was a funny comment. I must admit.

[@HiTopProd]

Sampras was a cool character out there - but so intense at the same time. His racket sense, movement and serving was phenomenal. But on top of that his concentration and ability to "get into the zone" was amazing. I am a huge fan of today's top elite players (Fed, Nadal, Djo, Mur, Nish, etc...) - but for me Sampras really was the best player of all time. He was the complete package and really dominated during his tenure.

[@TheTopspin77]

You make a lot of sense sir. I am a big fan of Federer but Pete was something special in the way he could dominate with his great serves, masterful volleys, classic running forehands and all around court sense. Fed is great, but there is no one out there that plays like Pete in his prime. Awesome talent!

[@Fiddi]

TheTopspin77 yes especially on clay

[@MrShwinner]

Roger Federer clay not make one great...(yoda)

[@xandrunull]

MrShwinner no, but it's a big part of the sport...

[@MrShwinner]

Costea Alex not really, djokovic dominates tennis right now and hasnt won clay. agassi won clay and was worse than sampras. Winning all four shouldnt be some amazing differential point...especially considering the lack of specialists and general uniformity nowadays.

[@enystn]

It's easy to forget how good Sampras was. Way better than anyone today.

[@FExpiate]

except roger.. roger is the goat.

[@coolyoutuber6237]

People used to retire at age of late 20s or early 30s . Don’t know how many Grand slams Sampras or Borg would have won if they had played for few more years .

[@franbatista9062]

@@coolyoutuber6237 Wtf you sayin', Samrpas would never have more Slams he was playing against Hewitt, Safin, Federer and Nalbandian era, which had wins against Sampras already in their 18-21 years old and they only got better and Sampras worse because he's game is relied upon Serve and Net thereby you will lose quickness and agility for Serve and Bolley all the time

[@phanindrak9880]

Fran Batista it all depends upon how fast the court is. If it was as fast as the courts in 1990s then I think only federer could challenge him. Djokovic nadal and every one else would get destroyed

[@williambaez1813]

damn sampras is no joke

[@aleksthegreat4130]

Pete wasn’t the same after his back injury back in 1999,but here,in his last tournament he played brilliantly against top and strong opponents,kinda reminds us the great champion from 1990-1999, I think he is the BESt fast court player ever,plus he had to deal with thalassemia during entire career

[@BiancoverdeRodi]

We Greeks are a special kind of people 🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷 Yasou Petro (Pete) Sampra

[@fleekdasheek9176]

Yeah! Spartans the whole lot

[@siddhartha3347]

What a magnificent player! Deft volleys! Incredible serve! We’ll never see the likes of him again!

[@NoosaHeads]

Sampras looks so damn relaxed.

[@suhasjoshi2905]

Because he is playing aganist andy (no disrespect) who.has only one tool in the kit .it was only on 2009 wimbeldon final where he rise above his single dimensional game and played his heart out but the only sad part is that he lost that final also

[@Eliath1984]

@@suhasjoshi2905 between 1992 and 2002 there were alotta people that looked lost against Pete.... it's the dangers of going up against in MY opinion..... the GOAT...who'd slipped for a few years but that 2002 US Open he was breathing fire.. It pretty much didn't matter who you stuck infront of Pete.. He was gonna School them...

[@joe6796]

The best tennis ever played by this legend .....I love you Sampras U left a very big gap

[@chrisvassiliou889]

One aspect of Pete Sampras game never mentioned was the fact that towards the end of his career when he lost some of his leg speed, he will not pressure his opponents from game one. He will play at his comfortable speed but he will explode with all his ability at game 7 or 8 ( depending who was serving first ) and when his opponent thought will match Sampras, game for a game, will find himself 5-3 down.

[@MariaE99]

Thanks to KZbin! Its nice to enjoy Sampras’ era , I was too nervous before whenever I watch him live, Im a Fanatic!

[@TonygMus2]

OMG the net play!

[@fedecasares]

Sampras was unstoppable in his era.

[@arnean]

In no single year did Sampras win more than 2 grand slams. He has only 11 Masters 1000 titles. Hardly unstoppable...

[@animanga9597]

check his 94-97 years stats and get back to me arnean.

[@jamescardakaris4602]

arnean did you bet against yourself here ? 1994 & 97- Australian open & Wimbledon 1995- US open & Wimbledon Sampras was and in many eyes still the absolute GOAT🙌🏼

[@farid1406]

In an era where only Agassi accomplished that feat just once, I'd say he was pretty unstoppable.

[@serenaistheb.o.a.t]

I love Sampras and the 90s.

[@dovchartarifsky5375]

Sampras...the last true serve-and-volley player of the modern era. A true master at the net.

[@Rorshacked]

Dov Chartarifsky while he def is a master at the net, there’s a few on the tour. Mischa zverev and giles mueller come to mind. But you’re right, they’re nowhere near as impressive as good ol’ Pete

[@igorboklah3068]

Pete was merely monstrous on hard courts,stunning level

[@chrismaynard6016]

PISTOL PETE.......The best ever 1st and 2nd serve and best ever serve and volleyer......say no more. Pity our TIM had to play Pete at his absolute best. Chris (ENGLAND)

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ Chris Maynard. It is impossible to determine with any degree of certainty who is the GOAT serve-and-volley player for the obvious reason that you can't legitimately compare the serve-and-volley abilities of the wood and metal racket era greatest serve-and-volleyers (Laver , Kramer, and the early years of McEnroe's career) with the serve-and-volley abilities of the greatest graphite era serve-and-volleyers (the part of McEnroe's career from 1983-1992, Becker, Edberg and Sampras).

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ Chris Maynard. Sampras, although an excellent volleyer, was not the best serve-and-volley player of all-time. First, as Jack Kramer accurately told Linda Lentz at the U.S. Open during a Sampras match during Sampras' prime, Sampras is "a great server who can volley". By that Kramer meant that Sampras is not a classic serve-and-volley player whose serve is strong enough to set up his first volley. Second, Sampras' serve was so freakishly accurate that he did not have to have a great volley to win points at the net! Edberg by contrast did not possess an overwhelmingly powerful serve like Sampras. Edberg had an excellent (but not overwhelmingly powerful) American Twist (kick) serve which set up his outstanding forehand and backhand volleys at the net. Edberg had to have an outstanding volley whereas Sampras did not have to have a great volley. Sampras could dominate his opponents with his serve whereas Edberg had to back up his excellent kick serve with outstanding volleys! Third, you can't legitimately compare the greatest serve-and-volley players of the wood and metal rackets era (Kramer, Laver, and the early years of McEnroe's career) with the greatest serve-and-volley players of the graphite rackets era (the part of McEnroe's career from 1983-1992, Sampras, Becker and Edberg) because of the major difference in equipment!

[@michaelbarlow6610]

I mistyped Linda Pentz's last name as Lentz in my previous comment.

[@rogerparker4468]

That match with Roddick was after Rudseski I think. Can see him smile to himself at times. Half a step, a step slower? Didn't need to be a step quicker, he was in the zone toying with his opponents at times. Serves, forehand, backhand, half volleys and volleys and anticipation came together like a perfect storm during the second half of that run to the title. All it needed was Rudseski to goad him. Watched the final one early Monday morning in New Zealand, little did we know it was his last

[@leebrandt8597]

Interesting fact. I re-watched this match three months ago. Sampras only made 45% of his first serves. But most of his second serves were between 108mph and 117mph. That is insane

[@xtraxtra171]

Tennis is a terrific sport, but I would prefer more variety. Today, to win a GS, you will need to beat 7 baseline players. In the Sampras era, you could play Agassi one day and Rafter the next, Courier one day, Ivanesivec

[@jorgeorellana7319]

Exactly! Many millennial tennis fans do not understand that. Tennis today is very one-dimensional and homogenous as Bud Collins of NBC said years ago and that takes away attractiveness.

[@860anthony]

The volley is the most beautiful shot in tennis and the serve and volley game, for me, is the most enjoyable to watch and Pete and Stefan Edberg were the two best serve and volleyers I've ever seen.

[@-Stinky_Pinky]

Boris Becker had a pretty good serve n volley game as well.

[@sonbun1755]

4:21 Am I the only one who likes that camera angle/approach?

[@kuruman1]

You are not alone (at least 4 years later) 😂 I like it for seeing the strokes and improving my own game.

[@gaskellr44]

only like it the odd time but not constant.

[@sean9267]

I think it's great. It gives a much better sense at how high they hit over the net.

[@ArthurVerhulst]

Certainly not. It seems to me it is done much less nowadays. Which I think is a pity

[@nickdaskalakis9289]

Sampras was simply the best and truly amazing at the net . He was a complete player , a champion in every sense

[@marcellocduarte]

Wonderful Sampras. Monstrous!

[@CMDR_Belisario]

The god of the net

[@erikpate8370]

actually Johnny Mac was the best serve and volleyer

[@qzrnuiqntp]

He's supposed to be. Why not Edberg?

[@pancho4083]

edberg basically schooled sampras at the net, when they played each other

[@mrbobevans]

Edberg and Mac very different styles of S&V. Edberg was the classic style, and Mac's style was just Mac.

[@eduardohuerta5460]

Stefan Edberg is hands down the best serve and volley in history. His footwork, speed and touch are unparalleled.

[@juandi2570]

Sampras 99 would beat anybody in history....He was superb that year...

[@Robert-de5xg]

Agassi 3 finals of grand slam in 1999 and beath Sampras that year...

[@vosharap]

Sampras' net game was on another level, along with that serve.

[@michaelbarlow6610]

Beautiful serve-and-volley by Pete Sampras! Always was and is an unmitigated joy to watch him play!

[@abc123s100]

This could be renamed as, "The Sampras Clinic: Roddick's visit"

[@tubolocossmaximu]

how... best highlight ever sampras god of tennis

[@steveharaslin3822]

When Pete was in his best shape like in this match, he was unbeatable. I remember this match, Andy was young gun with perfect servis and good baseline play but in this match he looked like rookie who is challenging the tennis god...Exhibition of perfect smooth play from Pete at the end of his career. I miss him. Tenis is no more like when Pete and Andre stood against each other.

[@novola1972]

Notice how passed his prime Sampras gets prime years Roddick serve back all the time. I watched that match and was amazed by that

[@patriciasalcedo7931]

Pete... The best... Ever

[@cuerdoxxx]

Sampras has best serve in the history.

[@vgr112261]

Agree

[@michelegrassi4385]

and consider that he was playing against a great server like Roddick ! Sampras was (and probably is) too good !!!

[@hellovanite]

Agreed

[@Robert-de5xg]

I like more Patrick Rafter serve, more inteligent no only strong...

[@steveturner609]

Absolutely agree! His First Serve was often simply unreturnable and his Second serves were Aces????

[@adamblister6005]

I love how Pete would even impress himself with how amazing he played

[@bjarktron]

Man Sampras got such good hands at the net..unbelievable

[@mandiganal]

real king and the GOAT

[@mohamadattar9330]

Best Tennis Player.....ever...🎾🎾🎾

[@MrNikodemus2]

the greatest, the legendary sampras. best volley game ever.

[@47imagine]

I never considered Sampras a "serve-and-volley" player but looking at old clips like this remind me how often he played serve and volley.

[@JustAnotherSniper12]

:'( I always loved watching him....

[@TakeDetour]

I miss the Pistol.

[@deniseharris1615]

I miss watching him play! Such a great tennis player!!

[@Oetti]

This was such a total clinic (at least the highlights showed; I *do* assume this was a fair representation fo both Sampras and Roddick, however). No one plays like this anymore, at least no one good. Very interesting to watch.

[@Normy2323]

Sampras is the best serve and volleyer of all time.

[@DanielBoonelight]

edberg.

[@emilestevenin3463]

Sampras is a modern Rod Laver!

[@michelez715]

Couldn't agree more! I was lucky enough to catch the last few years of Laver's career, and certainly Sampras was his heir. When Sampras was a kid, being coached by Pete Fischer, Fischer had him watch film of Rod's matches, and encouraged him to think of Rod as a role model, both in his game, and in his on court demeanour - no fuss, no bad behaviour, let yr racquet do the talking.

[@Eliath1984]

@@michelez715 and Pete's racket did alotta talking for several years..

[@surfjabroni]

That was a masterclass.

[@EndoftheTownProductions]

This was a pure serve and volley, chip and charge tennis clinic by Sampras, who was past his prime. It is a style of play that is unfortunately long gone.

[@FunTimeStudios82]

Looked like a man playing tennis with a boy lol Damn Andy looked like a backstreet boy lol

[@kabob21]

I mean, he was a boy in 2002. I think he was 19 in this match, IIRC.

[@Boomdizzle99]

Andy did win the US Open a year later at the age of 20...Andy peaked early. Nothing wrong with that. To be playing Pete Sampras at 19 is an incredible accomplishment though!

[@MoLetalis]

@@Boomdizzle99 He peaked early but also fell victim to playing in the era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Those three are so unbelievably good and took away the thunder of other great players like Roddick, Hewitt, Del Potro, Nalbandian, Davydenko, and others.

[@bretts5571]

Sampras acted like he was so old, Federer today at around 7 years older plays younger than Pete here

[@Eliath1984]

@@bretts5571 that's the amazing thing about modern sports medicine.. new technology. newer rackets are alot easier on the arm.. condition training has been improved vastly.. quicker recovery.. things that were Career Ending 30 years ago are now 6 months with rehab and back at it again. Sampras woulda definitely benefitted but I honestly think Thomas Muster woulda really enjoyed modern medicine..

[@JeanAlesiagain3]

By the looks of his game, it seems like he was a superior player than the current number one.

[@boodyan130]

Nah

[@androc75]

Superior player on fast courts and conditions. Like how it was more than 10 years ago. For current court conditions that are slow and do not favour S&V, Djokovic is the Master.

[@kabob21]

Djokovic got defeated by his own elbow. Can't knock old man Fed with his 20 Grand Slams and counting.

[@kevinlongman007]

@@kabob21 well his elbow is working ok now as he has won both of the last two grand slams! He has now won the same amount of majors as Sampras and it won't be long before he overtakes Sampras' 14 grand slam wins. He has also won the French Open which Sampras failed to do...

[@gregroscoe4051]

if you pitted the best players of all time against each other, in their prime, my money is on Pete. Especially on a fast court. Too athletic, and so clutch in the big moments.

[@rallynub956]

Breaking BIG PETEs serve just seems near impossible... perfect serve and near perfect net game. Brilliant!

[@fitzyehboah8289]

Sampras. . Gifted .. Tennis God..

[@douguette1]

I finally admitted this year that Federer is the best player ever. However, Sampras is by far my favorite player and I believe the most talented player ever. You can not learn what Sampras was doing, he was just a genius!

[@michelez715]

Agree with all you say EXCEPT that Fed is the best player ever. In my book, that is Pistol Pete. I only saw Laver from 1968 on, at the tail end of his career, and he was the only one I saw to match Pete.

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ douguette1. Federer is not the GOAT male tennis player! I could list a number of pieces of powerful evidence which indicate that but since I have listed those strong pieces of evidence in numerous other comments on many different tennis videoclips on KZbin, I will simply point out the one piece of evidence that automatically disqualifies Federer from being the GOAT. Federer has failed in his career to achieve what at least 8 other all-time great male tennis players have achieved in their tennis careers. Federer has not won at least 60% of his matches that go the 5-set distance! Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Lendl and Nadal all have won or did win at least 60% of their singles matches that went or have gone the 5-set distance. In order for a player to be legitimately considered the GOAT male tennis player, he must achieve what so many of the other all-time greats in the men's game have achieved by winning at least 60% of his singles matches that go the 5-set distance and Federer has failed miserably in that regard! Federer has an exceedingly mediocre 5-set record during his career. Interesting how his much ballyhooed, so-called "genius" abandons him so thoroughly at the times when he needs it the most "in the clutch" in a 5th and deciding set! This major blemish on Federer's career automatically disqualifies him from any legitimate consideration as the GOAT player in men's tennis history! A player cannot be the greatest of all-time in men's tennis history and be so abjectly mediocre when it matters most in "the clutch" in a fifth and deciding set throughout his career!

[@douguette1]

@@michaelbarlow6610 Good point! Again for me really, without looking at any stats or anything, Sampras is the best ever. However, you have to admit it is incredible to play as Federer plays at 38 years old! Ok, your stat is interesting but it would be nice to see the same stat before Federer got 30 years old. You have to admit it's completely incredible to be that good so long...Sampras stopped at 31, who knows how many 5 sets he would have lost if he would have continued - the physics plays a big role in 5th set. What about tie breaker...these are also decisive moments, how is Fed doing, do you know?

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@@douguette1 . I have not seen any statistics on Federer's career record in tiebreakers or his record in 5th set tiebreakers. As far as Federer's post-30 years old achievements, one has to bear in mind that the three major reasons why Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have continued to win major singles titles in their 30's compared to the all-time great players of the previous and earlier eras in tennis history are (1) the courts have been slowed down to favor baseline play over net play which means that older players like those three champions have much more time to react to the ball , (2) the lack of serve-volleyers ( especially great serve-and-volleyers) on the men's pro tennis tour means that those three players are not put under the enormous pressure that they would feel against serve-and-volleyers-- serve-and-volleyers (especially truly great serve-and-volleyers) can much more readily expose an opposing player's loss of foot speed around the court than a baseline player can because of the geometry of the court in which angles are wider at the net than at the baseline and (3) the lack of all-time great players to challenge the those three current champions. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic each have only the other two to challenge them at the 4 major tournaments, whereas by contrast, from the late 1970's to the mid-1990's, there were no less than 10 all-time great players on the men's pro tennis tour--Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Vilas, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Agassi and Sampras. At any given time during that period, there were anywhere from 5-7 all-time great players competing at or near the top of men's pro tennis for the 4 major singles titles, which explains Federer, Nadal and Djokovic's grossly inflated statistical achievements compared to the statistical achievements of the all-time great players of the previous and earlier eras in tennis history.

[@douguette1]

@@michaelbarlow6610 I think it is always hard to compare the quality of the players around, but I am 100% with you that there were no great serve-volley-high-IQ player under Fed-Nadal-Djoko era. Sampras will stay my idol, nobody can do what he did.

[@gregg.9420]

Roddick's backhand return on that final point is a winner 9/10 times.

[@chachulut]

after watching this i strongly believed sampras can beat nadal, djokovic, murray, nishikori, wawrinka and other player of this era

[@user-ci7vu7eo9w]

in that form for sure

[@rohitkaushik9885]

Federer too

[@lordbyron3603]

utubemaniacc Don’t be too sure. Andy doesn’t hit quite as hard as Warinka or have the spin and angles as Nadal or djokovic and doesn’t move as well as these guys either.

[@hellovanite]

I love Federer but my feeling is that if he had played at the same time as Sampras in his prime he wouldn't have reached 20 slams.

[@tericadouglas4523]

Sampras stared down LEFTY Ivanisivc at Wimbledon. 2-3 times. Fed would never have moved Pete the way he moves 90% of the ATP. But we don't know so lets dream...

[@zerodragoone8684]

I don't know. Federer 2005 to 2008 was a different animal.

[@idontknow1919]

nope he wouldn't reach 20 probably more like 30

[@thebigmonstaandy6644]

@- Tony No,he had weak groundstroke compares to Safin;Hewitt.And Safin,Hewit have weak groundsstokes compared to Federer,Djokovic

[@iamtman1]

Fed would have won 25 majors if he played then. And you don't love him btw stop being phony.

[@timlamiam]

seriously, I don't get people who say Fed is better at the net than Sampras. Sampras' aggressive and defensive volleying is just straight up more effective than federer's.

[@timlamiam]

***** honestly, if they were both in their prime it would've been 50 50. That Sampras serve is nigh unbreakable.

[@what9681]

+timlamiam Nobody thinks Federer is better than Sampras at net, it isn't even close. Federer is better from the baseline and Pete is better at volleying.

[@ShadeXH]

+timlamiam Pete's miles better than what Federer is at net currently, if you look at Fed's earlier career it was a bit closer, though I'd still say Pete was better.

[@jamescarr820]

even before looking at the comments, I knew in advance that literally the first posting would concern the relationship of Sampras to Roger Federer. It's an interesting phenomenon that recurs across the board in all manner of different domains, and one I call the 'comparison compulsion'. This strange psychosis is also particularly prevalent in the discussion of heavyweight boxers past and present where Mike Tyson is the main driver of this compulsion to compare. as with federer, Tyson is an obsession. It's all very peculiar and I think something worth studying.

[@WestCoastOutdoors]

+timlamiam Sampras serve is the highlight but not just his serve. Fed has only advantage over Sampras is the backhand.

[@dharmabumguy1]

His inside-in forehands were lazers

[@gbeachy2010]

"So, did you enjoy the lesson?"

[@Cavenaggi29]

Back when the courts were way faster than nowadays =(

[@georgedonaldson7220]

Awesome volleying from Sampras.

[@venkateshv626]

it's boring and it does not work well at present. powerful baseline game is far more interesting and electrifying to watch.

[@cesarmunoz4071]

Que era completo sampras...grande.

[@RamireZTKD]

The king of serve and volley

[@P1st0lP3t3]

Sampras the GOAT!

[@animanga9597]

here! here!

[@pitmie]

PistolPete Yeah...before the arrival of Roger Federer that is.

[@eduardohuerta5460]

The GOAT after Federer, Nadal and Djokovic...

[@darkdoctor417]

Sampras the only GOAT to win on true grass at Wimbledon. The grass had to be slowed for the 3 European slow court era GOATs to win at Wimbledon on slow green clay lol. Slow perennial rye since autumn of 2000.

[@johnnychiou2008]

Sampras' volley is insane!

[@jdfagen]

For a guy over 6 feet, he is able to handle the short hop and low volleys extremely well!!!!

[@emanoxgrunge]

Que clase de servicio y volea! Un genio Sampras..

[@manolofontaner7711]

Sampras the best for ever and ever.

[@petesampras4487]

sure!!!!

[@animanga9597]

manolo fontaner and ever and ever!!!!

[@verdammtnochmal5863]

So nice to see serve and volley again; Quite sick of long baseline rallies.

[@charlesrooibos5904]

+Fred M So did you enjoy the French open this year

[@kabob21]

They sped up the Aussie Open significantly the last two years. It's rated faster than the Wimbledon grass. It's one of the main reasons the best fast-court player in today's game, Old Man Federer, has won it back-to-back.

[@farid1406]

Grandaderer

[@menon_ji4984]

@@kabob21 and at same speed Djokovic won again in 2019

[@FLYBOY-eh5th]

Sampras owned the net completely during his 14 years on the tour.

[@Donalob]

Hands of a surgeon. Unbelievable!

[@Aaron-fj1hl]

Back when Hardcourt had decent speed

[@blake7871]

Yep, now hardcourt is like clay.

[@dick391]

@@blake7871 "Grass" too.

[@marctravismba]

Sampras: Complete game Roddick: One trick pony (serve)

[@Dman9fp]

Karlovic was a one trick serve pony. Can't win slams in the modern era with only one shot and next to no athleticism... Don't listen to the Djokovic/ Nadal fanboys with Zero brain cells who called the 03-07 era "Weak" lmao. Peak Federer was an alien and made it seem weak in retrospect. 76-80 was farrr weaker than 03-07 yet people never brought it up because Borg retired soon after I guess (or were smarter back then without message boards?..) hyper competitive sports will always be vicious and full of talented players near the top Let alone Federer is the only reason Roddick never won Wimbledon & Fed still was the clear #1 in a very competitive season in '09 and probably the best in early 2017- far and away past his peak. And somehow kept up fairly well with peak Djokovic, Nadal and Murray

[@spencerpierce1251]

I had forgotten how good Sampras was, the way he covered the net was amazing.

[@lalrinmawia6978]

Cant forget the outfit and color roddick wear during early 2001-2002....red,blue,black tshirt...time flies....