It is now a Trademark the Pete Sampras as we know it in 2023

His Hair style is and was a strange situation in his life and Character.

Pete might have the most beautiful wife in tennis history too lol. In her prime? Yummy.

Naw. I’d go with Becker’s serve instead.

His game was so predictable . Serve - volley (jumping smash ) - end of point . I stop to watch tennis because of that 5-6 years .

Andre >

I find this match very boring and thanksgod the best tennis players are now from Europe. This is absolutely muscular and rude. Federer, how good you existed and ended this up once and forever..

While I agree, I will say the game has changed. If the average rally was 10 shots in this match, now its 20.

@@daniele8716 meh tennis is boring AF nowadays

Yes, agassi always did a few frenetic bounces, and Sampras was doing ONE. LOL. Contrast that with Djokovic commonly doing 20, and sometimes up to 30 including pre-serve bounces.

@@Papiup18 It's always fun to make up stats in your head, but yours are ridiculous and false. In reality, average length of points has gone up but this is generally thought to be due to slower balls and a preponderance of baseline play. In fact, if we compare this to say....this to say the 2023 US open final we would find that indeed the points are shorter: 1-3 points/4-6/7-9/10+ agassi/sampras: 72% 21% 3% 4% vs 47% 18% 10% 24%, however if we just look at another QF with two baseliners in 2001, like for example Kafelnikov/Hewitt then we see nearly identical numbers 50% 26% 10% 14%. The shorter points are here are almost entirely due to Sampras' aggression. Something which Paul Annacone emphasized to Sampras at the end of his career, demanding he come to net more, be more aggressive, and capitalize on his superior athleticism and all-court game to shorten points and intimidate the other players. During the mid 90's Sampras had stopped coming to net as much and frequently just slugged it out (successfully) with the baseliners.

I love Federer-Roddick matches too. Quick servers and no grunting (until Roddick gets tired, at least). 😅

and one point of nadal is very cool to see and this points are like 3 seconds

That's why Sam end up with 13 ground slam and Nadal ve 21 plus still counting

@@titronich7538 The courts are so much slower nowadays which favor clay court specialists like Nadal. He probably wouldn't win that many grand slams if he played in the '90s.

​@@CoralSea Nadal is a clay court specialist , you have a brain cell? Australian Open court are slow court lol If Sampras met Federer and Djokovic in finals same %age of time as Nadal did he wouldn't even have 8 slams in total. Sampras is the one who was complete loser at clay. Nobody asked Sampras to hang up racquet by 30, he couldn't carry on due to lack of hunger and obviously some other issues too. Hunger is part of being great player, even if you assume there were no physical issues involved.

Also remember watching it live... I couldn't believe the quality then, I still can't today!

Oh ja,das ATP Finale Sampras-Becker war noch besser!

So low now

@@LINTUSOORYA no it isn't lol

@@LINTUSOORYA Exactly! No defense or resistance what so ever. They would get destroyed going up against today's players. Sorry to insult people's nostalgia, just keeping it real.

@@haissem8 sorry, I said the opposite. Today's players will get destroyed in a proper court, unlike the dead courts they play now.

@@LINTUSOORYA "proper court" my ass,those courts were way to fast it wasnt even about skill back then,now you have real competition

Pete was the one guy who could overpower Agassi from the baseline. Agassi might have won 75% of their baseline points, but Sampras saved his best groundstrokes for games when Agassi was serving at 4-5.

@@10jsamuels that was just a silly ignorant thing to say. Now many players could overpower Agassi from the baseline. Childhood rival Courier could do it, as Agassi freely admitted when manhandled at the 89 French with Agassi quipping that Courier was the hardest hitter and strongest person while trying to assuage his loss by saying he was a more nuanced player. Courier couldn't return as well, or play it extremely early with as much confidence (even though he too was trained to do that by Nick Bollettierri), but before his arm issues he certainly could match or overpower Agassi at times. Ivan Lendl manhandled Agassi in every meeting until 92 when Agassi got his first win (still a tight match) when Lendl was just back from a break due the bad back that would end up sidelining him a year or so later, and Agassi was fresh off winning Wimbledon. Lendl had a combination of power AND consistency that would just wear Andre down. He didnt' take the ball early like Agassi but that didn't matter. Mark Philipppoussis clearly had far more power than Andre, but as Andre himself said, his key against Flipper was to use his consistency to win. Not even trying to match Mark's power, but playing at 80%, hitting hard, but with consistency and let Mark make the winners/errors. Marat Savin was also more than an equal in power and they had many rugged battles. Actually Brad Gilbert had said himself that there were many players who could hit a forehand (the bigger shot) as hard or harder than Andre, but he did say the combination of power/accuracy from forehand and backhand gave Andre the better total package. THere's countless other times I saw players overpower Agassi....an example would an in the zone Kuerten steamrolling Agassi - and others in the same tourney. Ion Tiriac and Becker once talked bout how Mancini hit the ball harder than Agassi. There are even journeymen players who hit the ball as hard or harder - in the 2000's, 90's and even in the 80's. A.... Duncan Lawson could hit it harder - but they didn't have the other attributes. ( I believe somebody even posted a match between them online) It is true that Pete had more power in his forehand than Agassi - something Brad Gilbert also said, and that while Sampras wouldn't beat Agassi consistently off the ground, he could hang with anybody including Andre and strike at key times - that much is true.

At the time it was the best service in the game against the best return of service. Epic

Not against Nadal nor no-vax 🤣🤣🤣

Roger has better serves

@@guntodd true, but roger wasnt that big yet in 2001 and he wasnt as famous

Sampras had the best serve

Glad to hear this.

Pete’s game was awesome but I wouldn’t say he had an awesome backhand. It was good enough obviously but he ran around it a lot.

No greater joy for a tennis player if you can serve and volley AND outmatch your opponent from the back court. How great did AA play though? Dismissive with his returns and passing shots, like swatting flies. Of the matches Sampras played there was only one better, an ATP finals defeat of Becker.

Agassi basically half volleyed all the massive serves of that era lol. To be able to do that, with guys coming in all the time, to me, I still say hes the greatest returner ever. His returns had to be lower than the tape before the server got to the net to knock off an easy volley. Basically, if he wasnt hitting an outright return winner, if you let Agassi's returns bounce, they would land within the front half of the service box. Djokovic or whomever today, not having serve and volleyers, had the luxury of putting their returns into the ENTIRE court. Its such a huge difference of difficulty. In Andres era, he didnt have that luxury. Most of the top ten were serve and volleyers.

@@chocolatetownforever7537 One might think Agassi's return looks fancy.But if you deeply understand tennis, Djokovic is the best returner ever and it's not even close.

For sure 🤣

Like for 2 days, 11hrs ? Never could happen..

I know, hehe. The funny and ironic thing is this match was not in keeping with their rivalry at all, a real outlier. Their last match at the 02 US final was more typical, that match had six breaks of serve and tons of break points for both players. They went after each other at all times and there tended to be lots of breas and not many tie breaks in their 34 meetings.

Forgot to mention that famous Nike advert from 1996 the based on the US Open set point. The point that never ended ukposts.info/have/v-deo/oJemeYiDrKB-pmQ.html

Yes ithere is no tie breaker they arw still playing ubtil today

Yes. Eberg had long since moved on, I had moved on.... but for many years that damn Pro Staff was THE SHIT. I went back to try to use it a few years on and I found I was lame-o with it. Did you know it was designed for Jimmy Connors? He played it in '84 USO but he went back to his damn T2000 before going to Estusa, Prince MonoStick. We had a 2 and 3000 in the 80's and damn was that fucker hard to hit with.

@@josevigil4619 Interesting. I would like to read or hear that. Edberg has long since upgraded, true. IDK why Jimbo didn't like it. It was kinda designed with him in mind!

Yup he’s said that he wishes that he tried the new polyester strings before retiring, also said he was too stubborn to try a different racket as well. Funny to see him playing with a Babolat now.

Federer was still playing with the same Pro Staff 6.0 85 up til some time in 2002 when he went up to the 90 inch ProStaff he used til 2014

@@lofirecordclub Yep. Rog started winning slams after he changed racquets, although interestingly he beat PETE at Wimbers with the Prostaff in '01

I grew to like Pete. I know what you mean though. It just seemed like he had an unfair advantage because of that fucking serve but he was still badass all around. His "weaknesses...." were not truly measurable in fact.

It was the first match I ever saw. No wonder I got hooked.

@bob loblaw Yeah as someone who grew up watching 'Dre and PETE as a kid and now looking back as an adult, I love their matchups because it was like a boxing match. Each guy knew exactly what the other guy could do, and also what his weaknesses were and win or lose really depended on who could leverage their strengths into the other guy's weakness. Above all, it was really a mental match more than a physical one because of how close they were in ability. Was Andre gonna get in Pete's head by hitting great returns forcing PETE to volley up and wear him down until he started missing his first serve, or was PETE going to wear Andre out by winning the big points in the first set, then serve-blitzing him for the rest of the match. Way more tense and entertaining than today's matches imo.

Pistol Pete was special, then again so was Andre. Lost a little respect for Andre after his antics at a charity event with PS, RF & RN.

@@martinclarke2893 Was there something negative there? I've only seen highlights and it looked like a good time had by all.

Well, best serve of all time against best returns of all time.

Wait, Donald Young wasn’t the peak?

@@springfield03sniper unfortunately he was. In his era. Ohhhh doesn't that hurt.

I think the peak of American tennis was a few years before this. Early to mid 90s, you still had Courier and Chang up there, as well as guys like Wheaton and Mac hanging around. By the time this match happened, most of the other guys were retired.

*mens* tennis

Nah djokovic is way better.

His actual return isn't better. Djokovic's returns allow him to get into the point, which he them turns around with his baseline game. Agassi's returns were attacking shots on faster courts favouring servers more. Agassi all the way on that shot.

You are lucky)

Ouff I'm so fucking jealous of past You. God almighty. I feel like Sampras is the only player that actually could have beaten today's players at his best. I don't feel like that by actually anyone else. Perhaps Roddick if he could have been better at training on his consistency and learning when his own peak intensity could have given him a bigger edge in the game real time.

I see you

@@Hassanmf Agassi could have. Watch the 2005 US Open Final.

@@donbraugh185 Yes. “911” was on the Tuesday following the Sunday Men’s Final.

The most artistic tennis player ever, the best all court player

@@valsammajoseph421 Roger is more artistic than Pete. Pete is the best fast court player of all time thought and that is a very nice title to have

​@@sh33pyyy I would say both players more or less hit the same shots, and very similar players throughout both of their careers. I prefer Sampras' game and movement to Federer's. I like Sampras' net game more, especially those half volley winners into the corners, or stop volleys, both very artistic if we can use that word. Also, having seen both players live more than once in London, and in Paris Bercy indoors, I can also say Pete hits the ball harder. Maybe that's one area you might see as Federer being more artistic? Federer like McEnroe and Agassi tries to take he ball earlier at times to redirect the pace of his opponent although not as often as Agassi and McEnroe. Federer has been involved in a lot of five set battles in his career, he fights to the end, win or lose.

@@sh33pyyy He he is not. What on earth do you base that on??

@@camdelahuerta700 Sampras best fast court player easily. Rafa best clay slow court player. Novak best medium hard court player ever. Federer best at beating Andy Roddick player ever.

I think Federer imitates Agassi more. Federer's serve is very similar to Agassi's. It just a more artistic version of it. Federer's baseline game is the same as Agassi. Take the ball on the rise and dictate the points from baseline. You could say that Federer idolize both of them taking a bit here and there strategically. But, Federer changed the game with his forehand. Every ATP player uses a form of it. His footwork is very unique. Kyrgios said that every player tries to copy that. Also, Federer invented other shots, i.e. the squash shot, service return drop shots, baseline half-volleys, etc. The list is quite long. It's just amazing how he revolutionized the game.

@@twinwankel I agree with what you're saying about Federer taking a page from Agassi's book at the baseline. However, you give him undue credit. He did not invent squash shots (been around since tennis existed), or baseline half volleys (Agassi was the first guy who really excelled at that). The much lauded SABR was/is a timeless return tactic that aggressive players have used for decades. As far as his forehand goes, he does have one of the best ever, but the first true ATP forehands originated in the 90's with the likes of Muster, Courier, Berasategui, and others. Federer just made it look better and did it better. The same goes for the rest of his game...it's not that he invented shots, he's just a great shot maker with a lot of creativity who actually uses all these shots in the game...doesn't just bash balls from the baseline...which is why crowds have always loved him. He's creative and he looks good doing it.

@@Skiiiiiifreeeeeee Talking about taking the ball on the rise and half volleying from the baseline. After the 1995 US Open final, Sampras changed tactics against Agassi from the baseline. He decided to play further near the baseline to fight fire with fire. In 1995 he was getting pushed back and bullied (other than the famous set point where he took it too him). Most of their meetings after 1995, Sampras was taking the ball considerably earlier. Here's a perfect example 48:25

Sampras had a big advantage that Federer never had.... faster courts ( hard courts and grass were completely different back then , those surfaces required shots that almost expired in today's tennis).. federer was the last tennis player who continued to play those shots after the surfaces' slowdown that started after 2001, getting great results altough the conditions were against him. I'm talking about serve and volley , net game play in general ( half volleys) , slice backand, ability of hitting winners from every angle of the court , 1-2 punch, playing inside the court ecc ... i think they were similar in terms of aggressive play and will to command points from the first shot... two great champions and definitely my two favourite tennis players !!!

Yes. It sure is. Also the Federer/Blake stuff too.

Sampras serving 128mph, still smoking FAST

This is fast court tennis.

It’s always tough comparing tennis across the eras. The speed of the game, the quality of the equipment (racquet sweet spot), power of the players. I’ve discussed with fellow friends who are tennis fans and we all seem to agree: while the level of talent hasn’t declined over the years, the adaptability of the players has certainly increased. We were spoiled with Andre and Sampras, then Roger, Rafa and Novak. All are huge legends of the game. I still enjoy watching Connors/McEnroe matches…across any era really. Each has its own special place in history

@@gbfan4lifebg Nice post.

better than mcenroe borg 1980 wimbelton?

​@@debbieburns3848You got a great point.

Me too watching for last 35 yrs.Best match,I have ever seen.

‘80 WimbMcEnroe - Borg or ‘08 Wimbl Federer -Nadal or ‘19 Djokovic -Federer… tennis in its best!!!

I might be wrong, but I believe that Agassiz had one of the best "return of serves", and a 2nd serve had to be top-notch against him.

@@ronwatts5827 You're right but he used to do it against anybody

He play like shit evry game in carer,servis-voley game like pussy

@@SuperNino111 I take it you are Andre's fan

@@theUnabomber1 no,am djokovic fan but this is shit what he play

Yes, these two had a great rivalry. They had different playing styles, which made things more interesting.

watch Tiafoe nowadays and its a clown show

Sampras vs Agassi was always showtime.

Spot on! The battle of titans

@@Oblomovization Doesn't hold candles to Djokovic Nadal rivalry though.

Technically there were no major mistakes exept the ones on the tie breaks

@@user-gu4tv4hp6sWhy did you post that stupid comment?

Have you heard of Roger Federer?

True

@@ramirocastellanosbarron187 he cant serve and volley like Pete... Pete was coming in everytime!! dont get me wrong fed has great volleys... but Pete was a "true serve and volleyer"

Patric Rafter

@@Robert-de5xg Patrick Rafter... yes he is equal to Pete! Pete's ground strokes were better though

Always great to hear from a narcissistic dullard who doesn’t watch tennis. It’s one of the best he saw folks! 😂😂

I hadn't intended to watch the whole match but found myself unable to pull away. Talk about edge of your seat.

@@datacipher well you might as well be referring to almost all the youtube commenters. It's a very low IQ crowd, and yes -they say asinine things.

and basically he had to string it up that much to keep his shots in...imagine how wild he'd be smoking the ball with the Agassi racket!!!

Just a note of caution when comparing the 80s/90s and early 00s tension to todays players: They played with natural gut which was a completely different animal to play with than todays mono strings. But yes 70lbs was hard even back then, but would be totally unplayable with todays strings and racquets.

@@deepazure It is also worth noting that Sampras was a complete outlier in 2001. No one else other than Phllippoussis was playing with specs like that. His fellow pros thought he was crazy to play with those specs.

@@BurnsTennis Thomas Muster played at 70lbs, but then again.. he is for sure also an outlier in every possible way, haha

Don’t forget borg had his wooden Donney strung @ 80 pounds

today is more slow no serve and volley matches that last 4 5 hours...

@@gomriria2197 More players of very high level???? There has never been so few high level players as there is now. That no one have been able to overthrow Djokovic, Nadal and Federer, is the proof of that.

@@asterixx6878 no one could overthrow those 3 cause they’re the 3 best of all time by a margin

@@joetaylor3974 So? They're in their late 30s and still can't be toppled. I don't care how good they are, the newer generations just aren't good enough.

@@joetaylor3974 The fact that they have more grand slams doesn't mean they are better by a margin. Pete's 14 feels like 20 or more, just because he had so many good opponents. Actually I put Sampras over Djokovic any day.

Alcaraz*

Ya some of his returns are just absolutely insane.

And who say that Novak is better returner than Andre.Muahahaha

@@user-kx2yo7ve9w Every tennis expert says that. Lol

​@@brunofernandez2906which experts..ITS very hard to compare...those time we're extrem difficult for return players as Most of the top20 we're attackers with big Servers giving you very little time and Options compared to today werde you can Just Return Long in the middle of the court to start the Rally..Agassi returned Net Monsters Like Sampras, Becker, Rafter, Federer, Edberg, Ivanisevic just to Name a few. Novak ist absolutely great all around package, but the sharpness of Agassi Returns is unmatched...

Yeah, when Pete played well on grass, Agassi, unfortunately had very little chance.

@@Tetelestai17 I remember Agassi had 3 break points at 0/40 3-3 in the first set and Sampras simply served at an amazing level after that.

funny you mention that match, because for me it's on equal par with this match as the two best matches I've ever watched live (via TV). Two heavyweights just giving no ground. And in the US Open match, I remember how aggressive Sampras was with his 1 handed topspin backhand, a shot I didn't really associate with his game. But Sampras always seemed to rise to the occasion, especially against Agassi. And I was a Courier fan thru and thru

That 99 final totally sucked. Boring 3 set match. I expected so much more from these two legends.

Thanks for the love! Please upload all the finals you have available.

Sampras would get exposed so hard against Rafa and Novak

Pekillas ? It depends on equipment for me. I think Sampras certainly would lose in today’s poly string spin heavy brutally physical era. But with all gut strings and flexible frames on a faster surface? I’m liking Pete’s chances. He and Andre are the two greatest pure tennis players IMO. They struck a cleaner ball than anybody else and didn’t have the equipment advantages.

​@@anemicroyalty8764 Not sure why previous champions in any sport can't adapt. To turn the theory around, to grow up and use the strings you mentioned, you actually had to acquire much more technical skill to master those strings and stiffer racquets. Once you have the technical skills it is much easier to use more modern equipment. By the way, try buying those Babolat gut strings in the shop, they are ridiculously expensive even now. I think most people throw around talking about premium gut strings as if it is something you can buy in the 99p store.

@@pekillas2593 No one hits through the line of the ball any longer. Tennis has just become more physical, not more technical. I think Rafa would have struggled in the 90s with the game he has, standing six feet behind the baseline. Roger is a more instinctive player and would have adjusted to that pace better.

A great match between two of the greats.

Same here. Been looking for this match in a good quality for a very, like very long time.

That halfvolley was AMAZING

Fed Could. Nick might. I've seen Carlos hit similar. But your point is well-taken Sir!

Yes they could, but I hear what you're saying, I've said it before and I'll repeat it again, shot for shot Pete Sampras is the best tennis player who ever lived and I'm including the big 3

@@demolitor2359 I definitely put him even with them. Definitely.

Alcaraz does pretty frequently

Don't ride it too hard or it might break 🤢

@@Marco-717sounds like you’re worried you won’t get a chance to put it in your mouth. “You said something good about someone and I don’t agree with you so I’m going to be nasty for no reason.”

​@@travissmith2092 sounds like you get into arguments with your bf all the time. Cry to the cops

@@Marco-717 ahahaha bro cope harder. You’re the guy who’s every insult is gay this and gay that. Kinda suspect and I’m sure your friends think so too

@@travissmith2092 says the dude who hasn't had a gf in 10 years hahaha turbovirgin. I bet you'd date a tranny because it's the cool thing to do with you zoomers

He lost the final against Hewitt that year.

2002...

Thank you for sharing this man, as an Italian born in the 90s I envy you so much

Now we're talking. What an electric atmosphere. My all time favorite too.

He was like a machine. Prettiest groundies you could ever see as well.

You really went out of a limb picking those five.

I think Djokovic would have to say something about Agassi being the best returner in history, sure he one o the greats but not the best!!!!

@@ValentinG23 Exactly. Agassi was an excellent returner, but not in the same league as Djokovic.

Agassi isn't the best returner

Agassi was the best at hitting winners but djokovic is the best at placement to force errors and get the ball into play because of his flexibility.

@@juanserrano3221 oh yes he is.

Really? :) Im a Djoker fan but sheesh, no one plays like Federer. How is it even a comparison? Perhaps I may direct you to the Federer videos from 2004-2006 and you can check back in here? Federer and Djokovic are like the next gen versions of Sampras and Agassi seen here, respectively.

Sampras was great yes but not in Federer’s league

With the differences in playing surfaces, medicine, etc., it's tough to really compare players from recent eras. I think Sampras and the trio we've been treated to for more than the past decade would have likely flourished in either's era. Those courts in the 80s and 90s, definitely has more distinct properties than they do now, though. A lot of these guys could rack up hard- and grass-court wins, but it was usually up to some weirdo to come in and win the French - and often nothing on anything but clay - then disappear after a few tours.

I think Federer has the best of both these guys plus the fact that he’s been so good for such a long time. He places his shots like Connors, he dances around the court like Borg….I wouldn’t call his game classic but man is he good.

@@natrixxvision6997 I would agree that he's got the largest bag of tricks. It's like an aging pitcher. If he relies on a huge fastball, he's got maybe a decade in him. If he learned how to actually pitch during that time, he can pitch for 15-20 years. Then there's Nolan Ryan, who kind of learned to pitch, but who benefited his entire career from a big fastball and the fact that he wasn't always that great at placing it. 🤣