Agassi more talented than Sampras?

x.doublea · Agassi more talented than Sampras?

Rattler asked me to expand on my point on why I think Agassi is more talented than Sampras. Well, honestly, they are extremely close. However, Agassi does have better hand-eye coordination and reflexes (look at his returns... his volleying technique is a bit faulty, so I don't think he should be judged through that). It's too bad he didn't use his wonderful 'feel' as much as he could have. Some of those forehands and backhands winners Agassi pulled off throughout this career are just legendary. Obviously, Sampras had his great shots as well.

But, I honestly think that, in the past 25 years or so, no one is as good as Agassi at his best, including Sampras and Federer. Unfortunately, Agassi never had the match-to-match consistency of Federer or Sampras, in my opinion. Those two are amazingly consistent.

Mind you, though, I do admit that Sampras was probably a better natural athlete than Agassi. He was a taller, quicker, and generally a bit more elastic. In terms of H2H, I feel that Sampras's game matches up a bit better to Agassi's than Agassi's matches up to Sampras.

dav6789

I personally think Sampras was one of the most talented of all time. He would sometimes go into a zone where he was unbeatable and his pure talent would just shine. He would actually just glide to the ball and hit unbelieveable shots. I think he was more talented than Federer because he had more of an all-around game IMO. Sampras could consistently play a serve and volley game, but could also play well from the baseline. Federer these days (with racquet technology and such) can just survive by hitting forehands. Yes he does play at net, but not regularly enough to say it is a key part of his game.

As for Sampras against Agassi, I would say Sampras was the more talented tennis player. Agassi's hand-eye coordination is the best I have ever seen, and Agassi could also go on stretches of unbelieveable play, but he had less variety in his game than Sampras.

Rattler

Rattler

This past week I watched 60 minutes on ESPN Classic featuring Pete Sampras (just before he broke the Grand Slam record), they interviewed Andre and to paraphrase him. Andre said that as long as he prepares as he should and does all that he can he's confident that he can win against anyone; however, against Pete he can do all that and still be creamed.

Both players are gifted beyond imagination I thought I'd break it down.

1st Serve

Pete was a kill shot.
Andre's was described sneaky quick, particualry in '95 and '99

2nd Serve

Pete was/is the undisputed king of the second serve.

Andre's was solid, but it did break down, especially early in his career

Forehand
Pete's running forehand was a match winner, although most of his forehands were flat until Gully got a hold of him

Andre's forehad was his bread and butter shot...he could knock the fuzz off the ball with it.

Backhand

Pete's one hander was very vesitile, in anyone else's arsenal it would have been their go to shot.

Andre's down the line drive was killer

Volley

Pete was a much better volleyer, but not the best of his time...Edberg and Rafter were better

Andre, did not have a great volley; however, he was willing to volley (which nowadays, according to the ESPN commentators, is an act of surpeme bravery)

Swing Volley

Pete...did he ever hit one?

Andre's signature shot

Return

Pete could take his chances on returns because his serve was so good.
Andre revolutionized the shot.

Approaches

Pete solid on the approach

Andre, monster approaches...which is why he didn't need a great volley

Lob
Pete, not used much, but killer when he did...backhand topspin lob against Andre Wimbly quarters '93 springs to mind

Andre, particularly his backhand lob was one of the best shots in tennis.

Footwork and movement.

Pete always moved like a liquid cat on the court...even late in his career when he lost a step

Andre, was one of fastest movers early in his career....he lost a step after '95, but he adopted % tennis in '99 and his lost step was no longer a liability.

I think their talent levels are very close, so consistency, winning %, and Head-to-head results must be taken into account with these two. To Pete's credit though even when Andre's ranking and play were at tbe lowest, he never took playing him as an easy win.

Talentwise I think Pete edges out Andre, but in total impact on the game Andre wins by a long shot.

Andre's late 90s comeback introduced % tennis to club players everywhere.

x.doublea

Thank you, Rattler, for the comparison. Very fair both ways. It want to add that Sampras's drop shot (usually drop volley) was scary. Once, I remember taking a look at the US Open 2001 QF highlights. Andre absolutely drilled a running shot towards Sampras's midsection, and Sampras, at the net, just made the ball drop over and die. I was incredible.

Andre had a great drop shot as well, and he made use of it more and more during his last two years. However, it was effective, in my opinion, due to his smartness, not due to its beautiful execution.

x.doublea

Congratulations to Pete Sampras on being inducted to the Hall of Fame. Very Happy

http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/news/news1.asp

... as did Sanchez-Vicario.

Tennis fan

Pete showed so much emotion in his speech; enough to cover the fact that he never really showed real emotion during his career.

Great job Pete! You are still the best!!! Very Happy