by 
Bartman
ANSWERS: 14
-
G'day Ash, Thank you for your question. I was. However, Sampras must have been keeping fit and was a champion. Federer may also have taken him a bit too lightly. Regards
-
Pete is awesome or do you think 14 slams is just a fluke? He is everything you need to beat anyone powerful, athletic, smart, and talented. Did I mention the huge serve? Or the finest touch at the net i ever saw?
-
I'm not at all shocked. That's sports, anybody can win.
-
For Pete's sake, I am not shocked. Even any 30 year old can gear up for a big match. People only get more clever with age and speed and power in tennis get replaced with finesse and ability. No I am not surprised.
-
I think Federer lost purposely to make Sampras feel good about himself.Federer is a better player than to loose to Sampras who has not played for years.
-
Pete is a better all court player with a much better serve, net presence both of which counts a lot on a fast surface (which is what both of the players excel on).
-
Honestly, I have NO idea who either are, so I can seriously say that I am not shocked. I don't follow sports at all.
-
NOT SHOCKED AT ALL! - I've heard several "so called" authorities say - Sampras and the "serve and volley" are dinosaur relics (meaning - they can no longer survive) - well let me tell you, if Pete really is a T-rex living in todays world - he's going to destroy and devour anything and anybody he comes into contact with ...and he just ate Roger Federer in front of the world on live TV!!!
-
Sampras beat Federer at Macau but Federer beat Sampras in Seoul and Kuala Lampur. So considering Federer wins the contest 2-1, I am not shocked.
-
i wasn't really shocked. it was just that i was happy. nothing against federer, but sampras has been and probably always will be my favortite tennis player ever. so i can say pete sampras is the best tennis player ever because he beat the current nubmer one tennis player, although he may really not be. but it makes me happier either way. haha.
-
It's a shock only because Federer absolutely owns everyone that plays him (except Nadal on clay). It's more shocking how bad Federer's competition is seeing that Sampras can come out of retirement and beat him. I do however believe that Federer didn't condition for the match like he would a grand slam event, and Sampras dedicated a lot to it. I have no doubt that Federer will win in March but it was still shocking to see Sampras actually win.
-
am not pete's retired and rogers not
-
I wasn't shocked, pete sampras is always going to be ahead whenever his serve is on. A better server will always beat a better returner.
-
Well, I'm not. Sampras was always an absolutely genius tennis player. The fact that he beat Federer 3 or 4 years into his retirement just shows how much of a quality player Sampras truly is.
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC