tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 13 Feb 2009 18:45:20
From: Raja
Subject: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and
About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
just swung from a tree"
About Steffi Graf - "You have never defined yourself by what you have
achieved; rather, you have achieved by how you defined yourself,"




 
Date: 15 Feb 2009 04:56:19
From: Fan
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 15, 1:37=A0pm, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 14, 7:38=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismisse=
d as
> > >>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a gu=
y like
> > >>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> > >>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip =
him
> > >>>> while half asleep.
> > >>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed st=
ill
> > >>> playing and only 12
> > >>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
> > >> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's=
no
> > >> certainty.
>
> > > "Achievement goat" =3D goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>
> > Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
> > player....?-
>
> You're asking me? Didn't you invent 7543?

he-he


 
Date: 15 Feb 2009 04:37:56
From:
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 7:38=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismissed =
as
> >>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy =
like
> >>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> >>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip hi=
m
> >>>> while half asleep.
> >>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed stil=
l
> >>> playing and only 12
> >>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
> >> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's n=
o
> >> certainty.
>
> > "Achievement goat" =3D goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>
> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
> player....?-

You're asking me? Didn't you invent 7543?


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30
From: Raja
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 6:38=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismissed =
as
> >>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy =
like
> >>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> >>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip hi=
m
> >>>> while half asleep.
> >>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed stil=
l
> >>> playing and only 12
> >>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
> >> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's n=
o
> >> certainty.
>
> > "Achievement goat" =3D goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>
> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
> player....?

Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.



  
Date: 15 Feb 2009 17:14:29
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Raja wrote:
> On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>>>> while half asleep.
>>>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>>>> playing and only 12
>>>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>>>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>>>> certainty.
>>> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>> player....?
>
> Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.
>


Not true. Sampras' loss to Yzaga at USO was when he was 16 yrs old &
sensationally he led 2 sets to love before fading in 5. This is
actually another notch in his goat claims - amazing he could play like
that at 16. Later when Pete matured he beat Yzaga twice very easily at USO.



  
Date: 15 Feb 2009 02:35:03
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30 -0800 (PST), Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com >
wrote:

>On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> >> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> >>>> Of course this is complete rubbish.  Federer is already dismissed as
>> >>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>> >>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>> >>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>> >>>> while half asleep.
>> >>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>> >>> playing and only 12
>> >>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>> >> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>> >> certainty.
>>
>> > "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>>
>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>> player....?
>
>Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.


and galo blanco and george bastl and ....... oh wait ! they are all
different clowns !

being clobbered by a myriad of clowns is obviously no shame but losing
to another great is. you need a whispermind to figure that one out.


   
Date: 15 Feb 2009 17:23:01
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Superdave wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30 -0800 (PST), Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>>>>> while half asleep.
>>>>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>>>>> playing and only 12
>>>>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>>>>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>>>>> certainty.
>>>> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>>> player....?
>> Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.
>
>
> and galo blanco and george bastl and ....... oh wait ! they are all
> different clowns !
>
> being clobbered by a myriad of clowns is obviously no shame but losing
> to another great is. you need a whispermind to figure that one out.


Those clowns obviously weren't goat material so the reasons Sampras lost
are obvious. Losing to another goat in all the slam finals is far more
damaging - it proves you couldn't beat the other guy in the biggest matches.



    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 04:59:19
From: Fan
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 15, 12:17=A0pm, Superdave <the.big.rst.kah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 22:02:04 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Fan wrote:
> >> On Feb 15, 10:23 am, "*skriptis" <skrip...@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
> >>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>
> >>>news:4997d5a3$0$666$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> >>>> Fan wrote:
> >>>>>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final =
as
> >>>>>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
> >>>>> Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
> >>>>> champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
> >>>>> Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them al=
l
> >>>>> winners.
> >>>> Links?
> >>>> You'll find in an historical sense finalists get completely ignored =
too.
> >>>> eg did you realize Jimbo was r/up 4 times at Wimbledon, which is an
> >>>> alltime record? =A0Probably not because you & everyone doesn't care.=
=A0If you
> >>>> did care you'd bring it up all the time - eg 'Jimbo won 2 Wimbledons=
&
> >>>> importantly was also r/up 4 times'. =A0No, I'm pretty confident you =
never
> >>>> saw Jimbo as a winner 6 times at Wimbledon, which makes your claim a=
bove
> >>>> bullshit.
> >>>>> Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but =
not
> >>>>> winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finali=
st
> >>>>> than not getting close to it.
> >>>> Do you see Rafa as 3 time Wimbledon winner? =A0If not I must insist =
you
> >>>> withdraw the above post.
> >>> Rafa had 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals, only Newcombe, Borg, Mac, Ed=
berg,
> >>> Becker, Sampras and Federer achieved that during open era.
> >>> It looks flashy when told in that manner, but in reality his Wimbledo=
n
> >>> record is Agassi, Ivanisevic, Stich like.
> >>> Finals really don't matter otherwise Federer wouldn't have cried at A=
O.
>
> >> Federer cries a lot so don't you never mind Roger's tears :)
>
> >> This says it better than anything:
>
> >> Prize Money for Australian Open Men=92s and Women's Singles
> >> 1st Round $19,400
> >> 2nd Round =A0$31,000
> >> 3rd Round =A0$51,000
> >> 4th Round $88,000
> >> Quarter Finalist $182,250
> >> Semi Finalist =A0$365,000
> >> Runners-up =A0$1,000,000
> >> Winners =A0$2,000,000
>
> >> The Runner-up got a cool one million and it is half of what the
> >> champion got. Nothing to sneeze at. First and second round losers get
> >> only a fraction of what the top players get.
>
> >> In reality, Federer had nothing to cry about. He did real good...
>
> >In reality he had a lot to cry about - he failed to advance his legacy &
> >is still seen as '13'.
>
> >You'll note Sampras doesn't get credit for 8 USOs, only the finals he wo=
n.
>
> In reality it is only a matter of time until the sampras record is
> toast.
>
> Then, your fucked here, You will never be able to recover.-

True but it is also true that the best fedfans can hope for (and it is
no small thing) is to break Sampras' 14-slam record.
There will not be any 20-25 slams. That will be Nadal's job :)


    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 08:37:25
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:23:01 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Superdave wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30 -0800 (PST), Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>>>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>>>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>>>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>>>>>> while half asleep.
>>>>>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>>>>>> playing and only 12
>>>>>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>>>>>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>>>>>> certainty.
>>>>> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>>>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>>>> player....?
>>> Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.
>>
>>
>> and galo blanco and george bastl and ....... oh wait ! they are all
>> different clowns !
>>
>> being clobbered by a myriad of clowns is obviously no shame but losing
>> to another great is. you need a whispermind to figure that one out.
>
>
>Those clowns obviously weren't goat material so the reasons Sampras lost
>are obvious. Losing to another goat in all the slam finals is far more
>damaging - it proves you couldn't beat the other guy in the biggest matches.


excuse me ?

the reasons Sampras lost are obvious?

why would anyone want to lose to any yet so many clowns ?

it is most disgraceful bordering on ignominious for a supposed goat.

please explain why you sloughed over this with such a obviously stupid
statement.


    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 06:33:49
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:23:01 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Superdave wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30 -0800 (PST), Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>>>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>>>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>>>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>>>>>> while half asleep.
>>>>>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>>>>>> playing and only 12
>>>>>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>>>>>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>>>>>> certainty.
>>>>> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>>>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>>>> player....?
>>> Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.
>>
>>
>> and galo blanco and george bastl and ....... oh wait ! they are all
>> different clowns !
>>
>> being clobbered by a myriad of clowns is obviously no shame but losing
>> to another great is. you need a whispermind to figure that one out.
>
>
>Those clowns obviously weren't goat material so the reasons Sampras lost
>are obvious. Losing to another goat in all the slam finals is far more
>damaging - it proves you couldn't beat the other guy in the biggest matches.


hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.


     
Date: 15 Feb 2009 17:44:57
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Superdave wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:23:01 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Superdave wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30 -0800 (PST), Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>>>>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>>>>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>>>>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>>>>>>> while half asleep.
>>>>>>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>>>>>>> playing and only 12
>>>>>>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>>>>>>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>>>>>>> certainty.
>>>>>> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>>>>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>>>>> player....?
>>>> Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.
>>>
>>> and galo blanco and george bastl and ....... oh wait ! they are all
>>> different clowns !
>>>
>>> being clobbered by a myriad of clowns is obviously no shame but losing
>>> to another great is. you need a whispermind to figure that one out.
>>
>> Those clowns obviously weren't goat material so the reasons Sampras lost
>> are obvious. Losing to another goat in all the slam finals is far more
>> damaging - it proves you couldn't beat the other guy in the biggest matches.
>
>
> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.


Fed lost 5 times in r1/r2 & his career is not done yet. I think he can
get it to 9 & surpass Sampras, at which point you'll never mention it
again.


      
Date: 15 Feb 2009 07:10:48
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:44:57 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Superdave wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:23:01 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Superdave wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:09:30 -0800 (PST), Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 14, 6:38 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>>>>>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>>>>>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>>>>>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>>>>>>>> while half asleep.
>>>>>>>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>>>>>>>> playing and only 12
>>>>>>>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>>>>>>>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>>>>>>>> certainty.
>>>>>>> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.
>>>>>> Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
>>>>>> player....?
>>>>> Just like how can Sampras be beaten by Yzaga.
>>>>
>>>> and galo blanco and george bastl and ....... oh wait ! they are all
>>>> different clowns !
>>>>
>>>> being clobbered by a myriad of clowns is obviously no shame but losing
>>>> to another great is. you need a whispermind to figure that one out.
>>>
>>> Those clowns obviously weren't goat material so the reasons Sampras lost
>>> are obvious. Losing to another goat in all the slam finals is far more
>>> damaging - it proves you couldn't beat the other guy in the biggest matches.
>>
>>
>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
>
>
>Fed lost 5 times in r1/r2 & his career is not done yet. I think he can
>get it to 9 & surpass Sampras, at which point you'll never mention it
>again.


I was referring to 8X in a single slam and NEVER making a single
final!

That can never happen to Fed.


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 16:14:35
From:
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 6:43=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismissed as
> >> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy li=
ke
> >> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> >> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
> >> while half asleep.
>
> > I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
> > playing and only 12
> > points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>
> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
> certainty.

"Achievement goat" =3D goat. All else is woulda/coulda.


  
Date: 15 Feb 2009 11:38:47
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 14, 6:43 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>>>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>>>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>>>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>>>> while half asleep.
>>> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
>>> playing and only 12
>>> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?
>> "Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
>> certainty.
>
> "Achievement goat" = goat. All else is woulda/coulda.


Mostly true, but then how can the goat be constantly beaten by another
player....?



 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 15:22:44
From:
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 7:44=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:

> Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismissed as
> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
> while half asleep.

I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
playing and only 12
points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?


  
Date: 15 Feb 2009 02:07:11
From: Fan
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 15, 10:23=A0am, "*skriptis" <skrip...@post.t-com.hr > wrote:
> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:4997d5a3$0$666$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Fan wrote:
> >>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
> >>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
>
> >> Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
> >> champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
> >> Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them all
> >> winners.
>
> > Links?
>
> > You'll find in an historical sense finalists get completely ignored too=
.
> > eg did you realize Jimbo was r/up 4 times at Wimbledon, which is an
> > alltime record? =A0Probably not because you & everyone doesn't care. =
=A0If you
> > did care you'd bring it up all the time - eg 'Jimbo won 2 Wimbledons &
> > importantly was also r/up 4 times'. =A0No, I'm pretty confident you nev=
er
> > saw Jimbo as a winner 6 times at Wimbledon, which makes your claim abov=
e
> > bullshit.
>
> >> Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but not
> >> winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finalist
> >> than not getting close to it.
>
> > Do you see Rafa as 3 time Wimbledon winner? =A0If not I must insist you
> > withdraw the above post.
>
> Rafa had 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals, only Newcombe, Borg, Mac, Edberg=
,
> Becker, Sampras and Federer achieved that during open era.
> It looks flashy when told in that manner, but in reality his Wimbledon
> record is Agassi, Ivanisevic, Stich like.
> Finals really don't matter otherwise Federer wouldn't have cried at AO.

Federer cries a lot so don't you never mind Roger's tears :)

This says it better than anything:

Prize Money for Australian Open Men=92s and Women's Singles
1st Round $19,400
2nd Round $31,000
3rd Round $51,000
4th Round $88,000
Quarter Finalist $182,250
Semi Finalist $365,000
Runners-up $1,000,000
Winners $2,000,000

The Runner-up got a cool one million and it is half of what the
champion got. Nothing to sneeze at. First and second round losers get
only a fraction of what the top players get.

In reality, Federer had nothing to cry about. He did real good...



   
Date: 15 Feb 2009 22:02:04
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Fan wrote:
> On Feb 15, 10:23 am, "*skriptis" <skrip...@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4997d5a3$0$666$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Fan wrote:
>>>>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
>>>>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
>>>> Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
>>>> champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
>>>> Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them all
>>>> winners.
>>> Links?
>>> You'll find in an historical sense finalists get completely ignored too.
>>> eg did you realize Jimbo was r/up 4 times at Wimbledon, which is an
>>> alltime record? Probably not because you & everyone doesn't care. If you
>>> did care you'd bring it up all the time - eg 'Jimbo won 2 Wimbledons &
>>> importantly was also r/up 4 times'. No, I'm pretty confident you never
>>> saw Jimbo as a winner 6 times at Wimbledon, which makes your claim above
>>> bullshit.
>>>> Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but not
>>>> winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finalist
>>>> than not getting close to it.
>>> Do you see Rafa as 3 time Wimbledon winner? If not I must insist you
>>> withdraw the above post.
>> Rafa had 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals, only Newcombe, Borg, Mac, Edberg,
>> Becker, Sampras and Federer achieved that during open era.
>> It looks flashy when told in that manner, but in reality his Wimbledon
>> record is Agassi, Ivanisevic, Stich like.
>> Finals really don't matter otherwise Federer wouldn't have cried at AO.
>
> Federer cries a lot so don't you never mind Roger's tears :)
>
> This says it better than anything:
>
> Prize Money for Australian Open Men’s and Women's Singles
> 1st Round $19,400
> 2nd Round $31,000
> 3rd Round $51,000
> 4th Round $88,000
> Quarter Finalist $182,250
> Semi Finalist $365,000
> Runners-up $1,000,000
> Winners $2,000,000
>
> The Runner-up got a cool one million and it is half of what the
> champion got. Nothing to sneeze at. First and second round losers get
> only a fraction of what the top players get.
>
> In reality, Federer had nothing to cry about. He did real good...
>


In reality he had a lot to cry about - he failed to advance his legacy &
is still seen as '13'.

You'll note Sampras doesn't get credit for 8 USOs, only the finals he won.



    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 11:17:58
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 22:02:04 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Fan wrote:
>> On Feb 15, 10:23 am, "*skriptis" <skrip...@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
>>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:4997d5a3$0$666$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Fan wrote:
>>>>>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
>>>>>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
>>>>> Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
>>>>> champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
>>>>> Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them all
>>>>> winners.
>>>> Links?
>>>> You'll find in an historical sense finalists get completely ignored too.
>>>> eg did you realize Jimbo was r/up 4 times at Wimbledon, which is an
>>>> alltime record? Probably not because you & everyone doesn't care. If you
>>>> did care you'd bring it up all the time - eg 'Jimbo won 2 Wimbledons &
>>>> importantly was also r/up 4 times'. No, I'm pretty confident you never
>>>> saw Jimbo as a winner 6 times at Wimbledon, which makes your claim above
>>>> bullshit.
>>>>> Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but not
>>>>> winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finalist
>>>>> than not getting close to it.
>>>> Do you see Rafa as 3 time Wimbledon winner? If not I must insist you
>>>> withdraw the above post.
>>> Rafa had 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals, only Newcombe, Borg, Mac, Edberg,
>>> Becker, Sampras and Federer achieved that during open era.
>>> It looks flashy when told in that manner, but in reality his Wimbledon
>>> record is Agassi, Ivanisevic, Stich like.
>>> Finals really don't matter otherwise Federer wouldn't have cried at AO.
>>
>> Federer cries a lot so don't you never mind Roger's tears :)
>>
>> This says it better than anything:
>>
>> Prize Money for Australian Open Men’s and Women's Singles
>> 1st Round $19,400
>> 2nd Round $31,000
>> 3rd Round $51,000
>> 4th Round $88,000
>> Quarter Finalist $182,250
>> Semi Finalist $365,000
>> Runners-up $1,000,000
>> Winners $2,000,000
>>
>> The Runner-up got a cool one million and it is half of what the
>> champion got. Nothing to sneeze at. First and second round losers get
>> only a fraction of what the top players get.
>>
>> In reality, Federer had nothing to cry about. He did real good...
>>
>
>
>In reality he had a lot to cry about - he failed to advance his legacy &
>is still seen as '13'.
>
>You'll note Sampras doesn't get credit for 8 USOs, only the finals he won.


In reality it is only a matter of time until the sampras record is
toast.

Then, your fucked here, You will never be able to recover.


  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 23:12:11
From: Fan
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.

Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them all
winners.

Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but not
winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finalist
than not getting close to it. Agassi (Sampras' only and main rival)
was a three time French finalist and won one of those. That means that
he was a force at the French also.


   
Date: 15 Feb 2009 19:43:08
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Fan wrote:
>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
>
> Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
> champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
> Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them all
> winners.
>


Links?

You'll find in an historical sense finalists get completely ignored too.
eg did you realize Jimbo was r/up 4 times at Wimbledon, which is an
alltime record? Probably not because you & everyone doesn't care. If
you did care you'd bring it up all the time - eg 'Jimbo won 2 Wimbledons
& importantly was also r/up 4 times'. No, I'm pretty confident you
never saw Jimbo as a winner 6 times at Wimbledon, which makes your claim
above bullshit.


> Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but not
> winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finalist
> than not getting close to it.


Do you see Rafa as 3 time Wimbledon winner? If not I must insist you
withdraw the above post.


> Agassi (Sampras' only and main rival)
> was a three time French finalist and won one of those. That means that
> he was a force at the French also.


Yes he was. Pity he only won 4 blue-chip slams in a 20 yr career. Does
that make him a great GS force?




    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 10:23:43
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:4997d5a3$0$666$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Fan wrote:
>>> hogwash. it means you were at least good enough to make the final as
>>> opposed to LOSING EIGHT TIMES IN R1/R2 to absolute clowns.
>>
>> Early losses mean little when evaluating the record of great
>> champions. Even most record summaries show only the finalists.
>> Finalists are not losers because getting to the final makes them all
>> winners.
>>
>
>
> Links?
>
> You'll find in an historical sense finalists get completely ignored too.
> eg did you realize Jimbo was r/up 4 times at Wimbledon, which is an
> alltime record? Probably not because you & everyone doesn't care. If you
> did care you'd bring it up all the time - eg 'Jimbo won 2 Wimbledons &
> importantly was also r/up 4 times'. No, I'm pretty confident you never
> saw Jimbo as a winner 6 times at Wimbledon, which makes your claim above
> bullshit.
>
>
>> Federer has an outstanding record of performance at the French but not
>> winning it is a blemish. Much better to be a multiple French finalist
>> than not getting close to it.
>
>
> Do you see Rafa as 3 time Wimbledon winner? If not I must insist you
> withdraw the above post.


Rafa had 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals, only Newcombe, Borg, Mac, Edberg,
Becker, Sampras and Federer achieved that during open era.
It looks flashy when told in that manner, but in reality his Wimbledon
record is Agassi, Ivanisevic, Stich like.
Finals really don't matter otherwise Federer wouldn't have cried at AO.




  
Date: 15 Feb 2009 10:43:40
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 14, 7:44 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>> while half asleep.
>
> I thought goat was whoever had the best score on 7543. Isn't Fed still
> playing and only 12
> points away? Or did I miss the news report that he'd retired?


"Achievement goat" is still very much on the table for Fed, but it's no
certainty.



 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 15:22:19
From: Raja
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 1:55=A0pm, undecided <cost...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 14, 10:31=A0am, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 14, 9:26=A0am, undecided <cost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 13, 9:45=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like =
he
> > > > just swung from a tree"
> > > > About Steffi Graf - "You have never defined yourself by what you ha=
ve
> > > > achieved; rather, you have achieved by how you defined yourself,"
>
> > > Retard, Agassi said this when he was a young punk with funky hair. He
> > > changed his tune after a few @ss-rapings by Pete.
>
> > Agassi-Sampras H2H =3D 14-20. You are deluded.
>
> Pete almost ended AA's career in 95 USO.

No it was the burgers.



 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:55:06
From: undecided
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 10:31=A0am, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 14, 9:26=A0am, undecided <cost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13, 9:45=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> > > just swung from a tree"
> > > About Steffi Graf - "You have never defined yourself by what you have
> > > achieved; rather, you have achieved by how you defined yourself,"
>
> > Retard, Agassi said this when he was a young punk with funky hair. He
> > changed his tune after a few @ss-rapings by Pete.
>
> Agassi-Sampras H2H =3D 14-20. You are deluded.

Pete almost ended AA's career in 95 USO.


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 07:31:40
From: Raja
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 9:26=A0am, undecided <cost...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 13, 9:45=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> > just swung from a tree"
> > About Steffi Graf - "You have never defined yourself by what you have
> > achieved; rather, you have achieved by how you defined yourself,"
>
> Retard, Agassi said this when he was a young punk with funky hair. He
> changed his tune after a few @ss-rapings by Pete.

Agassi-Sampras H2H =3D 14-20. You are deluded.


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 07:26:46
From: undecided
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 13, 9:45=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> just swung from a tree"
> About Steffi Graf - "You have never defined yourself by what you have
> achieved; rather, you have achieved by how you defined yourself,"

Retard, Agassi said this when he was a young punk with funky hair. He
changed his tune after a few @ss-rapings by Pete.


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 06:47:57
From: Fan
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 3:30=A0pm, Superdave <the.big.rst.kah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:44:10 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Fan wrote:
>
> >> Sampras=92 obvious and impressive accomplishments are somewhat
> >> diminished by his selfishness and his game built almost entirely
> >> around his incredible serves.
>
> >This of course is not true in the slightest. =A0Sampras is considered no=
t
> >only the greatest tennis player of all time but amongst the greatest
> >sportsmen in all sports. =A0Every analyst I've ever read compares his
> >talent to the likes of Pele, Ali, Nicklaus & Bradman. =A0The only people=
I
> >see criticizing him is the bogan moron element in rst, of which you are
> >a prime example. =A0I put this down to several elements - ie some
> >combination of trolling, cluelessness & retardation.
>
> >> People often feel that winning by your
> >> serves is not as =93good=94 as winning with a complete game. That may =
be
> >> the reason why Federer and Nadal seem to be getting more respect than
> >> Sampras.
>
> >Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismissed as
> >goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
> >Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> >Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
> >while half asleep.
>
> Federer 1 Sampras 0 at the world championships proves that you are
> wrong.-

Funny how trying to make Sampras more than he is, always backfires :)

He should have been satisfied with the credit I gave to Sampras but he
is such a troll...


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 06:29:42
From: Professor X
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 12:44=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Fan wrote:
>
> > Sampras=92 obvious and impressive accomplishments are somewhat
> > diminished by his selfishness and his game built almost entirely
> > around his incredible serves.
>
> This of course is not true in the slightest. =A0Sampras is considered not
> only the greatest tennis player of all time but amongst the greatest
> sportsmen in all sports. =A0Every analyst I've ever read compares his
> talent to the likes of Pele, Ali, Nicklaus & Bradman. =A0The only people =
I
> see criticizing him is the bogan moron element in rst, of which you are
> a prime example. =A0I put this down to several elements - ie some
> combination of trolling, cluelessness & retardation.
>
> > People often feel that winning by your
> > serves is not as =93good=94 as winning with a complete game. That may b=
e
> > the reason why Federer and Nadal seem to be getting more respect than
> > Sampras.
>
> Of course this is complete rubbish. =A0Federer is already dismissed as
> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
> Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
> Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
> while half asleep.

Yes Rafa was very susceptible to Tsonga yesterday, and beat flake the
last 2 times they played.


 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 05:37:18
From: Silence, Fedfucker!
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Federer is already dismissed as
> goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
> Rafa

very true, very true indeed.



 
Date: 13 Feb 2009 23:02:34
From: Fan
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 14, 5:33=A0am, drew <d...@technologist.com > wrote:
> On Feb 13, 9:45=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> > just swung from a tree"
>
> He meant this as a joke. =A0It was a nasty comment but like many it
> holds some truth.
>
> Sampras didn't look like a champion and too often he didn't play like
> one.
>
> Nothing can erase his accomplishments but a man's weaknesses are
> always there.
>
> Pete Sampras was no superman and could never hold the aura or mystique
> of a guy like Bjorn Borg, who was himself a deeply flawed human being.
>
> Now Rafael Nadal, there's a guy who has true greatness written all
> over his self.

They made fun of each other a lot. Both pretended not to be bothered
by it but they were both bothered by it :)

Sampras=92 obvious and impressive accomplishments are somewhat
diminished by his selfishness and his game built almost entirely
around his incredible serves. People often feel that winning by your
serves is not as =93good=94 as winning with a complete game. That may be
the reason why Federer and Nadal seem to be getting more respect than
Sampras.



  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 23:44:10
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
Fan wrote:

>
> Sampras’ obvious and impressive accomplishments are somewhat
> diminished by his selfishness and his game built almost entirely
> around his incredible serves.


This of course is not true in the slightest. Sampras is considered not
only the greatest tennis player of all time but amongst the greatest
sportsmen in all sports. Every analyst I've ever read compares his
talent to the likes of Pele, Ali, Nicklaus & Bradman. The only people I
see criticizing him is the bogan moron element in rst, of which you are
a prime example. I put this down to several elements - ie some
combination of trolling, cluelessness & retardation.


> People often feel that winning by your
> serves is not as “good” as winning with a complete game. That may be
> the reason why Federer and Nadal seem to be getting more respect than
> Sampras.
>


Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
while half asleep.


   
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:30:40
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:44:10 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Fan wrote:
>
>>
>> Sampras’ obvious and impressive accomplishments are somewhat
>> diminished by his selfishness and his game built almost entirely
>> around his incredible serves.
>
>
>This of course is not true in the slightest. Sampras is considered not
>only the greatest tennis player of all time but amongst the greatest
>sportsmen in all sports. Every analyst I've ever read compares his
>talent to the likes of Pele, Ali, Nicklaus & Bradman. The only people I
>see criticizing him is the bogan moron element in rst, of which you are
>a prime example. I put this down to several elements - ie some
>combination of trolling, cluelessness & retardation.
>
>
>> People often feel that winning by your
>> serves is not as “good” as winning with a complete game. That may be
>> the reason why Federer and Nadal seem to be getting more respect than
>> Sampras.
>>
>
>
>Of course this is complete rubbish. Federer is already dismissed as
>goat due to constantly losing in all slams on all surfaces to a guy like
>Rafa, & Rafa himself is very susceptible to guys who played a very
>Sampras-lite game eg Blake, Tsonga etc - the real thing would rip him
>while half asleep.


Federer 1 Sampras 0 at the world championships proves that you are
wrong.


  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:24:58
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras

"Fan" <TurnagainArm@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:f1d823b7-00de-4e41-94fb-471276af7aee@k19g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 14, 5:33 am, drew <d...@technologist.com > wrote:
> On Feb 13, 9:45 pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> > just swung from a tree"
>
> He meant this as a joke. It was a nasty comment but like many it
> holds some truth.
>
> Sampras didn't look like a champion and too often he didn't play like
> one.
>
> Nothing can erase his accomplishments but a man's weaknesses are
> always there.
>
> Pete Sampras was no superman and could never hold the aura or mystique
> of a guy like Bjorn Borg, who was himself a deeply flawed human being.
>
> Now Rafael Nadal, there's a guy who has true greatness written all
> over his self.
>
>They made fun of each other a lot. Both pretended not to be bothered
>by it but they were both bothered by it :)
>
>Sampras’ obvious and impressive accomplishments are somewhat
>diminished by his selfishness and his game built almost entirely
>around his incredible serves. People often feel that winning by your
>serves is not as “good” as winning with a complete game. That may be
>the reason why Federer and Nadal seem to be getting more respect than
>Sampras.

I think it's just that the Agassi fans weren't happy with him, if you
consider most of them suddenly switched to being Fedfans, all becomes clear.




 
Date: 13 Feb 2009 20:33:16
From: drew
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf
On Feb 13, 9:45=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> just swung from a tree"

He meant this as a joke. It was a nasty comment but like many it
holds some truth.

Sampras didn't look like a champion and too often he didn't play like
one.

Nothing can erase his accomplishments but a man's weaknesses are
always there.

Pete Sampras was no superman and could never hold the aura or mystique
of a guy like Bjorn Borg, who was himself a deeply flawed human being.

Now Rafael Nadal, there's a guy who has true greatness written all
over his self.


  
Date: 14 Feb 2009 11:03:00
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: Andre Agassi explains the biggest difference between Steffi Graf and Pete Sampras
"drew" <drew@technologist.com > wrote in message
news:56ed2ea3-aac5-4b5b-9fe5-cf24f3ce3ed3@m22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 9:45 pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> About Pete Sampras - "Nobody should be ranked No. 1 who looks like he
> just swung from a tree"
>
>He meant this as a joke. It was a nasty comment but like many it
>holds some truth.
>
>Sampras didn't look like a champion and too often he didn't play like
>one.

what a load of cack.

>Nothing can erase his accomplishments but a man's weaknesses are
>always there.
>
>Pete Sampras was no superman and could never hold the aura or mystique
>of a guy like Bjorn Borg, who was himself a deeply flawed human being.

rubbish, he held his own mystique.

>Now Rafael Nadal, there's a guy who has true greatness written all
>over his self.

yes, very true.