<p>damn man...id bone maria sharapova...shes so fine...shes my age too ;)</p>
<p>The question is, would she bone you. And the answer is no.</p>
<p>laugh out loud</p>
<p>well obviously when she's a pro tennis player...but dont make your ***** ass seem like you got anything</p>
<p>hostility...anyways...back to the original topic of this thread.</p>
<p>Federer will rock tomorrow...just like Venus did today :)...only reason I was rootin for her was cuz she beat my Maria :p</p>
<p>"Rodger Federer could be the best player of all time..." - John McEnroe</p>
<p>From the way this guy is playing today, I think he could easily beat Sampras in his prime.</p>
<p>yeah federer is crazy. he has a killer backhand. he's just an overall great player, incredibly well rounded. sampras had a better serve, better net game, and more power than federer, but sampras was a god with those three talents. federer is a machine. unless he gets injured, i think he'll be tough to beat in any tournament. federer is more exciting to watch than sampras because his points are longer and he hits a better variety of shots since he cant ace or hit a winner quite like pete did. but i think federer has a long way to go to beat pete, and not just grand slam wise. </p>
<p>sampras is Zeus, and federer's Hercules</p>
<p>and roddick is a decent player, but he's never gonna be great. he's to inconsistent and chokes a lot. besides power he's got nothin. roddick might win one other grand slam, but its not gonna be easy. then again he's young, so we'll see.</p>
<p>Federer won the wimbledon, third year in a row equaling Sampras's record. The way he is going, he is unstoppable.</p>
<p>sampras won 4...and i have no doubts that federer will win next years</p>
<p>US Open August 29th....the fun starts again :)</p>
<p>I'd say Sampras is Kronos and Federer is Zeus....just wait a while and he'll overthrow em</p>
<p>what did I say. straight sets. :)</p>
<p>Sampras' game would have matched up well against Federer's. Federer beat him in 5 sets before, but that was after Sampras' prime and before Federer's (though he was still very hyped back then for his talent). In his prime, Sampras could have beaten anyone. He wasn't invincible, but at his best, he was nearly unstoppable. Just watch that Wimbledon final where he didn't even allow Agassi to get into the match. If you could somehow manage to return his perfectly placed serve, he'd already be at the net to hit the winner. Even Federer would have trouble against that.</p>
<p>actually sampras won 7 wimbledons. he won three in a row from 93-95 and then 4 in a row from 97-2000. he could have had EIGHT wimbledons in a row if he would have just won in 1996...oh well...7 ain't bad.</p>
<p>i have faith in Federer...his serve may not be as solid, but his rhythm is amazing</p>
<p>When he's down one or two break points, 9 times out of ten he'll ace his way out of it. That's amazing. What's so great about Federer is it seems like he's positioned before his opponent even hits the ball. He's so quick and so good at reading shots. And even against a powerful baseliner like Roddick, he still controls the rallies. The only guy I've seen better at the baseline than Federer is Agassi (and maybe Safin at his best), who unfortunately just isn't quick enough to position himself like Federer. If Agassi were younger and quicker, I'd give him the best shot at beating Federer.</p>
<p>GORAN IVANESEVIC, BIATCHES!!!!! (jk-he's my fav. player ever though-I sat next to him on a plane once!)</p>
<p>When comparing Federer with Sampras, how's the level of competition? Is Andy Roddick or Lleyton Hewitt as good as Sampras' biggest rivals? I mean Roddick and Hewitt are the next best players on the tour besides Federer and they couldn't even win one set against him.</p>
<p>um yeah...that Agassi dude doesnt compare to hewitt or roddick. haha. roddick's biggest weapon is his power. lleyton's is his speed. when agassi was playin you had guga, rafter, agassi, moya, rios (when he didnt tank), ivanesavic, kafelnikov (sp?), among many others. there's no way you can say that the level of competition was lower for sampras than it is for federer.</p>
<p>now the womens game is a different story...</p>
<p>woops, i meant "when sampras was playing you had guga...."</p>
<p>Who said Agassi doesn't compare with Hewitt or Roddick? Last year he beat both of them in a tourney, and he's over 10 years older than them. Agassi is an all time great. Hewitt is up there, he gave Sampras a lot of trouble after his prime, but Agassi is definitely the better player. He almost beat Federer in their five setter 2004 Open, and SHOULD have, but the wind screwed things up. I'd like to see Hewitt take Federer that far. Roddick has so many problems in his game. He's definitely not among the greats. Power alone is not enough to win Slams. He shouldn't have even won the US Open, Nalbandian should have beat him in the semis (I think Nalby got a bad call in a tiebreak, lost the set, and became exhausted afterwards because of his previous long matches). Screw Roddick. Guys like Nadal and Safin are much more interesting. They have potential. If Nadal can get his hard/grass court game up, and if Safin can pull himself together and play his best, tennis should be very interesting, because Federer will have big obstacles.</p>
<p>Saying that Agassi doesn't match up to Roddick is proposterous. Agassi is one of the all-time greats, a court legend, while Roddick's still the kid who can't dent Roger Federer. Listen to AIM78: even though Agassi was past his prime, he still pushed Federer to the limit. Contrast that to Roddick, who can't even win a measly set without nearly killing himself.</p>