Sampras or Agassi?

Question

I thought after hearing all the responses to the Federer-Nadal question, I would like to hear all your thoughts on that rivalry. Was it better or worse than the Federer-Nadal rivalry? if you think so will the Federer-Nadal surpass theres? whose side were you on? who did you think was better?

I was a little too young and not enough into tennis then to compare the two rivalries, but I do know I was always on the Sampras side. Although, I greatly respected Agassi.

Answer 1

this is much better

Answer 2

If you had ask this question a year ago I would have easily said the answer was Sampras/Agassi, because those two was capable of beating each other on any surface.

Roger/Nadal rivalry still has some ways to go even though as of this date, those two have played each other in more Grand Slam finals than Sampras/Agassi ever did. And you get the feeling that we will be seeing them in a lot more finals to come.

Right now Roger hasn't quite figure out how to beat Nadal, at least on a clay court, but you just get the sense that he will eventually turned this losing record Nadal has on him around. Kind of like how Chris Evert dominated Martina Navratilova in their early matches and then Martina found her winning weapon against Evert and then continued to dominate Chris every time they met.

Answer 3

Agassi was the better all around player, he made all the Slam Finals at least twice, and won one at least once.

The other things is his longevity and endurance, getting the #1 ranking four separate times in your 30s is quite an accomplishment.

Sampras on the other hand was Wimbledon God and pretty dominant at the U.S. Open making several finals and winning five times.

He was dead on clay and had just above average succes at the Aussie Open.

In the end I honestly think Agassi was better.

Sampras won 6 more Slams and made 1 more Final.

But Agassi made many more semifinals, including consecutive streaks of 3 and 4. He made 4 straight finals once etc.

Sampras outside of Grass and U.S. Open was not as consistent. It's hard, personally I take Agassi because of the overall game, consistency and longevity.

Answer 4

I think Nadal-Federer rivalry is more tough, because they're always playing the finals of the tournaments they play. The other players are just too far from them, even Djokovic.

With Sampras and Agassi there were more players... Becker, Kuerten, Jim Courier, Carlos Moya, etc...

Answer 5

sampras agassi i feel was more intense just because it involved two americans who shared 22 grandslams between them.....also sampras was the best serve and volleyer in the game while agassi was the best returner ...nadal and federrer is an awesome rivalry but ive always loved agassi and sampras

Answer 6

If the question is Sampras or Agassi, I like Agassi better , but I think Pete is the greatest ever. 2 great players

But in terms of Rivalry, Rafa Roger surpasses them all . Sampras Agassi played 5 finals with Pete having 4 - 1 edge. Rafa is 22 n Roger 26 and they have already played 6 finals with Rafa having a 4-2 edge. We will see a lot more finals between these 2 in the next 3 4 years. And I am sure when Rafa and Roger retire, Roger will break Pete's record of 14 and Rafa will have more than Agassi's 8.

Answer 7

federer took male tennis to another level as nadal did in clay and they both unreal!agassi  him self stated that they stronger tougher faster than him !agassi and sampras(who is greek like me) i love them but they are inferior i think as a rivarly to roger and rafa

Answer 8

I don't think the rivalry of Federer & Nadal is quite up to the rivalry of Sampras & Agassi. Sampras/Agassi took their rivalry to all different surfaces. So far its been Nadal dominating on clay and Federer pretty much everywhere else (except this year at Wimbledon of course). This year at wimbledon could be a sign that the rivalry is "moving up the ranks" so to speak.

With Sampras and Agassi, I was on Agassi's side. With Federer and Nadal, I am on Nadal's side. I don't really know why with either of those, but sometimes you just pick a favorite for no apparent reason.

As for who was better, it depends on the surface. Nadal for sure over Federer on clay. Federer has been dominant on grass and hard court, though Nadal has been making great strides on both those other surfaces. With Sampras & Agassi, I think overall Sampras might have had the edge, though not by much.

Overall Meetings & Win/Loss Record:

Nadal - 12

Federer - 6

     (10 meetings on clay, 3 on grass, 5 on hard)

Sampras - 20

Agassi - 14

     (20 meetings on hard, 4 on clay, 2 on grass, 7 on carpet)