Was fortunate enough to see both in person many times in their prime.. They never disappointed. Both had great service and net games, not any real weakness. Class competitors.
Arguably the best match ever: fantastic charismatic players, superb technique, fine shots, rallies, volleys, several tie-breaks, a true game to be enjoyed.
The greatest match ever was the Wimbledon 2008 final. McEnroe, Becker, Borg, Laver and many others said so. It's tennis from another dimension. Only downside to the match for me though is that Federer lost it. But beautiful nonetheless! It's even mentioned as the greatest tennis match ever on Wikipedia lol
It is more of media hype and then increased hype as they all know that is good for sport and brings more money with the news.. Federer now has a rival on all surfaces called Nadal.. etc. Just that intrigue and also the drama of the match where Fed launched a comeback and of course that tie breaker which is probably the greatest tie breaker ever. And also no light at the end of the match all that drama.. But in terms of pure quality of tennis.. Federer has made several uncharacteristic errors in that match too compared to 2007 which has more fantastic tennis. Great because of the legends played in that game and the drama not just because of pure tennis.
Greatest match ever is subjective and depends on what style of match a viewer enjoys most. I enjoy all court players so these type of matches become my favorite.
Becker's backhand is beautiful, but I never liked Sampras'. I think if Sampras would have had a better backhand to go along with that legendary forehand then he could have put a few extra majors under his belt. My favorite one hander is Wawrinka.
Anyone who believes Sampras was one-dimensional and just a server, or a serve-and-volleyer, should watch this and see what a brilliant all-court game he had (much the same applies to Becker). This is as high a standard of tennis as you will see, and those deluded fanboys who think this era is the best there's ever been simply have little knowledge of, or interest in, tennis before this era. This is the great match, with its magnificent all-court attacking tennis - note attacking: there's hardly a defensive shot to be seen and certainly, thank God, no Djokovic-type baseline defensive grinding - to show the fallacy of the fan-boys' view of today's tennis being the best ever.
While everything u said is spot on and nice written, you contradict yourself by saying notice how it’s attacking and no defending. And then u say this is proper all court tennis. All court would apply defending as well. Tennis includes defense so while u say this is complete tennis, you can’t also say they only attack
It was an epic match. I always felt like this match was one of the greatest examples of Becker having aged like fine wine into a finesse player rather than his early days known as a power server. The variation of the many court surfaces of the eighties and nineties truly added something special to the sport. This fast action is so dynamic it is truly fun to watch players have to negotiate a changing surface from tournament to tournament.
1996 was the last year the ATP final would be played on indoor carpet, in 1997 the surface was changed to indoor hardcourt, plexicushion. The players unanimously voted for this change. Indoor surfaces were being slowed down already in the mid 1990s. Nice to watch two players do a combination of serve volley and then stay back and rally on their own serve. Mixing things up.
the first tennis match I watched on TV was in 1989, Lendl-Chang at Roland Garros. And then all over the 90s. Maybe it's because I was in my 20s, the first TV marathons and sleepless nights due to timezone, but the emotions I felt watching games like this are unmatched. I like Roger a lot, but Lendl, Sampras, Becker, Edberg and Agassi are carved in my heart.
What a great match. It reminds the match between the great Borg and Mecanro.The two gaints in the history of Tennis displaying amazing classic game of power and art. Both are reallye very great players. Salute to them and their game.
One of the best matches I have ever seen. Becker's power was just incredible to watch. Puma Boris Becker Super Vs. Wilson Pro Staff. Classic stuff indeed.
Klaus Drienko it's right up there. Remember watching it live and I just kept thinking Ive never seen Becker so cool relaxed and imposing. That Sampras running forehand though deflated him a little. For me def top 3 matches Ive ever witnessed. Held my breath a lot.
roger ao win 2017 is one of your top3, djokovic 2012 ao and nadal 2008 wimbledon were both quality wise and intensity wise better, but i respect your opinion
you all are forgetting the all time greatest match the only match to never have a break in a slam. never has tennis reached a higher level than that night. once again it was achieved by pete of course.
Dieses Match zeigte,wie gut Boris eigentlich war!Niemand der damaligen Spieler,ausser eben Sampras, hätte ihn an diesem Tag geschlagen!Übrigens auch keiner der heutigen Grundlinienwühler!
Loved the times way back then in the 90s when becker was playing...he was always entertaining in some way like giving his best without being predictable...
@@pomerlain8924 i really don't understand why. Indoor carpet speeds varied from medium to fast. It is true Hannover was fast in 1996 but Stuttgart was much slower the same year as were the ATP finals from 1990-1995 at Frankfurt. I preferred watching tennis on this surface over grass because even though it could play faster the even bounce encouraged all court play. Serve volley, return winners, long rallies and point construction. I.e balanced all court play and no wars of attrition.
nuntana2 I met them both in the mid 90’s. Becker had a regal quality about him but was very cordial. Sampras was a nice guy, quiet and down to earth. So was his coach, Tim Gulleckson.
I played fairly high level competitive tennis in juniors and college, and I can tell you that serve by Sampras at the 3:01 mark has to be one of the hardest serves I've ever seen.
It is boring fast surfaces are boring it will be go to tie breaks most of the time I prefer medium fast,medium and slow surfaces mostly Serve and 2 to 3 shots point will be over actually
Past tennis is about skill and talent and dominate by Serve and volley players mostly on grass and hard court surface Present tennis is skill,Talent,Strength,Stamina,Agility, Fitness and toughness and flexibility dominating by Baseline players. Which Federer lacks actually Put little bit sand in it Djokovic and Nadal will win it Federer is struggling to win major titles as his rivals are mentally and physically stronger and fitter and powerful than Federer simple. Fast surfaces are very boring dominate by servnebots only it is showed by Anderson and isner also Thank God Djokovic won it in end. Max make it medium fast for Wimbledon and Australian open it will become fair and just for every player
Even those players will not play good in present tennis actually. Pete Sampras doesn't have French open titles so he is not one of the few players who complete career grandslam. Only 4 players are their in open era who won all majors at least once. 1. Andre Agassi 2. Rafael Nadal 3. Roger Federer 4. Novak Djokovic Non open era 1. Rod laver 2. Roy Emerson.
One can imagine what an incredible rivalry Becker and Sampras would have had if they had both come along at exactly the same time on the men's pro tennis tour. Sampras won his first major tournament (the 1990 U.S. Open) five years after Becker won his first Wimbledon title in 1985. Becker's prime was earlier in his pro tennis career than most tennis pros' primes are in their tennis careers because he had an incredibly strong physique when he was just 17 years old.
I realise how strong a weapon the backhand of Becker was at that time. He was known for his serve and powerful forehand, but I think his backhand was really undervalued...
I miss this era of the 90s so much! Tennis was far more competitive back then with many top players beating each other and even a lot of upsets happening with far lower ranked players beating much higher ranked players also.Grand slams were won by different players a lot also.That year in 96, at Wimbledon, Richard Krajiceck beat Malavai Washington! I remember those years so well as I was a teenager who enjoyed watching and playing tennis.What an era that was indeed.
Becker's style always impresses me. He invented a completely customized tennis, every shot of him was personal and beautiful, starting from the incredible serve movement. I miss so much Becker, and Edberg, and Mc Enroe. I dont miss players like Agassi, or Sampras. They were great Champions, but their style had nothing to say, to me. Greetings from Rome Italy
Know what you mean. Tennis is not just counting the victories. It's also art. The players express themselves. Alone McEnroe's Service for example makes it worth for me to watch the whole match. (Geetings from Germany🙋♂️)
@ cervantes1168. During the 1990's most tournaments and most tennis matches on the men's pro tour were not best-of-5-sets but were best -of- 3 sets. There were some tournaments (e.g., the Lipton International Players Tournament and the ATP Tour Finals which used to be called the Masters tournament) other than the 4 major tournaments which had a best-of-5-sets format, but most tournaments on the men's pro tour back then were best-of-3-sets format.
@@ryanfriesen4366 Peak Sampras shits on peak Federer. Dude won a grandslam in the 2000s using 80s racquet tech and playing with thalassemia. How many grandslams did Federer win with an 85 sq inch racquet? He changed to a bigger & more modern one pretty fucking fast lol
@@hehehehehahahaha2025 Federer is more entertaining to watch (for the spectator) than Sampras. Pete feels monotonous many times, even if good for his wins. Agassi is more entertaining to the spectator.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 this is true. Commentators, analysts and other pro players have said that it was difficult for the average audience to appreciate Sampras' style simply because he was so good & efficient that he could make everything look so easy and simple, to the point where people thought there was nothing special about it. It didn't help his cause that he didn't show much of his personality on court or in interviews either, but that's his business.
@@hehehehehahahaha2025 He was obviously supremely TALENTED, and hence won 14 GSs. My comment was only about ENTERTAINMENT factor for the spectator. Federer is both TALENTED and ENTERTAINING to watch. I can't say who is better as they didn't play in same era. However, I'm tempted to say that if RF Pete ND RN debuted at the same time and were of same age (i.e. preparing a level field in my mind), I feel Roger would have the upper hand on all of them (however small the margins might be). To go deeper, RF would have edge over ND on H & H(i), a minor edge over Pete on Grass, but can't beat RN on clay, and clearly overtake them on the other surface combinations. My feeling, having watched Roger since his debut.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 I can respect that opinion. My feeling is that prime Federer would have an edge over Sampras on AO and FO (just like Agassi did), but prime Sampras would take the edge on the old surfaces of Wimby and US Open - I base this feeling PARTLY on the fact that Federer himself stated after their exhibition matches that even after having been retired for 5 years (with injuries), Sampras could still beat current top 10 players on really fast courts like carpet etc.
Been watching tennis since the 70's. For me Laver passed the best male tennis player in the world title to Borg and Borg passed it to Mcenroe and Mcenroe passed it to Becker and Becker passed it to Sampras and Sampras passed it to Federer and Federer passed it to Djokovic. All those players are the best of their era.
Sampras playing with an 85 pro staff, meanwhile Becker plays with an 88 racket. Pure precision, you really need to hit it on the small sweet spot. That's why I am not impressed with today's Pros. They all particularly play with oversized rackets. The tour should make rules on this, 6 footers should only use rackets 85 up to 93. The players that should be permitted to use 95 to 100 head size rackets are those 5'11 below.
This match helped save the 1990s. It was the time of the return of Star Wars action figures and there was the ice hockey World Cup of 1996. After all this decade was not that bad.
This was right in the shift of domination from Becker's peak (ending) to Sampras' peak (starting). Andre got in the middle of it all for a few years too and owned the early 90's
Eric I don’t think this years Wimbledon final was great. It was nothing more but a compilation of Federer missing chances one by another. I was so heartbroken after the match
Pistol Pete Sampras-the best tennis player ever. Federer’s 20 slams do not measure up to Sampras’s 14 slams. Why? The 90s was the most competitive era in tennis history. 15-20 guys were capable of winning Grand slams. Tennis has never been the same since this era.
I agree. While roger is my favorite player Sampras had way better competition. It's just like when people say lebron is better than jordan. I just laugh at the comparison because Jordan's era of competition was on a whole other level and way more physical. Lebron and Federer never had that killer instinct that jordan or Sampras did.
Genius Q hard to compare eras because of the change in technology. I tend to believe the greats in any era would be as good if given the same equipment and training. What is intriguing to me is the thought of today’s players competing in the wood racquet era. In those days, it was actually and advantage to be smaller and more nimble in order to get low on volleys.
Much deeper fields, who? He had Agassi, who he owned. Becker, lendl and edberg were well past their prime. Ivanisevic was really only good on grass. Courier was solid and rafter. Muster only in clay. So how is this deep. But 80s tennis for me was the greatest era for tennis and its players
What are you talking about? He whipped Sampras at Stuttgart a week prior and was 27-28 here if I recall correctly. Pretty sure Becker beat Pete in the Round Robin as well.
I was thinking - on the one hand - that Becker was fantastic in his last great year. Because '96 was his last good year and before him in '95 he did not really go for the game. True, he could win in Frankfurt. On the other hand, I thought Boris was mentally and physically old to professional tennis (Boris, in fact, spent 29 years in November 1996.) He did not win anything in '97 and '98 and finished the game in the summer of '99.
Slightly confused thinking here - Becker in '95 (had a great season btw and lost to a dominant Pete in the Wimbledon final) and '96 was still operating at the highest level in my mind. If Sampras, who in my mind is the GOAT, says Becker is the one to beat coming into the Hanover Masters in 96 (which btw had a ridiculous top 8 lineup featuring Agassi, Muster, Ivanisevic, Kraijeck, Kafelnikov etc), then I'll take his word over yours.
Ok, I looked at a statistic, '95 was not so weak (he also won in Marseilles) Besides, do you still have a problem? I do not have enough time to worry about Boris's (wonderful) career. Bye!
I remember this match live seen on television. Becker played one point wrong. You also see this in this summary. At 4:4 in the 5th set, Becker's first point, he played for the first time, after a good serve through the middle, his first backhand volley longline into Sampras' forhand and not cross into his backhand as he did always before and lost the point by an passing shot from Sampras. This was the point to 00:15 and the beginn for the final and only break. Sad, if Boris had won this match I would say that was his best match ever!
For me Federer is the most accomplished and the goat. But if you were to ask me who wins in their PRIME Samprus or Federer. I couldnt give you a straight answer. Samprus in his prime was a monster. He had no weakness at all. Federer was able to beat these guys later because their power and agility was waning due to age.
LOOK AT THE POWER & ACCURACY OF BOTH FOREHAND & SINGLE HANDED BACKHAND OF THESE 2 players!!!! EASILY WERE MUCH BETTER THAN BOTH FEDERER & NADAL IN THEIR PRIME BY A HUGE DISTANCE!!!!
you are just kidding right, federer and nadal took tennis to next levels and made it more popular, what they've done for tennis is not easy, your comparison is just bollocks
Hard to believe Sampras never did much on clay -- never even reached a French final, semis only once. His ground stokes here look good enough to compete on clay
Yes he did. And collapsed on match point - which I think was his single biggest problem on clay - he had thalassemia and he knew it. He knew he couldn't count on hanging in there for 5 seta on clay through an entire slam. I think this really hurt his mindset on clay. At his best, even on clay he was capable of beating the best in a given math - hinknahout it, he beat courier, bruguera, and muster - at the French open. The guy could play on clay... he just couldn't keep it up.... and then he rather listlessly lose to journeyman x....
What a legend, Sampras: he beat Boris Becker in Hannover, playing in his pijamas
Don't think he broke Becker until the final set decider though, pretty lucky.
Possibly the funniest thing I've read in quite some time. Lol hahaha
Very very funny comment!!!
@@phadley78tube Definitely. The master Sampras knew how to deal with the home-field advantage
Oh God! So funny, exactly what I was thinking! Rolled out of bed and went "ok let's go play the finals"! 90s aesthetics at its best
Pete called that the greatest match he was ever a part of.
Nice to hear the huge sheering Sampras received from the German crowd while lifting the trophy. It showed the well-deserved respect for him.
Germans are mainly honest about facts. Great culture.
this classic matches deserve to be uploaded at their full lenght
At least a full highlight, with less talking and more points!
5 hours match started 2pm ended 7pm
Masterpiece of 1996. Probably the best match that year🤝🤝🤝
Was fortunate enough to see both in person many times in their prime.. They never disappointed. Both had great service and net games, not any real weakness. Class competitors.
Arguably the best match ever: fantastic charismatic players, superb technique, fine shots, rallies, volleys, several tie-breaks, a true game to be enjoyed.
far from a final federer nadal australian open 2017 ! not the same level dude
The greatest match ever was the Wimbledon 2008 final. McEnroe, Becker, Borg, Laver and many others said so. It's tennis from another dimension. Only downside to the match for me though is that Federer lost it. But beautiful nonetheless! It's even mentioned as the greatest tennis match ever on Wikipedia lol
It is more of media hype and then increased hype as they all know that is good for sport and brings more money with the news.. Federer now has a rival on all surfaces called Nadal.. etc. Just that intrigue and also the drama of the match where Fed launched a comeback and of course that tie breaker which is probably the greatest tie breaker ever. And also no light at the end of the match all that drama.. But in terms of pure quality of tennis.. Federer has made several uncharacteristic errors in that match too compared to 2007 which has more fantastic tennis. Great because of the legends played in that game and the drama not just because of pure tennis.
Greatest match ever is subjective and depends on what style of match a viewer enjoys most. I enjoy all court players so these type of matches become my favorite.
Yves M. I prefer AO 2017
One of the Greatest Matches of All Time.
Did you see all the matches?
I would say the best match no one talks about. They bring up McEnroe/Borg '80 Wimbledon, or Federer/Nadal Wimbledon. This match doesn't get it's due.
The best match of the 90s, at least!
And that Final in Stuttgart a Month before was also that good.
Sampras and Becker, two of my favorite backhands in tennis!
No Question Mitch
Becker's backhand is beautiful, but I never liked Sampras'. I think if Sampras would have had a better backhand to go along with that legendary forehand then he could have put a few extra majors under his belt. My favorite one hander is Wawrinka.
Sampras was one of the greatest players ever, but in my opinion, Becker all the way, a true legend!
Anyone who believes Sampras was one-dimensional and just a server, or a serve-and-volleyer, should watch this and see what a brilliant all-court game he had (much the same applies to Becker). This is as high a standard of tennis as you will see, and those deluded fanboys who think this era is the best there's ever been simply have little knowledge of, or interest in, tennis before this era. This is the great match, with its magnificent all-court attacking tennis - note attacking: there's hardly a defensive shot to be seen and certainly, thank God, no Djokovic-type baseline defensive grinding - to show the fallacy of the fan-boys' view of today's tennis being the best ever.
While everything u said is spot on and nice written, you contradict yourself by saying notice how it’s attacking and no defending. And then u say this is proper all court tennis. All court would apply defending as well. Tennis includes defense so while u say this is complete tennis, you can’t also say they only attack
It was an epic match. I always felt like this match was one of the greatest examples of Becker having aged like fine wine into a finesse player rather than his early days known as a power server. The variation of the many court surfaces of the eighties and nineties truly added something special to the sport. This fast action is so dynamic it is truly fun to watch players have to negotiate a changing surface from tournament to tournament.
single backhanded always my favourite...
1996 was the last year the ATP final would be played on indoor carpet, in 1997 the surface was changed to indoor hardcourt, plexicushion. The players unanimously voted for this change. Indoor surfaces were being slowed down already in the mid 1990s. Nice to watch two players do a combination of serve volley and then stay back and rally on their own serve. Mixing things up.
the first tennis match I watched on TV was in 1989, Lendl-Chang at Roland Garros. And then all over the 90s. Maybe it's because I was in my 20s, the first TV marathons and sleepless nights due to timezone, but the emotions I felt watching games like this are unmatched. I like Roger a lot, but Lendl, Sampras, Becker, Edberg and Agassi are carved in my heart.
What a great match. It reminds the match between the great Borg and Mecanro.The two gaints in the history of Tennis displaying amazing classic game of power and art. Both are reallye very great players. Salute to them and their game.
One of the best matches I have ever seen. Becker's power was just incredible to watch. Puma Boris Becker Super Vs. Wilson Pro Staff. Classic stuff indeed.
To me, this was the best tennis match I ever watched.
Klaus Drienko it's right up there. Remember watching it live and I just kept thinking Ive never seen Becker so cool relaxed and imposing. That Sampras running forehand though deflated him a little. For me def top 3 matches Ive ever witnessed. Held my breath a lot.
+John Sutton III, what were the other 2 matches?
jandroid33 they are more cerebral for me than the level of tennis. Agassi 99 FO win. And Rogers AO win 2017.
roger ao win 2017 is one of your top3, djokovic 2012 ao and nadal 2008 wimbledon were both quality wise and intensity wise better, but i respect your opinion
you all are forgetting the all time greatest match the only match to never have a break in a slam. never has tennis reached a higher level than that night. once again it was achieved by pete of course.
Good old days when tennis was real tennis
The birth of modern and fast tennis was in Hannover... never ever had this speed & quality together been seen before in matches...
I think the last point really showed awesome both players are.
rohan u are following tennis since ?
Great. Great to know indians who are avid followers of this beautiful sport.
Okk..okk. My bad. Long live tennis.
This name is Indian, thats why i thought.
It wouldn't be any difference, because he would have played with the old rackets as well.
Dieses Match zeigte,wie gut Boris eigentlich war!Niemand der damaligen Spieler,ausser eben Sampras, hätte ihn an diesem Tag geschlagen!Übrigens auch keiner der heutigen Grundlinienwühler!
One of my most favorite matches of all time :) Two indoors players, playing in zone.
Loved the times way back then in the 90s when becker was playing...he was always entertaining in some way like giving his best without being predictable...
Sampras in his prime was just out of this world
IMO greatest match of all time
Rod Laver this and 2008 Wimbledon final maybe
@@aaronhinton7601 agree but add ausopen 2017 and Wimbledon 2019 both epic matches
Wow tennis was really amazing at that time
The days of the one handed backhand, Becker had a great backhand, very good player.
They should make a movie called Backhand like Becker lol
I love Becker’s service motion
Beautiful and skillful tennis, most entertaining
Sampras tremendous forehand was overshadowed by his great serve and volley skills.
CC to CC rallies were mouth-watering in this match.
CC?
Cross court
back when tennis players didn't need to wipe their sweat after every point.
ru40342 Que tal!!
¿Porque estas canchas tienen este dibujo?
Well, Tennis today is more fisical
Or grunt on every shot
Or bounce the ball 30 times.
Amazing match. True all court tennis from both players.
Sampras is the only player ever who could have beaten Becker that day
Great backhands by both players.
The courts were so fast and so great then...
The days of indoor carpet tennis. It's a crime they discontinued the carpet courts, and decided to make even the indoor tournaments slow HCs.
@@pomerlain8924 i really don't understand why. Indoor carpet speeds varied from medium to fast. It is true Hannover was fast in 1996 but Stuttgart was much slower the same year as were the ATP finals from 1990-1995 at Frankfurt. I preferred watching tennis on this surface over grass because even though it could play faster the even bounce encouraged all court play. Serve volley, return winners, long rallies and point construction. I.e balanced all court play and no wars of attrition.
Brilliant. Tons of respect for both of them. Grew up on Boris but Sampras is a legend, such a nice bloke.
nuntana2 I met them both in the mid 90’s. Becker had a regal quality about him but was very cordial. Sampras was a nice guy, quiet and down to earth. So was his coach, Tim Gulleckson.
Becker was awesome in 96. Chang match in Australia is also one of the best on u tube.Easily two of the best s and v players ever sampras and bb
When tennis was still interesting to watch.
I played fairly high level competitive tennis in juniors and college, and I can tell you that serve by Sampras at the 3:01 mark has to be one of the hardest serves I've ever seen.
Damn the courts were fast as hell, it's almost as if the ball gets faster after bouncing.
It is boring fast surfaces are boring it will be go to tie breaks most of the time
I prefer medium fast,medium and slow surfaces mostly
Serve and 2 to 3 shots point will be over actually
@@kikaa1884 lol no variety ...repeating every shot and waiting opponents to make mistake and taking no risk....in modern tennis...
@@kikaa1884 That superfast courts were very relentless.
@ what is Superfast courts their is fast courts,
Medium fast courts,medium courts, Slow medium courts and slowcourts
They also hit less topspin, so the ball doesn’t sit up as much.
This was the golden era of tennis. None of the modern players can play this good
Federer can but not Djokovic or Nadal - they're not good enough in the forecourt, and certainly not at the net.
@@martydav9475 Federer won most of his titles against a field of inconsistent mentally weak players. Djokovic and Nadal took the game to new heights.
Past tennis is about skill and talent and dominate by Serve and volley players mostly on grass and hard court surface
Present tennis is skill,Talent,Strength,Stamina,Agility, Fitness and toughness and flexibility dominating by Baseline players.
Which Federer lacks actually
Put little bit sand in it
Djokovic and Nadal will win it
Federer is struggling to win major titles as his rivals are mentally and physically stronger and fitter and powerful than Federer simple.
Fast surfaces are very boring dominate by servnebots only it is showed by Anderson and isner also
Thank God Djokovic won it in end.
Max make it medium fast for Wimbledon and Australian open it will become fair and just for every player
Even those players will not play good in present tennis actually.
Pete Sampras doesn't have French open titles so he is not one of the few players who complete career grandslam.
Only 4 players are their in open era who won all majors at least once.
1. Andre Agassi
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Roger Federer
4. Novak Djokovic
Non open era
1. Rod laver
2. Roy Emerson.
Only 4 players won all major titles twice at least
1. Novak Djokovic
2. Rod laver
3. Roy Emerson
4. Rafael Nadal.
That backhand at 1:19 is ridiculous
And what about that 0:53 forehand
@@oussamaelbaz5932 this one was good to too but I think the backhand was more impressive
My favourite shot of the match
One can imagine what an incredible rivalry Becker and Sampras would have had if they had both come along at exactly the same time on the men's pro tennis tour. Sampras won his first major tournament (the 1990 U.S. Open) five years after Becker won his first Wimbledon title in 1985. Becker's prime was earlier in his pro tennis career than most tennis pros' primes are in their tennis careers because he had an incredibly strong physique when he was just 17 years old.
Sampras my childhood hero, a true legend!!!
Probably the best match ever
Best carpet match ever. Period.
Probably top3 match of all-time regardless of surface.
Match is from '96 and there is a lot of people here commenting "is the best match i saw live" lot of old guys here :P
Mgo Umk, go fuck yourself... Im 47 and im still young...
I miss those great indoor tournaments on fast surfaces.
Yes , all the courts now are like clay
@@ignaciolopez-fu4mo Nadal the GOAT
@@rishbahpandey8697 na
@@rishbahpandey8697 stfu
😍🤩PETE SAMPRAS THE GREATEST EVERRRR👍💪💚
Definitely my favourite!
Tenis agresivo, de ataques continuos, nada de temores ni especulaciones. Tenis maravilloso
Tenis rápido y poderoso….Después de 1999 hicieron las canchas muy lentas…
Loved this court ... Trully the BOSS of tournaments !!
I realise how strong a weapon the backhand of Becker was at that time. He was known for his serve and powerful forehand, but I think his backhand was really undervalued...
Becker, Lendl & Edberg all had awesome single handed backhands.
Possibly the best tennis either of these guys played in their careers. Sampras obviously, as he won, but Becker was nassssty in this match.
What an incredible final!
That court was so epic
I miss this era of the 90s so much! Tennis was far more competitive back then with many top players beating each other and even a lot of upsets happening with far lower ranked players beating much higher ranked players also.Grand slams were won by different players a lot also.That year in 96, at Wimbledon, Richard Krajiceck beat Malavai Washington! I remember those years so well as I was a teenager who enjoyed watching and playing tennis.What an era that was indeed.
Back when you had lightening fast courts where chip/charge was possible.
Look how fast that court played!
2 greats going toe to toe, highest level..
The best match ever played no matter the era
Simply magnificent
Sampras sicher damals der komplette Spieler. 🙏🙏
REAL tennis. REAL players.
@@LukasOfTheLight Nadal GOAT
@@LukasOfTheLight why hate good person like Rafa??
1:20 what an incredible shot
I miss this style of tennis.
Hannover '96, noone else noticing the irony? 😂
Had to Google it but wow! Now I'm embarrassed as a football fan 😅
They were relegated to second division, ¿right?
@@masters.1000 Actually, they went down directly 😅
Becker's style always impresses me. He invented a completely customized tennis, every shot of him was personal and beautiful, starting from the incredible serve movement. I miss so much Becker, and Edberg, and Mc Enroe. I dont miss players like Agassi, or Sampras. They were great Champions, but their style had nothing to say, to me. Greetings from Rome Italy
Know what you mean. Tennis is not just counting the victories. It's also art. The players express themselves. Alone McEnroe's Service for example makes it worth for me to watch the whole match. (Geetings from Germany🙋♂️)
Sampras, Agassi, ivanisevic, moya, rafter, henman, roddick, safin
Beautiful childhood days.
harish .s kuerten, kafelnikov, corretja, etc
Well, how about Borg, Connors, JMac. Lendl, Edberg , Becker, Wilander-in my case.
Those were the good old times when in most tournaments (not only Grand Slams), matches were played in best of five sets!
@ cervantes1168. During the 1990's most tournaments and most tennis matches on the men's pro tour were not best-of-5-sets but were best -of- 3 sets. There were some tournaments (e.g., the Lipton International Players Tournament and the ATP Tour Finals which used to be called the Masters tournament) other than the 4 major tournaments which had a best-of-5-sets format, but most tournaments on the men's pro tour back then were best-of-3-sets format.
For me, when Sampras was in the zone, he was the best player ever - impossible to beat!
@@ryanfriesen4366 Peak Sampras shits on peak Federer. Dude won a grandslam in the 2000s using 80s racquet tech and playing with thalassemia. How many grandslams did Federer win with an 85 sq inch racquet? He changed to a bigger & more modern one pretty fucking fast lol
@@hehehehehahahaha2025 Federer is more entertaining to watch (for the spectator) than Sampras. Pete feels monotonous many times, even if good for his wins. Agassi is more entertaining to the spectator.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 this is true. Commentators, analysts and other pro players have said that it was difficult for the average audience to appreciate Sampras' style simply because he was so good & efficient that he could make everything look so easy and simple, to the point where people thought there was nothing special about it.
It didn't help his cause that he didn't show much of his personality on court or in interviews either, but that's his business.
@@hehehehehahahaha2025 He was obviously supremely TALENTED, and hence won 14 GSs. My comment was only about ENTERTAINMENT factor for the spectator. Federer is both TALENTED and ENTERTAINING to watch. I can't say who is better as they didn't play in same era. However, I'm tempted to say that if RF Pete ND RN debuted at the same time and were of same age (i.e. preparing a level field in my mind), I feel Roger would have the upper hand on all of them (however small the margins might be). To go deeper, RF would have edge over ND on H & H(i), a minor edge over Pete on Grass, but can't beat RN on clay, and clearly overtake them on the other surface combinations. My feeling, having watched Roger since his debut.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 I can respect that opinion. My feeling is that prime Federer would have an edge over Sampras on AO and FO (just like Agassi did), but prime Sampras would take the edge on the old surfaces of Wimby and US Open - I base this feeling PARTLY on the fact that Federer himself stated after their exhibition matches that even after having been retired for 5 years (with injuries), Sampras could still beat current top 10 players on really fast courts like carpet etc.
Sampras was awesome player look at his footwork and backhand
Hannover gives not shit for Doubles. Well played.
Sorry?
They propably had other courts with doubles lining and wanted to fit more people in the main stage hence the singles court
A lot of respect between those 2. Boris always thought Pete was doing all the same as him, just a little better
Been watching tennis since the 70's. For me Laver passed the best male tennis player in the world title to Borg and Borg passed it to Mcenroe and Mcenroe passed it to Becker and Becker passed it to Sampras and Sampras passed it to Federer and Federer passed it to Djokovic. All those players are the best of their era.
Great game in tennis history. Both player is epic.
Sampras playing with an 85 pro staff, meanwhile Becker plays with an 88 racket.
Pure precision, you really need to hit it on the small sweet spot. That's why I am not
impressed with today's Pros. They all particularly play with oversized rackets.
The tour should make rules on this, 6 footers should only use rackets 85 up to 93.
The players that should be permitted to use 95 to 100 head size rackets are those
5'11 below.
Amazing champions!
I love the crowd hushing themselves.
Those good old times when Pete used to play in boxer
Hannover '96 is also a German football club
Becker had fewer serves and won more points in this match.
sensational tennis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This match helped save the 1990s. It was the time of the return of Star Wars action figures and there was the ice hockey World Cup of 1996. After all this decade was not that bad.
Pete sampras is the Real greatest of all time!!! Great greek blood!!!
polychronio "Second only to Roger Federer on the all time winners' list"
QFT, listen to the narrator man.
farid pete held the record way before Federer. nice try.
bring back the singles court!!!! it looks amazing
The best match ever.
This was right in the shift of domination from Becker's peak (ending) to Sampras' peak (starting). Andre got in the middle of it all for a few years too and owned the early 90's
No, you clearly know nothing about tennis LOL
this game was eerily like Federer Djokovic Wimbledon
Eric I don’t think this years Wimbledon final was great. It was nothing more but a compilation of Federer missing chances one by another. I was so heartbroken after the match
@@jorisw.6233 Helooo 🇷🇸
Pistol Pete Sampras-the best tennis player ever.
Federer’s 20 slams do not measure up to Sampras’s 14 slams.
Why? The 90s was the most competitive era in tennis history. 15-20 guys were capable of winning Grand slams.
Tennis has never been the same since this era.
I tend to agree. Sampras was playing against much deeper fields.
I agree. While roger is my favorite player Sampras had way better competition. It's just like when people say lebron is better than jordan. I just laugh at the comparison because Jordan's era of competition was on a whole other level and way more physical. Lebron and Federer never had that killer instinct that jordan or Sampras did.
Genius Q hard to compare eras because of the change in technology. I tend to believe the greats in any era would be as good if given the same equipment and training.
What is intriguing to me is the thought of today’s players competing in the wood racquet era. In those days, it was actually and advantage to be smaller and more nimble in order to get low on volleys.
Much deeper fields, who? He had Agassi, who he owned. Becker, lendl and edberg were well past their prime. Ivanisevic was really only good on grass. Courier was solid and rafter. Muster only in clay. So how is this deep. But 80s tennis for me was the greatest era for tennis and its players
Absolutely!
That matchpoint. I forgot how good Sampras's forehand is.
The Best Forehand In The Match Was By Becker. Trust Me!
Becker was old but good! He came back at the end of his career! BECKER THE LEGEND.
What are you talking about? He whipped Sampras at Stuttgart a week prior and was 27-28 here if I recall correctly. Pretty sure Becker beat Pete in the Round Robin as well.
I was thinking - on the one hand - that Becker was fantastic in his last great year. Because '96 was his last good year and before him in '95 he did not really go for the game. True, he could win in Frankfurt. On the other hand, I thought Boris was mentally and physically old to professional tennis (Boris, in fact, spent 29 years in November 1996.) He did not win anything in '97 and '98 and finished the game in the summer of '99.
Slightly confused thinking here - Becker in '95 (had a great season btw and lost to a dominant Pete in the Wimbledon final) and '96 was still operating at the highest level in my mind. If Sampras, who in my mind is the GOAT, says Becker is the one to beat coming into the Hanover Masters in 96 (which btw had a ridiculous top 8 lineup featuring Agassi, Muster, Ivanisevic, Kraijeck, Kafelnikov etc), then I'll take his word over yours.
Ok, I looked at a statistic, '95 was not so weak (he also won in Marseilles) Besides, do you still have a problem? I do not have enough time to worry about Boris's (wonderful) career. Bye!
My problem is that you seem to detract from Sampras's victory here by calling Becker old. Both played to the best of their ability. End of.
super match
I remember this match live seen on television. Becker played one point wrong. You also see this in this summary.
At 4:4 in the 5th set, Becker's first point, he played for the first time, after a good serve through the middle, his first backhand volley longline into Sampras' forhand and not cross into his backhand as he did always before and lost the point by an passing shot from Sampras. This was the point to 00:15 and the beginn for the final and only break. Sad, if Boris had won this match I would say that was his best match ever!
he should of won had it not been for the atrocious line calls during the 3rd set tie break.
For me Federer is the most accomplished and the goat. But if you were to ask me who wins in their PRIME Samprus or Federer. I couldnt give you a straight answer. Samprus in his prime was a monster. He had no weakness at all. Federer was able to beat these guys later because their power and agility was waning due to age.
Djokovic and Nadal are best
LOOK AT THE POWER & ACCURACY OF BOTH FOREHAND & SINGLE HANDED BACKHAND OF THESE 2 players!!!! EASILY WERE MUCH BETTER THAN BOTH FEDERER & NADAL IN THEIR PRIME BY A HUGE DISTANCE!!!!
you are just kidding right, federer and nadal took tennis to next levels and made it more popular, what they've done for tennis is not easy, your comparison is just bollocks
Hard to believe Sampras never did much on clay -- never even reached a French final, semis only once. His ground stokes here look good enough to compete on clay
Sampras won the Italian Open on clay. Didn't he also win a Davis Cup final against Russia on clay?
Alan Chong Sampras also won the Austrian Open at Kitzbühel on clay in '93.
Yes he did. And collapsed on match point - which I think was his single biggest problem on clay - he had thalassemia and he knew it. He knew he couldn't count on hanging in there for 5 seta on clay through an entire slam. I think this really hurt his mindset on clay. At his best, even on clay he was capable of beating the best in a given math - hinknahout it, he beat courier, bruguera, and muster - at the French open. The guy could play on clay... he just couldn't keep it up.... and then he rather listlessly lose to journeyman x....
Sampras was 4th best on clay during 1990-1998
This surface is a lot faster than clay. Becker never won a French Open either.
outstanding!
The funny and awkward thing is that today is not looking faster and stronger.
The good old times...