Pete is the greatest of them all! Classic serve and vollier even in this day and age I've not seen anyone nearly half as good as Pete especially when it comes to volley....
What is so striking is the speed of the exchanges, how flat a lot of the shots are. Much higher risk than today's game. And the amazing counterattacking shots from a defensive position from both André and Pete. This is a real gem of a match.
Yes. It was harder to generate topspin with gut back then than it is with poly today. The fact these guys were playing at today's level with inferior technology says a lot about their talent.
After Agassi's win over Sampras at the 1995 1000 Masters in Canada, it took him three years to beat Sampras again. Such was the disappointment Agassi experienced after he was confident he'd beat Sampras at the 1995 US Open (and the disappointment of how convincingly Sampras beat him).
Pistol Pete, my youngsters idol. Sports Icon, Clean personification of offensive serve & volley & spectacular game on the court. Its great to see in modern times a lot his matches and brilliant plays in the Tube. I didn't have opportunities to see all his victories in 90s Fascinating person away of media hustle and bustle.
Sampras' backhand was very underrated in my opinion... I think it's partly due to the fact that his slightly elevated elbow during the swing, rendered this shot non the most "elegant" of the one-handers... but it was heavy, and he was able to setup for very quickly for hitting the topspin. He hits winners and takes control of many points thanks to heavy backhands, and didn't show being in much difficulties against Agassi's backhand.
Sampras had a great slice BH as well as the ability not only to go down the line but also to hit that loopy top spin backhand that would often set up his forehand.
@EndoftheTownProductions his slice was mediocre in the early part of his career but by the end he had so much sting. Unfortunately his topspin backhand suffered by the end. Coming from a huge sampras fan, at no point in his career was his backhand best in the business but it was always serviceable and one of his great strengths was he was never afraid to go for it even if he missed a bunch earlier in the match. Plus if someone approached and he had a target he seemed to focus more and was very good passing on that wing
Your right , the high top spin backhand , which was in contrast to his devastating forehand , was a set up play for the opponent to go down the line , which Sampras left very open by hanging around the left side of the T during points . So by leaving that area open and enticing the opponent to go down the line meant that Sampras could use his devastating running forehand . The opponent couldn't really do much while receiving the loopy high net clearance backhand , and when they would decide to play the down the line they would face the flatter forehand and this is how he played to his advantage a lot . His backhand was the exact requirement for his game and a lot of people don't get this . Of course he could also pull the trigger on the backhand , more so at Wimbledon with his passing shots on the backhand . In general the backhand is never going to be a dominant kill ball type shot, its really the shield to the forehands sword .
I doubt San Jose was much faster than a lot of courts today, if at all. There was a much greater dispersion in hard court speeds back then. The Aussie Open, San Jose, Miami were all terribly slow compared to Cincinnati/US Open/etc. As for serve speed...110 in 96 is basically 120 today. They changed where they clocked the serve from being over the net to off the racket which added about 10 mph to registered serve speeds in the early 00's. That's why Sampras went from being basically a 125 mph server most of the 90's to suddenly registering mid 130's before retirement.
Thank you for the upload, I lived that era. However, this is why Federer, Nadal and Djokovic brought tennis to the next levels, I can see winner shots in this match that in the big 3 era are not anymore.
*Killer Sampras here, on fire mode.* For me he was the best of his era and the 4th best tennis player of all times, after the big 3 (Djoker, Roger and Rafa).
Donot know who wd hv beaten whom in imaginary world but sampras was undisputed king of 90s while big 3 are not even undisputed champs in their own era forget all time so how can they be GOAT.
@@SonateSonate 2 tears later Agassi started to use juice aka steroids "the clear" cream, the new hi tech undectable at the time PED developed by Victor Conte / BALCO. -- same stuff Bonds Sosa Clemens Marion Jones used. Agassi had to in order to elevate his game and be relevant in tennis. Otherwise he's not naturally as good a player as Sampras.
@@connicrow9463 Agassi is much more gifted than Sampras. He's less athletic but a far better ball striker. Andre was the most complete player of his generation.
@@connicrow9463 Oh yes, doctor? Is that your official medical opinion or just one you pulled out of your exhaust port after Luke Skywalker shot a proton torpedo up it?
That's the funny thing. Agassi was his greatest rival in terms of how often they met, but in his autobiography Pete says he found Michael Stich his most difficult opponent, though they met far less often.
Andre was a more complete player than Pete. Agassi was at his worst here too. If Agassi only hit to Sampras' backhand more often and nailed his passing shots, Sampras would never beat Andre.
If? He could but he never did. He was always loosing the same way against Pete. Agassi was great player no doubt but he never reached Sampras greatness.
Sampras in his better form would have clearly beaten Djokovic, Nadal, Federer and especially the doll Alcaraz, but today's children need their dose of illusions and exaltation...
Y...conque argumentos basas esa idea...porque Nadal ,Nole y Roger tienen mucha mejor capacidad para aguantar peloteos..a mucha intensidad..Sampras era extraordinario ,pero en Clay no hacía mucho ,no era un extraordinario jugador en Clay,no aguantaba tantos peloteos ,y ese reves alto ,no hacía Daño ....
On faster courts he will always have a chance... But his service should and must work in his favour... On slower courts he stands no chance... Fast courts or slower courts.. Peak Sampras would always have an inferior h2h record against Novak and Rafa for sure I still remember how Hewitt completely dismantled him in the US open finals.. U will argue that he was on the verge of retirement then.. But still he ended up beating Andre the following year.. Because Andre never had the nimble feet to go with his ground strokes... But hewitt had... He will always struggle against players who r extremely consistent from the baseline and extremely agile too... Here Novak and Rafa are better than Leyton and there level of play from the baseline even better...Novak is the best returner of the serve too.. They have got too much in them for Pete to overcome.. Though i feel Pete would always have a chance on faster courts and grass... But certainly he is not bossing that rivalry if it existed.
The way Sampras, Agassi all the hit the ball back then was definitely good and ahead of its time. But nowadays thats changed. Players today have better rackets, better nutrition, better fitness are better than the game back in those days. That way of playing from Sampras, Agassi will not work in todays game. Novak would pounce on Sampras
@@jagjitsinghmanku2283 Sampras is a pretty private guy so I'd bet the dude probably got aggressive trying to get time with Pete and Sampras isn't really to keen on that... from everyone I've talked to has said if they were respectful Pete was also extremely respectful and polite.. rub him the wrong way though and he's not so polite..
Watch other highlights: www.patreon.com/TennisLegends
When Sampras backhand was on, he was completely unbeatable. His serve and volley was almost always on. As well as his forehand.
Pete is the greatest of them all! Classic serve and vollier even in this day and age I've not seen anyone nearly half as good as Pete especially when it comes to volley....
What is so striking is the speed of the exchanges, how flat a lot of the shots are. Much higher risk than today's game. And the amazing counterattacking shots from a defensive position from both André and Pete. This is a real gem of a match.
Yes. It was harder to generate topspin with gut back then than it is with poly today. The fact these guys were playing at today's level with inferior technology says a lot about their talent.
After Agassi's win over Sampras at the 1995 1000 Masters in Canada, it took him three years to beat Sampras again. Such was the disappointment Agassi experienced after he was confident he'd beat Sampras at the 1995 US Open (and the disappointment of how convincingly Sampras beat him).
Pistol Pete, my youngsters idol. Sports Icon, Clean personification of offensive serve & volley & spectacular game on the court.
Its great to see in modern times a lot his matches and brilliant plays in the Tube. I didn't have opportunities to see all his victories in 90s
Fascinating person away of media hustle and bustle.
Sampras locked and loaded was invincible 👍
1996 Sampras on fast courts is the greatest.
Sampras' backhand was very underrated in my opinion... I think it's partly due to the fact that his slightly elevated elbow during the swing, rendered this shot non the most "elegant" of the one-handers... but it was heavy, and he was able to setup for very quickly for hitting the topspin. He hits winners and takes control of many points thanks to heavy backhands, and didn't show being in much difficulties against Agassi's backhand.
Sampras had a great slice BH as well as the ability not only to go down the line but also to hit that loopy top spin backhand that would often set up his forehand.
@EndoftheTownProductions his slice was mediocre in the early part of his career but by the end he had so much sting. Unfortunately his topspin backhand suffered by the end. Coming from a huge sampras fan, at no point in his career was his backhand best in the business but it was always serviceable and one of his great strengths was he was never afraid to go for it even if he missed a bunch earlier in the match. Plus if someone approached and he had a target he seemed to focus more and was very good passing on that wing
Your right , the high top spin backhand , which was in contrast to his devastating forehand , was a set up play for the opponent to go down the line , which Sampras left very open by hanging around the left side of the T during points . So by leaving that area open and enticing the opponent to go down the line meant that Sampras could use his devastating running forehand . The opponent couldn't really do much while receiving the loopy high net clearance backhand , and when they would decide to play the down the line they would face the flatter forehand and this is how he played to his advantage a lot .
His backhand was the exact requirement for his game and a lot of people don't get this . Of course he could also pull the trigger on the backhand , more so at Wimbledon with his passing shots on the backhand .
In general the backhand is never going to be a dominant kill ball type shot, its really the shield to the forehands sword .
Sampras my idol! He dominated the 90’s era
Pete Sampras da sempre il mio giocatore preferito. Sempre Forza Pistol Pete
those were real fast courts. miss this part of the game and sampras game on those courts
People forgot how good he was, when was Pete in the zone he was insane.
And he was in the zone for most of this match. Brutal.
I miss serve and volley tennis 🎾
Pretty shocking hot faster the courts in the 90’s seem. The 110 in 1996 feels almost 120 today
They were much faster. San Jose was considered a slower hard court though
I doubt San Jose was much faster than a lot of courts today, if at all. There was a much greater dispersion in hard court speeds back then. The Aussie Open, San Jose, Miami were all terribly slow compared to Cincinnati/US Open/etc. As for serve speed...110 in 96 is basically 120 today. They changed where they clocked the serve from being over the net to off the racket which added about 10 mph to registered serve speeds in the early 00's. That's why Sampras went from being basically a 125 mph server most of the 90's to suddenly registering mid 130's before retirement.
Pistol Pete was the master of serve and volley, a lost art. Now tennis is dull and robotic.
I don't think Andre was playing that bad, it was just that Pete was on absolute fire.
Thank you for the upload, I lived that era. However, this is why Federer, Nadal and Djokovic brought tennis to the next levels, I can see winner shots in this match that in the big 3 era are not anymore.
*Killer Sampras here, on fire mode.* For me he was the best of his era and the 4th best tennis player of all times, after the big 3 (Djoker, Roger and Rafa).
This was Pete in his Prime
Pete❤❤
Pete clearly wanted that mercedes
Donot know who wd hv beaten whom in imaginary world but sampras was undisputed king of 90s while big 3 are not even undisputed champs in their own era forget all time so how can they be GOAT.
Imagine if the ball had broken the car's mirror, especially by Agassi' serve return. LOL!
Back when you could put a car for advertising right next to the court. Crazy...
They still do that. Someone nailed a bmw last year with their racket.
That's a nice car
Would like to See the whole Match. Any ideas how to get the record?
The best
This was right before Andre became Methhead Andre.
He did meth for about five minutes,,,
TOTAL DEMOLITION
Pete always giving him the beatdown
Agassi beat Sampras two years later 62 64 in the final. You're talking nonsense.
@@SonateSonate 2 tears later Agassi started to use juice aka steroids "the clear" cream, the new hi tech undectable at the time PED developed by Victor Conte / BALCO. -- same stuff Bonds Sosa Clemens Marion Jones used. Agassi had to in order to elevate his game and be relevant in tennis. Otherwise he's not naturally as good a player as Sampras.
@@connicrow9463 should I take your word for it? Of course I should.
@@connicrow9463 Agassi is much more gifted than Sampras. He's less athletic but a far better ball striker. Andre was the most complete player of his generation.
@@connicrow9463 Oh yes, doctor? Is that your official medical opinion or just one you pulled out of your exhaust port after Luke Skywalker shot a proton torpedo up it?
Sampras forehand 😅
Agassi was his closest rival but still Pete was head & shoulders above Andre.
That's the funny thing. Agassi was his greatest rival in terms of how often they met, but in his autobiography Pete says he found Michael Stich his most difficult opponent, though they met far less often.
Sampras blocked agassi from winning grand slams with his one dimensional hard hitting ground strokes
Andre was a more complete player than Pete.
Agassi was at his worst here too.
If Agassi only hit to Sampras' backhand more often and nailed his passing shots, Sampras would never beat Andre.
If? He could but he never did. He was always loosing the same way against Pete. Agassi was great player no doubt but he never reached Sampras greatness.
Inwiefern kompletter?Sampras konnte alles,Agassi war mit Serve and Volley überfordert,also wer war kompletter du Hirnschüssler?
You're joking😂😂😂😂
@@steveharaslin3822 He won the career golden slam which Sampras never did.
Sampras in his better form would have clearly beaten Djokovic, Nadal, Federer and especially the doll Alcaraz, but today's children need their dose of illusions and exaltation...
Y...conque argumentos basas esa idea...porque Nadal ,Nole y Roger tienen mucha mejor capacidad para aguantar peloteos..a mucha intensidad..Sampras era extraordinario ,pero en Clay no hacía mucho ,no era un extraordinario jugador en Clay,no aguantaba tantos peloteos ,y ese reves alto ,no hacía Daño ....
Federer no...the other yes
On faster courts he will always have a chance... But his service should and must work in his favour... On slower courts he stands no chance... Fast courts or slower courts.. Peak Sampras would always have an inferior h2h record against Novak and Rafa for sure
I still remember how Hewitt completely dismantled him in the US open finals.. U will argue that he was on the verge of retirement then.. But still he ended up beating Andre the following year.. Because Andre never had the nimble feet to go with his ground strokes... But hewitt had... He will always struggle against players who r extremely consistent from the baseline and extremely agile too...
Here Novak and Rafa are better than Leyton and there level of play from the baseline even better...Novak is the best returner of the serve too..
They have got too much in them for Pete to overcome.. Though i feel Pete would always have a chance on faster courts and grass... But certainly he is not bossing that rivalry if it existed.
@@francescoskorpion9557federer yes
Look at you and think again on who needs his dose of « illusion ». How can you be that deluded ?
The way Sampras, Agassi all the hit the ball back then was definitely good and ahead of its time. But nowadays thats changed. Players today have better rackets, better nutrition, better fitness are better than the game back in those days. That way of playing from Sampras, Agassi will not work in todays game. Novak would pounce on Sampras
I had a run-in with Sampras when I was a Bollettieris the guy was a jerk 🤷♀️
That’s interesting. What happened? Sampras seems to come across as a nice guy on camera.
Sampras is well known to be a prick.@@jagjitsinghmanku2283
@@jagjitsinghmanku2283 Sampras is a pretty private guy so I'd bet the dude probably got aggressive trying to get time with Pete and Sampras isn't really to keen on that... from everyone I've talked to has said if they were respectful Pete was also extremely respectful and polite.. rub him the wrong way though and he's not so polite..
Yeah we need details
If you had a "run in" with him, why would you expect him to be nice?