Man, watching pete get in the groove serving never gets old. i just hate there was no RU-vid back in my day so i coulda analyzed his motion a little better.
I remember watching this match live. Things looked bleak for Agassi in the fourth set after Sampras fired that incredible running forehand passing shot. As a Agassi fan, i always wondered how pete could step up his game like that in key moments against Andre. Despite the frustration of seeing Sampras hitting that shot and nailing aces after aces throughout the match, Andre remained close to his baseline from start to finnish and it payed off.
Thanks for sharing. That’s vintage Agassi and Sampras at their respective high level of play. The running forehand was lethal as ever while the Agassi angles were crazy as well.
@@boke75 That's part of tennis... Andre wore him down and if you can't keep it up, you lose. That being said, injuries were rarely an achilles heel for Sampras. Pretty durable guy due to his play style.
i like how he puts jamie owen at the bottom of the video when this guy steals other peoples videos and copies them and then makes highlights of them, he is the reason i stopped putting up tennis matches, because he would copy them and make highlights of them.
His serve was so good it would just morally crush the opponent, since it was almost impossible to put a racket on those balls, and if anyone managed to return some of those serves, there he was at the net ready to finish the point. Lethal! In his prime years, and on fast courts, at least on par with the level of the big 3.
@@daniluzzu In the 90's, Wimbledon was super fast. Thus, Sampras would've handled the Big 3 for the most part. Today's Wimbledon is a lot slower thus the Big 3 would be awfully hard for Sampras to beat.
Idk....when he wasn't serving and playing against anyone outside of his top rivals....it was def less impressive. He said it himself, he had to play his absolute best to beat Andre, for example. The big 4 or 3 play incredibly no matter who it was in their prime
So you say he couldn't sustain it. Are you talking about over 5 sets or over the remarkable 12 years between his first Grand Slam title and his fourteenth? What the average pundit hasn't realised is that Pete by winning so many majors and Andre by playing so late into his 30s established a new template for tennis in the new century. With courts dramatically slowed down over the last 20 years and such a shallow talent pool three men (not four) have dominated tennis in a manner unprecedented in professional sport.
cant believe this 23 years ago nearly, the time before that was like 1976 borg v connors rivalry ! now nearly 2023 and federer has just retired , there is nothing left when nadal and djokovic at 35 and 36 call it quits
Sampras could have had an unprecedented 2000... But still ended up being a great one. Almost won here against Andre, won Wimbledon, and lost in finals of US Open. Still somehow didn't finish year as No.1.
Pete and Andre were SO SEXY to me back in the day!!! I absolutely LOVED watching them play against each other - some of the best tennis the game has ever seen!!! 🎾🙏🏾🙌🏾🥰❤️
Amazing how tennis evolves and changes from generation to generation... these guys where all about accuracy & consistency on the serve and returns... not much rallies going on... the next generation (federer, Nadal, Djokovic) were all about precision and physical strengh... the current generation is all about endurance and power plus agility... great sport!
What a fabulous match! These two produced some of the highest class tennis in history, an amazing match-up. This was 24 and a half years ago, with those crappy rackets they had back then, and yet, this tennis is in no way inferior to the top notch matches of 24 years later in terms both pace, shotmaking, and athleticism. The Sampras serve in this match was stupid good, with 37 aces and crazy high winning percentages on the 1st serve. Both his serve and his net play were so good that he would have been demoralizing to play for anyone, but not for Agassi's immense heart! In the 5th set he showed who had the iron nerves on that day. This was also one of numerous matches that illustrate why Agassi is the best returner of serve in history, unmatched to this day!
The world's best serve & volleyer vs. the world's best returner/counter puncher. Was a thrill every matchup. If Andre's serve was 25% better, the match outcomes would have been reversed (20-14 Sampras).
This ace rebound is the worst surface for a serve and vollyer. Its even harder than clay because the ball bounces so high. Andre definitely had the edge over Pete on this surface. That's why he won both matches they played against each other at the Aussie Open.
@@grinchoi1Yes. While they are both hardcourts the play quite differently. In 2000 the AO was played on a surface called Rebound Ace, it was a medium paced court with a high bounce that suited baseliners like agassi, Courier Kafelnikov ect. The US Open was played on a medium Fast lower bouncing court called Decoturf I believe .
The Sampras serve (both 1st AND 2nd !) will be analyzed in the 25th century as the greatest shot in tennis ! Probably be playing the sport in space by then. 😁
This result was not surprising at all. Pete has a decent but not great record on Rebound Ace like Becker, courier, lendl (all won 2 each) and the combination of high bounce plus the medium slow surface played right into Agassi's strength. His backhand was especially exposed since the slice didn't always stay low like the USO plus Agassi returned his serve better here.
Rebound Ace exposed overly serve-reliant players. Pete was probably the most poorly conditioned Champion in tennis history. Thank allah that that outmoded style was completely erased by the very next generation that totally eclipsed all those records immediately.
@@niceguy1774 Your statement is nonsensical for the simple reason courier and Lendl were baseliners who had good serves. And Pete wasn't poorly conditioned. He had thalassemia which became worse as he grew older. Even in the modern game serve volley has been replaced by serve + 1. Look at the French open . It's much faster today and matches are decided by 0-4 shot rallies not 9+ shot rallies. The serve still matters , the only difference is Wimbledon in the 90s was boring because there were no rallies and indoor hard today is extremely boring because it's slower than clay at times. For the record Becker and Pete had powerful baseline games and could rally with anyone from the back. Pete was a baseliner earlier in his career but had to rely on serve volley later because his thalassemia became worse
No it was Sampras who had stopped training even a year before. He has said in interviews. If he wasnt so young he would have declared resignjng from game kn 1999 as he had said.
Man the exchange around 20:55 , then the return of agassi right after at 21:00 phew..😮 Then agassi was super solid on serve. And pumped up, he deserved it.
My thought as well! Sampras' backhand was remarkable in this match, great depth and faster than usual, including some really sweet, powerful backhand return winners.
@@basedbear1605 i said change of guard with implied sense of playing serve and volley at a fundamental level, Federer or for that matter anybody in recent times didn't play serve and volley at a fundamental level with a few exceptions like karlovic
Serve and volleyers have almost always been a minority... because it takes a large wing span and great reflexes. Conners/Borg/McEnroe, only 1 was S&V. This era had a pretty good mix of BL/S&V. It wasn't an "era" of S&V. However, I guess it can seem like there aren't any out there when the top 2 players just duke out baseline all day like today.
@@1stevemcsherry1You can definitely argue this was Agassi’s greatest match. Pete had Andre’s number at the majors overall, so this was a massive win for Agassi to beat Pete in a 5 set hard court major match. This was Agassi’s absolute peak, both tennis wise and mentally. A few years earlier he would have lost this match against Pete. Not to mention Pete had dominated him just a few months before a couple times.
Agassi, when he still had hair, reminded me of Zed from the movie "Police Academy". He played great, of course, one of the best, but I don’t really like his style. Pete has always been an idol. I think Sampras and Federer are the best in history
Le meilleur joueur de tennis de tous les temps, c'est Sampras. Quel courage, quelle fougue, quel jeu offensif. C'était pas un rigolo. Faut avoir des cojones pour jouer comme ça.
Right, and this is the amazing thing. Smaller heads, heavier, highly technical with very poor control compared to today's rackets. And yet, these two could still produce tennis at a level at least as high as that of the top players from 24 years later!
Average size used by pros today is 90-100 sq. inches. Pete used a 90 square inch Wilson Pro Staff. Federer went from 90 to 97. It increases the sweet spot a LITTLE, but not as much as you think. The more important thing is what the racquets are made of... Composites are much stronger and lighter today.
@@basedbear1605 I thought Pete used an 85 square inch. And among pros, today it's rare to see any use sizes under 100. When Federer made his long due switch from 90 to 97, it was still considered below average. Nadal and Djokovic always used 100, Agassi and Chang used even bigger heads, like 107 or 110.
@@daniluzzu Do research before you make claims. I literally just looked at the top 20 pros and what size they use. Only a woman used over 100. Most guys use 95ish.
@@basedbear1605 I'm not saying most guys use over 100, I'm saying these days it's rare to find players with sizes between 90 and 95. Djokovic, Nadal, Sinner, Zverev, Ruud, Rublev and many others use 100, Murray used 98, De Minaur uses 99, Dimitrov 97, Tsitsipas 98, Alcaraz 98, etc. And I double checked, Sampras used an 85, Agassi a 107.
It makes you wonder what their rivalry would have looked like had they played more at AO and Roland Garros. They played like a million times at USO and Wimbledon, but only 3 times totally at AO and RG, where Agassi won all 3.
For me, there was a brutal elegance tto the way Pete played. This was continued by federaal that wiith effortless grace Both of then seem to glide around, Like The movemennts are already written. Other players, in their level of achievement bracket, just seem to be making so much more effort
The comments about the Rebound Ace surface playing into Andre's favor are on point. Also Agassi looks about as lean and mean as at any point, or more, in his career. In contrast Sampras had started to show a bit of the extra lbs that were there to stay. Thanks for the upload, haven't seen this match before 🙂👍
What extra pounds on Sampras ? He was always rail thin. Agassi trained very hard at many times during his career and it showed , Sampras never stopped training and taking care of himself from early 1993 when he committed himself to be the best till his retirement . His first few years , he was so and so with commitment according to him
@@ROYDORO Sampras was really thin in the early 90's, then became more muscular during his prime years, and had just an extra pound or two at the end of his career.
Agassi still had the superior all round game it's just that Pete had the more potent powerful game due to having probably the best serve ever. If their serves were equalised then Sampras would have won less and Agassi would have won more. When facing Sampras Agassi had to be A+ all the time whereas Sampras could get away with B+ due to the number of free points on his serve. Agassi arguably had the greater achievements ie all 4 GS+olympic gold+last GS of the 20thC and first of the 21stC.
Sampras may not be the GOAT but he is undisputed GSOAT (Greatest Server of all time). In terms of returners, Agassi and Connors could have claimed GROAT but I think Novak has bettered them. It would have been fun to see Sampras at his serving best against Novak at his retuning best on fast USO hard court
Novak has certainly not bettered Agassi in the return of serve. By all means, Novak's return is insane, but he goes more for exploiting the serve's pace, and for depth, making the server's second shot very hard. Agassi would go beyond that, he would attack the serve looking for a clean winner. In terms of sheer pace and angles, the Agassi return is still unmatched.
Sampras was already a step or 2 slower laterally by 2000 as we can see here. Cross-court Agassi shots 1995 Sampras would've reached...here he doesn't even try.
Ahahah! That's right, it very often felt that way, due to their playing styles, with Sampras being this totally lethal serve and net play monster. Sampras would also bully Courier, badly! Sent him into depression and an early decline in results.
@@daniluzzu All 3 came from Nick Bolletieri's Academy and were all baseliners. When Pete had a growth spurt, he switched to serve & volley and left Nick behind. Pete made a good choice. Eventually Andre left Nick behind, too. That was also a good choice. Nick was poison to talent.
Yeah total Pete fan but this is my favorite loss of Pete's period. Great to see Andre overcome his mental demons against Pete and pull off an amazing win.
Looking at their head to head it's actually more even than we tend to think. Sampras won the last 3 matches, which is surprising because Agassi was the better player and higher ranked at that time. It's a credit to Sampras' greatness that he elevated when he played Agassi. So it was 17-14 at one point.
Yes, because when tennis was fast, attacking, and beautiful, players would try to win points in every possible lethal way. The endless baseline rallies are a style that became standard because of Djokovic and Nadal. Sometimes I despise the idea of that kind of tennis, where you just sustain a baseline rally until your opponent makes an error. Djokovic won the majority of the points in his career that way. 😪
Agassi is not at all like Djokovic. Agassi is much more aggressive and more of a shotmaker. Djokovic is much more defensive and thrives on long rallies. Of course Agassi was in a faster era, so he had to be more aggressive. Djokovic in a faster era would have had a different game.
Cest tres énervant..que du service.. même si on gagne mille points que abec le service.. c'est pas un match.. c'est ennuyeux. Sampras trop de coups de pute...
@@Romans8-9 The slower and higher bouncing surface gave Agassi much more control. Compare this match to 1999 Wimbledon: it’s night and day. There, he was scrambling like crazy.
Looking back, it's still abundantly clear that Sampras was the more classy, technically proficient player. The later on court demo matches also show this gulf in personal class.
more technically proficient? How so? Yea those exhibition matches were awk to see - but I've been lucky to met Andre a few times and he exudes simplicity and sincere warmth. Not sure how to square those up with what occurred at the exhibition matches, but I will remain a big fan of both players!! Legends
Pete was after many injuries that cost him ,check that he played 8 tournaments in a row to keep his number 1 position,never fed or nole or Rafa have that ,max 3 tournaments in a row maybe 4 at clay ,he has his back and the thalassemia,fed at his 30 has few injuries anyway after Pete my favorite is fed,but I like the aggressive Pete style,fed have achieved more and play more years,pity that Pete didn't play till 40 and pity that he played with ancient racket and strings 😔
An ace is the weakest of all highlights. Thank allah that this overly-serve reliant style was forced into extinction by the very next generation, completley erasing Sampras from any Greatest discussion forever.
@mezanine10 the serve is the one shot where your opponent had no say. Sampras struck me as one of the most poorly-conditioned champions of any individual sport. Thankfully that loophole was closed tightly by the very next generation, so it's just a fuzzy memory now.
@@niceguy1774 That's LITERALLY why it's the single most important shot... because your opponent has no say in it. Mastering the serve is essential to make sure your service games don't get broken. It's funny that gimp-gammas like you want to talk about a peak athelete's conditioning when you probably eat McDonald's and are 40 lbs. overweight.
Agassi played amazing all tournament, beating a very tough draw (a redlining Philippoussis in the round of 16, Sampras at his absolute serving best in the Semis, then Kafelnikov in the final). Sampras served 37 aces, including 5 on 2nd Serve. These two always played incredibly compelling matches, with Sampras serve/volleying every single serve, and Agassi's reaction time and strikes on returns of insane quality. Agassi had to be incredibly resilient, missing break point after break point on Sampras aces. One of my favourite matches of all time.
I remember commentary in this game describing them as old men and veterans of the sport. I remember thinking they were ancient and so old. Now I’m 2 years older than Agassi in this video. I can’t imagine feeling old at all. The game sure has changed that’s for sure.
