Tennis: Roland Garros (French open)

Who's going to win with the men ? I say Gustavo Kuerten, the man is a warrior on gravel. One of the best backhands on the circuit.

Capriati with the women.

As for the men, i try with Coria.

Men : Guga Kuerten
Woman : Amelie Moresmo

Men: Hewitt
Women: Mauresmo

Any of Guga, Hewitt or Coria would be fine with me on the men's side. I don't see Hewitt winning it, but Guga sure could. Coria's just sick on the red stuff, and I wouldn't bet against him, but it'd be nice to see Guga go out on top.

For the women, as much as I'd like to see Mauresmo win it, my head tells me it'll be a Williams sister winning it.

Sampras :cry:

oh... thats right he retired I therefore dont care really... :lol

Women: Mauresmo

Woman : Amelie Moresmo

For the women, as much as I'd like to see Mauresmo win it

Hey guys, it's women you're talking about here! (Mauresmo :lol: )

Well woman final will be a Russian ;) I think Dementieva will win it.
As for men - Nalbandian looks most impressive.

Sampras :cry:

oh... thats right he retired I therefore dont care really... :lol

He wasn't succesful on clay ;)

I wonder what the odds were before the tournament started on Henman getting to the semis let alone winning it..

Well, the men's final has been even grotesque. Coria dominated the first 2 sets, then injured his right leg during the final part of the third, couldn't play anymore in the fourth, suddenly regained some mobility in the fifth, went on leading 4-2 and even managed to have two match points ( :amazed: ) thanks to Gaudio's tennis-blindness before losing 8-6.

First: this sucks for Coria who was by far the best player in the final.

Second: Gaudio sucked big time in the final and didn't deserved this lucky win even if he was outstanding against Nalbandian.

Third: i feel for Coria but the result came as relief to me since before the final i was irritated with myself because i didn't take the time to bet and put the money on my guy (Coria) despite picking him on this board. :joker:

Sampras :cry:

oh... thats right he retired I therefore dont care really... :lol

maaaaaan...
have you EVER seen Federer play in the last two years??? :jump: :bow:

maaaaaan...
have you EVER seen Federer play in the last two years??? :jump: :bow:
Yes... still doesn't compare to sampras in his prime...

and Slay... your right he wasn't great on clay but either way i'd take him anyday ;) he is the reason i started watching and playing tennis.

Yes... still doesn't compare to sampras in his prime...

I disagree! :jump:

the titles of each guy sure differ....
As of right now, Federer isn't half Sampras.
But hey, he's young, he's got time.
And not everyone can be the greatest tennis player of all time (even though I hate Sampras, he is).

the titles of each guy sure differ....
As of right now, Federer isn't half Sampras.
But hey, he's young, he's got time.
And not everyone can be the greatest tennis player of all time (even though I hate Sampras, he is).
If you want to bring titles to the table, obviously you should compare titles won at the same age, as you said Federer is young and this means he has just started winning.
Sampras was born on 12th August '71, Federer on 8th August '81, so it's pretty easy to make the comparison.
Before June 1994 Sampras won '90 USopen, '93 Wimbledon and USopen, '94 AUSopen.
As for now, Federer has won '03 Wimbledon and '04 AUSopen.
So at the moment it's 4-2 Sampras, but it could be just a matter of prematurity. Sampras started winning with consistency in July'93, Federer in July'03, so from the moment they both reached maturity is 3-2 Sampras, it's close and definitely too early to say won titles assure Sampras is the best of the two.

As for Sampras alone, i've problems considering the best ever a player who never went even close to win Roland Garros. Obviously one of the greatests anyway.
But i would be curious to know how you guys will talk about Federer ten years from now.. :jump:

As for Sampras alone, i've problems considering the best ever a player who never went even close to win Roland Garros.

Two semi-finals.

Two semi-finals.
Uh!?
For what i know Sampras reached the SF at Roland Garros just ONE time (1996) in his long career, losing in straight sets 7-6,6-0,6-2 to Yevgeny Kafelnikov.
I think i can stay with what i previously said: he never went close to win there.

If you want to bring titles to the table, obviously you should compare titles won at the same age, as you said Federer is young and this means he has just started winning.
Sampras was born on 12th August '71, Federer on 8th August '81, so it's pretty easy to make the comparison.
Before June 1994 Sampras won '90 USopen, '93 Wimbledon and USopen, '94 AUSopen.
As for now, Federer has won '03 Wimbledon and '04 AUSopen.
So at the moment it's 4-2 Sampras, but it could be just a matter of prematurity. Sampras started winning with consistency in July'93, Federer in July'03, so from the moment they both reached maturity is 3-2 Sampras, it's close and definitely too early to say won titles assure Sampras is the best of the two.

As for Sampras alone, i've problems considering the best ever a player who never went even close to win Roland Garros. Obviously one of the greatests anyway.
But i would be curious to know how you guys will talk about Federer ten years from now.. :jump:
Not even close? Semis IS close.

Not even close? Semis IS close.
Well, ONE semifinal lost 7-6,6-0,6-2 isn't that close imo.

Speaking of offensive players only, Vitas Gerulatis, John McEnroe, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, Patrick Rafter, all went closer to the goal than Sampras.

Well, ONE semifinal lost 7-6,6-0,6-2 isn't that close imo.

Speaking of offensive players only, Vitas Gerulatis, John McEnroe, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, Patrick Rafter, all went closer to the goal than Sampras.

Partick Rafter one semi-final. 6 times (8x present) eliminated in the 3rd round or earlier. Hey, I'm not defending Pete Sampras but keep the facts straight.

Well, ONE semifinal lost 7-6,6-0,6-2 isn't that close imo.

Speaking of offensive players only, Vitas Gerulatis, John McEnroe, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, Patrick Rafter, all went closer to the goal than Sampras.

Except none were as dominant as Sampras in the other grand slams.

Being in a final four of a grand slam and winning the other three IS close to winning the four grand slams.

Except none were as dominant as Sampras in the other grand slams.

:shakehead
When i said otherwise??
I wasn't suggesting that therefore they were better!
In fact i think Sampras has been better than all those players (despite they went closer than him to the Roland Garros title.)

Partick Rafter one semi-final. 6 times (8x present) eliminated in the 3rd round or earlier. Hey, I'm not defending Pete Sampras but keep the facts straight.
in 1997 Rafter lost to Sergi Bruguera 6-7 6-1 7-5 7-6 in the semifinal while the only time Sampras reached the semis, as said, he lost 7-6,6-0,6-2 to Kafelnikov;
That's why i said Rafter went closer to win the title. I guess i should have been clearer in pointing out what i meant mentioning those names. :)

in 1997 Rafter lost to Sergi Bruguera 6-7 6-1 7-5 7-6 in the semifinal while the only time Sampras reached the semis, as said, he lost 7-6,6-0,6-2 to Kafelnikov;
That's why i said Rafter went closer to win the title. I guess i should have been clearer in pointing out what i meant mentioning those names. :)

Correct and I knew Rafter lost with 6-7 6-1 7-5 7-6 from Sergi and he may have been closer to title but you seem to forget that Sampras has also played three quarterfinals. Again, I'm not defending Sampras because I think his results at Roland Garros are very poor for a great player like him, just what your point is.

Correct and I knew Rafter lost with 6-7 6-1 7-5 7-6 from Sergi and he may have been closer to title but you seem to forget that Sampras has also played three quarterfinals.
Yes, yes, overall (along their entire career) Sampras had better results than Rafter in Paris.



Again, I'm not defending Sampras because I think his results at Roland Garros are very poor for a great player like him, just what your point is.

We agree! yes! this time we agreeee!!!! :hyper: :cheers: