9 thoughts on “Pete Sampras LEGENDS OF WIMBLEDON – Part 5”

  1. I agree with you, Pete was the better athlete. But rch9000 actually has a point here. I too can recall Martina being dismissive of Agassi in the past. And her recent comparison of Agassi to Roger Clemens really sealed it (re: Agassi’s crystal meth use). Big difference between a depressed Agassi taking a performance inhibitor and Clemens taking a performance enhancer. It really made Martina look mean-spirited, so much so that she had to go on The Today Show to apologize for her comment.

  2. @rch9000 labelling someone a bitch is not a good reflection on you, though. Pete was a better natural athlete than Andre, even though Andre was fitter.

  3. @rch9000 there is a difference between being a better athlete than being in better shape. I agree that Pete was a better athlete, but there is no doubt andre was in better shape and conditioning. Gil Reyes made sure Andre was in shape. But if you look at what pete could do, serve and volley and the overhead slam dunks its obvious Pete was a better athlete if not in better shape.

  4. @rch9000 I would tend to say that Pete was a better natural athlete. Quicker across the ground, better in the air, faster at the net. Its like a ballet dancer against the boxer. On the track, Sampras would win the track events against Andre but lose the shot putt and discus. In the boxing ring, Andre would win easily. Its horses for courses and in the context of a tennis course (or court) Pete was simply a better athlete.

Leave a Reply