I am a big fan of Pete Sampras. In fact, while Sampras was playing I made sure that I saw most of his Grand Slam matches. When he retired I thought tennis would never be the same again.
Then, slowly but surely this name kept cropping up in discussions, about someone being magnificent to watch. Someone, who in this world of power tennis plays "touch" shots, someone who can play on all sides of the court with equal perfection. I should have known that Roger Federer was going to not only fill Sampras's shoes but also exceed all expectations. The 4th round match at Wimbledon where Fedex beat Sampras was the precursor of total domination that we see in tennis these days. People say that Federer is not very good on clay and that Nadal keeps beating him at the french open. Just go through the list of recent french open champions... Sergie Bruguera, Gustavo Kuerten, thomas Muster, Kafelnikov, Albert Costa, Gaston Gaudio, Rafael Nadal. Don't you think that most of them are players who have not succeeded in any other grand slam? Of the list above, only Nadal is one who's ok to watch, but that too because of his athleticism. Federer on the other hand, gives joy to a person watching tennis, shots which have a lot more to them than just raw power
On comparing with Pete, all I can say at this point of time is that Fedex is just as good (if not better)
