Me too Trent

Not me, tennis is much better these days. I actually preferred watching women’s tennis back in those days.

@@bulleranse8323 Tennis was better back in the day

I miss the serve and volley style of the 90's !!

No shorts or netpoints.

they don’t hit nearly as hard as todays players

@@insonder4515 LOL, so wrong ! Did you even see this match here ? Becker and Sampras at their prime could easily be in the top 10 nowadays.

man is Becker a major choke artist

thankfully.

Well-said!

@@mathewhorodner2000 64 Titles overall and 6 Grand Slam titles? Yeah, choker. 😂

@@radar0412 Federer has 20 slams, and multiple chokes (from a roger fan, I still think he is the best of all time, although not the greatest)

You know it got real when Pete was roaring. Another example I can remember was when he beat Kracijek at the Open in 2000 to reverse his general losing trend to him.

so true. Compare this to any match between todays defensive play, nadal and djokovic, for example...how boring compared to this

@@mtklaric nadal is boring???!!

@@mrf9893Yes.... very boring.

@@Straight.Forward.Indian Thank you. Nadal and Djokovic are so boring to watch. I can't watch Nadal and all his OCD ticks, and all Djokovic knows how to do is grind from the baseline. This is why I like Fed so much, due to his variety and creativity.

@@1bcordell They just hit, hit, hit till they get a point.... Selfish baseline game. No varieties, nothing.. Guys like McEnroe, Borg, Becker, Edberg, Sampras, Ivanisevic, Rafter played sportive & real tennis. They had varieties of shots in their book. Becker was very good, but he couldn't win more Grand slam titles as he was too sportive and lost most of his points by experimenting too much & playing volleys.

Disgusting to play versus but great to see it at the best level ^^

Can Becker choke any more?

how old are you? 12?

I wanted Becker to win. He was dominating. Sampras just wouldn’t go away

Never ever heard that Lendl was Sampras's idol. Pete has said Laver was the player who was his role model since childhood.

@@michelez715 Sampras for sure looked up to Ivan. In the champions mind( Pete’s Autobiography) Sampras categorically puts Lendl in his top 5 Goat list. He dedicates 2 pages to his experience of staying with Lendl at his house in 1989. If you read the book or have read the book, you will realise that Sampras idolises and looks up to Lendl for sure for the qualities of discipline, professionalism, the precision of his ground strokes, the hard work that Lendl put in day in day out, dominating or staying ahead during the most competitive era in tennis( 80’s) , 270 weeks at World no 1, 8 consecutive US open finals with 3 consecutive wins, 9 consecutive Masters finals with 5 wins..n several such achievements that he brought to the tennis world.

@warrenflatt same here. I started at the beginning of the hewitt (short lived) era. The game i started to watch is high powered tennis. This is power, with technique.

I really miss that moment where 'the guy is at the net and here comes the passing shot'. Great moment of anticipation.

This is tennis from the future

Nope. Becker beat Lendl 7 6 in the fifth, and his last ball hit the bet and trickled over for the match winner. Horrible luck for Lendl, but a great matche up to that point.

@@denisdaly1708 I disagree. Lendl was great defensively, but never had the attacking game of Sampras.

@Sleepy Joe Lendl was a clay courter who adapted well to hard courts (never won Wimbledon). Pete was an attacking all courter who adapted well to grass (never won French Open). I see few similarities. I recall Lendl making superior fitness a strategic advantage. That's about all.

@Sleepy Joe Forehand, ah, maybe 😐. Petey was NO baseliner; always looking to move forward and volley (lucky he did not mimic that from Lendl 😂).

binkyxz3 when Pete did rally from the back of the court, it was like Lendl’s aggressive baselining. Particularly early in his career, his style was closer to Lendl’s. Lendl is the father of the modern aggressive baselining game whether you like it or not. Sampras, of course, was convinced to modify it specifically to win Wimbledon. Unfortunately a side effect was he never even sniffed an RG final.

I remember it too! There was high tension from the begining to the end.

This was when in earlier round Sampras lost, right? What a way to come back. I was shooting at my old 4:3 CRT tv.

Yes, I totally agree! This was the greatest tennis match in HISTORY!

it shows this match was a real tough one. That was only break Sampras could have. Beating Becker under a roof, in Germany, was nearly impossible at that time.

@@kwansikkim8712: But, in the long run, Sampras owned Becker, even under the German roof.

Why did they slow down all the courts? This was incredible to watch.

@@myheartspits to have longer rallies

@@zy9662 It'd just be nice if SOME courts were faster. Longer rallies doesn't necessarily equal more excitement, right?

@@myheartspits yeah they should put back some of the speed again, they went for too slow now

@@myheartspits to suit Nadal and stop Federer from dominating

I remember this match too. These two were actually my nightmares, because I favoured Agassi (instead of his greatest rival - Sampras) and Edberg (instead of Becker). And I never suported Sampras, unless when he played Becker. So I was kinda happy that Sampras won.

Becker choked

I think he had a legit chance of getting that elusive 4th Wimbledon in ‘96 had he not got injured in the 3rd round. The problem was he would have faced Krajicek in the Final.

Becker was defeated by emerging Sampras in 1993 Wimbledon SF and useless Goran Ivanisevic in 1994 SF. Beker in his prime started loosing on his favorite surface grass.

@@drlee2 Yes indeed, and Kraijchek was absolutely on Fire at the time!!

Richard Kraijchek at Wimbledon 96 was just awesome, he was taking NO prisoners!!

@@soundar4270 - Your disrespectful comment about Goran Ivanisevic being useless, only goes to show your crass ignorance! I wouldn’t believe anything that you have written here!!

Me too!

You rememer it so well because you just watched it ;)

@@boygood8509 also..😄🤣

I was 13 and I remember it wividly. I only suported Sampas when he played Becker, so I was happy that he won :)

Marty dav, thank you! I couldn't express my thoughts any better than you have. Agree 100% with you.

@@michelez715 Thanks very much Michele, I appreciate that, thanks.

I agree with everything here. This Tennis is amazing to watch and far more better than current grinding one. Also the thing that this era is best just because it has players with more slams is just ridiculous and disrespectful to past legends. Tennis fans have deteriorated with time making such claims.

marty: Nice of you to refer to the current generation tennis fans (many of who are new) as "deluded fools".

Agree 100%. These men had to be ready for anything

True, but these co-poly strings and oversized rackets mainly suit baseliners on much slower courts. Neither Becker's nor Sampras' game was designed for that. So I don't think they would have done well. Likewise, the big 3 wouldn't have done well on those much faster courts and without those strings. Federer is probably an exception.

@@anthonyroberts79 Agree! In terms of outfit though, the 90s win for me no speculation needed haha!!!

The longest point was won by whom?

Benjamin, quite agree with you. The half volleys were pretty spectacular, too.

many people forget these are and always will be the Titans of tennis...

Are you blind? What about the rallies?, the groundstrokes?… This match had it all… Power tenis at Its best…

Yeah, screw that top spin bonanza...

I agree, I like topspin but flat is way more fun

Looooool I heared your comment imagining you're a proper lad in your late 50s drinking a beer

​@@meilstone the best is a blend of contrasting styles, not just one.

ATP and ITF don't care about tennis, they care about money hence the homogenization of the court speeds.

0) Djokovic v Nadal (2012 Australian Open)

World sports doesn't evolve around american sports or player. glad your opinion doesn't officially matter to the tennis world.

@@zen.4332 Glad your opinion doesn't matter either. But facts are facts and Pete Sampras was the best in the world. He held NO.1 rank for 6 years straight. So that pretty much trumphs your so called arguemnt.

Well, you can tell right here, why Pete essentially ended Becker's dominance.He's just slightly better than Boris, in 3 facets, and Boris is only Petes equal, in all of the others. Hes faster, more agile and had a slightly more accurate serve. The vast majority of the times they but, Pete was just slightly tooa good.

Funny, that is how I remember the most about this match!!

Becker was able to get incredible angle on his out wide deuce court serve.

And 3 aces to confirm his sensational break

LOL

That was a shot even during the wooden racquet days. It's just now with racquet and string technology you can get more pace and spin on them. Also it helps that becker and sampras had phenomenal powerful serves and forehands and lesser backhands. So it makes sense both would want to maximize their strengths. A player like stefan edberg might opt to take a neutral shot as a backhand because his was so good. Gasquet or wawrinka certainly do / did that. Gives them better court position.