Hard-to-impress tennis icon John McEnroe is prepared to advise now-retired Pete Sampras to step back into the mix with a one-off return to Wimbledon this summer.

"To tell you the truth I'm sort of tempted to push him to play it, because it would be interesting," said MacEnroe, a three-time champion on the lawns.

"You forget until you see him because he hurts you with one shot."

The 48-year-old McEnroe, playing this weekend in Rome at the Black Rock Masters seniors event at the Foro Italico, cites personal experience that the 35-year-old Sampras still has game after losing to him at a seniors event this month in Boston.

Sampras, who played in a serious tournament for the first time since his 2002 retirement, said he was not interested in changing his post-tennis life.

"I wouldn't play Wimbledon just to play - I would play to win. There needs to be a reason to come back, and there really isn't a reason," said the 14-time Grand Slam winner who lifted seven of those trophys at the All England club.

McEnroe, who announced that he will not be playing at any more seniors events on clay due to a gradual decline in his performance on the surface, does not share Sampras' opinion.

"I would seed him in the Top 5 in Wimbledon without a doubt," said the veteran. "Name five guys that could going to beat this guy at Wimbledon.

"I'd be hard pressed to name a couple - two out of three (sets). Three out of five is a different animal. (Sampras) absolutely just cranks the ball still, and just makes you so uncomfortable and uneasy."

McEnroe said that Sampras, who has been hitting this spring with the likes of reigning four-time Wimbledon champion Roger Federer and Germany's Tommy Haas, could possibly mount a challenge at the All England club.

"Physically he's fit - he's not super-fit, not best-of-five fit, but he's best-of-three fit."

That's pretty interesting - but also a load of bull from McEnroe!

Yeah if he entered the main draw he would be a man to avoid, but he wouldn't be in the top 10 of contenders really. Remember his final Wimbledon? Losing to the hopeless Bastl?

One match-up that never gets mentioned much is if there was a match between peak Sampras and Nadal as he currently is - You'd get the feeling with pete that his ruthlessness would drive him to beat Rafa on hard and grass virtually every time!

Yeah, Mc likes to come with sensation comments. it's his job after all. But as Sam says, what if Bastl was doing a come back too and was in the same draw?

Why could he do more now than he did 5 years ago? with a slower court, better returners etc....

Regarding his facing Nadal, I think it will be as hard for Sampras as it is for everybody else. He struggled against Chang and Hewitt, so just imagine against Nadal!

I don't think Pete would embarrass himself by any stretch, but there is no way he could win it...which is why I'd ask myself, why bother?

McEnroe is king of the sensational comments...and they certainly provide room for debate, but I just wonder how Sampras would hold up against the gruelling returns of some of todays players? Especially in a 5 setter?

I don't doubt that he'd dispose with a large number of players-after all, he's only 35 and he's a tennis genius-but there the top 3 at least who I just can't see him beating. So best leave his legacy intact!

This is BS, and thankfully Sampras is modest enough to know that it is. Quite frankly, it would be a HUGE achievement were Sampras to recover his form of 5 years ago, 2002. It is worth looking at what he did in 2002 and who was able to beat him (see below). Some of those players (and some of those he beat) are still around and will have improved whilst, in truth, he cannot have done during five years away from the tour. McEnroe's speculation can be undermined by one trite but obvious riposte: reputations do not wield tennis racquets or cover the court and once a fit modern player used to the grind of the Tour works out the mismatch between Sampras as he is now and his reputation Sampras would be there for the taking.

US Open, NY, U.S.A.
Grand Slam, 26-Aug-02, O, Hard , Draw: 128


R128 Portas, Albert (ESP) 76 6-1 6-4 6-4 Stats
R64 Pless, Kristian (DEN) 85 6-3 7-5 6-4 Stats
R32 Rusedski, Greg (GBR) 35 7-6(4) 4-6 7-6(3) 3-6 6-4 Stats
R16 Haas, Tommy (GER) 3 7-5 6-4 6-7(5) 7-5 Stats
Q Roddick, Andy (USA) 11 6-3 6-2 6-4 Stats
S Schalken, Sjeng (NED) 25 7-6(6) 7-6(4) 6-2 Stats
W Agassi, Andre (USA) 6 6-3 6-4 5-7 6-4 Stats


This Event Points: 1000, ATP Ranking: 17, Prize Money: US $900,000



Long Island, New York, USA
International Series, 19-Aug-02, O, Hard , Draw: 48


R64 Bye
R32 Mathieu, Paul-Henri (FRA) 85 3-6 7-6(7) 4-6 Stats


This Event Points: 5, ATP Ranking: 17, Prize Money: US $4,800



Cincinnati TMS, Ohio, USA
ATP Masters Series, 5-Aug-02, O, Hard , Draw: 64


R64 Canas, Guillermo (ARG) 12 5-7 7-6(6) 6-3 Stats
R32 Arthurs, Wayne (AUS) 70 6-4 3-6 6-7(4) Stats


This Event Points: 35, ATP Ranking: 16, Prize Money: US $15,800



Montreal / Toronto, Toronto, Canada
ATP Masters Series, 29-Jul-02, O, Hard , Draw: 64


R64 Ferreira, Wayne (RSA) 45 7-6(6) 5-7 6-4 Stats
R32 Lee, Hyung-Taik (KOR) 94 3-6 7-6(5) 6-2 Stats
R16 Haas, Tommy (GER) 3 6-7(3) 6-3 6-7(5) Stats


This Event Points: 75, ATP Ranking: 15, Prize Money: US $30,000



Wimbledon, England
Grand Slam, 24-Jun-02, O, Grass , Draw: 128


R128 Lee, Martin (GBR) 116 6-3 7-6(1) 6-3 Stats
R64 Bastl, George (SUI) 145 3-6 2-6 6-4 6-3 4-6 Stats


This Event Points: 35, ATP Ranking: 13, Prize Money: US $19,257



Halle, Germany
International Series, 10-Jun-02, O, Grass , Draw: 32


R32 Stoliarov, Andrei (RUS) 107 4-6 6-3 6-4 Stats
R16 Kiefer, Nicolas (GER) 66 3-6 4-6 Stats


This Event Points: 20, ATP Ranking: 13, Prize Money: US $12,025



Roland Garros, France
Grand Slam, 27-May-02, O, Clay , Draw: 128


R128 Gaudenzi, Andrea (ITA) 69 6-3 4-6 2-6 6-7(3) Stats


This Event Points: 5, ATP Ranking: 12, Prize Money: US $10,677



World Team Cup, Dusseldorf, Germany
WT, 20-May-02, O, Clay , Draw: 64


RR Escude, Nicolas (FRA) 30 6-7(3) 6-2 6-7(2) Stats
RR Canas, Guillermo (ARG) 17 7-5 2-6 7-6(5) Stats
RR Johansson, Thomas (SWE) 9 2-6 7-6(3) 6-7(5) Stats


This Event Points: 0, ATP Ranking: 12, Prize Money: US $15,840



Hamburg TMS, Germany
ATP Masters Series, 13-May-02, O, Clay , Draw: 64


R64 Mirnyi, Max (BLR) 39 3-6 4-6 Stats


This Event Points: 5, ATP Ranking: 11, Prize Money: US $7,900



Rome TMS, Italy
ATP Masters Series, 6-May-02, O, Clay , Draw: 64


R64 Mantilla, Felix (ESP) 45 4-6 7-6(3) 3-6 Stats


This Event Points: 5, ATP Ranking: 12, Prize Money: US $7,900



Houston, TX, U.S.A.
International Series, 22-Apr-02, O, Clay , Draw: 32


R32 Vacek, Jan (CZE) 79 4-6 6-1 7-5 Stats
R16 Puerta, Mariano (ARG) 210 6-4 6-2 Stats
Q Martin, Todd (USA) 46 6-2 7-6(3) Stats
S Agassi, Andre (USA) 10 6-1 7-5 Stats
F Roddick, Andy (USA) 13 6-7(11) 3-6 Stats


This Event Points: 120, ATP Ranking: 14, Prize Money: US $30,300



USA v ESP WG Qtrs, Houston, Texas
DC, 5-Apr-02, O, Grass , Draw: 4


RR Corretja, Alex (ESP) N/A 6-4 6-4 6-7(4) 5-7 4-6


This Event Points: , ATP Ranking: N/A, Prize Money: US $0



Miami TMS, FL, U.S.A.
ATP Masters Series, 18-Mar-02, O, Hard , Draw: 96


R128 Bye
R64 Nieminen, Jarkko (FIN) 66 4-6 6-3 6-2 Stats
R32 Gonzalez, Fernando (CHI) 62 6-7(1) 1-6 Stats


This Event Points: 35, ATP Ranking: 13, Prize Money: US $18,400



Indian Wells TMS, California, USA
ATP Masters Series, 11-Mar-02, O, Hard , Draw: 64


R64 Fish, Mardy (USA) 141 7-6(5) 6-2 Stats
R32 Costa, Albert (ESP) 30 6-4 6-4 Stats
R16 Santoro, Fabrice (FRA) 20 6-3 3-6 7-5 Stats
Q Schuettler, Rainer (GER) 37 6-2 6-4 Stats
S Hewitt, Lleyton (AUS) 1 2-6 4-6 Stats


This Event Points: 225, ATP Ranking: 13, Prize Money: US $108,200



Scottsdale, AZ, U.S.A.
International Series, 4-Mar-02, O, Hard , Draw: 32


R32 Black, Byron (ZIM) 175 6-1 6-2 Stats
R16 Ferreira, Wayne (RSA) 48 5-7 5-7 Stats


This Event Points: 15, ATP Ranking: 12, Prize Money: US $6,200



USA v SVK WG Rd 1, Oklahoma City, OK
DC, 8-Feb-02, I, Hard , Draw: 4


RR Beck, Karol (SVK) N/A 6-3 6-7(3) 6-1 7-5


This Event Points: , ATP Ranking: N/A, Prize Money: US $0



Australian Open, Australia
Grand Slam, 14-Jan-02, O, Hard , Draw: 128


R128 Nieminen, Jarkko (FIN) 60 6-3 6-3 6-4 Stats
R64 Chela, Juan Ignacio (ARG) 55 6-3 7-5 3-6 6-4 Stats
R32 Escude, Nicolas (FRA) 31 7-6(5) 5-7 6-4 6-7(6) 6-3 Stats
R16 Safin, Marat (RUS) 11 2-6 4-6 7-6(5) 6-7(10) Stats


This Event Points: 150, ATP Ranking: 10, Prize Money: US $32,500



Adelaide, Australia
International Series, 31-Dec-01, O, Hard , Draw: 32


R32 Martin, Todd (USA) N/A 6-3 3-6 4-6 Stats


This Event Points: 5, ATP Ranking: N/A, Prize Money: US $3,200

I think his serve would cause Nadal big problems for some reason - the Federer serve is not the tracer bullet the Sampras Serve certainly was.

anyway it's not going to happen, but Mac has reignited some debates i'm sure!

I think the peak sampras would have caused returners today as much trouble as always.

This is what annoys me about tennis though - why have they slowed Grass court tennis down and made extinct serve-volley? And then, in all Irony, why have they quickened up clay court tennis? Why can't we have a big distinction between grass, hard and clay? I for one would not actually mind awatching a wimbledon on the old courts with a batch of serve volleyers!

Disagree on this. Federer's serve is underrated because players are now returning better. Chang, hewitt, Federer and Safin were young and already capable of returning Sampras serve.

It will take an amazing serve today (Karlovic on grass maybe) to impress us like Sampras did then becaus we are simply used to good servers nowadays. We are used to great BHs a la Safin or FHs a la Federer or Gonzo. Back then those shots would have killed most players. Now it is not enough. Hewitt's footwork is not that impresive either. Look at Nadal or Davidenko! Who says Wow when Roddick hits a 140mph serve now?

Not me.

Mind Roddicks serve is not as good as Pistol Pete's anyway Tenez. Even though the INITIAL velocity on his serve is huge, I don't believe it to be as penetrating as a sampras, a Goran, a Karlovic etc. It loses speed quicker than those visually. Federer's serve is well placed but doesn't penetrate like Pete's.

I always wonder why in tenniss we bother looking at initial velocities of serves anyway - reaction time is the important one, it would be interesting to see who is best in terms of reaction time. I don't know if this has been calculated already using the UVAST projectile motion formulae.

I agree on this, s&v really hasn't a hope of any resurrection!

I don't think a one off reutrn to Wimbledon would be more than a gimmick.

But I do take what McEnroe says and I think that if he *wanted to* Pete could come back at a high level. His serve has obviously still got some pop.

People use that Bastl match as an example of why Sampras would fail, but that doesn't hold any water with me, because Pete beat Agassi in the final of the US Open a couple of months later. Agassi who would then go onto win a slam in 2003 and be number one again.

Pete could still beat anyone on his day in 2002, don't base everything on one humiliating match.

Who is to say that he would embarass himself 5 years later.

I don't think he would or should comeback to the tour. But I don't think it would be a catasrophe if he did.

Form is temporary, class is permanent ;)

Unless the grass is made the way it was up until the late 90's... :)

I am not saying you are wrong about different serves being more penetrating than others - I know nothing about tennis compared to you, but how can the ball slow down more quickly off some people's racquets than others? Can it be something to do with spin or trajectory, or is it more to do with how well disguised the serve is so that, as you say, it is reaction time not pure speed that we ought to be looking at?

I know, I find that really stupid.

I've not based it on one match SW - He really was on the way, the US Open was a wondeful emotional flash in the pan for currently the greatest player ever. But he was nearly a goner!

Pete is probably still good enough to make top 100 - after that, no i don't think so, although he may well still have the odd great one-off match in him!

Does anyone remember Superset tennis, when McEnroe hammered Murray 6-1? Mac is amazing though ;)

In fact what happened to Superset - that was awesome!

These days tennis is primarily won from the baseline and regardless of his serve people are better returners so Pete would inevitably be forced to play from there.Look at Tim Henman.We see him more at the baseline these days than at the net and he is from Sampras era.

Dare I mention it coz it will start an old fight,but Petes rallying abilities left much to be desired so he would be mince meat for almost anyone today.So he should just remain as he says he will...Content with the seniors.Johnny Mac loves controversy!

Yes, but a lot of it was mental, he just didn't have the will to win anymore. He just wanted one last moment of glory and gathered himself together for it at the US Open.

If he came back today and the hunger was there...who knows...that's what I was trying to get at, more than that he can be a consistent threat on the tour again.

I think he could be top 20 though.

Im not sure about his fitness however, he would have to spend about a year training again before being fit enough for a 5 set match in a Grand Slam.

I think it's a known facts that some players serves "skid" through a lot more than others (Hewitt for instance). Obviously the Roddick serve is very big, but I think someone like a Karlovic, for instance, hits their serve so flat that it flies off the court and loses relatively little speed on impact! Pete's serve had a similar effect, and Goran's was unbelievable in that regard!

Obviously, Roddick's serve is famously abbreviated - I don't know if this might be a reason why the serve might not penetrate as much, A more length swing would certainly generate more long-term momentum I think. Maybe one of us should write in to NEW SCIENTIST and find out...

i think top 50 would be pete's limit, just due to the tour physically. I don't think it was all mental with Pete, his game was slowly going too with the wear and tear!

But as I said, Pete may be able to pull off the occasional big win, although Federer, Nadal, Murray etc. would surely be too much for him

Henman's serve in the "sampras era" was stronger than now - Larry Stefanki ruined his serve and it killed his serve-volley game :(

More to do with disguise and placement Barrystar. I agree the speedgun has become an overated device because it makes people base their opinions on that alone. Every human being is different and Sampras was able to serve aces at pressure points in the game (like break point down) he could come up with unreturnable second serves or aces at 30:30. That's not fluke but pure ability and bravery to go for the lines - plus self assurance in his technique to give it a go over and over again.

The big difference between the Federer serve and the Sampras serve is the second serve. Federer's second serve isn't as big, or as deep, or as well placed. The Federer 1st serve is damned good but still not as good as Sampras because it doesn't have as much action, especially on the ad side, he doesn't hit aces down the middle at will like Sampras did.

Everyone knows there is no way Sampras is coming back anyway.

A peak Sampras v peak Nadal would have been great because putting just Tennis ability of both aside - that's a real battle of two guys who real willpower! It would have been great.

Yes, I pretty much agree with that. I think he could beat a frightening number of players BUT, I don't think he'd win...and I think he probably knows this...so it would be a bit pointless entering.

I think the Sampras serve is much flatter than the Federer serve as well though, which will always give him more penetration!

Fed's action naturally slices the ball a little

agreed :)

Wibble..... is really all I can say to that comment DN ;)

Sampras should not even attempt to come back. Yes, on form he might mix it with some of the top 10 players on grass, butover 5 sets? No.... and if he isn't 100% on form he will be beaten by many a player unfortunately.

Let's get this into perspective. He has barely picked up a racquet in 4 years. He is 5 years older than when he was last at Wimbledon. The grass is slower. Coming back will be a mistake. And if he somehow managed to face Federer he would be beaten.

People seem to want to see Federer versus Sampras on grass but unless it was a peak Sampras from 10 years back I just can't see it being anything other than a massive win for Roger.

that is so obviously correct ;)

I wish McEnroe would just shut up to be honest. He was a great player but nowadays he talks so much rubbish, and far too frequently. He also has a habit of changing his mind back and forth from month to month, whether the debate is this issue (i.e. one day he says that this era is the strongest of all time, the next day he goes on about how past greats could have dominated the game nowadays) or the equal pay argument (he was completely against it at first, but after Wimbledon's decision, he said that he had always been in favour of equal prize money). He contradicts himself so much it is hilarious.
Pete ended his career in the perfect manner, winning a grand slam and beating his biggest rival in the final, making him the envy of practically all the other greats who couldn't close out their careers in such a fashion. Why would he want to jeopardise that by coming back and risk losing to nobodies in the 1st or 2nd round that he would have annhilated in his prime? As Pete said he would only want to take part at Wimbledon if he had a chance of winning the tournament, and he realises that his chances of doing that lie somewhere in the region of 0%. Pete's word is more than good enough for me.

If Federer can lose to Volandri or Canas, If Nadal can lose to a retired Johansson, a Moya or a Malisse anything can happen but what would it prove regarding sampras?

Also, Roddick's serve is dissmissed too easily, but I am sure that had the conditons been quicker (smaller balls and faster grass), his serve woudl be more deadly than Sampras'.

Whether there was more spin in Sampras is irrelevant if one cannot put his racket on Roddick's serve. I am certainly not a big fan of his game, but let's give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and Roddick's serve is a deadly weapon!

roflmao

You're right - mind at least we've had some other debates crop up, such as Sampras-Nadal and whether velocity actually matters on serve!

Think about it tenez - an abbreviated serve such as roddicks probably does have more chance of losing more velocity and thus penetration - Federer has embarrassed it many a time. Have you ever played snooker? If so you could look at the effects of spin you impart when you are hitting a ball close to the cue ball or far away from it. The difference is marked.

So, so true. He's hailed about four players as the greatest ever/to come in about the last month.

That's why I think it's always a problem when we discuss the serve.

Yeah, I agree Roddick's serve would be even more deadly. But it's what he does after the serve that's a problem for him. Sampras was able to back up his serve consistently with good play if the returner got it back (not always of course, he's not a machine - but consistently). Roddick doesn't seem able to do that consistently plus of course his movement is nowhere as good as Sampras' (athleticism etc) anyway. Roddick is more in the Karlovic territory than the Sampras/Becker territory.

Dark Necrofear, if we are talking about a 1990 to 1999 Sampras, his groundstrokes and movement was good enough to match anyone during those years - 30 + hardcourt titles and 3 clay titles is proof of that.

A young Sampras today would focus more on his groundgame than volleying just like everyone else. And like I said before, if you watch some Sampras matches from the early 1990s on hardcourts, you would be hardpressed to come to the conclusion he was a serve and volleyer specialist. You've based your opinion on a couple of matches post 2000 when his form and focus was on the wane. I can send you some early stuff if you want so you could have a look.

The difference between the two is that Sampras serve has more kick, not flatter. When I say kick I don't mean the conventional 85mph kick serve to the backhand - I mean when he hit's that ace down the middle and centre line judge ducks as it hits the backboard head height. When you think how far the service line is from the backboard then I think how much power there is on it. Federer maybe does use more slice on that wing so the ball stays lower. Sampras gets the slice and kick, just like Yannick Noah, Goran and Becker. That's what made his serve deadly.

I don't deny that Laurie. I was only comparing serves here and tried to get Roddick's his due credit in that department.

There is no doubt that besides the serve, Sampras was more agile than A-Rod.

PS - Did you get the PM I sent you 2 weeks ago?

Sam - I don't see the parallel with snooker. Maybe I don't catch your point but I play the game and the cloth has quite an impact on the spin such as drag and follow through, etc...a tennis ball is only travelling in the air and the spin takes effect on landing only, I believe.

Tanner had also a very short move and his serve was the fastest of the time. The question is whether a spinning ball travels faster than a flat one. I don't know about this one. I would tend to think that a spinned one travels more slowly but more constanly as it carries the speed better after the bounce.

The bottom line is that Roddick was hitting a lot of aces so the drag effect was not obvious for his returning opponents.

kick and slice are two different things though - his serve was effectively flat, not massively cut around like Fed's is a little

I am not really interested in this discussion but still I want add a couple of simple remarks:

A. whatever the quality of the weapons left to Pete' armoury if he decides to come back it will be nothing more than a shame. It will be particularly short because the guys out there are physically more powerful that 5 years ago and they are playing in a rhythm (or in mode, or a flow, call it how you want) that Pete, even with a great preparation, will be able to cope for, let's say, max two-three matches..And to win a slam, even on grass you have to cover and stay there a little bit more longer in term of matches right!! :P ..

So, come on..His serve will be still deadly for a lot of players but for the top names out there (and not only the top two) at a certain point they will simply start to retrieve most of them asking Pete to play back...and there with the speed, in terms of curt covarage mainly, of today..Come on... Once again, it will be the rhythm who would kill him at the end IMO (Pete will not play against the past champions but against full prepare at the top physically guys..Come on!!! do not come back stay away Pete).

Second, Master AA :) did just the n+1 great synthesis here:

Sometime I am really asking myself why John is opening his big mouth so often to say this kind of stuff..But then I say to myself: Come on the guy is coming from the BIG APPLE :yikes: , i.e. the city of all extremes and superlatives and then I laugh (BTW: I am working daily with New Yorkers..a lot of them are just like John..Give them a normal project and suddenly it becomes a gigantic one, the best of all time and with a great future and impact for the entire company. :whistle: ..)

whe n i say in snooker, hitting a ball close to the cueball, that effectively is the "abbreviated" shot, and responds differently to a ball a long way away. Seethe next time you apply backspin.

HI Tenez, I sent you a reply two weeks ago. Did you get it?

You assume that im basing my opinion on matches from the late 90's early millenium when in fact my friend I have told you that I have been watching Pete from about 93,more specific when he beat my man Agassi at Wimbledon in that epic rain delayed match.Pete never impressed me off the ground.I have expressed this avidly in my thread Sampras could not rally.I stand firm by it.I will however admit that some interesting facts were brought forward there to make me believe and based on what I watched that he was adequate enough to hold his pwn from the ground against the people of that time.But then again they were mostly serve and volleyers.The quality of groundstrokes today outclasses that of then and thats definetly due to equipment,nevertheless that is the way of any sport,evolution.Sampras was never a baseliner and was never the best from the baseline.I rest my case.