Sampras was my idol as a young boy, but realistically speaking, from two years into Federer's spell of dominanace I accepeted that Federer would one day break Pete's record, and even Pete himself has said on numerous occasions last year it will be broken/

I thought perhaps it would start to get harder and harder, but now given Federer's form and the fact he is losing to guys he usually hammers ie Roddick and Fish, it is the first time I am actually sitting here questioning will he actually break the Slam record?

Because lets not forget the way Federer was going 3 slams which is what he still needs to break it seemed like nothing but for most players to win 3 slams in a career makes for an awesome career and federer is very much back with the pack so to speak at the moment.

I personally feel this year will decide if he does or not, if he wins at least one slam this year then he can still break it. However if Federer doesnt win a slam in 2008 then I think that Sampras' record will start to look more and more safe something not many of us thought possible a year or so ago.

What are your thoughts on this?

Fed's form thus far in 08 has been baffling and disappointing. yet i think it's rubbish to suggest that he won't break Pete's record. given the 3,4 (or more) years of highly competitive tennis he has left in him, 3 is most certainly still in the cards.

This is regarding Sampras in what was a relitively bad year for him 1998....

'In 1998, Pete began to hear footsteps, as youngsters Patrick Rafter and Marcelo Rios were gunning for the # 1 ranking. Pete won just two tournaments in the season’s first half, raising questions about his ability to fend off this new crop of challengers. He silenced some of his critics when he overcame Goran Ivanisevic in a five-set Wimbledon final, 6-7 (2-7), 7-6 (11-9), 6-4, 3-6, and 6-2. The victory was Pete’s 11th Grand Slam title, drawing him even with Bjorn Borg and his idol, Rod Laver. A loss to Patrick Rafter in the U.S. Open semis, however, refueled the argument that his best days were behind him.
Late in the year, Pete admitted to Annacone that he was obsessing over his #1 ranking, and that it was starting to affect his game. He desperately wanted to be the first player to hold this honor six straight seasons—so much so that he had lost his appetite, couldn’t sleep, and was losing his hair'

The piece about Sampras which i've used before, illustrates some the parallels with Pete's career at almost exactly the same age as Fed is now-and from this point onwards Pete won 4 more slams.
I think there are far too many knee jerk reactions to Feds current form-which while not brilliant has fed at No4 in the champions race-and given recent form Fed only needs a chink of confidence and he's definitely back as the main contender for most slams.. We don't know to what extent he's been effected by the mono virus, clearly Fed has found it harder and harder to stay ahead of the pack, but i think to virtually count him out of the slams-as some have is astonishing.
There are far too many variables, and too little evidence to make too much of Fed-he isn't about to drop out of the top five and ironically has strengthened his hold on No1 in recent weeks.
I think the pressure of maintaining his position must have put Fed under both internal and external pressure to keep it but, but ironically Fed may actually go into this years French as a relative underdog-with Nadal and Djoko as favourites and it could be interesting to see how the lightening of the berdon of expectation will play out with Fed

I think at the very least Fed has 1 more Wimby, Aussie Open and US Open in him so I fully see him breaking that record even with a slump like this.

As BT says it rather neatly parallels Sampras 10 years ago and he went on to get 4 more slams from that point.

Of course nothing is certain but if I had to bet either way if my life depended on it I'd be saying he'd break Sampras's record and be very positive that the Grim Reaper would be kept at bay. :ok:

Fed went through a slump this time last year- and went on to win Wimbledon and the US . This year he's recovering from an illness - it seems a bit premature to suggest this when he hasnt been beaten at those two slams since 2003 . If he doesnt win a slam this year, Ill start considering it .
And I think he only needs to win two more including the French to beat Sampras.

I'll say it again."Form is temporary,class is permanent"

Yes it's a slump,yes he's had problems,but I just can't see how he will suddenly fall apart.
It's great that we are actually starting to doubt his dominance,as the tennis is not a foregone conclusion,but to see Federer's confidence erode after 5 years of building it,I can't see that happening.

I stick with Estoril as a haven for him.If he can win a lower key event like that it will spur him on,knowing that he is a champion,and I fully believe that the Federer game when everyone plays their best is still superior to his challengers.

The nuts and bolts just need more oil

Of course he will!
I believe at the end of his career he'll have atleast 17 slams(I hope so :pray: ) He's such a gifted player that if the present way he's playing doesn't work out for him he'll find another way to win slams..for that of course I believe he should get a coach first.The present crisis for him IMO is his position as the no:1 player by the end of this year

Of course nothing is impossible - and winning Slams is never easy. (Even if sometimes special players can make it look that way. :D )

However, the overwhelming likelihood is that Roger will break Pete's record. Even if he doesn't win a single slam this year, I would think it is more likely than not that he will have broken it by the end of his career. A champion like Fed is always a contender - just what Sampras (and also Agassi) proved late in their careers. And fast surfaces - particularly the USO imo, even more so than Wimbledon - will allow him to get a win even if he may start to be outplayed from the baseline. :ok: