britbox said:
Sampras/Agassi wasn't very equal the way I remember it. Pete dominated the big matches between the two.
You misread my posts. I was making completely two different points in two different posts. In my second post, I talked about both Agassi/Sampras and Nole/Andy being an equal rivalry on all accounts, as in, both being of almost same age, same eras, same types of surfaces etc. - but mostly same age. Reason why I then stated that Nadal and Federer aren't an equal rivalry, given that one is a few years older, not only that, started dominating the tour much earlier than Nadal. So if you take the H2H into account, the rivalry between Sampras vs Agassi, and Murray vs Djokovic are far more equal almost on all accounts. Now who dominated whom is irrelevant given that the basis of this rivalry is flawed as shown. Now Nadal vs Djokovic or Nadal vs Murray are true rivalries in all sense.
In my first post I'd indicated something different and it had nothing to do with either Sampras or Agassi. I said that I don't enjoy Federer vs Nadal match-up at all because most of the time, it's heavily one sided (21-10) and since 2008 it's 16-4 in Nadal's favour. Not only that, Federer has lost all his matches in Marjors to Nadal 5-0 whereas from 2003 to 2007, their H2H is pretty decent 8-6 and in Majors 3-2 (they met 3 times in RG and 2 times in Wimbledon). So again, I don't enjoy their matches because they are a bit too predictable for my taste. And if you still want to bring Sampras/Agassi (20 - 14) rivalry up, I'd say it wasn't as dominating, since Agassi beat Sampras more times at AO within the same timeframe, so at least at one place Agassi was more dominant over Sampras. Agassi also won their only meeting at RG. So that's two places where Agassi had his control over Sampras; therefore, making this rivalry far more interesting and equal on all regards. In fact, Nadal vs Federer is the most boring rivalry I've ever seen.