To the Editor:
Baird Hull's article ("Federer at Wimbledon: No Sampras," July 12) is very well written, but deserves a few clarifications.
Hull's concludes that Roger Federer's dominance "come[s] at a time when the competition is far less tough" and that "Federer has emerged as the king of a new breed of baseliners who cannot take advantage of the grass as in days past."
However, I am not conviced. Federer is basically avoiding the net because the grass is newly laid and is artificial. Consequently, the surface is a bit slow when compared to the Sampras era.
It is obvious logic that playing from the baseline would really help the players.
I accept that the Sampras era can't be compared with Federer's era because Sampras had to deal with Agassi, Rafter and Goran.
I also fully agree with you that Federer lacks quality opponents.
But you can't take away anything from Federer.
Remember, he had also defeated Sampras once at Wimbledon, when he didn't have the game that he possesses now. If Sampras were currently competing at the professional level, he would probably still be hard-pressed to beat Federer.
