he question on the tennis world’s lips is just how superhuman Pete Sampras could become again. He’s 35 now, his hair continues to recede, and he’s not as quick as he was back in ‘90, when he thumped Andre Agassi for his first Grand Slam title at the U.S. Open.

But oh, how he can still serve, still sharply put away a volley, still rocket a forehand when he gets it into his wheelhouse. The 14-time Grand Slam champion will go into the Hall of Fame in July, but will not compete at Wimbledon, even though a slew of experts believe he could challenge his new friend, No. 1 Roger Federer, for the title and win for a record eighth time.

John McEnroe put him in his top five favorites and contended that the mighty Federer wouldn’t even want to tangle with him. Tim Mayotte was so impressed with Sampras’ “incredibly heavy ball” that he contended in April that Sampras actually would tie his laces at the AELTC again. Czech Petr Korda said that on grass, the Californian’s serve is still murder and that the new generation of players wouldn’t know how to return it, because the only way to properly return Pete’s heater is to slap it back.

“Most of the guys in the draw, he would beat badly on grass,” Korda said.

Johnny Mac, who lost to Sampras at a Champions Cup event in Boston, believes that today, armed with state-of-the-art strings and a modern racket, Sampras could still numb his foes, possibly even Federer.

“Pete is arguably the greatest who ever lived and he could step on a [quick indoor] surface and beat most of the guys on tour,” McEnroe said. “He might not be ready for best of five, but he’s stepped it up from when I saw him a year ago. He’s got more movement, he’s holding his own against top 10 guys. It’s taken some time, but I can see a marked difference. He has more rhythm on his serve. He’s hitting a backhand better. The guy has won seven Wimbledon’s, but why bother [to play it again], so he can prove he can beat guys we all know he can beat? I couldn’t name five players I’d take over Pete on grass. Davydenko? On grass? Go down the list. I’m not sure about Nadal, either. Pete is the master on grass. Best of five and luck of the draw would be the difference. There wouldn’t be a guy in the tournament who’d want to play him. Roger would say he’d want to play him, but he’d be concerned. He’d be a lot more concerned than he would be against all these other guys.”

But could Sampras really beat Federer, an all-surface demon who has racked up 10 Slam titles in four years and could be on his way to being called the greatest ever?

Obviously, part of the world wants to see that ultimate heavyweight matchup take place again because with all the chatter going around, the two decided they would play a series of exhibitions in Asia during November. And — perhaps the most intriguing match nobody saw — Sampras and Federer practiced together earlier this year in March at Sampras’ L.A. home, and the Californian pushed him.

“He’s a great player, but I felt like I didn’t embarrass myself out there. I feel like I can hold my own,” said Sampras, who lost the set 7-5.

Sadly, the two never met when they were in their primes. The two did play once on the tour, when in ‘01, a still-wet-behind-the-ears Federer shocked Sampras at 2001 Wimbledon, just 14 months before Sampras called it quits after winning his final major at the U.S. Open and two years before Federer won his first Slam.

Had they met on a consistent basis, the theory that Sampras’ old-school serve-and-volley game is the only style that could consistently challenge Federer’s all around wizardry on hard courts, indoor and grass would have been severely tested. Obviously, Federer is substantially stronger from the backcourt, is a more accomplished defender, is quicker, and he would have had his way with Sampras on clay.

But during his amazing stretch, Federer hasn’t had to face an elite man who could back up a huge serve with crisp and well-placed volleys, the trademark of Sampras’ game. The Swiss has done a tremendous job muting a gigantic server like Andy Roddick., but Roddick is not a serve-and-volleyer, and Federer is adept at blocking his serves back into play, and he then toys with him from the baseline. Federer would have no such option against Sampras, who not only had a more dependable and better placed first serve, but had a far superior second serve, which frequently bailed him out of tough spots as he could kiss the lines with remarkable speed, spin and precision.

Sampras would follow many of those serves to net. A terrific athlete with long arms who could stretch out to the sidelines, Sampras covered the cords like a praying mantis.

That does not mean that he was unbreakable — especially to Federer, whose passing game is underrated because he doesn’t face that many net rushers. But when he is forced to pass, he shows off fast hands and a keen mind, often chipping low or rolling dipping forehands that force his opponents to pop their first volleys up, which he eats alive and guns past them.

While it would be convenient for Sampras’ fans to see their hero registering convincing wins over Federer like he once did over Agassi (pound his way into the tiebreaker, produce a few eye popping back-court winners and mentally break down his foe), Federer has more options at his disposal. First of all, he is nearly unbreakable on faster surfaces, because his serve is deceptively lethal, and he absolutely hammers weak returns. Once he’s in control of a rally, it’s almost impossible to knock him off his stride. Federer’s backhand is far better than Sampras’, as he can hit it three different ways, and Sampras could barely hit it two (slice and marginal topspin). Federer’s forehand is just as hard and has more variety. Sampras rarely positioned himself to hit an inside out forehand, which Federer loves to do, and while Sampras had an excellent forehand — especially his running crosscourt — he wasn’t as secure going down the line as Federer is.

Sampras lived to chip and charge off weak second serves, but he would rarely see one from Federer, which would force him to contest more backcourt rallies than he’d be comfortable with. And while any human would be hard pressed to get more than a handful of points off Sampras’ legendary serve when the Californian was in the zone, Federer reads serves as well as anyone has and on a great day would make Sampras play more low volleys than he’d like.

What few grasp about the Swiss is how quickly he adapts to his foes’ styles, which is the primary reason he is making such a lightning-fast run into the history books. While it is nearly impossible to compare eras — and there are many ex-champs who believe that the depth at the top of today’s game is thin — on fast surfaces, Federer has been able weave his way past an extremely athletic group of elite players during the past four years (think Agassi, Nadal, Roddick, Ljubicic, Blake, Nalbandian, Davydenko).

A Sampras-Federer battle would partly come down to what most championship bouts are determined by: who is mentally tougher on the day. Both have proved themselves in that category time and time again, so the final result would be determined by Sampras ability to keep the points short and suffocate the Swiss by not allowing him to put his wizard’s hat on. If he couldn’t, Federer would flatten him. “Roger’s game doesn’t have many cracks...It’s one of those matchups where either I just need to overwhelm him with some power and try to come in and hopefully serve well,” Sampras said. The  prediction: Federer in four tight sets on hard, and Sampras in five on grass.