Discussion in 'Other Sport' started by Raoul, Jan 29, 2012.
Racket technology suits Agassi better as well.
I beat Henman 1987 Cheltenham Open just leaving that one here
Agassi is a bit underrated it seems. He was absolute quality at his peak, and brilliant to watch.
The best bit about Agassi is he at one point left Tennis in the mid/late 90s after winning 3 slams, had his ranking plummet into the 900s, had to go play on the satellite tour in some bizarre places just to claw his way back into even qualifying for major tournaments, then went on to win another 5 slams. Great player.
well Meth is a helluva drug!
So did my brother and Tims mother phoned our house asking my brother to be his doubles partner the following year and the plank said no
I sadly started watching tennis when he was way past his prime, but I watched a few full matches of him in his peak on YouTube and can see why people called him the best returner ever.
Agassi vs Federer at US open 2005 was probably the only time Federer didn’t have the crowd on his side once he started winning slams besides away Davis cup matches. Even at Wimbledon when Federer played Murray the crowd was split.
He definitely was the best returner ever before Novak showed up.
I remember seeing him return 125+ mph serves standing inside the service line and win the point. It was unbelievable.
Anybody else remember Sampras vs. Corretja in the 1996 US Open quarters?
Sampras suffering from a stomach bug threw up mid-5th set, got a delay warning, then won the match.
I love big Pete.
Agassi was my favorite player . Though I have admired all of current big 3, and preferred at different times one over other and sometimes all together (no homo), never became die-hard fan of anyone after Agassi. Agassi is more likely to do better on current courts than Sampras and more likely to give fight to big 3 had he been around right now.
Agassi was my favorite as well even though I never got to see him at his absolute peak. I also disliked the big serving Pete so I guess the pattern has followed with me then going on to support a very good returner like Rafa and disliking Federer.
Have to include Djokovic in the Top 5 now, you'd think.
The last 4-5 years have been simply incredible from him.
Agassi is the reason I got into Tennis
Me and my Brother as kids would venture out wearing our Bandannas
He was a phenomenal player that’s for sure
Feds the man, but Agassi is the guy I followed before hand
Aggasi was a bit rock n roll wasn't he. I remember being a kid and desperately wanting some of those funky t-shirts that he used to wear. That garish early 90s look when shell suits were king.
Top 5? He's been in the Top 3 for quite a while!
Of all time? Maybe after another year with the same consistency.
It's currently Federer, Nadal and Sampras/ Laver for me. Though I've obviously never seen Laver play
Agassi's movement would be heavily exposed by Nadal, Djokovic & Federer. He wouldn't lock down an end with his serve, and the courts and Nadal and Djokovic (even Federers) defense will mean that he wouldn't get as much reward for his shots in this era.
The faster courts suited his style of play much more than the current ones.
By what metric is Sampras ahead of him?
Sheer dominance of his era.
Stupid arguement. You've got 2 players in your top 3 who played in Djokovic's era yet he's managed to win more Grand Slams than Sampras and by the end of the year will overtake him in weeks at World No. 1.
Silly nostalgia. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would butcher both Agassi and Sampras, prime or not. These guys are dominant on a completely different level while the sport has become more and more professional in more and more countries. The fact that in their 30s the rest of the field still can't catch up says enough.
Had Agassi lived for his sport completely he would've rivaled them, but he didn't, and he doesn't.
Sampras isn't anywhere near the Big 3.
He’s two slams off of Novak, so pretty close.
And yes!! Those T-shirts!! They were class at the time, what am I saying, looking back I still feel they are class
Top 5 for me are
I don't think Sampras was ever universally recognised as the GOAT even when he had the slam record. I get the impression, it was Borg and Laver who were recognised as being at the top.
Federer by the way has been called the GOAT since about 2007. Long before he even got the GrandSlam record.
Same. Agassi was my favourite player growing up. Never liked Pete
Always Federer for me. He plays the game in the most breathtaking manner possible and gets points for being a more aggressive and complete tennis player than the others. He'd be just as successful in the pre 2004 era of rapid surfaces.
This past Sunday was heartbreaking for him and fans of his like me. But that's sport for you. He played a magnificent match of tennis and a few hiccups here and there cost him GS no 21. I don't think he'll add now to 20, but I guess it's time to savour being able to watch him for the remainder of his winding down career.
Sigh. He would done to Djokovic exactly what he did to Nadal in 2017. Coming back from a break to win the 5th set. Would have been unreal. But what can you do. Djokovic himself probably felt he thought it all away given he had a 4-2 lead.
Inability on clay court is something which holds back Sampras in GOAT discussion or all-time top 5, especially since 3 guys who came after him have proved themselves far better than their peers on all surfaces. Sampras could never improve on clay. 24 wins in 13 attempts at RG, that averages to 3rd round exit each attempt. Only one semifinal appearance. Amazing on grass though.
Exactly. And I dont see a Federer Hill, or a Djokovic Hill... but I do see a Henman Hill!
Most gutting thing is that Federer was playing better tennis for most of it, but somehow just over did it in the three breakers.
Bit of heartbreak makes the sport fun though I guess.
It’s like he used up all of his good karma against Nadal.
He had like 10 aces in the 5th alone before that game, yet couldn’t muster one good first serve on any of the 4 points from 40-15 and lost the break. It’s actually inexplicable.
Exactly. Stats aside, he wasn't technically or mentally at the level of the current big 3.
There is no way Sampras is over Novak.
There are many times Federer has been below his best, outplayed in matches but somehow stuck around because of his serve and won tie breaks to win matches. It's just how it is and sometimes you get what you've dished out yourself.
The thing for me here is that with both players at their very best - on any surface - I'd say Djokovic edges out Federer. Federer has a longer career under his belt so for now would probably say he is the greatest but I expect Djokovic to overtake him. Nadal is also brilliant of course and would probably be 3rd. Then Laver and Borg etc.
Yeah definitely. That's also what sets him, Nadal and Djokovic apart from the rest of the field. Some of these younger guys can match their shots on a good day, but simply lack the consistency and mentality to do it when it matters most. Unlike the kids, they almost never break down. Djokovic is most notable for this since his rise to the absolute top. He wasn't overly spectacular on Sunday, but his level simply doesn't drop when i matters most.
that's why it's so grating to watch a guy like Kyrgios. He's talented sure, but he's just such a weak willed fecking moron that it's a shame the gods saw fit to bless him with talent. And I don't know why I suddenly sound like dialogue from Spartacus in that last sentence.
Separate names with a comma.