Originally Posted by rofe
Yeah Agassi was lucky in more ways than that. I think, his opponent Medvedev (?) in the finals self-destructed after being up 2 sets to love. Agassi hung in there and won the trophy. I think it is a moot point to discuss it anyway because looking back Agassi won the final that day and that resulted in him being one of the few to win all four majors.
Fed has his work cut out for him due to Nadal's ascension so victory will be all the more sweeter if he does it this year.
I think even if Roger never wins RG he will end up being viewed as greater than Agassi. If Roger stays healthy and can play till he's 30 he will probably have won more majors than Agassi and won more MS series. An RG win would be icing on the cake but it doesn't make or break Roger's greatness factor. That said, if Roger doesn't win RG this year he certainly has a lot more time left to keep trying.
Furthermore.....McEnroe never won RG but he is viewed as being greater than Agassi. As I remember, they used to praise Agassi's career slam just to make him not feel jealous of Sampras' record.
What is strange to me is the fact that Roger had a lot more competition coming up through the ranks than what Nadal had to face to climb to #2. Rgoer had to face players like Agassi, Henman, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nalbandian when they were at their PEAK
. Now Nadal is benefitting from the fact those guys are only half what they were. This lets Nadal have a much better chance off of clay than he would have had otherwise. That's just not fair. Even now Roger gets the toughest draws every time.