Andre Agassi's Strategy at Roland Garros in 1999? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Andre Agassi's Strategy at Roland Garros in 1999?

erik-the-red
06-08-2005, 07:22 PM
What was Agassi's strategy in 1999 that allowed him to win the title on his third final appearance?

I was too young to remember it.

During last weeks coverage, they'd show a few clips of Andre's performance in 1999.

It looks like he just played his usual game of "move left, move right, finish." It didn't seem like he shot that many moonballs, either.

Can anyone confirm this who remembers Andre's run?

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:23 PM
Luck and rain delay helping him in the final.

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:24 PM
Seriously he had a fairly good draw and he was just aggressive as he usually is, getting absolutely smashed in the final, it rains, he comes back a new player and too good and won the title.

Fumus
06-08-2005, 07:24 PM
Luck and rain delay helping him in the final.

Hey hey hey...that's not entirely the reason. You alittle bitter about that victory still?

Fumus
06-08-2005, 07:25 PM
Seriously he had a fairly good draw and he was just aggressive as he usually is, getting absolutely smashed in the final, it rains, he comes back a new player and too good and won the title.

Isn't that also why he lost to Courier.(e.g. the rain) :)

alfonsojose
06-08-2005, 07:25 PM
Steffi gave him a nice blowjob in the locker room :drool: *speaking using the cheeks while sucking :ignore: * "there will be more of ... :spit: :toothy: these if u win, hot american baldy"

Fumus
06-08-2005, 07:27 PM
Steffi gave him a nice blowjob in the locker room :drool:

I love Alfonso. :)

Actually he said in the Journeymen documentary that he preffered sex before matches it made him feel like a stud, light on his feet etc. etc.

So perhaps this isn't entirely untrue. :D

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:27 PM
Isn't that also why he lost to Courier.(e.g. the rain) :)

Well 89-93 was when the weaker generation of tennis on clay was, cycles happens in all sports. It wasn't just 1 delay in that match.

alfonsojose
06-08-2005, 07:28 PM
Hey hey hey...that's not entirely the reason. You alittle bitter about that victory still?
of course. Can u imagine GWH jokes about Andre losing 3 finals on clay :lol:

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:29 PM
Talk about Agassi's win at Wimbledon that is impressive.

Fumus
06-08-2005, 07:29 PM
Well 89-93 was when the weaker generation of tennis on clay was, cycles happens in all sports. It wasn't just 1 delay in that match.

Yea but, you can't say Rain...bla bla because if not for the rain he would surely have had a championship there already. :)

Neely
06-08-2005, 07:30 PM
Damn, well deserved that luck for Agassi after his previous RG history to get this lucky delays! :) Third time was a charm for Andre.

alfonsojose
06-08-2005, 07:30 PM
Well 89-93 was when the weaker generation of tennis on clay was, cycles happens in all sports. It wasn't just 1 delay in that match.
if Nadal wins on grass, after a rain delay, then this will be the weakest grass generation ;)

Fumus
06-08-2005, 07:30 PM
Talk about Agassi's win at Wimbledon that is impressive.

More impressive than Oscars future win? :)

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:31 PM
More impressive than Oscars future win? :)

Agassi did it with a mullet and spandex even more impressive.

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:34 PM
if Nadal wins on grass, after a rain delay, then this will be the weakest grass generation ;)

It would be, unlike when Agassi won Wimbledon he beat very good grasscourt players like Rostagno, Becker, McEnroe and Ivanisevic and for that he will always get respect.

It's not exactly a deep generation of grasscourt talent now.

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:35 PM
Damn, well deserved that luck for Agassi after his previous RG history to get this lucky delays! :) Third time was a charm for Andre.

Yeah, luck easy draws for 18 years that's funny.

KarstenBraasch#1
06-08-2005, 07:40 PM
Can't remember the rain delays. I thought it was the immense crowd support that got him through the third set in the final. I think Medvedev was annoyed about it.

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:42 PM
Can't remember the rain delays. I thought it was the immense crowd support that got him through the third set in the final. I think Medvedev was annoyed about it.

Medvedev was 2 sets to love and a break, but yes the RG crowd were on Agassi's side.

Fumus
06-08-2005, 07:50 PM
Agassi did it with a mullet and spandex even more impressive.

No offense but don't you have a mullet in like two of your pics? :)

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 07:53 PM
No offense but don't you have a mullet in like two of your pics? :)

Mullet and spandex Fumus that combo and the 3 day growth Agassi should have been in a cockrock band then, but his Wimbledon win :hatoff:

Fumus
06-08-2005, 08:19 PM
Mullet and spandex Fumus that combo and the 3 day growth Agassi should have been in a cockrock band then, but his Wimbledon win :hatoff:


You didn't answer my question. GWH how old are you?

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 08:20 PM
You didn't answer my question. GWH how old are you?

10001

Fumus
06-08-2005, 08:21 PM
10001

I knew it, since you seem to have lived through every era of tennis.

Are you implying by your rep to me that I don't know what I am talking about? :o

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 08:24 PM
I knew it, since you seem to have lived through every era of tennis.

Are you implying by your rep to me that I don't know what I am talking about? :o

It was a good rep and you can take it however you like and as for my age that is it I remember Don Budge winning the Slam.

Fumus
06-08-2005, 08:27 PM
It was a good rep and you can take it however you like and as for my age that is it I remember Don Budge winning the Slam.

Yea but you look like a young guy in those pics you had in your avatar.

uh huh, I mean, I didn't know what I was talking about in MC thread because I misunderstood the flawed question.

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 08:29 PM
Yea but you look like a young guy in those pics you had in your avatar.

uh huh, I mean, I didn't know what I was talking about in MC thread because I misunderstood the flawed question.

My avatars are a mystery and the MC thing well it was a flawed question, that some people took in a different way.

My answers to the Agassi questions well he didn't do anything different from before apart from win the title.

Fumus
06-08-2005, 08:35 PM
My avatars are a mystery and the MC thing well it was a flawed question, that some people took in a different way.

My answers to the Agassi questions well he didn't do anything different from before apart from win the title.


Your avatars are a mystery but you always told me they were you. You asked me about my boy recently, well...he did ok today.

Action Jackson
06-08-2005, 08:36 PM
Your avatars are a mystery but you always told me they were you. You asked me about my boy recently, well...he did ok today.

The last one was myself with blonde mullet flowing.

Fumus
06-08-2005, 08:38 PM
The last one was myself with blonde mullet flowing.

What about the one where you look like Jon Gruden?

MisterQ
06-08-2005, 10:32 PM
Against both Moya and Medvedev, who were leading against Andre, the key ended up being Andre's decision to start following shots into the net. It was risky, but paid off, (most notably serving 1-6, 2-6, 4-4, 30-40 in the third set, when Andre had to hit a difficult volley down near his shoes, but he managed to pull out the game, and then gain momentum in the match). Incidentally, this is also a large part of the reason Andre managed to win Wimbledon in 1992 --- despite not being very comfortable at the net, he knew he had to move in and put away points.

In 1999, Andre was winning by going for shots which were big, but relatively high-percentage for him. In general, he wasn't going for outrageous winners like he did when he was younger.

While Andre's serve almost lost him the match in the beginning of the final (some disastrous double faults), in the end his serving was strong enough to allow him to take control of the points. When serving for the championships, he did not miss a first serve. His kick serve out wide became difficult for Medvedev to attack.

Andre did not significantly alter his movement on clay. In fact, some of his attempts at sliding led to errors. He was most effective when playing his normal game, using lots of quick precise steps, not moving back too much, and taking the ball early.

The other aspect of Andre's game around 1999, which was not really present in 1990-91, was his fitness. In these matches he trusted his ability to last through a grueling match, and know that if he stuck around, his opponent could would either tire, or have a momentary lapse in form that he could take advantage of.

NYCtennisfan
06-08-2005, 10:36 PM
Great win for Andre in 1999 with some really beautiful hitting. Not too many, "Wow! Did you see that shot?!" but some really, really solid hitting. I'm saying this and I don't even like Andre:)

megadeth
06-08-2005, 11:25 PM
Steffi gave him a nice blowjob in the locker room :drool: *speaking using the cheeks while sucking :ignore: * "there will be more of ... :spit: :toothy: these if u win, hot american baldy"


they weren't even an item yet back then. maybe steffi said to him "if you win this, i'll agree to go on a date with you" :p

seriously, it was just his time. remember before the tournament, he was even considering not playing it.

Pea
06-09-2005, 01:29 AM
roids.

NYCtennisfan
06-09-2005, 02:02 AM
I wonder how Andre got lucky with an easy draw in 18 different years?? I bet other players would like to have this ability too. That and making 3 French Open Finals. Oh, throw in playing in a cycle of weak claycourters, rain delays in your favor, etc.

erik-the-red
06-09-2005, 03:32 AM
Thanks to all replies!

Action Jackson
06-09-2005, 11:10 AM
I wonder how Andre got lucky with an easy draw in 18 different years?? I bet other players would like to have this ability too. That and making 3 French Open Finals. Oh, throw in playing in a cycle of weak claycourters, rain delays in your favor, etc.

If you can tell me when Agassi has had a difficult draw at RG then come back to me.

I don't like Sampras, but when he made the semis in 96 apart from Draper, he played Gustafsson, Bruguera, T. Martin, Courier then losing to Kafelnikov.

The closest he has had to something like that was in 91 when he played Rosset and Mancini. Korda was ranked 70 then Pat McEnroe, QF against Hlasek and semi against Becker that is a dream.

How many times has he had qualies in the 1st round?

NYCtennisfan
06-09-2005, 06:00 PM
GWH, if Agassi had one good year at RG or even maybe just two, then I think this criticism might be somewhat fair--not much, but somewhat.
.
In 1988, his second season playing clay, he gets to the quarters at Rome beating Muster (who of course was not the clay king at the time but was steadily improving that year), and beat a very good Perez-Roldan in the quarters at RG. This guy was playing really well on clay that year, making several SF's and F's. He took Lendl to the distance at Rome and won Munich beating Svensson which is not bad. That's a tough player to have in the quarters and he rolled him, slapping him off of the court. Then he played Wilander and took him to 5. That's a relatively tough draw and Agassi played very well on the red clay. He also went on to beat Perez-Roldan in DC play in Argentina.

In 1989 he played Paulo Cane in the second round who had a very good clay career and made a couple of finals that year and won Bastad. Then he met Courier who I know you don't consider much of a player but he was gaining confidence at that time.

In 1990 he had a stretch of Courier, defending champion Chang, Svensson, and then Gomez. He probably should've won it that year although I felt so happy for Gomez since his dominator Lendl wasn't there to knock him out. Agassi was hitting the ball brilliantly all tournament and all year really, taking the ball earlier than anyone I had ever seen before. Really a weak serve at the time, not very good fitness, but such beautiful ball striking. He played a bad match against Gomez but Gomez played great. Not an easy draw that year and Agassi proved himself.

In 1991, it wasn't the toughest of draws since Korda was still developing and didn't like the clay all that much. Hlasek didn't like clay but had beaten Sanchez who was 10 in the world at the time earlier. And then Courier in the final. Agassi didn't play a good final again and Courier took advantage. Courier was brimming with confidence that year and his extraordinary consistency was amazing. But it was Agassi getitng to the finals again and no matter what the draw or how great the claycourters are, making it to the finals back to back at RG is something.

In 1992 he beat Pozzi, Prpic and Sanchez in the early rounds. Not easy players do deal with especially Sanchez. He then got to Courier again who was at the top of his game.

In '94 he got Muster in the 2nd round and that was a great match which he lost 7-5 in the fifth.

In '95, he had Clavet and in the 3rd round and Clavet was no pushover on clay. He beat Kafelnikov and Bruguera on clay that year and almost beat Muster at Umag or Monte Carlo.

In '98 he got a very talented youngster named Safin in the first round who he had thrashed a month earlier in Davis Cup

And then there is 1999. Squillari was no pushover on clay and Clement on French soil was more difficult than in other places. That's a reasonable pair of 1st/2nd opponents. Moya in the 4th round was of course a great win. Then he played an aging Filippini who had done some damage on clay in his career but was way past his prime. Hrbaty and Medvedev in the SF's and F's. People have already discussed that duo to death.

I'll stop there, but to say that Agassi never got a difficult draw at RG is not true. If you wanted him to get the number 17 seed every year (or the best claycourter closest to the number 17 seed) then that just will not happen. You've been watching tennis for a long time. You know that draws break down and GS's produce surprising results. Agassi beat a lot of good players on clay and the fact that he could make 3 finals and 2 SF's over his career should be enough to give him credit for his win. If he only had 1 year of success or two, we can nitpick at this guy, but he has had many very good wins at RG where, in my opinion and most other people's opinion, he simply deserves the respect accorded a RG champ without doubts cast by the draw, rain delays, etc.

I♥PsY@Mus!c
06-09-2005, 06:15 PM
Steffi gave him a nice blowjob in the locker room :drool: *speaking using the cheeks while sucking :ignore: * "there will be more of ... :spit: :toothy: these if u win, hot american baldy"

Too funny! :haha:

Damn, well deserved that luck for Agassi after his previous RG history to get this lucky delays! :) Third time was a charm for Andre.

Well-said! :yeah:

Action Jackson
06-10-2005, 02:09 PM
GWH, if Agassi had one good year at RG or even maybe just two, then I think this criticism might be somewhat fair--not much, but somewhat.

In 1988, his second season playing clay, he gets to the quarters at Rome beating Muster (who of course was not the clay king at the time but was steadily improving that year), and beat a very good Perez-Roldan in the quarters at RG. This guy was playing really well on clay that year, making several SF's and F's. He took Lendl to the distance at Rome and won Munich beating Svensson which is not bad. That's a tough player to have in the quarters and he rolled him, slapping him off of the court. Then he played Wilander and took him to 5. That's a relatively tough draw and Agassi played very well on the red clay. He also went on to beat Perez-Roldan in DC play in Argentina.

He was ranked # 11 at the time and did not meet a good standard clay player at RG until QF with Perez Roldan. Btw, do you think I have not thought about what I have said? Yes, that includes knowing about Perez Roldan's abilities on clay. I am sorry a tough draw does not consist of 4 easy matches until the QFs, but the later rounds should be tougher. Wilander was never in danger in that match.

In 1989 he played Paulo Cane in the second round who had a very good clay career and made a couple of finals that year and won Bastad. Then he met Courier who I know you don't consider much of a player but he was gaining confidence at that time.

Bĺstad is after RG and Cane did not win that tournament before they met at RG, that was actually a bad loss since Courier was not near the top then.

In 1990 he had a stretch of Courier, defending champion Chang, Svensson, and then Gomez. He probably should've won it that year although I felt so happy for Gomez since his dominator Lendl wasn't there to knock him out. Agassi was hitting the ball brilliantly all tournament and all year really, taking the ball earlier than anyone I had ever seen before. Really a weak serve at the time, not very good fitness, but such beautiful ball striking. He played a bad match against Gomez but Gomez played great. Not an easy draw that year and Agassi proved himself.

Agassi owned Chang in his career. Svensson actually lost more matches on clay that won them and only had 2 good performances at RG, so that's a dream semi final. Actually Gomez outstmarted Agassi and as for should have winning it, considering Muster was the other semi finalist and loved playing Agassi on clay that claim you make he should have won it is at best highly doubtful. The draw not difficult considering the circumstances, best win was over Courier.

In 1991, it wasn't the toughest of draws since Korda was still developing and didn't like the clay all that much. Hlasek didn't like clay but had beaten Sanchez who was 10 in the world at the time earlier. And then Courier in the final. Agassi didn't play a good final again and Courier took advantage. Courier was brimming with confidence that year and his extraordinary consistency was amazing. But it was Agassi getitng to the finals again and no matter what the draw or how great the claycourters are, making it to the finals back to back at RG is something.

Why do you think I didn't mention Korda and Hlasek initially? Rosset and Mancini were better opponents in early rounds than anything else he had faced at that time. Are you trying to convince me that this was not a transition period of tennis on clay?

In 1992 he beat Pozzi, Prpic and Sanchez in the early rounds. Not easy players do deal with especially Sanchez. He then got to Courier again who was at the top of his game.

Pozzi was better on faster surfaces or did that escape you? Emilio Sanchez was IS specialist who didn't play at his best in Slams and had a history of doing this, in theory it was a tough match but in practice not the case. Agassi brings to the Slams, Sanchez never did.

In '94 he got Muster in the 2nd round and that was a great match which he lost 7-5 in the fifth.

Muster should have won this match in straight sets and it was not that good of a match, but 1 tough early match isn't a bad ratio so far.

In '95, he had Clavet and in the 3rd round and Clavet was no pushover on clay. He beat Kafelnikov and Bruguera on clay that year and almost beat Muster at Umag or Monte Carlo.

One good opponent doesn't make a hard draw.

In '98 he got a very talented youngster named Safin in the first round who he had thrashed a month earlier in Davis Cup

Still a qualifier though and one expected to be beaten, that he lost was a great effort from Safin, not cause of a hard draw.

And then there is 1999. Squillari was no pushover on clay and Clement on French soil was more difficult than in other places. That's a reasonable pair of 1st/2nd opponents. Moya in the 4th round was of course a great win. Then he played an aging Filippini who had done some damage on clay in his career but was way past his prime. Hrbaty and Medvedev in the SF's and F's. People have already discussed that duo to death.

Clement is rubbish on clay and always has been. Squilliari and Moya are good wins, but everything else fell into place after that and he took advantage of that and good for him.

I'll stop there, but to say that Agassi never got a difficult draw at RG is not true. If you wanted him to get the number 17 seed every year (or the best claycourter closest to the number 17 seed) then that just will not happen. You've been watching tennis for a long time. You know that draws break down and GS's produce surprising results. Agassi beat a lot of good players on clay and the fact that he could make 3 finals and 2 SF's over his career should be enough to give him credit for his win. If he only had 1 year of success or two, we can nitpick at this guy, but he has had many very good wins at RG where, in my opinion and most other people's opinion, he simply deserves the respect accorded a RG champ without doubts cast by the draw, rain delays, etc.

If you think one match where it could be tricky is constituted as a tough draw, then that's your choice. Ok, the Sampras one was an example. Federer is someone who has not always got easy draws and Hamburg 04 is an example of this, but yes someone must be a philistine to suggest that Agassi has never benefitted from comfortable draws at RG moreso than many other players, or the fact that sporting generations go in the cycles, where the strength and depth of competition isn't always at a constant level and that in those years between 89 and 93 wasn't one of the higher levels of tennis on that surface.

Squillari and Moya are so many good wins at RG, apart from that when he played against the best of the claycourters there he came up short. Agassi played Wilander and Muster and couldn't beat them, he also hardly played any of the top claycourters at RG Corretja, Kuerten, Bruguera, Rios for example. Did he deserve to win the event in 99? Yes he did, he was good enough over the 2 weeks to win the event, and took advantage of the situation that went his way, which happens in all Slams, it plays a factor whether people like it or not, but Agassi deserved to win and gets enough respect for doing it.

NYCtennisfan
06-14-2005, 06:32 AM
We'll agree to disagree:)

Action Jackson
06-14-2005, 06:55 AM
We'll agree to disagree:)

Fine with that.

NYCtennisfan
06-14-2005, 07:00 AM
^:)

Deejay
06-14-2005, 11:57 AM
All this talk about his win at RG in 99 but his wimbledon win in 92 with the courts being so quick and to beat all those grass court specialists has to rank as his best achievement. Alright, he did play some volleys, but to win wimbledon in 92 from the back of the court is unbelievable...

Action Jackson
06-14-2005, 11:59 AM
All this talk about his win at RG in 99 but his wimbledon win in 92 with the courts being so quick and to beat all those grass court specialists has to rank as his best achievement. Alright, he did play some volleys, but to win wimbledon in 92 from the back of the court is unbelievable...

Wimbledon 92 was a much better achievement actually.

Deejay
06-14-2005, 12:02 PM
If your wanna talk about joke draws look at Hewitt's draw when he won wimbledon 2002...now that is a joke! But to be ohnest he would of won wimbledon that year anyway regardless of who he had to play - he was clearly the man to beat that year.

Action Jackson
06-14-2005, 12:07 PM
If your wanna talk about joke draws look at Hewitt's draw when he won wimbledon 2002...now that is a joke! But to be ohnest he would of won wimbledon that year anyway regardless of who he had to play - he was clearly the man to beat that year.

Hewitt doesn't consistently get joke draws AO 2005 is an example of that.