Watching the Tie-Breaker, is there any doubt that Agassi is a choker [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Watching the Tie-Breaker, is there any doubt that Agassi is a choker

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 10:44 PM
against great players?

My god, you could literally set your watch by Andre's asshole puckering up on those fat 2nd serve returns and sitters that he sent into orbit....

Which is a shame because Roger did EVERYTHING he could to give Andre this match; if he tried more, he'd be rightfully accused of throwing the game...


.

KarstenBraasch#1
09-11-2005, 10:45 PM
:haha:

pinky
09-11-2005, 10:52 PM
against great players?

My god, you could literally set your watch by Andre's asshole puckering up on those fat 2nd serve returns and sitters that he sends into orbit....

Which is a shame because Roger did EVERYTHING he could to give Andre this match; if he tried more, he'd be rightfully accused of throwing the game...


.

You are too hard with your man, there would have been no tie-break at all with all the BP he saved at 5-5 if he was such a choker...

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 10:53 PM
Let us not forget about his service game in the third set at 4-2, 30-0 and a couple of absolute sitters that he decided would be nice to send RIGHT INTO Fed's wheelhouse who, not being a choker, didn't miss a stitch when the opportunity presented itself...

Andre's lucky he had those finals against dreck like Clement, Medvedev, Martin and Shuettner. I suggest we only count those wins as half-Slams.

...

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 10:56 PM
Should I rename my handle to "OldGutlessFuckFan"?

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 10:59 PM
A pants-shittinng of historical proportions.

Novotna-against-Graff-at-Wimbledon-Final like. Maybe we'll even see Baldy weep into TD Waterhouse guy's chest.

R.Federer
09-11-2005, 11:08 PM
AGASSI FAN!!!!

He did not choke. All the choking pressure was on Roge. He had FOUR CHANCES TO BREAK for 6-5 and could not.

Please, say something NICE ABOUT ANDRE. He put in 200%, and even to me as a Roge fan, it was heartbreaking to see him so gracious at the net to congratulate Roge. It was so sad to see him go.... of course I wanted Roge to win. But ROGE had to win this, andre DID NOT hand it to him.

oneandonlyhsn
09-11-2005, 11:08 PM
Fed is the TB king :worship: enough said

Tennis Fool
09-11-2005, 11:08 PM
Well, Hewitt did have the same problem. I think it was more of Fed's confidence with pulling out TBs that helped him. Agassi did have all the momentum and Fed was using wrong tactics. Agassi, however, strayed from the plan after the TB.

safdem
09-11-2005, 11:09 PM
no, andre is not a choker...
its just that roger is tooo strong in tiebreaks, just ask lleyton

PaulieM
09-11-2005, 11:12 PM
Roger did EVERYTHING he could to give Andre this match; if he tried more, he'd be rightfully accused of throwing the game...

you got this part right. but in the tiebreak just like yesterday roger stepped it up a millions times, andre didn't choke that tiebreak away.

Timariot
09-11-2005, 11:12 PM
I'm not a big Andre fan, but why doesn't Agassi'fan' just shut the fuck up...Agassi played a better match vs Fed than anyone else in this tournament. He saved 7 set points in the 1st set, that's some choking, huh?

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 11:13 PM
no, andre is not a choker...
its just that roger is tooo strong in tiebreaks, just ask lleyton

Um did you SEE the shots he blew in the TB at 1-0, 1-1, etc?

By the time he fell behind 1-3 in the TB, it was too late.

Andre played well - like he needed to. Unforunately, like in so many Sampras matches, when he was presented with a 2ND serve return opportunity to stick a dagger into his opponent and maybe, just maybe, get into Roger's head for the first time in years.... HE CHOKED.

Which was all the opening Federer needed, really. One point here, one point there and he took it from there; they didn't even NEED to play the 4th set. It was over.

R.Federer
09-11-2005, 11:20 PM
AgassiFan: the match is over now. The guy came so close, can you say one nice compliment please?

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 11:21 PM
He saved 7 set points in the 1st set, that's some choking, huh?

Yes, short bus-rider, that actually IS part of choking - doing extremely well when you're expected to wilt & wither, but shitting your pants when ahead. See: Blake-Agassi match.

When you play like shit or don't have great talent, and as a result are blown off the court, you DON'T get the chance to "choke".

The choking comes when you have the VICTORY within your grasp - which I believe was the case were Andre able to hold to take the 3rd set which he was leading 4-2, 30-0 and a couple of GREAT looks at Roger's backhand... and end up being either too tentative or too reckless on routine shots that you were making with ease just seconds/minutes ago.

Roger played fairly unspectacular tennis (great serving but not-so-great hitting). He gave Andre a window of opportunity on numerous times. And Andre said "no thanks!"....

Why do you think Agassi was so pissed off in the 4th? Because he was so thankful for Roger giving him a chance to compete? No, he knew the famililiar feeling of CHOKING - which he experienced so many times against Pete; he knew he blew possibly his greatest shot at glory. Blew it but good.

Shabazza
09-11-2005, 11:24 PM
AgassiFan: the match is over now. The guy came so close, can you say one nice compliment please?
no not during and after a game, he can't ;)

MisterQ
09-11-2005, 11:27 PM
Andre blew a few big points... He also NAILED countless pressure shots! :clap2: No one can play a perfect match against such high level competition.

I would not count this match as an example of choking.

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 11:30 PM
you got this part right. but in the tiebreak just like yesterday roger stepped it up a millions times, andre didn't choke that tiebreak away.

I didn't ask for your opinion, bland fanboy.

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 11:35 PM
Andre blew a few big points... He also NAILED countless pressure shots!

Guess what, MisteQ? When you're constantly referred to as the greatest returner of all time... when you're called a living legend and an amazing ball striker... when your psychological resilience is supposedly second to none... YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO NAIL A LOT OF "PRESSURE" SHOTS!

And you know what else you're supposed to do as a great champion? Hit the hell out of 4-2, 30-0/30-15 sitters when your opponent is caught flat-footed and not even giving him a chance to get into position to hit a winner out of!




.....

Shabazza
09-11-2005, 11:35 PM
I didn't ask for your opinion, bland fanboy.
oh, you DID ask everyone on this board if he's a choker, when you posted this thread, don't you? ;)
stop insulting other, when they give there opinion :rolleyes:

AgassiFan
09-11-2005, 11:36 PM
oh, you DID ask everyone on this board if he's a choker, when you posted this thread, don't you? ;)
stop insulting other, when they give there opinion :rolleyes:

Do you understand what a rhetorical question is? :)

mangoes
09-11-2005, 11:37 PM
AGASSI FAN!!!!

He did not choke. All the choking pressure was on Roge. He had FOUR CHANCES TO BREAK for 6-5 and could not.

Please, say something NICE ABOUT ANDRE. He put in 200%, and even to me as a Roge fan, it was heartbreaking to see him so gracious at the net to congratulate Roge. It was so sad to see him go.... of course I wanted Roge to win. But ROGE had to win this, andre DID NOT hand it to him.


Completely agree. While I was very happy with the results, my heart did go out to Andre and he really did put in way above 100%/

R.Federer
09-11-2005, 11:38 PM
This is hard for everyone who appreciates andre, to hear this after he put in so much effort. At 3-0 in the final set, it was only a one -break difference and I did not think that this is near finishing. It was competitive, andre put in so much effort, the grunting/hustling to get to farout balls that lazy 25-year olds cannot get to.

I know you are pissed at andre for how you see this as choking, Agassifan, I hope you can say one nice thing because it is over now and andre could do with some good positive vibes and all set to win in Melbourne!

PaulieM
09-11-2005, 11:38 PM
I didn't ask for your opinion, bland fanboy.
if you're not looking for people to respond then don't start threads. :rolleyes:

Shabazza
09-11-2005, 11:41 PM
Do you understand what a rhetorical question is? :)
I do, but you should know that many on this board doesn't know this and expect them to react - it's your fault :p and no this doesn't include PauliM ;)

alfonsojose
09-11-2005, 11:42 PM
The key was not to confirm the break when leading 4-2 in the third. He served with fear or careless :shrug: With Andre leading 5-2, that would have been another story.

Doris Loeffel
09-11-2005, 11:49 PM
Opppsss there we have one heck of a disappointed AA fan...

...come on AA played a great match - he just happend to play against the best player in the world who for some reason causes others to make silly errors. By the way his opponent had a few of those too...

kundalini
09-11-2005, 11:51 PM
I don't think Andre had the energy to win the match. He put everything he had into sets 2 and 3 but Federer gifted him a lot of points in those sets to give him a chance.

Overall an ok match. Federer was patchy. Agassi tried but never really looked like winning. When 4-2 became 4-3 in the third it was all over. He had that one opportunity and he threw it away.

To call it a choke is harsh but at this level that is what it was.

The 4th set was embarassing. Andre stopped running for shots - hence Federer winners that most players would have got to.

SwissMister1
09-11-2005, 11:53 PM
You might be the most negative fan of a player on this whole board :lol:

onewoman74
09-11-2005, 11:54 PM
I'm not a big Andre fan, but why doesn't Agassi'fan' just shut the fuck up...Agassi played a better match vs Fed than anyone else in this tournament. He saved 7 set points in the 1st set, that's some choking, huh?

Listen Agassi played his ass off...Fed played kinda crappy...you know why? Cause Agassi was taking it to him and not letting up...that's the sign of a champion. Fed another champion played his best in the tie break...this is what champions do!!!

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 12:13 AM
I don't think Andre had the energy to win the match. .

You'd be suprised how much energy reserves Andre has when he is FEELING GOOD and WINNING... versus when he loses the 1st set and never really has any intensity in the subsequent sets. And before you say he won the 2nd today, remember that he was only serving at 40% in the 2nd set versus the crisp 70% in the 1st; against Federer that's suicide - just ask Roddick.

Against Malisse and Ginepri, Andre looked exhaused in the 4th, but as soon as he got ahead in the 5th, it was like someone wound up the energizer bunny - and he started blowing aces and ripping return-winners left and right...

Matches like these come down to literally one 1st service miss here, one UE there... and it's the difference between losing in 4 and winning in 4.

And not only has this tightening/choking happened a lot against Pete in the Slams, but also against Federer just a year ago at USO - remember that match, anyone? Andre was flat in the 1st, lost it, people said "he is done", but he stormed back to easily take the 2nd, then controlled most rallies in the 3rd only to "choke" on bigger points, which gave Fed a close win, then once again had to scramble to stay alive in the 4th, only to miss tons of sitters in the 5th....

I didn't think Agassi could play well enough to beat Federer and made it known in dozen of posts. That said, it just so happened that Andre had a FANTASTIC chance to beat Federer today - if you were to tell him he was a couple of decent swings away from a 3-6, 6-2, 5-2 lead BEFORE the match began, he'd be creaming his pants for hours....

Choker.

mishar
09-12-2005, 12:14 AM
Maybe Andre's not a choker... maybe he's just not as good as Fed and Sampras.. But you're right maybe it's mental. He's certainly lost a lot of slam finals.. and the ones he won are not against the toughest opponents.

Goran, Stich, Clement, Schuettler, Todd Martin, Medvedev.

deliveryman
09-12-2005, 12:15 AM
AgassiFan: It's a game, buddy. You're gonna give yourself ulcers.

vogus
09-12-2005, 12:26 AM
it's true, if Andre had gotten it to 5-2 in the third, it's a 95 percent chance he goes up two sets to one. And if Andre goes up two sets to one, it's a better than 50-50 chance he goes on to win the match and the title. I have to watch the tape to see what exactly Andre did at 4-2, 30-0 to lose four straight points and let Feds back into the set.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 12:28 AM
Maybe Andre's not a choker... maybe he's just not as good as Fed and Sampras.. .

I see you're among the many who missed the entire point. Of course Agassi is not as good as Federer or Sampras. Duh!

That's why it's extremely important that he plays extremely well NOT only on 'less critical' points but also on the 'hugely critical' ones as well - and he clearly has shown that he can't do the latter consistently against those 2 even when they don't play well.

The VERY SAME "sitters" that he hit into the corner against Blake and Malisse and Ginepri with cold blood, he BLEW against Sampras and Federer.

And judging by Zen Master's language and facial expressions in the 3rd and early in the 4th set, he KNEW he blew it big-time.

People keep looking at the tail end of the tie-breaker and the 4th set as some kind of proof that Federer played too brilliantly, not even realizing that Agassi's choking took place BEFORE Fed settle into a real groove - and arguably the reason Fed settled into a real groove is because he felt the air go out of the Agassi balloon at 4-2 as well as very first few points in the TB...

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 12:29 AM
AgassiFan: It's a game, buddy. You're gonna give yourself ulcers.


Frankly, I am too young and too awesome to get an ulcer let alone multiple ulcers.

revolution
09-12-2005, 12:30 AM
To have won all four grand slams isn't bad for a choker is it AgassiFan?

amierin
09-12-2005, 12:31 AM
Not a choker, just a tired 35 year old who was facing someone who hadn't drunk the kool-aid and wasn't going to roll over. The match should've been over in three sets. As Mary C said after one of the men went on a bender about how well Andre played the first three sets "but he only won one." That was the story of the match.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 01:22 AM
.The match should've been over in three sets

Huh?

You had Federer serving OUT OF HIS MIND (near 80 % and no double-faults for most of the match), and the match still was tightly contested every step of the way until middle of the 3rd tie-breaker when Andre threw in 3 UE and Fed cruised on home...

Andre was more careless with the lead than tired. When he was down, he didn't think - he reacted which he does very well. But when he got ahead, you could see him take the foot off the gas pedal and start "thinking" and hitting practice-quality shots middle of the court, hoping Federer would continue to play conservatively...

If you don't keep Fed on the run and don't convert your chances when present themselves, sooner or later he will get into a rhythm - and then it's winner city and you're dead.

Jimena
09-12-2005, 01:34 AM
Jeez. With fans like this one, who needs haters?

Poor Agassi. He played the best match I've seen him play against Roger. And he still lost. Still, he is such an incredible asset to the game.

AZILANA
09-12-2005, 01:42 AM
I think AgassiFan, you should change your name, you should be ashamed to call yourself that...That man, Andre Agassi did not play for 20+ years and subjected himself to such pain and and sometimes humiliation just to choke in the end... Roger switched on when he needed to, he simply is too good for anybody to handle for almost two years now, if you think what andre did to fight well when evebody expected roger will have cakewalk to the title, then all 100+ players who played this granslam are all choker by your standard because they too never beaten roger..

stop this nonsense, if you don't like agassi, fine...

Pheobo
09-12-2005, 02:02 AM
Andre did play miserably after losing that break in the third.

jmp
09-12-2005, 02:22 AM
Andre did play miserably after losing that break in the third.

This was very noticeable to me. But, I think it might have been the case that he was too tired from the mental and physical exertion of the previous sets rather than a choke job. Also, he must have been deflated to have played so well in the first three sets only to be down two sets to one and to have been trounced in the TB.

I was surprised at myself for being angry at Roger for his sloppy play and for slicing BH return of serves to Andre's high second serves. Being the conspiracy nut that I am I thought about calling up The Lone Gunmen. ;)

As I reflect on all the Andre matches I've seen lo these many years, AgassiFan may have a point. While Andre was a fave of mine through the 80s and 90s I was never so attached to him that I got as angry as AgassiFan is now. I was blinded by the long hair and flashy image. He's moved on and so have I.

mishar
09-12-2005, 02:42 AM
Why are you a fan old zen master then?

Paul Banks
09-12-2005, 02:53 AM
I can't be bothered to read this thread, but I come to the point to defend Agassi, then something is wrong.

The guy is 35, made a Slam final and what do I see, Agassi bashing threads? I thought he played a decent final anyway. Sure his level went down in third set, but he was playing against you know, Roger Federer.

You should celebrate Agassi accomplishment and have a bit of class.

federer express
09-12-2005, 02:56 AM
I can't be bothered to read this thread, but I come to the point to defend Agassi, then something is wrong.

The guy is 35, made a Slam final and what do I see, Agassi bashing threads? I thought he played a decent final anyway. Sure his level went down in third set, but he was playing against you know, Roger Federer.

You should celebrate Agassi accomplishment and have a bit of class.

you kidding? you'll be lucky to get that with some of these 'experts'
this is why i have been saying for ages now...

mandatory IQ tests for everyone before they can post here!!

NYCtennisfan
09-12-2005, 03:15 AM
This has got to be the stupidest thread in this forum's history and that is saying something. Agassi played out of his mind to win taht 2nd set. Fed was serving at 76% the entire match. I don't think he has ever done that. He was seeing the ball so well during the match. I don't think anyone would've taken a set from him today but AGassi returned remarkably well to win set #2. There was no choking involved in this match. The best player in the world won but was given a battle for 3 very, very, very well played sets.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 03:22 AM
.There was no choking involved in this match

Except for the 7th game of the third, and of course the first 4 (decisive) points of the TB.

Hey, maybe Blake didn't choke against Agassi.

In fact, noone ever 'chokes'.

You've got me convinced. :rolleyes: :D

NYCtennisfan
09-12-2005, 03:26 AM
Federer played better than Agassi in that game and that is why he won that game. Just like Agassi played better in the games that he broke Fed in the 2nd set. Fed served a good game when he got broken for the first time by AGassi in the 2nd. 99% of the time he wins that game but Agassi returned like the best returned in the world.

Fed was getting close to breaking in every game up to the point of the break in the third at 2-4. It was bound to happen.

The better player won but by no means did Agassi choke. He played a hell of a match to play Fed to a standstill after 3 sets. Both players' levels were incredible.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 03:27 AM
...

mandatory IQ tests for everyone before they can post here!!
If that were the case you'd be the first one out for being the first to post in threads you hate.
BTW, please bold the next time. I didn't understand what you were trying to say in plain text :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 03:30 AM
Federer played better than Agassi in that game and that is why he won that game. Just like Agassi played better in the games that he broke Fed in the 2nd set. Fed served a good game when he got broken for the first time by AGassi in the 2nd. 99% of the time he wins that game but Agassi returned like the best returned in the world.

Fed was getting close to breaking in every game up to the point of the break in the third at 2-4. It was bound to happen.

The better player won but by no means did Agassi choke. He played a hell of a match to play Fed to a standstill after 3 sets. Both players' levels were incredible.
Lucky you to be at the final. Did you get a (reasonably) good seat? I don't like AA stadium.

NYCtennisfan
09-12-2005, 03:33 AM
Lucky you to be at the final. Did you get a (reasonably) good seat? I don't like AA stadium.

I love the Open and I consider myself lucky to go every year. Pretty good seats too:) The men's final fills the stands earlier than the other days but today's match filled Ashe quicker than usual. There was a buzz in the air that only a men's final can bring about.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 04:31 AM
Alright Andre. Let's get you some industrial-strenght throat inflammatories, and you're good to go for Aussie O.

ALLEZ!!!

AZILANA
09-12-2005, 05:52 AM
wow, somebody decided to toned down.. lol...

so we may never see you name change, no..?

deliveryman
09-12-2005, 06:16 AM
If you're going to use the "choking" argument, then you could say Federer "choked" away the second set. What happened? Federer got broken in the second set on a 40-15 service game. Federer had 5 break points to get back in the set and blew them all on errors, I don't think Agassi hit one winner to save a BP. And once Federer didn't capitalize on all those break points, he was deflated and got broken again in his last service game of the set.

WAY TO CHOKE, ROGER. GOD.

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 06:39 AM
Wow! I am going to defend the player that walks like a constipated duck. It's interesting how someone could choke when they saved over 10 break points in the match and for 2 sets played at a very good level, yes he got done by a better player and Federer stepped up when he needed to, actually maybe I should be so pissed off that Federer didn't bagel him in the 4th set, now that was a choke (yes, I am joking).

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 06:39 AM
.If you're going to use the "choking" argument, then you could say Federer "choked" away the second set

a) Fed wasn't leading 2-0, 30-0 in the second set, was he?

b) You're still not even close to getting the point. Federer could "choke" all he wants - because he creates too many breaks for himself, so it's no biggie if he wastes a few. At 4-2, 30-0, Agassi knew he had to come through with a couple of crisp 1st serves and put away groundies that he was making just a few minutes ago with no problem. 5-2, the set is probably wrapped up. 2-1 lead. Real chance to get into Fed's head - remember, all year long Roger has hardly been pushed like this.... Fed can also "choke" all he wants because he is 24 and he hasn't had a history of laying down on big points against another great player like Andre has against Pete in Slams. So their two situations aren't comparable at all.


If Fed had played his 'A' tennis today, then there would be no complaints since noone can beat him (just as when Pete was serving like he did in the 1999 Wimbledon Final, noone could have touched him). But Roger didn't look all that good today on his groundstrokes, and because of that Andre had much better chances to win the match than he had any right to expect coming in. Basically the same as their match at 2004 USO, where Andre was also given a match on the silver platter but predicatably still came up short on the bigger points, in the 3rd set especially.... So this is choking from Andre even when things go his way, is nothing new.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 06:40 AM
wow, somebody decided to toned down.. lol...

so we may never see you name change, no..?


Now in English, please?

deliveryman
09-12-2005, 06:52 AM
a) Fed wasn't leading 2-0, 30-0 in the second set, was he?

Federer could "choke" all he wants - because he creates too many breaks for himself, so it's no biggie if he wastes a few.

So if he creates so many breaks for himself, then how could you say that Andre "choked" away the set? With what you said, isn't it more of the case of "Andre giving in to the inevitable?" Especially after the 293482093482094820934 break points that Andre saved, the break was going to happen sooner or later.

It's not a case of Andre "choking" it's more of a case of Andre not serving as well as he needed to... which was the case throughout the ENTIRE match, just not in the third set. Andre was getting lucky with those break points saved all match, by Federer errors, and finally it caught up with him.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 07:14 AM
.Wow! I am going to defend the player that walks like a constipated duck

And that's a problem for you why exactly...?

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 07:18 AM
And that's a problem for you why exactly...?

It's not a problem at all, then again you are never happy with Agassi. He could win a tournament without losing a game for the whole tournament and you'd be pissed off that he lost a few points.

Agassi has more than enough admirers in this world and at the same time he didn't choke in this match at all, so therefore I defended that point of view.

deliveryman
09-12-2005, 07:18 AM
It's interesting how someone could choke when they saved over 10 break points in the match

14 break points saved, to be exact. Heh.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 07:33 AM
There is nothing "interesting" about that whatsoever.

Fed didn't play well, obviously, and Andre came up big when he was behind - noone questioned his ability to do that either against Fed or Pete - when you don't expect Andre to do well, he can be a tenacious bulldog...

What IS questioned, however, is his ability to maintain a very high level of tennis against the greats in "big" Slam matches once he gets ahead and can practically taste the suddenly not-so-distant victory...

He choked in the same manner during the 2001 USO against (at one point exhaused) Pete, just as he did against (the sleepwalking) Federer at 2004 USO, just using the two most notable examples... And today, even when he survived Fed's BP barrage and got ahead 3-6, 6-2, 4-2, 30-0 and needed nothing more than a couple of 1st serves in, which gave Fed so much trouble for some reason... Andre missed those 1st serves, took his foot off the gas pedal, started hitting tentative, practice-caliber cross courters as if he was comfortably ahead 6-3, 6-2, 5-1... And only THEN did Roger say "what the hell" and seized the moment.

From Roger's pespective, had he lost today, I wouldn't have blamed his idolatrists fanboys for playing the "choke" card. Hell, they were doing it all through-out the match thread when things didn't look so good for him, anyway.... I can definately see where Roger didn't come through in the clutch, as well.

But I am strictly coming from the Agassi's perspective (and putting it in the context of his failures against Pete)... and Dre flat-out didn't grab the bull by the horns - even when said bull fell asleep for a set or two.




...

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 07:37 AM
AgassiFan, as long as you believed he choked this match away that is all that counts, as I said I know your form when it comes to Agassi, and nothing has changed since yours and my absence from this place.

What ifs, maybes, would be, could be, should be, counts for absolute nowt.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 07:42 AM
What ifs, maybes, would be, could be, should be, counts for absolute nowt.

A lot of things in Life count for "absolute nowt" when you get right down to it.

Doesn't mean they aren't worthy of note or debate.

YMMV

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 07:46 AM
A lot of things in Life count for "absolute nowt" when you get right down to it.

Doesn't mean they aren't worthy of note or debate.

YMMV

What if your uncle was born as a woman, then it wouldn't be your uncle.

You're kidding yourself if you think Agassi choked in this match. As I said I know your form and answer this would you be pissed off if Agassi won a tournament without losing a set? If he was up 2 sets to love and 5-1 in the 3rd, then we have a choke, this is just excuse making what you are offering up now.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 07:48 AM
What if your uncle was born as a woman, then it wouldn't be your uncle.

You're kidding yourself if you think Agassi choked in this match. As I said I know your form and answer this would you be pissed off if Agassi won a tournament without losing a set? If he was up 2 sets to love and 5-1 in the 3rd, then we have a choke, this is just excuse making what you are offering up now.

Now you're just being facetious and feisty, Mr. WHitler. :)

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 07:52 AM
If he was up 2 sets to love and 5-1 in the 3rd, then we have a choke, this is just excuse making what you are offering up now.


:haha: :rolleyes:


Excuses? Considering that I made it well known prior to the match that I expected Old & Banged-up Baldy to get blown off the court today... Let's just say you're barking up the wrong skyscapper, my friend.

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 07:56 AM
:haha: :rolleyes:


Excuses? Considering that I made it well known prior to the match that I expected Old & Banged-up Baldy to get blown off the court today... Let's just say you're barking up the wrong skyscapper, my friend.

One good stir deserves another, but the 2 sets to love and the 5-1 classifies as a choke, and Baldy was never in that position, if he was up 6-0 in the breaker and lost, then your choke theory would be correct, but there was no choke in this match and to suggest there was means you are on the wrong skyscraper, thanks for the laughs man. :)

vincayou
09-12-2005, 09:57 AM
Leading 4-2 in a set and losing it is hardly a choke, especially against Federer. The verb "choke" is overused these days. Especially by fans who can't understand that their player can lose because his opponent suddendly played better.

joycomesmorning
09-12-2005, 10:24 AM
[QUOTE=pinky]You are too hard with your man, there would have been no tie-break at all with all the BP he saved at 5-5 if he was such a choker...[Do not be fooled by the screen name..."Agassi fan is no Agassi fan. How 'ya doin, Katherine?

I'm so proud of Andre...I rue the day when we will have to face tennis without him...

jcm

AZILANA
09-12-2005, 11:54 AM
Mr. AgassiFan made up his mind that andre choke.... no one can change his mind... he seemed to think that andre is a superhuman, incapable of mistakes and should be winning all the time...

All I can say is that Andre did not choke today, you can say all you want, you can bring all andre's record for all i care, im his fan and in supporting him, i learn to accept his flaws, and part of being loyal to him i will say nary a negative thing about him...99% of respondent to this thread did not think andre choked and it's all that matters...

tennischick
09-12-2005, 02:18 PM
in his interview Andre said that the turning point in the match was when he was leading 4-2 30-0 in the third. he credits the loss to Rogi's amazing ability to completely change tactics just when you started thinking you had figured out how to beat him. he even said that Rogi was better then Pete. he didn't admit to choking -- nor should he have bec IMO he didn't.

my sense of the match was that Roger played well enuf to suit the occasion. if he had gone out and crushed Andre the way he once double-bageled Hewitt, the crowd would not have gotten into the match and frankly would have hated him. Rogi played just badly enuf to make it look as if Andre had a sporting chance. and just when Andre started to believe this, Roger crushed him, even trying to go for the bagel. i think our Rogi has a mildly sadistic streak. :devil:

vogus
09-12-2005, 02:40 PM
in his interview Andre said that the turning point in the match was when he was leading 4-2 30-0 in the third. he credits the loss to Rogi's amazing ability to completely change tactics just when you started thinking you had figured out how to beat him. he even said that Rogi was better then Pete. he didn't admit to choking -- nor should he have bec IMO he didn't.
:


of course Andre didn't admit it. For all his reputation for honesty, Agassi's never had enough balls to come straight out and say, "It was there for the taking, and i didn't get it done." He just is hiding behind "the other guy was too good" credit-the-opponent clichee, like he always has. 100 million people know Agassi should have been up 2 sets to 1 in the match.

joycomesmorning
09-12-2005, 02:51 PM
100 million people know Agassi should have been up 2 sets to 1 in the match.

__________

100 million people watched that match???? Wow!! I KNEW Andre was good for TV ratings like no other... but I didn't know he was that good....:)

I don't think that 100-Million people have watched all the Slams combined in all of 2005....

It would have been good for tennis if Andre had pulled one out of the hat...we would have seen tennis as the lead story on the sports shows, etc...and as it is, one day of page 2 and out...

But, regardless, I'm proud of Andre...Enjoy him while you can...sure tennis will go on without him...but sooner than later, you'd better come up with more than Roger and the Seven Dwarfs if you expect the sport to have any TV time at all....

jcm

victory1
09-12-2005, 03:32 PM
I felt it was Fed doing the choking in the 3rd set. He had break points on most of Andre's service games in the 3rd set, if I remmember correctly. I remmember yelling at the TV, come on Dre holdddddddddd! Andre was just better at converting his break points because he did not get many. The game in the 3rd which Andre broke Roger, the previous game Roger had 2 breakpoints and could not convert and then he served and Andre got 2 breakpoints and only needed 1 to break. So it was no surprise that Roger had a breakpoint during Andre's next service game (he had BP on all 3 of Andre's service game in the 3rd set at that point), the surprise was Fed finally converting 1 of his many BP chances since the 1st set. Even when Andre was serving for 6-5 in the 3rd, Roger had 4 chances to break to go up 5-6 instead, and missed all 4, so who was playing better and who was actually choking. Even the American commentators said how bad Fed played some of those BPs. Some of them Agassi was to good, but some was just Fed messing up. The entire 3rd set, Andre only had 2 BPs chances on Roger serve, while Roger had 8 chances and only took 1.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 04:02 PM
Mr. AgassiFan made up his mind that andre choke.... no one can change his mind... he seemed to think that andre is a superhuman, incapable of mistakes and should be winning all the time...

..


Too stupid to dignify...


...other than to say that the scribbling quoted above is precisely the opposite of what I am actually saying.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 04:05 PM
I felt it was Fed doing the choking in the 3rd set.

I see that people are still confused as to what 'choking' actually is, especially as it pertains to Baldy's Slam matches against the greats.

Fed didn't choke; he just didn't play well. Andre choked. There is a difference, believe it or not. :)


.

R.Federer
09-12-2005, 04:08 PM
Alright Andre. Let's get you some industrial-strenght throat inflammatories, and you're good to go for Aussie O.

ALLEZ!!!

:yeah:
I think everyone learns yesterday not to dismiss 'old man'. Journalists maybe shut up the retirement question also. i expect to see andre in Melbourne!

mandoura
09-12-2005, 04:16 PM
...other than to say that the scribbling quoted above is precisely the opposite of what I am actually saying.

Ok, maybe AA did choke. Don't be that harsh on him.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 04:35 PM
in his interview Andre said that the turning point in the match was when he was leading 4-2 30-0 in the third. he credits the loss to Rogi's amazing ability to completely change tactics just when you started thinking you had figured out how to beat him.

First of all, OF COURSE that was the turning point of the match (well, leading 1-0 in the TB and then netting a couple of UE, didn't help either), that much was obvious WHEN it was happening.

What Andre DIDN'T say however is "I had him on the ropes, it seemed, but couldn't get a 1st serve in to save my life when it mattered the most, and played very conservatively on the groundstrokes, which let right Roger back into the match... In short, no matter how well I played and how poorly he played, when I got the chance to stick a dagger in him, my hands trembled, to borrow from the Usual Suspects - how DO you shoot the Devil in the back....", or something along those lines. ;)

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:41 PM
...other than to say that the scribbling quoted above is precisely the opposite of what I am actually saying.
So, maybe you should clarify your position. What exactly do you think of Agassi at 35 as opposed to 29, what do you think he should be doing in his career at this point, can he still win majors?

andre the great
09-12-2005, 04:57 PM
I have to say it was painful when Fed broke Agassi in the 3rd set. After the first set I expected an annihilation (such as Aus 05). But Baldy played some remarkable returns in the 2nd set and all of a sudden I started believing again. and when Dre went 4-2 up in the 3rd I was in heaven. But as soon as Fed broke him back I knew the writing was on the wall. The great chance to make a classic out of this match had evaporated. But as was said Dre wasn't serving good enough at that stage to count on shutting Fed out. Rogi had countless break points something had to give. It is a massive pity that this happened when he was 30-0 up. I think Dre definitely lapsed from there. Got a bit anxious let Fed in and that was the match.Fed played great in that game but Agassi definitely faltered. Is that a choke? Maybe not. But for fans it sure is bloody painful.

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 05:09 PM
. After the first set I expected an annihilation (such as Aus 05).


Ok, I call bullshit: in what world is 6-3, 6-4, 6-4 an "annihilation"? A comfortable win, perhaps, but annihilation is what Fed did to Hewitt 2004 USO. Fed served superbly but the rallies were tightly contested. The better player won, but there was no dominance.

Ditto for Pete winning in straight sets at 1999 Wimbledon Final. He just served incredibly - even better than Roger did yesterday. But when ever the ball was actually in play, you could see Andre winning more of them than losing...

andre the great
09-12-2005, 05:17 PM
He looked totally wasted in the last set. Was this due to losing his will with the third set or was he just physically shattered.If he was exhausted then he probably would have run out of gas even if he had led 2 sets to one.He fought to the bitter end against Blake but in this one by the time we got to the TB the white flag was out.

onewoman74
09-12-2005, 05:30 PM
in his interview Andre said that the turning point in the match was when he was leading 4-2 30-0 in the third. he credits the loss to Rogi's amazing ability to completely change tactics just when you started thinking you had figured out how to beat him. he even said that Rogi was better then Pete. he didn't admit to choking -- nor should he have bec IMO he didn't.

my sense of the match was that Roger played well enuf to suit the occasion. if he had gone out and crushed Andre the way he once double-bageled Hewitt, the crowd would not have gotten into the match and frankly would have hated him. Rogi played just badly enuf to make it look as if Andre had a sporting chance. and just when Andre started to believe this, Roger crushed him, even trying to go for the bagel. i think our Rogi has a mildly sadistic streak. :devil:

I would agree w/ you on that point...if that's the case then it's DAMN scary!!!

AgassiFan
09-12-2005, 05:52 PM
He looked totally wasted in the last set. Was this due to losing his will with the third set or was he just physically shattered.

He looked totally wasted for many reasons, not the least of which is knowing that he just blew arguably the greatest opportunity at legend-making he's ever had. (Blake match my ass). By the time he fell behind 3-1 in the TB, including 2 errors, the match was pretty much OVER. Dre knew it.

But you also have to remember his matches against Malisse and Ginepri where Andre looked like SHIT in the 4th, he was cooked... before finding the needed reserves and then some in the 5th set. I guarantee you that if Roger would have given him the 3rd set, Andre would have looked incomparably better in the 4th...

jmp
09-12-2005, 06:35 PM
AgassiFan, the score line of the Andre/Roger AO '05 match does not imply an annihilation. But, the tone and tenor of the match most asuredly did. Roger employed a tactic that Pete was famous/infamous for. He didn't blow Andre off the court. Roger got one break early in the set. He played with such authority thereafter that Andre knew, as did all of us watching, that Andre had absolutely, positively, NO way of getting into that match. Roger's facial expression and demeanor said it all as did Andre's.

There is a lot of truth in TennisChick's post. It was very sophisticated of Roger not to blow Andre off the court yesterday. We already know Roger can double bagel his opponent in a major final. He didn't have to do it to the legendary Andre in front of Andre's home crowd. To make sure we all kept Lleyton's great Davis Cup come back in perspective, Roger made sure to bagel Lleyton at least once every single time they met in 2004. Roger is subtle, but, he makes his point emphatically. I also liked the machismo in Roger's celebration after the win as opposed to the former drop to the knees. The US audience can identify with that fist pump gesture. Then he quickly dialed it back and gave Andre his due at the net. Roger is just soooo :cool: and, probably, mildly sadistic. :devil:

Timariot
09-12-2005, 06:54 PM
Agassi was never in the contention in the tie-break. Fed hit unreturnable serves and two incredible backhands after screwing up every previous backhand in that match. There was absolutely nothing Agassi could do there.

Fedex
09-12-2005, 07:27 PM
Andre's lucky he had those finals against dreck like Clement, Medvedev, Martin and Shuettner. I suggest we only count those wins as half-Slams.

...
:haha: You are too much!

alfonsojose
09-12-2005, 08:22 PM
AgassiFan, the score line of the Andre/Roger AO '05 match does not imply an annihilation. But, the tone and tenor of the match most asuredly did. Roger employed a tactic that Pete was famous/infamous for. He didn't blow Andre off the court. Roger got one break early in the set. He played with such authority thereafter that Andre knew, as did all of us watching, that Andre had absolutely, positively, NO way of getting into that match. Roger's facial expression and demeanor said it all as did Andre's.

There is a lot of truth in TennisChick's post. It was very sophisticated of Roger not to blow Andre off the court yesterday. We already know Roger can double bagel his opponent in a major final. He didn't have to do it to the legendary Andre in front of Andre's home crowd. To make sure we all kept Lleyton's great Davis Cup come back in perspective, Roger made sure to bagel Lleyton at least once every single time they met in 2004. Roger is subtle, but, he makes his point emphatically. I also liked the machismo in Roger's celebration after the win as opposed to the former drop to the knees. The US audience can identify with that fist pump gesture. Then he quickly dialed it back and gave Andre his due at the net. Roger is just soooo :cool: and, probably, mildly sadistic. :devil:
so those rallies where Andre pushed JesusFed were calculated :eek: ?

mandoura
09-12-2005, 08:36 PM
...my sense of the match was that Roger played well enuf to suit the occasion. if he had gone out and crushed Andre the way he once double-bageled Hewitt, the crowd would not have gotten into the match and frankly would have hated him. Rogi played just badly enuf to make it look as if Andre had a sporting chance. and just when Andre started to believe this, Roger crushed him, even trying to go for the bagel. i think our Rogi has a mildly sadistic streak. :devil:

:eek: This is what I thought exactly.

jmp
09-12-2005, 08:44 PM
so those rallies where Andre pushed JesusFed were calculated :eek: ?

No, I don't think it's as simple as that. Andre played tremendous tennis during yesterday's final. Roger was an enigma to me for much of the match, though. He was so in and out - brilliant CC FHs in the corner then missing FHs; slicing, slicing, and slicing BHs he should have smacked for return of serve winners. The first set seemed to be high quality. The 2nd and 3rd sets ticked me off. Then Roger took over in the TB and all of a sudden smacked the BH up/down the line winner return of serve to win the TB. After that it seemed like a real match again. By then Andre was spent. Roger didn't need to grind him into dust and he didn't. He just played beautiful tennis. 6-1 was good enough. I saw some sweet shots and Roger closed it out, but, good.

MisterQ
09-12-2005, 09:51 PM
There is a lot of truth in TennisChick's post. It was very sophisticated of Roger not to blow Andre off the court yesterday. We already know Roger can double bagel his opponent in a major final. He didn't have to do it to the legendary Andre in front of Andre's home crowd.

I strongly disagree. Federer has too much respect for Andre to give him free games. Andre had to earn them, and he did.

Andre took it to Federer, and that has everything to do with Roger's temporary breakdown of form. There were no gifts. Federer has not shown remorse against Andre in the past, and it was no different the other day. It's simply that for a set or two, Andre played at a higher level than he has played against Roger in quite some time. Andre's service games were regularly in danger, as always, but he managed to hold rather than get broken regularly as in their past few matches. And his return was quite a weapon for a stretch there.

When Andre's level dropped slightly, Federer finally had a chance to loosen up and gain confidence, and he was able to let the shots fly. Then we got the type of final set that many people expected.

tennischick
09-12-2005, 10:15 PM
I strongly disagree. Federer has too much respect for Andre to give him free games. Andre had to earn them, and he did.

Andre took it to Federer, and that has everything to do with Roger's temporary breakdown of form. There were no gifts. Federer has not shown remorse against Andre in the past, and it was no different the other day. ....
i disagree. every backhand chipped or sliced return-of-serve (especially on second serve) was a blatant gift. even Johnny Mac commented that Roger seemed to be waiting for Agassi to start the point. Rogi only changed tactic in the 3rd set tiebreak and then of course in the 4th set when he miraculously discovered his topspin backhand. i think Rogi respected Andre enuf not to humiliate him in front of his homies. i'm not saying that Andre did not play well. i'm just saying that Rogi gave him the chance to do so everytime he avoided going for a winner on Andre's umpteen second-serves.

but we can agree to disagree on this :smooch:

MisterQ
09-12-2005, 10:23 PM
i disagree. every backhand chipped or sliced return-of-serve (especially on second serve) was a blatant gift. even Johnny Mac commented that Roger seemed to be waiting for Agassi to start the point. Rogi only changed tactic in the 3rd set tiebreak and then of course in the 4th set when he miraculously discovered his topspin backhand. i think Rogi respected Andre enuf not to humiliate him in front of his homies. i'm not saying that Andre did not play well. i'm just saying that Rogi gave him the chance to do so everytime he avoided going for a winner on Andre's umpteen second-serves.

but we can agree to disagree on this :smooch:

ok, we can agree to do that :lol: :smooch: ;)

But I will say that even if Roger's tactics were flawed for a stretch, it doesn't mean that he was "giving" the point away, with the intent of allowing Andre to win it. I think Roger simply had great confidence in his movement and his defensive abilities, since they have generally worked in the past.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 10:36 PM
Wow TC, conspiracy theorist :devil:

That's a whole new thread onto itself.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 10:37 PM
BTW, where's your boyfriend Rogiman been? Curiously absent, he.

tennischick
09-12-2005, 10:50 PM
ok, we can agree to do that :lol: :smooch: ;)

But I will say that even if Roger's tactics were flawed for a stretch, it doesn't mean that he was "giving" the point away, with the intent of allowing Andre to win it. I think Roger simply had great confidence in his movement and his defensive abilities, since they have generally worked in the past.
i wasn't actually referring to anything other than his return-of-serve which is what JMac also pointed out. i wasn't including any of the other shots. once the serve was returned, it was each man for himself. and Andre was definitely better at points. but Roger appeared (to me) to be deliberately avoiding taking advantage of second serves. and yes at times his play sucked. so see, we agree more than we disagree. :smocch: :hug:

tennischick
09-12-2005, 10:52 PM
Wow TC, conspiracy theorist :devil:

That's a whole new thread onto itself.
so start one then. :p

actually you're taking it too far. i was referring only to the return-of-serve, not to Roger's entire game. sorry if that wasn't clear.

as for Rogiman, we were both traveling to far-flung places when last i checked. i have no idea when he will be back but i am about to take off again anyway.

AZILANA
09-13-2005, 01:32 AM
Too stupid to dignify...


...other than to say that the scribbling quoted above is precisely the opposite of what I am actually saying.


and yet you bother to...goes to show who's more....

andre the great
09-13-2005, 12:20 PM
The ignorance contained in stating that Agassi only won his slams cause he was playing rubbish opponents beggers belief. In Wimby 92 he had to beat Becker, McEnroe and Goran (who had beaten Sampras). In US Open 94 he had to beat Chang and Stich.In Australia 95 he had to beat Kafelnikov and Sampras. In France 99 he knocked out the defending champion Moya. In US 99 he knocked out Kafelnikov. In Aus 00 knocked out Sampras and Kafelnikov and in Aus 01 he beat Rafter. What do all the above have in common? That's right they are all grandslam champions