Originally Posted by Dougie
HIs baseline-game was perfect for the 90´s fast grass. No long backswings and he liked to take the ball so early that having little time didn´t really bother him as much as other baseliners. Great return of serve, too. But like you said, it was all natural to him, it probably would have been nearly impossible to play like that as a result of adaptation, it was just his game.
Had to tip my hat to this because this excellent summation of why Agassi was formidable on grass when the surface played quicker.
To that, I'd add that his propensity for hugging the baseline was another strong feature of his game on grass. Between that and his compact swings, he was a great reactive player. He was able to beat guys not by big serves and moving in, but by responding so well to the guys who did.
Also, even as a clean ball-striker, he hit very flat. It boded well for him on a low-bouncing, slick grass court.
Originally Posted by BIGMARAT
if you cant win wimbledon, your not great on grass!!! slam win doesnt lie.
You know, at the risk of sounding like a prick, this is the type of one-dimensional, ABC logic that really limits threads like these.
For the sake of context, I think it's worth mentioning that none
of the champions in this list faced either Sampras or Federer on their road to victory...
You don't sit in the top ten W/L% (Open Era; Roddick, Murray) on a surface that you're average on.