Mens Tennis Forums banner

81 - 100 of 102 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,300 Posts
Disagree completely! Djoker has never faced a serve like Pete's. Agassi could hit outright winners from 140 mph serves and consistently get the return back in play. In addition, most players putting the importance of speed over placement in this era would make Agassi's life much easier if he were barely 30 nowadays.
I have seen Agassi against Karlovic (an even better server than Pete), actually i have the match in the highest quality available at the time. Yes, i have seen Agassi return Karlovic's serve 2 meters inside the baseline.. yes, i have seen Agassi return a 136 mph slice serve full stretch with an outright winner (which is one of the most amazing return of serve i have ever seen)..

Still... I would take Djokovic consistent return of serve any day of the week over Agassi's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Discussion Starter #82
What is more important? Hitting a return with depth (and getting on a neutral rally) on 8 out of 10 serves, or hitting the odd return winner on say one 1 out of 20 serves and getting aced 10 times in the process?

Agassi return of serve was good, but nowhere near Djokovic level.
Lol who said Agassi hit only the odd winner? Agassi's return was good enough to hit winners frequently. In evey opponents Service game he'd get into their Service games, return deep, even hit winners DTL or CC. Djokovic never faced someone of the serve of Sampras on fast courts . He would struggle to return as he does with Federer's serve now. Not too mention struggling against Kyrgios and Karlovic. Agassi at his last years managed to return Federer's serve quite comfortably.

Agassi at his best possessed the best return I've ever seen. It was also the best to watch. Never would you find a person eagerly waiting for a player to return serve. Agassi was that player . As good as Djokovic's return was, you wouldn't eagerly wait and watch him return serve it wasn't as flashy or stylish as Agassi's.
I'd rate Agassi as the best returner of all time, followed by Djokovic, and Murray. Though Murray never had that much trouble against big servers as much as Djokovic has.
Nadal is also a decent returner. Especially in clay, but no where near the level of Agassi, Murray, DJ, etc. He struggles against big servers, especially in faster courts.
Federer's return is atrocious for a top player, especially the last decade or so. At least it was bearable in 04-07, but he was a very poor returner of the ball.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,158 Posts
I have actually The Come Back King as a better returner than Novak Djokovic, that's of course if we solely rate the returning shot and nothing else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,300 Posts
I have actually The Come Back King as a better returner than Novak Djokovic, that's of course if we solely rate the returning shot and nothing else.
I was of the same opinion about 8-10 years ago... Then Wimbledon 2015 convinced me otherwise. Djokovic ROS puts him in a far better position to start with. In 2019 Djokovic's ROS has substantially gotten worse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
I have seen Agassi against Karlovic (an even better server than Pete), actually i have the match in the highest quality available at the time. Yes, i have seen Agassi return Karlovic's serve 2 meters inside the baseline.. yes, i have seen Agassi return a 136 mph slice serve full stretch with an outright winner (which is one of the most amazing return of serve i have ever seen)..

Still... I would take Djokovic consistent return of serve any day of the week over Agassi's.
The Karlovic serve is faster, but not better. Remember, Pete's serve is considered the GOAT by pundits and legends alike. His 1st and 2nd serve had speed and incredible accuracy. No one in today's game has that feature (outside of Serena Williams). We cannot let ourselves get caught up in the prisoner of the moment mentality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,559 Posts
Lol who said Agassi hit only the odd winner? Agassi's return was good enough to hit winners frequently. In evey opponents Service game he'd get into their Service games, return deep, even hit winners DTL or CC. Djokovic never faced someone of the serve of Sampras on fast courts . He would struggle to return as he does with Federer's serve now. Not too mention struggling against Kyrgios and Karlovic. Agassi at his last years managed to return Federer's serve quite comfortably.

Agassi at his best possessed the best return I've ever seen. It was also the best to watch. Never would you find a person eagerly waiting for a player to return serve. Agassi was that player . As good as Djokovic's return was, you wouldn't eagerly wait and watch him return serve it wasn't as flashy or stylish as Agassi's.
I'd rate Agassi as the best returner of all time, followed by Djokovic, and Murray. Though Murray never had that much trouble against big servers as much as Djokovic has.
Nadal is also a decent returner. Especially in clay, but no where near the level of Agassi, Murray, DJ, etc. He struggles against big servers, especially in faster courts.
Federer's return is atrocious for a top player, especially the last decade or so. At least it was bearable in 04-07, but he was a very poor returner of the ball.
Won’t deny Agassi was one of the pioneers of anticipating baII on the rise & breaking down opponents serves in order to attack but earIier in his career, a Iess experienced but talented Novak couId aIso hit winners off ROS but as some servers became more varied & deceptive/trickier, he had to aIter ROS techniques & enhance his overall game in order to win more consistently which eventuaIIy Ied to more titIes. I suspect if AA had empIoyed simiIar strategies w/ more patience to execute them, he couId have even more titIes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
As stated before, old, wheelchair Agassi pushed absolutely peak Fed to the brink. Agassi would have a field day nowadays.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,158 Posts
The Karlovic serve is faster, but not better. Remember, Pete's serve is considered the GOAT by pundits and legends alike. His 1st and 2nd serve had speed and incredible accuracy. No one in today's game has that feature (outside of Serena Williams). We cannot let ourselves get caught up in the prisoner of the moment mentality.
In absolute terms John Isner's serve is much better than Pete, imagine if he played in very fast conditions, it would be impossible to break him but the rest of his game would not shine as his movement is way too slow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
The Karlovic serve is faster, but not better. Remember, Pete's serve is considered the GOAT by pundits and legends alike. His 1st and 2nd serve had speed and incredible accuracy. No one in today's game has that feature (outside of Serena Williams). We cannot let ourselves get caught up in the prisoner of the moment mentality.
Sampras is seen as the GOAT server not just because of the actual shot, but the way he could consolidate on it with other facets of his game. As far as the actual shot "the serve" goes, Karlovic and Isner are better servers than Sampras. And what the hell is Serena Williams' name doing there?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
As stated before, old, wheelchair Agassi pushed absolutely peak Fed to the brink. Agassi would have a field day nowadays.
Agassi beat Federer when Federer was 17 and 20-years-old. Federer destroyed him in the 2003 Masters Cup and never looked back with 8 consecutive wins. Agassi was about the same age as Nadal now when he was losing most of those matches. No, he wouldn't have a "field day" now anymore than he had in his day. Jim Courier was the same age as him and dominated their rivalry, so there's no reason to believe Agassi "would have a field day nowadays". Lleyton Hewitt at 16-years-old beat an Agassi in his 20's in 1998.

I liked Agassi, but I honestly can't see anything that'd make him a dominant player in the Big 3/Big 4 era. His strengths are basically Djokovic's strengths, but he certainly had more holes in his game than Djokovic. In the Big 3 era, I'd see him having a Murray-like career.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
if Agassi would born in 1980...
he would won: 2003 USO, 2004 RG, 2005 AO, 2009 USO.
Agassi was born in 1970. He lost in the first round of the 1993 US Open to 19-year-old Enqvist. He lost in the 1994 RG 2nd round to Muster (who lost the next round to Rafter). So the notion he "would have won" anything for sure if he had been younger in 2003 or 2004 is some strange conjecture. Most ridiculous is claiming he'd have won the 2009 US Open, where Del Potro played the tournament of his life to win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Discussion Starter #93 (Edited)
Agassi beat Federer when Federer was 17 and 20-years-old. Federer destroyed him in the 2003 Masters Cup and never looked back with 8 consecutive wins. Agassi was about the same age as Nadal now when he was losing most of those matches. No, he wouldn't have a "field day" now anymore than he had in his day. Jim Courier was the same age as him and dominated their rivalry, so there's no reason to believe Agassi "would have a field day nowadays". Lleyton Hewitt at 16-years-old beat an Agassi in his 20's in 1998.

I liked Agassi, but I honestly can't see anything that'd make him a dominant player in the Big 3/Big 4 era. His strengths are basically Djokovic's strengths, but he certainly had more holes in his game than Djokovic. In the Big 3 era, I'd see him having a Murray-like career.
Federer, was 23 and 24, in his prime when he was taken to 5 sets and 4 sets in 04, 05 USO. Despite 04 being hindered by windy conditions, and 05 Agassi being hampered by back problems and 5 setters. He would definitely push Federer to the brink in his peak. This is despite, Agassi being 33-34. And coming to your other points about Agassi losing often in early rounds, that was because of 16 seeds. In 32 seeds, he would not lose often in early rounds. He'd still be in contention for the second week. Plus, these slower surfaces will suit Agassi's game. Agassi is a more aggressive version of Djokovic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,800 Posts
His best was in not so fast hard courts so he would do very well these days. He wouldn't beat Nadal on clay or Federer on grass but other than that he could beat everyone anywhere. He's the only player to win the 4 slams, TMC and Olympic Gold and did it in an era of extremely different surfaces, and in fact, was only one match away from winning 4 slams in a row back then which would have been the most amazing accomplishment in tennis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Discussion Starter #95
His best was in not so fast hard courts so he would do very well these days. He wouldn't beat Nadal on clay or Federer on grass but other than that he could beat everyone anywhere. He's the only player to win the 4 slams, TMC and Olympic Gold and did it in an era of extremely different surfaces, and in fact, was only one match away from winning 4 slams in a row back then which would have been the most amazing accomplishment in tennis.
Yes , Agassi is probably the most underrated and underappreciated player of all time. He could've easily been a double digit GS champion. He revolutionised the game and influenced an era of attacking baseliners instead of serve and volley specialists and servebots. Back then, his kind of style was unheard of , either it was all-court tennis, or serve fests, or defensive baselining and grinding/pushing. Aggressive attacking baseliner with groundstrokes were unheard of.

Sadly, today most of the baseliners are defensive players.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Federer, was 23 and 24, in his prime when he was taken to 5 sets and 4 sets in 04, 05 USO. Despite 04 being hindered by windy conditions, and 05 Agassi being hampered by back problems and 5 setters. He would definitely push Federer to the brink in his peak. This is despite, Agassi being 33-34. And coming to your other points about Agassi losing often in early rounds, that was because of 16 seeds. In 32 seeds, he would not lose often in early rounds. He'd still be in contention for the second week. Plus, these slower surfaces will suit Agassi's game. Agassi is a more aggressive version of Djokovic.
"Windy conditions". Apparently, windy conditions only affect one player in a match, while the other player plays in perfect weather with no wind.😂 Agassi pushing Federer in one or 2 matches is irrelevant. Any top professional can "push" another in the game on their day - especially being cheered by their home crowd at the US Open which was like a Davis Cup match for Agassi. Once Federer was more than 20-years-old, Agassi had absolutely nothing in his game that could hurt Federer. He would never have stood a chance competing with Federer at any time.
Why would the number of seeds be relevant? If you changed the seeding system today, do you think it'd make any kind of difference to Federer or Nadal or Djokovic whether they were playing the number 17 or number 33 player in an early round match. If Agassi was as invincible as you're making out, why would the seeding system matter?

The slower surfaces claim isn't borne out by any facts. Agassi's game was pretty well suited to quick courts where his flat, penetrative shot-making was at its most effective - especially on hardcourts. There's no evidence slower courts would improve his prospects in general. It might improve his prospects against someone like Federer, but might be a disadvantage against players like Nadal and Djokovic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Yes , Agassi is probably the most underrated and underappreciated player of all time. He could've easily been a double digit GS champion. He revolutionised the game and influenced an era of attacking baseliners instead of serve and volley specialists and servebots. Back then, his kind of style was unheard of , either it was all-court tennis, or serve fests, or defensive baselining and grinding/pushing. Aggressive attacking baseliner with groundstrokes were unheard of.

Sadly, today most of the baseliners are defensive players.
I guess you've never seen Ivan Lendl, or Borg or Connors play. Agassi did not "revolutionize" anything in the game. Since you claim that most of todays baseliners are "defensive", who then did Agassi influence, since you say he "revolutionized" the game? You have made a lot of strange claims here.

Agassi is not underrated and underappreciated. He's well respected. You're overrating him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,559 Posts
Federer, was 23 and 24, in his prime when he was taken to 5 sets and 4 sets in 04, 05 USO. Despite 04 being hindered by windy conditions, and 05 Agassi being hampered by back problems and 5 setters. He would definitely push Federer to the brink in his peak. This is despite, Agassi being 33-34. And coming to your other points about Agassi losing often in early rounds, that was because of 16 seeds. In 32 seeds, he would not lose often in early rounds. He'd still be in contention for the second week. Plus, these slower surfaces will suit Agassi's game. Agassi is a more aggressive version of Djokovic.
There's no ? Agassi's an ATG who woud have chaIIenged Fed in his prime esp at AO & USO but i take issue w/ your assessment of Agassi's aggresiveness vs Novaks in that the surface conditions in aImost aII Majors & many Masters have changed (homogenization) since Agassi's prime era which is a big reason for Novak transitioning to more defense vs earIier offense & yieIding more success. Venture to say a simiIar pIayer Iike AA wouId have needed to transition to the conditions as weII.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,646 Posts
less than the Big 3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Discussion Starter #100
I guess you've never seen Ivan Lendl, or Borg or Connors play. Agassi did not "revolutionize" anything in the game. Since you claim that most of todays baseliners are "defensive", who then did Agassi influence, since you say he "revolutionized" the game? You have made a lot of strange claims here.

Agassi is not underrated and underappreciated. He's well respected. You're overrating him.
I have seen , Borg achieve tremendous succes. But Neither he or Connors achieved the CGS and the full boxed set resume. They had their holes when it came to certain surfaces.
Agassi was good on all surfaces.

But Id rank Borg over Agassi, because of his sheet dominance over FO and W, in an era where nobody was able to transition between surfaces. Plus the fact he retired early in his prime.
 
81 - 100 of 102 Posts
Top