PDA

View Full Version : Agassi or Djokovic: who is the better claycourter?


matchmaker
05-03-2009, 09:47 AM
I thought this would be an interesting comparison. I feel technique-wise Djokovic is better but result-wise it's AA.

Cesc Fabregas
05-03-2009, 09:51 AM
Djokovic has the better claycourt game moves better, hits with more spin with power aswell and defends better but he has to get 1 RG to pass Agassi.

nethawkwenatchee
05-03-2009, 12:08 PM
Novak has a career French open record of 15–4 with losses in the second round, QF, and consecutive SF’s the past two years. He has three additional clay court titles to his record. I’d say he’s achieved great success at his young age and pro career basically taking off in the past five years (2005 was his first year entering the slams). At this point he has a 61–24 career clay court record. Pretty Good!

Andre had, in his first five years of professional competition, a 66-20 record on clay with a 2nd round loss, 3rd round loss, SF loss, and two Finals at the French. At this point in his career he also had three clay court championship titles to match Novak’s.

Judging both players based on this timeline we see that they are fairly close in wins-losses/titles. *Side note—I’ll be interested to see if Novak can keep it up for twenty years, win majors on all four surfaces, hold a year end #1 rank, 60 titles, (lets not forget Andre skipped the grass courts, to include Wimbledon, four of his first five years on tour with a title in only his second attempt. If you’ve ever poured over Andre’s stat’s you’re finger may get tired from scrolling! I hope Novak can stay healthy and consistent it's also unfortunate for him that he'll most probably have Nadal (another legend on clay) to get through for any attempts he has at clay court championships!

This is an interesting comparison! Take Care,

thalivest
05-03-2009, 12:38 PM
My answer would be WAY too early to say.

GameSampras
05-03-2009, 02:00 PM
Agassi at this point. Im not drinking the Djoker Kool-Aid yet

anointedone
05-03-2009, 02:13 PM
Djokovic is better. He is giving Nadal more trouble on clay than Agassi would have. Agassi during his best years was losing to Grosjean and a past his prime Gomez at the French. The year he won the French he was lucky to get past Squillari, Clement, a choking Moya, Hrbaty, and a choking Medvedev, all matches he could have easily lost. Djokovic is unlucky to keep running into Nadal so often or he would have alot of clay court titles already.

World Beater
05-03-2009, 10:43 PM
agassi has the better results but djokovic has better clay court talent.

djokovic is better but agassi is greater...if that makes sense.

grafrules
05-03-2009, 10:49 PM
agassi has the better results but djokovic has better clay court talent.

djokovic is better but agassi is greater...if that makes sense.

I agree with that. I think in time Djokovic will surpass Agassi's career on clay. Nadal cant win the French every year for all of eternity. The one to take atleast one French and some Masters titles away from Nadal will be Djokovic. Also Djokovic will probably still be in his prime atleast a couple years when Nadal is past his.

Azzurri
05-04-2009, 11:06 AM
as long as Nadal play the FO and other clay tourneys, Novak has little chance to win a FO title. I think he is a very good clay court player, but he is in the same era as nadal, who is the best CC player I have ever seen.

Cloudy
05-04-2009, 11:08 AM
Agassi didn't have to play in the era of Nadal.

drakulie
05-04-2009, 11:12 AM
This is a joke.

At this point, AA rules Joker. Not even close.

All-rounder
05-04-2009, 11:14 AM
novak has the better game but agassi has the FO title
But time will tell if novak can get his title soon

drakulie
05-04-2009, 11:14 AM
Agassi during his best years was losing to Grosjean and a past his prime Gomez at the French. The year he won the French he was lucky to get past Squillari, Clement, a choking Moya, Hrbaty, and a choking Medvedev, all matches he could have easily lost.


I agree,,,,, in the same way Nadal has been very lucky to beat a "choking" Federer and Puerta.

CyBorg
05-04-2009, 11:20 AM
He needs to make a final at RG at least I'd think.

ttwarrior1
05-04-2009, 11:27 AM
agassi all day, agassi was playing against alot more clay court specialist

GameSampras
05-04-2009, 01:25 PM
Djoker doesnt even have an RG title yet. Now we can use the "Djoker had to play Nadal excuse" but thats a cop out. All great players need to overcome who is in front of them. Or they should have to.


And its not like Andre played in some shallow crap era of clay courts. The 90s provided a strong, deep clay field overrall

tonyg11
05-04-2009, 02:05 PM
Djokovic has a far better clay court game than Agassi. The fact that Agassi has done well on clay is only testament to how good he was as a player and how good his all court game was.

Agassi has an aggressive baseline style that thrives on short points and control off the serve AND return. It is mentally tiring for someone with that type of game to be forced into long rallies on points that would be otherwise over with on faster surfaces.

Novak’s game is far more comfortable with longer points and his groundstrokes have far more room for error.

thalivest
05-04-2009, 02:08 PM
Djoker doesnt even have an RG title yet.

Neither does Federer and I would rate him over Agassi on clay easily. I agree it is too soon for Djokovic, but he is only 21. I would take losing in the semis of the French to Nadal over losing in the finals to 30 year old Gomez or pre-prime Courier in his first slam final.

Actually didnt you say on the Nadal match thread that you thought Djokovic had the game to beat Nadal on clay. That alone says something (and they were your own words) since Agassi certainly didnt.

The-Champ
05-04-2009, 02:15 PM
Achievement-wise, Agassi was better, but I'd take Novak's game and movement on clay anytime.

jimwh
05-04-2009, 02:28 PM
It is to early to tell. Agassi transformed from a very talented but arrogant player at the beginning of his career, to a hard working and motivated humble player. I see some of that same young arrogance in Joker. He is very talented. If he matures and works a lot harder on his fitness, who knows how well he can do.

grafrules
05-04-2009, 04:25 PM
Djoker doesnt even have an RG title yet.

If you feel Agassi is superior to Djokovic on clay that is fine but it is kind of laughable in a thread of Agassi vs Djokovic on clay you say something like that. One would think Agassi was this clay court legend who had multiple French Opens by your "doesnt even have an RG title" comment. Agassi did not win his one and only French Open until age 29, so it is pretty hard to slam a 21 year old for not achieving this yet by comparision. Agassi didnt even win his only Masters title on clay ever until he was 32. Djokovic has already achieved this as well.

As for Nadal is just an excuse comment, if Agassi were a contemporary of Nadal he would have never won the French Open. That is a virtual gaurantee.

CyBorg
05-04-2009, 05:08 PM
if Agassi were a contemporary of Nadal he would have never won the French Open. That is a virtual gaurantee.

Wouldn't he just wait until Nadal retired and then win one?

grafrules
05-04-2009, 05:11 PM
Wouldn't he just wait until Nadal retired and then win one?

Actually that is a good point. I guess it depends if you think Nadal will still be going strong on clay at around 30. Probably not, but you never know. He seems to be good at surprising people (including me and I dont even like Nadal).

jimbo333
05-04-2009, 05:14 PM
Wouldn't he just wait until Nadal retired and then win one?

Yep, and also Nadal will have retired in 3 or 4 years, so all Djokovic needs to do is wait until then:)

NadalandFedererfan
05-04-2009, 05:15 PM
Yep, and also Nadal will have retired in 3 or 4 years

That is what people said 3 or 4 years ago.

matchmaker
05-04-2009, 05:25 PM
Thanks for the reactions.

My question was not really who has most merits on clay. It's crystal clear Agassi has.

Who has more raw clay court talent is more difficult to tell.

Djokovic seems to have more variety, also a bigger serve (even if clay often neutralises that), and probably grew up more on clay than the A-man.

Agassi basically played HC tennis on clay IMO. However he reached the RG final at a very young age and had he won, we'd be talking quite differently about his clay achievements.

It is also remarkable how he was able to win clay court masters at a relatively old age.

jimbo333
05-04-2009, 05:33 PM
That is what people said 3 or 4 years ago.

Who said that 3 or 4 years ago?

Nadal WILL definitely have retired by the age of 27 anyway for sure, probably with more Grand Slam titles than anybody ever!!!

drakulie
05-04-2009, 06:36 PM
If you feel Agassi is superior to Djokovic on clay that is fine but it is kind of laughable in a thread of Agassi vs Djokovic on clay you say something like that. One would think Agassi was this clay court legend who had multiple French Opens by your "doesnt even have an RG title" comment. Agassi did not win his one and only French Open until age 29, so it is pretty hard to slam a 21 year old for not achieving this yet by comparision. Agassi didnt even win his only Masters title on clay ever until he was 32. Djokovic has already achieved this as well.

As for Nadal is just an excuse comment, if Agassi were a contemporary of Nadal he would have never won the French Open. That is a virtual gaurantee.


I'm surprised at this post, especially coming from you. It is extremely arrogant.

Agassi may not have won multiple French Opens, however, he made the quarters or better 9 times. Semis or better 5 times, and finals 3 times. He was a damn solid clay court player, even though it was not a natural surface for him.

Give the guy some respect.

matchmaker
05-04-2009, 07:01 PM
I'm surprised at this post, especially coming from you. It is extremely arrogant.

Agassi may not have won multiple French Opens, however, he made the quarters or better 9 times. Semis or better 5 times, and finals 3 times. He was a damn solid clay court player, even though it was not a natural surface for him.

Give the guy some respect.

You are right. In fact the whole comparison with Djoko is way too early.

Agassi could have been a three time FO champion, at the same level as Kuerten.

Definitely his results on clay were outstanding, anyone, not in the least Roger Federer would sign for them.

theagassiman
05-04-2009, 07:37 PM
It is to early to tell. Agassi transformed from a very talented but arrogant player at the beginning of his career, to a hard working and motivated humble player. I see some of that same young arrogance in Joker. He is very talented. If he matures and works a lot harder on his fitness, who knows how well he can do.

Well maybe Djokovic can make the same metamorphosis.

I hope so, or tennis will become a much more boring sport in the years to come...

CEvertFan
05-04-2009, 08:03 PM
Save this thread until Djokovic's career is over. It's too early to compare the their careers.

If you wanted to compare the two at the same age then that would be more accurate. Agassi reached the FO final in '90 at the age of 20. In '88 he got the the FO semis. Agassi won 3 clay titles by the age of 21 (Charleston, Forest Hills and Stuttgart).

Djokovic has made it to the FO semis twice so far and has won 3 clay titles as well (Amersfoort, Estoril and his masters series title in Rome).

Agassi is the one that is ever so slightly more accomplished on clay at the age of 21 by virtue of his RU finish at the FO in '90 although you could argue that he blew that opportunity big time, thus taking away some credit.


I included any clay surface and not just red clay.

grafselesfan
05-04-2009, 08:19 PM
You are right. In fact the whole comparison with Djoko is way too early.

Agassi could have been a three time FO champion, at the same level as Kuerten.

Definitely his results on clay were outstanding, anyone, not in the least Roger Federer would sign for them.

I dont see the logic of just randomly saying he could have been a 3 time Champion just because he was in 3 finals. Do we say any player that was in 3 or 4 finals could have been a 3 or 4 time Champion.

In 1990 he had a great opportunity but was clearly outplayed by a veteran clay courter who had never come close to such a moment before. The 1990 French should have been Lendl's anyway, his absence was why Agassi had a big chance, and he still didnt get it done. In 1991 he could not hold off a player who would dominate their head to head matches from 1991-1995 in fact. In 1999 he was very lucky to win if anything. All in all his winning 3 titles would have required the same lucky horseshoe wedged up his *** that Capriati got to win 3 slam titles period.

GameSampras
05-04-2009, 08:36 PM
If you feel Agassi is superior to Djokovic on clay that is fine but it is kind of laughable in a thread of Agassi vs Djokovic on clay you say something like that. One would think Agassi was this clay court legend who had multiple French Opens by your "doesnt even have an RG title" comment. Agassi did not win his one and only French Open until age 29, so it is pretty hard to slam a 21 year old for not achieving this yet by comparision. Agassi didnt even win his only Masters title on clay ever until he was 32. Djokovic has already achieved this as well.

As for Nadal is just an excuse comment, if Agassi were a contemporary of Nadal he would have never won the French Open. That is a virtual gaurantee.



Maybe but who knows. We dont know how both would have matched up. IMO Agassi on top of his game could his own with anyone today since today's game by baseline players and no attackers and you would hardpressed to find a player today who is more solid from the ground than Andre was. Yes Andre only managed one RG title, but he also reached the finals of two others. We dont know how Andre and Nadal would have matched up. Nadal is a very defensive style of player, and Andre had the ability to run those types of players ragged with his return not to mention he would have a field day with Nadal's faily weak serve. Andre at the peak of his power was arguably more solid from the baseline than any player there is today I feel. I think he could give Fed at his current form fits, along with Djoker, Murray etc.

And no I dont think Nadal is UNBEATABLE on clay. I just dont feel there is solid clay field today. THere is one thing for certain and that is Nadal would have received much tougher draws in route to the final of the Roland Garros in the 90s as he does today which in turn could make Nadal look much more vulnerable in the end. He wouldnt just CRUISE to each final if had to meet, Bruguera, Kuerten, Muster, Courier, Medvedev etc. which is a much tougher field that what we see today with Fed, Djoker, Monfils, Ferrer, Wawrinka etc


Djoker hasnt really proved anything on clay yet IMO. Yes Nadal is great on clay.. One of the best. But the clay court field today is FAR FROM IT. Outside of Djoker and Fed (who isnt even a top 15-20 all time on clay) whats left?

grafselesfan
05-04-2009, 09:01 PM
On non clay surfaces we dont know how Agassi and Nadal would match up. On clay surfaces it is pretty obvious. Agassi wouldnt have a prayer. Grafrules is right, if Nadal were in the Agassi era then Agassi would have never won a French.

Also Bruguera, Kuerten, Muster, Courier, Medvedev were never at their best together so to list them all jointly as some practical competitive field Agassi had to face is a joke. Prime Kuerten and prime Courier contemporaries, LOL! Now I have heard it all. By that logic lets just list Ferrero, Kuerten, Coria, Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Costa, and pretend they make up the 2000s clay court field all at once. After all everyone of those was playing really well at some point this decade. Kuerten won more French Opens this decade than the 90s after all.

380pistol
05-04-2009, 11:06 PM
Agassi... Djokovic has some work to do. He played Nadal well in Hamburg, and Monte Carlo.... yet lost 6-1 in the 3rd. Played well in Rome and.... that's right Nadal had 2 chances to closeserve out the 1st set and didn't and went away 6-2 in the 2nd.

Novak's 2 SF in Paris aren't that impressive, when you look at his draws, yet people will never let go of Dre's 1999 French draw around here. Then they'll talk about how Djokovic beat Federer in Rome, ignoring for the last 12 months or so Roger has been in decline. As mentioned here... along with Dre's French title, has 2 other finals, SF or better 5 times, QF or better 9 times. Not bad. So for now it's Andre, end of story. Come back in a few years, and we can re-evaluate.

World Beater
05-05-2009, 06:03 PM
Neither does Federer and I would rate him over Agassi on clay easily. I agree it is too soon for Djokovic, but he is only 21. I would take losing in the semis of the French to Nadal over losing in the finals to 30 year old Gomez or pre-prime Courier in his first slam final.

Actually didnt you say on the Nadal match thread that you thought Djokovic had the game to beat Nadal on clay. That alone says something (and they were your own words) since Agassi certainly didnt.

that is the big problem. people are comparing andre's whole career to djoker who is still a young gun.

grafrules
05-05-2009, 06:06 PM
that is the big problem. people are comparing andre's whole career to djoker who is still a young gun.

Hence why as thalivest said it is too soon to pass judgement either way. This thread topic is far premature.

grafrules
05-05-2009, 06:08 PM
Save this thread until Djokovic's career is over. It's too early to compare the their careers.

If you wanted to compare the two at the same age then that would be more accurate. Agassi reached the FO final in '90 at the age of 20. In '88 he got the the FO semis. Agassi won 3 clay titles by the age of 21 (Charleston, Forest Hills and Stuttgart).

Djokovic has made it to the FO semis twice so far and has won 3 clay titles as well (Amersfoort, Estoril and his masters series title in Rome).

Agassi is the one that is ever so slightly more accomplished on clay at the age of 21 by virtue of his RU finish at the FO in '90 although you could argue that he blew that opportunity big time, thus taking away some credit.


I included any clay surface and not just red clay.

That is a good breakdown as it compares them at the same point in their careers. Agassi ironically became a weaker clay courter as years went along. His best clay court tennis by far was in the late 80s and early 90s when he should have won the French atleast once and was so often making semis or finals. His late career French Open title was a bit of a miracle from the gods, but his best clay court was long past by that point. If Djokovic can become stronger as years go on he could wind up better.

Azzurri
05-05-2009, 06:26 PM
novak has the better game but agassi has the FO title
But time will tell if novak can get his title soon

Really? What game is that, just curious.

Azzurri
05-05-2009, 06:29 PM
Djokovic has a far better clay court game than Agassi. The fact that Agassi has done well on clay is only testament to how good he was as a player and how good his all court game was.

Agassi has an aggressive baseline style that thrives on short points and control off the serve AND return. It is mentally tiring for someone with that type of game to be forced into long rallies on points that would be otherwise over with on faster surfaces.

Novak’s game is far more comfortable with longer points and his groundstrokes have far more room for error.

I have to disagree with you there. Short points? Agassi liked to run his opponents ragged, left to right, right to left, etc. He beat most people because he could hang into those long rallies. He was also 2-3 time finalist of the FO, so again I have to strongly disagree.

World Beater
05-05-2009, 07:27 PM
Hence why as thalivest said it is too soon to pass judgement either way. This thread topic is far premature.

yes...i was agreeing with him

jimwh
05-06-2009, 09:44 AM
I totally agree.

JoshDragon
05-06-2009, 09:56 AM
Right now I would say Andre. Djokovic, definitely has better technique than Andre did but he will need to win 1 RG before I can put him ahead of Andre.

drakulie
05-06-2009, 10:09 AM
Right now I would say Andre. Djokovic, definitely has better technique than Andre did but he will need to win 1 RG before I can put him ahead of Andre.


Care to elaborate???

Better technique in what sense??

Andre's fh was perfect, as was his backhand (possibly greatest ever)?????

Azzurri
05-06-2009, 11:32 AM
Right now I would say Andre. Djokovic, definitely has better technique than Andre did but he will need to win 1 RG before I can put him ahead of Andre.

Josh,
what do you mean? Agassi had a monster game and not sure if if any part of Novak's game is better except serve (nobody volleys anyway so its a scratch). But Andre may be the cleanest hitter the sport has ever seen..I rarely recall him even shanking. Maybe you like Novak's style a bit better, but that is not the same. Also, Andre has 3 RG finals and had 2 finals early in his career.

Azzurri
05-06-2009, 11:33 AM
Care to elaborate???

Better technique in what sense??

Andre's fh was perfect, as was his backhand (possibly greatest ever)?????

I commented on Josh prior to reading yours. If anything, Andre was a beatuful ball striker and hist very cleanly. I don't see how Novak's "tecnique" is better (it's not), but maybe Josh likes his motions.

anointedone
05-06-2009, 07:14 PM
Djokovic vs Agassi? I would probably go:

Serve: Djokovic by alot
Return: Agassi
Forehand: Djokovic by a bit
Backhand: Agassi by a bit
Movement: Djokovic
Volleys: what volleys
Mental game: depends of the time

I could see one arguing Djokovic having as good or better an overall game, especialy on clay. I think you will him win alot of slam titles in his career.

Azzurri
05-06-2009, 07:50 PM
Djokovic vs Agassi? I would probably go:

Serve: Djokovic by alot
Return: Agassi
Forehand: Djokovic by a bit
Backhand: Agassi by a bit
Movement: Djokovic
Volleys: what volleys
Mental game: depends of the time

I could see one arguing Djokovic having as good or better an overall game, especialy on clay. I think you will him win alot of slam titles in his career.

LOL, byt the time Agassi was 22 here is what he did at the majors:

Aussie: did not play until 1995, but won 4 in 9 tries..much better than Mr. Novak at this point.
French: 2 SF, 2 F
Wimby: He won in 1992
USO: 2 SF, 1 F

So he was pretty competitive considering he was playing in an incredible era of tennis (by age 22 anyway).

Novak:
Aussie: 1 SF, 1 W
FO: 2 SF?
W: 1 SF?
USO: 1SF, 1 F

(not sure on his stats..could not find them. the point is unless Novak has a great year, Agassi far outperformed him at the same age. Crazy with all this fascination for Novak..he is no Agassi.

GameSampras
05-06-2009, 07:59 PM
Oh jeesh.. Are u really going to compare a player who has 8 slams and the career slam in an era with the most diverse surface conditions ever on his resume to a player who has.... 1 slam, and has yet to even sniff number 1 in the world.

DJoker has ALOT of work to do to even be considered in the same era code to Dre

flying24
05-06-2009, 08:00 PM
Aussie: did not play until 1995, but won 4 in 9 tries..much better than Mr.

Lucky for Agassi he skipped on playing a whole bunch of years none which he would have won, 1986-1994 and 1997 to give him that ratio.

flying24
05-06-2009, 08:01 PM
Oh jeesh.. Are u really going to compare a player who has 8 slams and the career slam in an era with the most diverse surface conditions ever on his resume to a player who has.... 1 slam, and has yet to even sniff number 1 in the world.

DJoker has ALOT of work to do to even be considered in the same era code to Dre

Yes since Agassi at 22 had won 8 slams and the career slam hadnt he. Agassi didnt even win his first slam until turning 22.

GameSampras
05-06-2009, 08:22 PM
Yes since Agassi at 22 had won 8 slams and the career slam hadnt he. Agassi didnt even win his first slam until turning 22.

The way Djoker is going (considering his breathing issues, conditioning, erratic play, and mental letdowns, choking etc) he will be lucky to even grab 3-4 slams. Hell he may never win another. Djoker cant play well enough for long enough.

flying24
05-06-2009, 08:29 PM
The way Djoker is going (considering his breathing issues, conditioning, erratic play, and mental letdowns, choking etc) he will be lucky to even grab 3-4 slams. Hell he may never win another. Djoker cant play well enough for long enough.

It is far too early to say he would win 8 slams but I have seen you post on him many times and you are excessively hard on him. I would be willing to bet hundreds of dollors on him winning multiple more slams and I cant even stand the guy (ask gj011 or Ripster for example) and root against him in all his matches, yet even I would admit he will manage this. He is too good at too young an age, too competitive with the top players, and too proficient on all surfaces, not to. The guy is regularly making semis or better of all slams, regularly right now making finals of Masters events, he is 2-0 vs Federer this year, he is the only guy giving Nadal matches on clay. I am not sure what more you want from him. Do you expect him to dominate tennis on all surfaces at 21, please dont suggest Agassi or almost anyone not named Nadal or Borg was close to doing this. He was in a slump for awhile, this is true. He is coming out of it though and playing really well. On clay being 2nd to Nadal is about the best anyone realistically could do. No I doubt he will have as good a career as Agassi but he will have a much better career than you seem to think he will.

GameSampras
05-06-2009, 08:48 PM
It is far too early to say he would win 8 slams but I have seen you post on him many times and you are excessively hard on him. I would be willing to bet hundreds of dollors on him winning multiple more slams and I cant even stand the guy (ask gj011 or Ripster for example) and root against him in all his matches, yet even I would admit he will manage this. He is too good at too young an age, too competitive with the top players, and too proficient on all surfaces, not to. The guy is regularly making semis or better of all slams, regularly right now making finals of Masters events, he is 2-0 vs Federer this year, he is the only guy giving Nadal matches on clay. I am not sure what more you want from him. Do you expect him to dominate tennis on all surfaces at 21, please dont suggest Agassi or almost anyone not named Nadal or Borg was close to doing this. He was in a slump for awhile, this is true. He is coming out of it though and playing really well. On clay being 2nd to Nadal is about the best anyone realistically could do. No I doubt he will have as good a career as Agassi but he will have a much better career than you seem to think he will.



What makes you believe Djoker is coming out of his slump? He won the AO in 08 beating Fed and yet couldnt even handle Roddick this year. He was thumped by headcase Safin at Wimbeldon. Got embarrassed by Roger at the USO. He was arguably 2nd best clay court last year. That hasnt changed. Murray will be snatching that #3 ranking. Djoker hasnt done a whole in my eyes to make me believe he is the same Djoker as early last year. He still has tendency to drop in play dramatically and has alot of trouble maintaining a high level throughout the course of the season or even matches against the top dogs

In fact, I wouldnt be surprised if Djoker is this era's version of Safin or Nalbandian just to a lesser degree. He may not totally disappear off the radar but he may be just an era filler.

Murray is showing more promise I think at this point than Djoker is.

flying24
05-06-2009, 08:50 PM
What makes you believe Djoker is coming out of his slump? He won the AO in 08 beating Fed and yet couldnt even handle Roddick this year. He was thumped by headcase Safin at Wimbeldon. Got embarrassed by Roger at the USO. He was arguably 2nd best clay court last year. That hasnt changed. Murray will be snatching that #3 ranking. Djoker hasnt done a whole in my eyes to make me believe he is the same Djoker as early last year.

In fact, I would be surprised if Djoker is this era's version of Safin or Nalbandian just to a lesser degree. He may not totally disappear off the radar but he may be just an era filler

He came out of his slump in Miami IMO. He played a very solid tournament, beating Federer in the semis, and only lost to Murray in the final. He then went to Monte Carlo, easily made the final, and took Nadal to 3 sets. In Rome he again beats Federer in the semis and gives Nadal a decent match in the final. Up to the Pacific Life he was still in his slump.

Orion
05-06-2009, 10:42 PM
If you feel Agassi is superior to Djokovic on clay that is fine but it is kind of laughable in a thread of Agassi vs Djokovic on clay you say something like that. One would think Agassi was this clay court legend who had multiple French Opens by your "doesnt even have an RG title" comment. Agassi did not win his one and only French Open until age 29, so it is pretty hard to slam a 21 year old for not achieving this yet by comparision. Agassi didnt even win his only Masters title on clay ever until he was 32. Djokovic has already achieved this as well.

As for Nadal is just an excuse comment, if Agassi were a contemporary of Nadal he would have never won the French Open. That is a virtual gaurantee.




Maybe but who knows. We dont know how both would have matched up. IMO Agassi on top of his game could his own with anyone today since today's game by baseline players and no attackers and you would hardpressed to find a player today who is more solid from the ground than Andre was. Yes Andre only managed one RG title, but he also reached the finals of two others. We dont know how Andre and Nadal would have matched up. Nadal is a very defensive style of player, and Andre had the ability to run those types of players ragged with his return not to mention he would have a field day with Nadal's faily weak serve. Andre at the peak of his power was arguably more solid from the baseline than any player there is today I feel. I think he could give Fed at his current form fits, along with Djoker, Murray etc.

And no I dont think Nadal is UNBEATABLE on clay. I just dont feel there is solid clay field today. There is one thing for certain and that is Nadal would have received much tougher draws in route to the final of the Roland Garros in the 90s as he does today which in turn could make Nadal look much more vulnerable in the end. He wouldnt just CRUISE to each final if had to meet, Bruguera, Kuerten, Muster, Courier, Medvedev etc. which is a much tougher field that what we see today with Fed, Djoker, Monfils, Ferrer, Wawrinka etc


Djoker hasnt really proved anything on clay yet IMO. Yes Nadal is great on clay.. One of the best. But the clay court field today is FAR FROM IT. Outside of Djoker and Fed (who isnt even a top 15-20 all time on clay) whats left?

Not a fan of Djoker but I admit he hits a clean ball..NOT as clean as Agassi. I aslo agree with what you said about him just being and era-filler. Murray DEFINITELY has more upside than him. I don' know if it's his mental fortitude or physical conditioning but he doesn't seem to have IT. Granted the kid is still young, but I don't think the competition is anywhere near the field of the 80's and 90's where you had a plethora of clay court specialists. Nadal is not UNBEATABLE, it's more of an issue of lack of talent compared to the era Agassi played in. Who are the serve and volley'ers today?? They don't exist. Blake is a prime example of this era's player. He shows flashes of brilliance then fizzles. NOBOBY pushed Fed until Nadal upped his game. I think Murray has the talent to give Nadal fits as he matures. Nadal may enjoy another year at best at his current level and that's provided Fed keeps him in his head.

I don't see Novak in the same league with Nadal, Fed and Murray as an overall player. Personally, I believe he lacks that gear that they possess. I'm pretty sure he is officially the #4 ranked behind Murray. It's strange that Djoker doesn't have the physical problems on clay that he seems to have on hardcourts, given the long nature of points played on clay.

Djoker may have the game that appears to be best suited to clay but gimmie Agassi's complete package ANYDAY over Djoker!!! Djoker reminds me alot of Safin, great potential, a slam under his belt..... but you wonder if he has what it takes to elevate his game past those in front of him.

CEvertFan
05-06-2009, 10:48 PM
Djoker doesn't have problems with the surface per se, he has problems with the heat.

Azzurri
05-07-2009, 07:03 AM
Lucky for Agassi he skipped on playing a whole bunch of years none which he would have won, 1986-1994 and 1997 to give him that ratio.

thanks for making your OPINION sound like a fact.

Azzurri
05-07-2009, 07:05 AM
Yes since Agassi at 22 had won 8 slams and the career slam hadnt he. Agassi didnt even win his first slam until turning 22.

what is your point? he was stating FACTS, odd how you like to argue facts.

slice bh compliment
05-07-2009, 07:26 AM
Movement: Djokovic
Anticipation: Agassi
Serve: Djokovic
Return: Agassi
Net play: toss up
Offense: Agassi
Defense: Djokovic
Personality: Agassi
Integrity: Agassi
Sliding ability: Djokovic
Number of Roland Garros titles: Agassi 1 to 0.
Early career hairdo: Djokovic
Late career hairdo: 'toss up', slight edge to Agassi.
Cheese factor: Normally Agassi trumps all in this category, but we have a new champion of cheesey personality here. Congrats, Nole.

Results against top rivals: both on the weak side, but I give the edge to Agassi at this point........Nole's got the potential to turn this one around.

Conclusion: Nole is technically better, but Agassi was the man of destiny.

EDIT:
But wouldn't it be amazing if Nole stripped down his personality and carved his way to legendary status...treating the sport to a long and distinguished career..... be basically universally admired, and end his career with a record number of tears of joy emanating from myriad eyes in 196 countries?

Not likely. But it would be nice.

pc1
05-07-2009, 07:29 AM
slice bh compliment,

Funny categories. lol.

vandre
05-07-2009, 08:53 AM
slice bh comp,

you know of better hair than this?????????????????????????????????

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/nm_agassi_91_ssv.jpg

lol :)

slice bh compliment
05-07-2009, 11:42 AM
LOL, for sure....okay, yeah, it's a toss up between that glorious mullett and ''The Screech''.

matchmaker
05-07-2009, 06:44 PM
Djokovic vs Agassi? I would probably go:

Serve: Djokovic by alot
Return: Agassi
Forehand: Djokovic by a bit
Backhand: Agassi by a bit
Movement: Djokovic
Volleys: what volleys
Mental game: depends of the time

I could see one arguing Djokovic having as good or better an overall game, especialy on clay. I think you will him win alot of slam titles in his career.


I am sorry but Djoko is to be found at net quite often and is a decent volleyer. Agassi rarely volleyed and if possible would take a swing at the ball.

Sentinel
05-07-2009, 08:28 PM
Great post. But you forgot "imitations".

Movement: Djokovic
Anticipation: Agassi
Serve: Djokovic
Return: Agassi
Net play: toss up
Offense: Agassi
Defense: Djokovic
Personality: Agassi
Integrity: Agassi
Sliding ability: Djokovic



Quitting ability - Djokovic ;-)

JoshDragon
05-08-2009, 11:06 AM
Josh,
what do you mean? Agassi had a monster game and not sure if if any part of Novak's game is better except serve (nobody volleys anyway so its a scratch). But Andre may be the cleanest hitter the sport has ever seen..I rarely recall him even shanking. Maybe you like Novak's style a bit better, but that is not the same. Also, Andre has 3 RG finals and had 2 finals early in his career.

Andre had a big game but it was much better suited to hard courts than grass and especially clay. I think Novak has a style better suited to clay than Andre and Nole would have made 2 French Open finals if not for Nadal. However, Andre is still a former French Open Champion, so until Novak is able to win the French he can't be ahead of Andre, on clay. That's a given.

JoshDragon
05-08-2009, 11:10 AM
slice bh comp,

you know of better hair than this?????????????????????????????????

http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/nm_agassi_91_ssv.jpg

lol :)

Lol. It's hard for me to believe that people used to have hair-styles like that.

IMO Andre, made a good decision when he shaved that off. ;)

slice bh compliment
05-08-2009, 11:29 AM
Great post. But you forgot "imitations".


Quitting ability - Djokovic ;-)

LOL, right on ... imitations and quitting ability, absolutely. While Djokovic is the clear titleholder for both, I remember Andre doing a spot-on Mac, Becker and Lendl back in the day.

Also, even though Andre couldn't hold Nole's Djokstrap in the 'calling trainers and retiring' department, he was a pretty blatant tanker during the mullett years. So, yeah, turns out these two guys have a lot in common.

!Tym
05-08-2009, 06:57 PM
I know one thing. Agassi v2.0 had better endurance Djokovic. I don't think it's just conditioning either. I think in their natural states, Agassi just has God-given more natural endurance than Djokovic. You can't be born with everything, and endurance is one of those things where some are born better than others. I know as I'm like that...all fat-(pardon fast)-twitch, and precious little by way of endurance, for which I was notoroiusly bad. Look at Borg, an extreme example, but even today his endurance is phenomenal even without having to work out.

clayman2000
05-08-2009, 07:14 PM
Novak has a career French open record of 15–4 with losses in the second round, QF, and consecutive SF’s the past two years. He has three additional clay court titles to his record. I’d say he’s achieved great success at his young age and pro career basically taking off in the past five years (2005 was his first year entering the slams). At this point he has a 61–24 career clay court record. Pretty Good!

Andre had, in his first five years of professional competition, a 66-20 record on clay with a 2nd round loss, 3rd round loss, SF loss, and two Finals at the French. At this point in his career he also had three clay court championship titles to match Novak’s.

Judging both players based on this timeline we see that they are fairly close in wins-losses/titles. *Side note—I’ll be interested to see if Novak can keep it up for twenty years, win majors on all four surfaces, hold a year end #1 rank, 60 titles, (lets not forget Andre skipped the grass courts, to include Wimbledon, four of his first five years on tour with a title in only his second attempt. If you’ve ever poured over Andre’s stat’s you’re finger may get tired from scrolling! I hope Novak can stay healthy and consistent it's also unfortunate for him that he'll most probably have Nadal (another legend on clay) to get through for any attempts he has at clay court championships!

This is an interesting comparison! Take Care,

If Novak in 10 years can play 1 set with the world no 1 and still be alive i think that would be great progress