Agassi says he tanked matches, calls Sampras one dimensional, calls Connors a name

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by jamesblakefan#1, Nov 6, 2009.

  1. jamesblakefan#1

    jamesblakefan#1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    15,760
    Location:
    VA Beach
    New book excerpts.

    Just when you thought there weren't any more headlines in Andre Agassi's incendiary, engrossing and endlessly human autobiography, "Open" (with J.R. Moehringer, from Knopf), the hits keep on coming.

    In it:

    • Agassi hints he tanked games. "Losing on purpose isn't easy," he writes. "You have to lose in such a way that the crowd can't tell, and in a way that you can't tell. Your mind is tanking, but your body is fighting on. ... You don't do those tiny things you need to do. You don't run the extra few feet, you don't lunge. You're slow to come out of stops. You hesitate to bend or dig." Of losing in the semifinals of the 1996 Australian Open against Michael Chang -- a match Agassi suggests he tanked -- he writes, "I'm glad I lost."

    • He describes rival Pete Sampras as one-dimensional, "robotic" and a bad tipper, recalling a time Sampras gave a Palm Springs car valet one dollar. On the other hand, Agassi is grateful to have had Sampras' greatness to measure himself against. "Losing to Pete has caused me enormous pain," he writes, "but in the long run it's also made me more resilient. If I'd beaten Pete more often ... I'd have a better record ... but I'd be less.

    • He saves no love for Jimmy Connors, whom he calls a "rude, condescending, egomaniac *****." Of Connors' coaching Andy Roddick for a time, he writes, "Poor Andy."

    • He was incensed that Chang would point to the sky every time he won a match. "He thanks God -- credits God -- for the win, which offends me. That God should take sides in a tennis match, that God should side against me ... feels ludicrous and insulting."

    • He says Todd Martin was, "like me, an underachiever."

    • And, perhaps the most shocking revelation of all: Beginning in 1999, he says, he never played wearing underwear again.


    More revelations at the link:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/package?id=3835231
     
    #1
  2. Agassi has always had a chip on his shoulder regarding Sampras. That's always been clear. But saying that is just low. How does having a killer serve, cat like movement, and an all court game with a monster forehand and terrific volleys qualify as one dimensional? Agassi had less "dimensions" than Sampras without question.

    Looks like Agassi doesn't mind burning a few bridges.
     
    #2
  3. volleynets

    volleynets Professional

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,245
    Location:
    CA
    Agassi did a great job hiding the fact that he is a very bitter person inside. IF he never wrote this book nobody would have guessed. Lose more and more respect for him, but mostly, his dad is crazy. Agassi's dad Mike stated that his first three kids were guinea pigs to perfect strategies to produce a player like Agassi.
     
    #3
  4. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,426
    I doubt Agassi was glad that he lost to Chang in the 1996 AO semis because had he won, he would have played against Becker in the final, a player that he owned, so he would have gotten another Slam title.

    Also, the thought of Agassi wearing those short shorts without any underwear underneath makes me cringe.
     
    #4
  5. Cesc Fabregas

    Cesc Fabregas Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    8,318
    How dare he call Sampras one dimensional, in his prime Pete could play anywhere on the court. Agassi is way more one dimensional than Pete.
     
    #5
  6. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    Agassi calls Sampras one dimensional?! Too funny. Pete Sampras had not only one of the most amazing if not the best serve in history, but a better return of serve than Agassi did a serve. Sampras was outstanding from both the backcourt, net, transitioning from one to another, while Agassi was only outstanding from the backcourt and lost everywhere else. Sampras on his best days could outplay Agassi from the baseline. Imagine Agassi outplaying Sampras from the net, ROTFL!! Sampras was extremely quick, athletic, and could play great defense AND great offense, again unlike Agassi who only played great offense even if it was a grinders form of offense at times. Agassi is clearly jaded about all the smack downs Pete gave him over the years. Comparing their games:

    First serve- Sampras by a HUGE margin
    Second serve- ditto the first serve
    Return- Agassi obviously
    Forehand- Sampras. Agassi had a great forehand but he was consistently outplayed by guys like Lendl, Courier, Federer, and Sampras off that side.
    Backhand- Agassi of course
    Volleys- Sampras by far. Agassi was a joke at the net.
    Overhead- Sampras by alot again.
    Movement- Again Sampras by far.
    Overall athletic ability- Yep again Sampras easily.
    Mental game- Sampras of course.
    Court smarts- hard to say, similar probably, both were very good.

    So the one dimensional Sampras owns Agassi in nearly every dimension of the game, LOL! If anyone was one dimensional it was Agassi. He won through his groundstrokes and return of serve, that is it. When he played guys who could outslug him off the forehand, outhusle and outrun, outlast and outwill him from the backcourt, and whose backhands he couldnt get to enough, he lost nearly everytime. Think of guys like Lendl, Federer, Courier, Kuerten when in form, and even the top clay courters on clay, and how he fared vs them. When you shut him down from the backcourt he had no other options to win matches, as his lack of success vs those guys who did the things to him I mentioned in backcourt duels proved. He couldnt play great defense, his net game sucked, he couldnt intuitely wit his way through matches like his mentor Gilbert (that he was with Gilbert so long only advanced him out of brainless basher territory where he was before), and he certainly couldnt serve you off the court.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
    #6
  7. Ripster

    Ripster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,238
    Wow, this just keeps getting better.
     
    #7
  8. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    Agassi would not have beaten Becker in the 96 Australian Open final. Yes he owned Becker for awhile but he was not in form at that event at all, going 5 sets to Bjorkman before he became briefly a top singles player, and a slumping past his prime Courier. Becker was in blazing form in the late rounds at that event. Becker had also schooled Agassi at Wimbledon, and gave him all he could handle at the U.S Open when Agassi was playing the tennis of his life. Yes Agassi did well vs Becker, but he would have lost that final if he somehow made it in. Chang who was in much better form than Agassi at that event was even overpowered by Becker in a quite one sided final (despite that it went 4).
     
    #8
  9. volleynets

    volleynets Professional

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,245
    Location:
    CA
    What is next?

    Agassi cheated on Steffi Graf?

    Agassi tanked his match against Benjamin Becket to retire quicker because he always hated tennis?

    Agassi says Federer is one dimensional?

    Agassi used cocaine?

    f Agassi had affairs with men?

    What else is left for this book?
     
    #9
  10. aphex

    aphex Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    6,263
    Location:
    athens, greece
    ...and the petards keep rolling in
     
    #10
  11. jman

    jman Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2006
    Messages:
    664
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I know it's a little harsh what Agassi says, but out of all the tennis books i've read about the tour, it's no surprise really. I mean, these guys are in competition with each other, and the stress can really get so high (from what i've read).
    I guess Agassi had a lot of things to get off his chest. I still respect him, and consider him one of the greats.
     
    #11
  12. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    I am also not surprised he tried to diminish Chang's wins over him since he always hated Chang. He never would give Chang his due. Chang was a darn good player, and IMO one of the best and unluckiest 1 slam only winners in history. While Agassi is the better player and does have something like a 15-7 head to head, Chang was also no easy opponent for him. In 1994-1995 when Agassi was at his best he had to go 5 sets with Chang on the way to his 94 U.S Open title (the winner of that match would probably have won the title this year), and had a loss to him in 95 I believe when he played by far his best hard court tennis ever. In addition to perhaps most of all the two smackdowns in 2 slam semis of 96 which no doubt irked Agassi regardless what he said, given his lack of respect for Chang. Agassi wasnt playing his best in 1996, but he stayed in the top 10 all year, won 2 or 3 Masters titles, won the Olympics, and was in those 2 hard court slam semis, so no way did he simply just want to be trounced badly by Chang in both like he seems to want you believe. Chang flat out kicked his butt in both those matches, man up and admit it.

    As for his comments regarding Connors, IMO Connors if anything is a slightly better and more complete version of the Agassi game. Of course his comments regarding Connors were about Connors personality, but perhaps that he realizes Connors who is most similar in playing style of all the greats to Agassi, is a better player than him, despite the hype of some to the contrary, irks him. Atleast Connors was his true self, meat and potatoes, what you saw was what you get. Whether you love him or hate him, I always respected that about him. Unlike Agassi who had his phony "image is everything" persona going and with his latest revelations comes across as even more of one.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
    #12
  13. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,426
    Um....Agassi beat Becker 6-2, 6-4.....on carpet.....in Germany....at the year-end Championships. Then did it again the following year....on carpet....in Germany....6-3, 7-5. Carpet was Becker's best surface along with grass. Rebound Ace at the Aus Open was Agassi's best surface. From 1990-1999, Agassi was 10-1 versus Becker. Becker's only win was at Wimbledon, on Centre Court, his second home, and he barely squeaked by.
     
    #13
  14. aphex

    aphex Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    6,263
    Location:
    athens, greece
    yeah, so was Jeffrey Dahmer.
     
    #14
  15. Sarzy

    Sarzy Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    920
    Location:
    England
    Agassi sounds like an ass. Does he really want to destroy what everyone thinks of him? It's interesting reading but I don't get why he's revealed all this to be honest.
     
    #15
  16. CMM

    CMM Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,713
    I wonder if Gil Reyes had two salaries.
     
    #16
  17. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,016
    Location:
    Weak era
    Lol,calling Sampras one-dimensional is bad,robotic I could understand but until the last few years of his career Sampras definitely wasn't one-dimensional.
     
    #17
  18. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    That was way back in 1990 and 1991 which has little bearing on an early 1996 match. I acknowledged that Agassi had Becker's number for awhile, but by 1995 it seemed Becker was getting a handle on playing Agassi. After the first set and half of their 95 Wimbledon semi he completely outplayed Agassi. Then at the U.S Open with Agassi playing the tennis of his life that summer he still had to go to a 4th set tiebreaks and win two tiebreaks to eke past Becker, a match that helped Sampras beat him in the final as Becker really extended Agassi on his favorite surface. So Agassi is having trouble with Becker in 95 playing the tennis of his life, and barely ekes past him on his best surface playing the summer of tennis of his life, yet was going to beat him at the 96 AO in mediocre form and with Becker playing his best tennis in years in the last 3 rounds? LOL dont think so.

    Rebound Ace was Agassi's best surface and yet it didnt stop Chang was raping him in the semis, and Bjorkman and a past his prime Courier nearly beating him. Also didnt stop Berasetegui and Spadea from beating him his next 2 appearances there. Agassi is a great rebound ace player but not the god some make him out to be. He padded his record there with a couple additional titles over the most laughable draws in history near the end of his career. He also beat a less than 100% Sampras to win the first 2, and nearly nobody else of note (other than Kafelnikov the pigeon of all the top guys of the 90s).

    That being said of course Agassi you would normally heavily favor over Becker on rebound ace. However the way both were playing at the 96 AO hell no. As for ekeing by, that was also Agassi barely ekeing past Becker at the 95 U.S Open during the summer of tennis of his life as I said.
     
    #18
  19. I totallt understand what Andre means, i agree with him to 75%.
    I still have the biggest amount of respect for him.
     
    #19
  20. BlakeGOAT

    BlakeGOAT Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    197
    What was his for reason for tanking matches?
     
    #20
  21. severus

    severus Rookie

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    148
    I agree with Agassi that Petros was a one dimensional player ( for Petrostards it's not bad that your idol was one dimensional, it's actually impressive that Petros had won so much with such a limited game).
     
    #21
  22. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    I am no Sampras fan but I totally disagree with any of those who saw he is one dimensional. What on earth are you people thinking. You would think he was Greg Rusedski the way some of you and Agassi talk about him. And in Agassi's case it is pure jealousy, plain and simple. If Sampras had Agassi's serve I bet he still wins atleast half their matches in all honesty, not that he should be faulted for having a much better serve than Agassi either.
     
    #22
  23. jorel

    jorel Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,488
    if Sampras is one dimensional... then Agassi is zero dimensional
     
    #23
  24. dropshot winner

    dropshot winner Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,852
    Sampras was not 1-dimensional, but he realied HEAVILY on his serve.

    On a very good day Sampras could outplay Agassi from the baseline, but on a normal day it was very difficult for him to win matches against top players on clay because he couldn't get enough free points with his serve.
     
    #24
  25. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Sampras wasnt that good on clay since he didnt hit with enough topspin, since he wasnt comfortable moving on the surface, and since his overall agressive mentality wasnt as effective on clay. It doesnt mean his ground game was lacking.
     
    #25
  26. dropshot winner

    dropshot winner Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,852
    Sampras forehand was heavy enough for clay, his problems where the inconsistent backhand and lack of sliding skills.
    He needed his service winners and aces to compensate for errors, on clay he had to play longer points (more chance to make an error) and got less free points.
     
    #26
  27. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    Agassi always disliked Chang. A journalist who got to follow Agassi around for a reported, he once called Chang "he of short arms and deep pockets". He and Gilbert got off making juvenile jokes about Chang. Agassi also felt Chang "copied" his baseline game, shortly after Chang got on tour. (Chang started hitting harder and earlier).

    I guess he did not feel imitation was flattery...it was childish then and it's childish now. And it wasn't the first time he ripped on Chang. Another time he said of Chang "I remember playing him when he only came up to hear (indicated chest height), oh wait, he still comes up to here!" (like Agassi was a giant! LOL) He publicly went after him about Davis Cup as well once. I dont recall Chang EVER saying anything bad about Agassi.

    Though even in the mid nineties, Agassi did grudgingly admit that Chang improved 5-10 percent every year, more than any other player. The journalist who hung out with Agassi (and really liked him and befriended him), felt that the real reason Agassi hated Chang is that he saw Chang in the rear-view mirror, always right behind him....and he knew that Chang always improving represented the fact that he could not be stagnant either.
     
    #27
  28. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    I think that is an amazingly accurate accessment of everything that went down between Agassi and Chang, and why Agassi alway seemed to have a chip on his shoulder towards Chang. Wow great breakdown. Also good to know I am not the only one who sensed that when they were on tour and mostly near the top together.
     
    #28
  29. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    No. Sampras did not succeed on clay because of his movement on clay. He was not comfortable sliding on slippery surface.
     
    #29
  30. dropshot winner

    dropshot winner Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,852
    His mediocre movement on clay didn't help, but it was not the only reason.

    The slower the surface, the less sucess Sampras had on it, it was the case for both hardcourt and clay.

    Sampras could play from anywhere on the court, so he definately was not 1-dimensional, but he relied big time on his serve. If that part of his game was neutralized he was much more vulnerable.
     
    #30
  31. MichaelChang

    MichaelChang Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,253
    Thanks man! And thanks God!
     
    #31
  32. MichaelChang

    MichaelChang Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,253
    To Agassi, Sampras IS one dimentional, and that is Sampras's serve. NOTHING ELSE really bothered Agassi except Pete's serve.
     
    #32
  33. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    I take it you have never seen them play.
     
    #33
  34. MichaelChang

    MichaelChang Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,253
    yes you are the only one who watched them play :)
     
    #34
  35. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,022
    Hey Sampras doesn't have the career slam. That is why he is not counted among the big guys, like Federer and Agassi.
     
    #35
  36. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    If you had seen Sampras and Agassi play more than once, and actually had good eyes, it would be impossible to conclude only the Sampras serve could trouble Agassi.
     
    #36
  37. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,022
    Nadal should learn from Agassi about the lack of underwear.

    I would think it is not good for the health - too much freedom of movement if you know what I mean.
     
    #37
  38. bolo

    bolo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,380

    even the tennis abridged version looks like it will be bad.
     
    #38
  39. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    Thank you. It was really just a random, quick recollection of Agassi anti-Chang moments...there are others I remember. Since you seem interested, I dug up the article with the journalist who followed Agassi for a while and got pretty close to him (he got to play Agassi in a special handicapped match and eventually shaved his head to join the "club"). I was wrong about Agassi saying he played Chang when he, "came up to here", he was actually talking about just seeing Chang around but the comment was correct.

    The section starts off with Gilbert ripping on Chang. Chang had told a funny joke at a tennis reception for Gilbert's old coach. While Gilbert was the punchline, the journalist says it was not a



    "terrible insult or anything. Chnad had gotten up on stage, and the little story was sort of amusing, especially given that it was Michael Chang - who's no Henny Youngman, face it- telling it and that the audience was a bunch of.....tennis diehards, which you have to admite limits your material. It was just a funny little story and BG was the butt of the joke, and he can't get over it."

    "So Bg's going on about this in the way he goes on about everything and then he stops himself, because a Chang joke comes to mind: "you know, you play a 5 setter against Michael Chang and 2 hours later you're ready to go out and play a couple more sets" (Datacipher NOTE: for the life of me, and 10+ years later, I don't really get this joke, seems pretty lame to me) And then he remembers he met Michaeol's fiancee at the reception and he starts riffing on her."




    Gilbert then ends up asking Andre if he thinks Chang is "getting any?"....Agassi makes a masturbation joke aong other things, then admits he doesn't think so because he thinks Chang would see that as starting down the slippery slope.

    The article then mentions how they used to be buds and talk about Jesus and the bible together but how Andre had moved towards "personal dynanmism and social responsiblity and Michael to "evangelistic engagement". (note: the journalist clearly sides with Andre here and notes that Chang had signed autographs "Jesus loves you. Michael Chang", which he calls "annoying by anyone's standards". (again, it doesn't really annoy me but...)




    "but it's clearly more than a difference of phil. that annoys Andre about Michael,. One day andre referred to Micahel as "he of the deep pockets and short arms". Another day, when he was asked of someone if he had ever played Chang when they were kids, Andre explained that no, they didn't play much because Michael was younger, though "I've been seeing Michael around since he came up to here on me." Pause. "come to think of it, he still comes up to here on me.
    Eventually if you keep pressing him, he'll offer a few reasons. He'll tell you that for his whole career Michael has imitated him, patterning his game after his, and that this bugs him; he'll tell lyou that it bugs him that Michael moved to Vegas, Andre's turf, the town in which he was born and raised; and he'll tell you that it bugs him that the reason Michael moved to Vegas is to avoid paying California taxes, and he'll talk about how odd it is for someone who is as extremee a born-again as Michael is to, you know, abidcate his duty as a citizen, to refuse to at least PAY for things like cops and schools and social services"




    (Note: I think the imitation criticism is idiotic, I think him moving to Andre's home turf criticism is idiotic, I think moving to avoid taxes, is not a bad criticism at all, but then again, Andre would have to hate most of the top echelon of the tour....and while it might be hypocritical/contradictory of Michael to avoid the taxes....Andre really isn't a person who has a right to judge anyone about hypocrisy or deception...




    It continues: "But thre real thing about Michael Chang is this: Here's Andre, and he's at the top - well, not literally the top; Sampras and mUster are ahead of him. But the whole world, when it talks about tennis, talks abouts ntohing but the Sampras-AGassi rvialry, and Nike has made Anre, not Pete, the focus of its Olympic tennis ad blitz, and Andre's teh one everyone wants to see, he's the star, tenni's only crossover artist, and whenever Andre talks about who his competition is, it's Pete, just Pete, and no one else. He's trying to convince himself that this is true. But every time he looks at Michael Chang there in the 4th spot on the ATP rankings, only a few points behind him, all over his ass, too close, just like on his home turf in Vegas, well, something inside Andre just knows that it's Chang who's the wild card in his life and he hates that more than he dislikes the actual flesh and blood Michael Chang.
    Because what MIchael, who even Andre acknowledges improves 7 percent every single year (datacipher note: he said 5-10 in another interview), represents is the need for Andre himself to constantly improve and that's getting harder all the time. Andre's becoming an adult now, he's 26, and he has commitments, more every day. It's not that he feels burdened by any otf it- not Nike or Mountain Dew or the Official all star cafes or any of the other things that make him dozens of millions of dollar sa year; and not his own foundation..(datacipher edit)....not the business he and PErry Rogers, his best friend and COO are creeating, and not the prospect of a family of his own, no, he thrives on all of it, and moreover, he realizes taht it's the inevitable course his life must take. But right now it's annoying how much of a challenge it's become to deal with some single-minded, personality-free automaton for whom it's perfectly easy to subordinate everything, every single thing, to tennis, and Jesus freaking Christ."




    Note: I believe the journalist met Agassi just after the AO 1996 and then spent 4+ months covering him, I wouldn't be surprised if Chang was a particularly sore spot then.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
    #39
  40. MichaelChang

    MichaelChang Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,253
    That is what you think. But to Agassi himself, he is just being outright honest in his book, he felt it is the serve only. Sure to the rest of the world Sampras is hell no 1 demensinal, but to Agassi, to this man, Sampras is. Don't argue with me pls, no one played Sampras more than Agassi, and Agassi have the guts to call this, you gonna give him that.
     
    #40
  41. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,227
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    dont you know that computer potatoes opinions are vinculative dispite what Carreer slam winners and other former pros say?
     
    #41
  42. Xenakis

    Xenakis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,431
    Car crash autobiography, great.

    Also, I did say a while ago that something funny about his underwear would be in the book, I think the idea he went commando is just a half truth, really he was wearing Steffi's undies because 'they were more comfortable', Chang was going to 'out him' about it but Agassi paid him off and has disliked him ever since.
     
    #42
  43. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,029
    Dre is inching toward Michael Jordan status. And not in a good way.

    I liked his approach to tennis, but I'm not a fan of this. I mean, I get it: brutal honesty, frankness and keepin' it real...coming clean, prodigal son, turning things around, turning into a good family man of integrity. There could be a real message here.

    But this just seems like he just wants to sell books. Gentlemen like Laver and Ashe are shaking their level heads over this kid....even moreso than when he was a haircut and a forehand.

    Now, to me, he's two haircuts, a forehand and a charter school. Complex, complex individual. Even the writing style suggests that he's trying to be the pained soul finding himself over and over again. Like his game -- it smacks of effort.

    Maybe he's purging...and training for a career in politics.
    This whole thing makes me appreciate other men of Andre's generation: Martin, Rafter, Pete, Guga and Chang (who I never liked as a player).

    EDIT:
    PETE? 1 dimensional? Maybe Edberg or Henman. Maybe Rafter. Bruguera. Chang. Costa (who beat the crap out of him like 1 and 1 once). But Pete? This book is clearly not intended for the knowledgeable tennis fan or purist.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
    #43
  44. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Dear Agassi,

    WTF?????

    TMI!!!!!!!!!

    Sincerely,

    Jrstriker12


    -BTW- This one is a jem: He had plenty of stress. He was so angry after then-girlfriend Brooke Shields licked actor Matt LeBlanc's hand at a live taping of "Friends," he stormed out, drove home and smashed all his trophies, including ones he won at the Davis Cup, U.S. Open and Wimbledon.
     
    #44
  45. Totally agree with this, whoever says anything else is obviously clueless.
    Without the Sampras serve their head to head would have been 30-4 to Agassi imo.
     
    #45
  46. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,029
    Totally agree with this. Anyone who doesn't has no clue, obviously.

    And w/o Andre's return, their H-to-H would have been 34-0 in favor of Sampras.

    See? The ol' reversal.
     
    #46
  47. With all due respect, how can Ashe shake his head ? :shock:
    Pete IS one-dimensional.
    Rafter and Edberg? Not really.
    There probably is a message.
     
    #47
  48. A huge serve makes you WAY more one-dimensional than a huge return-game.
    Now how will you tackle this? :twisted:
     
    #48
  49. bolo

    bolo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,380
    you don't get props for being "honest" AND wrong. or do you? :)
     
    #49
  50. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,029
    Maybe you have never heard the expression about a forefather rolling over in his grave. Sorry if that's a cultural difference. Or maybe you were just being a little impish.
    [but I said, with all due respect!]
    Yhhheah, hrriight.

    The reason I feel Pete had more dimension than a lot of players mentioned is that he could defend well. Please just watch some of his matches on hardcourts agains Agassi. Pete could play the baseline. He had much more top than Andre. He obviously could transition well and finish points off at the net, too.

    Rafter and Edberg were great, but they HAD to come in a LOT.
    Andre and Chang could not come in much, and did not.

    Watch Pete v Becker in the 95 Wimbledon final. You'd swear it was Chang one point (running stuff down and making otherworldly lobs), Borg or Wilander the next point (with the ridiculous passes), and Krajicek serving with the volleys of Edberg or maybe McEnroe. I know Boris was tired and all, but this was a master class in all-court, nuanced tennis on grass.

    He did the same thing to a lot of guys in the middle of his career.

    Perhaps you are only old enough to have seen the rush and crush vintage Sampras of the early 2000s?
     
    #50

Share This Page