Who is the greatest ever player in Miami?

[The Big Foe fan]

Should have won 2005

And 2011
And 2008
And 2017

 

[The Big Foe fan]

Btw, Federer's late career resurgence at Miami was a hell lot surprising to me.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Go to 18:00

 

[MichaelNadal]

 

[duaneeo]

Prob partly due to a contingent of Fed and Ned fans ganging up on Novak...

I suspect Rafa fans would rather pick Nole so they can claim Rafa never won the title because he had the unfortunate luck of facing the greatest-ever Miami player.

 

[metsman]

Fraud in nighttime conditions, who cares in daytime conditions?

So happy this is catching on (it's true of course).

 

[NoleFam]

I have Djokovic at 86.3% and Agassi at 82.4% in Miami but that graph is not counting 1987-1989 before it was considered a Masters tournament, which is why it has them about tied. So Agassi really won 6/19 and Djokovic won 6/13. Honestly, Djokovic is better here but if you look at their entire careers, they both won 6 so not much to choose from really. Agassi played more of them and has more deep runs but Djokovic won 5/6 at his peak. Saying they are tied is fine but to me Djokovic has the edge when you look at their careers there.

 

[Kralingen]

I have Djokovic at 86.3% and Agassi at 82.4% in Miami but that graph is not counting 1987-1989 before it was considered a Masters tournament, which is why it has them about tied. So Agassi really won 6/19 and Djokovic won 6/13. Honestly, Djokovic is better here but if you look at their entire careers, they both won 6 so not much to choose from really. Agassi played more of them and has deeper runs but Djokovic won 5/6 at his peak. Saying they are tied is fine but to me Djokovic has the edge when you look at their careers there.

I do find it fun to see all the Federer fans picking the player who wins on post prime ‘vulturing’ and long term consistency over the guy who dominated his prime lol

 

[Third Serve]

I do find it fun to see all the Federer fans picking the player who wins on post prime ‘vulturing’ and long term consistency over the guy who dominated his prime lol

lol I was just thinking about that…

huh…

 

[NoleFam]

I do find it fun to see all the Federer fans picking the player who wins on post prime ‘vulturing’ and long term consistency over the guy who dominated his prime lol

Well that might look familiar to them.......lol

 

[Kralingen]

Agassi probably does deserve it though, it’s just a funny logical position to see taken. As usual, Octorok leads the pack in moral and philosophical consistency

 

[duaneeo]

Agassi won 3 finals in BO5. If Miami had still been BO5 in 2011, Nole (who at the time had never beaten Rafa in five) likely wouldn't have won.

 

[Third Serve]

Agassi won 3 finals in BO5. If Miami had still been BO5 in 2011, Nole (who at the time had never beaten Rafa in five) likely wouldn't have won.

doubt

 

[Kralingen]

Agassi won 3 finals in BO5. If Miami had still been BO5 in 2011, Nole (who at the time had never beaten Rafa in five) likely wouldn't have won.

Eh the 3 Bo5 finals thing is overplayed.

1990 Edberg win is totally legit and in many ways the best win he has.

The other two were: 2001 Jan Michael Gambil, famous for his double handed FH (lol)
And 2002 Federer, who while a talented shot maker was a total headcase and had little consistency to his game. In that case, the Bo5 format actually favored Agassi.

Also given that Djoko won 4/6 of his Miami titles without even dropping a set the entire tournament, there’s no indication that Bo5 would have been an issue (he would have been the fresher player)

 

[duaneeo]

Also given that Djoko won 4/6 of his Miami titles without even dropping a set the entire tournament, there’s no indication that Bo5 would have been an issue (he would have been the fresher player)

Nole likely would not have beaten Rafa in five.

 

[TheNachoMan]

Nole likely would not have beaten Rafa in five.

He would have won in 3.

 

[abmk]

Djokovic better at prime.
Agassi better longevity.
Will go with Djokovic marginally.
Also note that Agassi allowing Sampras extra time to recover cost him the title in Miami 1994.

 

[InsideOut900]

Both won 6 titles but there are a few differences. Agassi had to play 3 bo5 finals compared to ND playing only 1 (2007). Agassi defeated 9 future or prior GS champions en route to his six titles. This includes players as Courier, Federer, Sampras, Moya, and Edberg. ND did defeat 3 GS champions (Nadal 3x, Murray 4x, and a "green" Thiem). The 2002 version of Federer was still better than the 2016 version of Thiem. Both times Agassi lost in the final he took it to a deciding set while ND lost in straight sets.

Even in 1994 when Agassi lost the final to Sampras he defeated Becker, Edberg, and Rafter before losing in the final. Overall, I pick Agassi via photo finish.

I never understood why BO5 finals are used as an argument against given they probably increase Djokovic's chances against anyone even more.

But good contribution with the rest of the comment. It's darn close.

 

[Biotic]

I do find it fun to see all the Federer fans picking the player who wins on post prime ‘vulturing’ and long term consistency over the guy who dominated his prime lol

 

[abmk]

I never understood why BO5 finals are used as an argument against given they probably increase Djokovic's chances against anyone even more.

But good contribution with the rest of the comment. It's darn close.

in a vaccum maybe, but not looking at season, how tiredness can carry on etc.
see fedal skipping Hamburg 06 after Rome 06 final.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

 

[UnderratedSlam]

The real answer:

So the wind blew away the white stuff... hence Becker should have done well?

 

[thrust]

Agassi does have two iconic wins, beating Edberg for his first big title in 1990, and then confirming his AO win by beating the BOAT PETE in ‘95.

However the rest were pretty weak, ‘96 Goran retired only 3 games into the first set, ‘01 had Jean Michael Gambill in the final, ‘02 did have Rios and Federer but neither were in peak form (Federer was pretty good for his pre prime self though), and ‘03 beat Philippoussis and Moya.

Djokovic beat Nadal 3x there, Murray 4x (all in title winning runs) along with Federer once. 2016 probably his weakest win beating Goffin and Nishikori in the SFs+F.

I don’t think competition will be enough to separate the two really.

Competition? Edberg and Sampras were Andre's only really great competition. Certainly: Rafa, Roger, and Murray were all superior to Andre's other competition.

 

[Third Serve]

Competition? Edberg and Sampras were Andre's only really great competition. Certainly: Rafa, Roger, and Murray were all superior to Andre's other competition.

He admitted that, check out the post again.

 

[mike danny]

Novak has quietly been mostly crapola at every masters since the Nole Slam/Becker days. Well, he’s still Djokovic, but I mean not willing to go the extra mile and expend energy in comebacks at Masters. ‘17/18 were obviously injury addled but you saw some uncharacteristically flat losses (Khachanov/Zverev in 2018 finals, RBA/Kohl/Med in 2019, Evans MC ‘21).

Basically the only masters you’re guaranteed to see a fully firing Djokovic is Rome and maybe Shanghai/Paris, but the rest are close to mailed in, outright skipped, or experimenting for an upcoming slam. Obviously COVID had an impact but he definitely takes masters less seriously than his prime.

That's pretty much the main reason why the Next Gen have won big titles: The Big 3 and Murray no longer giving full effort in these events.

 

[AgassiSuperSlam11]

I never understood why BO5 finals are used as an argument against given they probably increase Djokovic's chances against anyone even more.

But good contribution with the rest of the comment. It's darn close.

Agree post-2011 after he overcame that gluten problem. At the time he faced Nadal in the final as stated by another poster he was 0-6. My bet is that 2011 ND would've likely won, but we never know unless the full match is played. Obviously, at this point ND having won 20 slams has proven his ability to play bo5 matches.

As far some other people debating is there any big difference between bo3 and bo5? Even today how many recent examples we have of players blowing two set leads then blowing the final 3 (Med, Tsitsipas, Zverev to name a few). Even Nadal won the first two sets and had a double-break in the third set only to lose the Miami final to Federer back in 2005 in five sets. If 2005 Miami Final was bo3 then Nadal has 37 M1000 titles.

Here are H2H disparity between bo3 and bo5 matches among players: ND-Wawrinka bo3 14-2, bo5 5-4, ND-Zverev bo3 4-4, bo5 3-0,
ND-Nadal bo3 23-17, bo5 7-11, Lendl-Becker bo3 7-3, bo5 4-7 bo5 (1-5 GS).

 

[MotoboXer]

The real answer:

GASQUET>Becker (in Miami)

 

[Europa1]

If B05 is more difficult than B03, then Andre gets my nod.

 

[Sudacafan]

I thought we were talking about players born or residing in Miami.

 

[Sampras-Bruguera 1993]

Probably Agassi because Pete/Edberg>>>>Nadal/Murray on hards

 

[Incognito]

How many 5 set finals have they played?

 

[Dead Mosquito]

Djo is the Goat at MIami, then Carlos Alcaraz's title at Miami today is an asterisk???

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Djokovic and not close

 

[Subway Tennis]

Both won 6 titles but there are a few differences. Agassi had to play 3 bo5 finals compared to ND playing only 1 (2007). Agassi defeated 9 future or prior GS champions en route to his six titles. This includes players as Courier, Federer, Sampras, Moya, and Edberg. ND did defeat 3 GS champions (Nadal 3x, Murray 4x, and a "green" Thiem). The 2002 version of Federer was still better than the 2016 version of Thiem. Both times Agassi lost in the final he took it to a deciding set while ND lost in straight sets.

Even in 1994 when Agassi lost the final to Sampras he defeated Becker, Edberg, and Rafter before losing in the final. Overall, I pick Agassi via photo finish.

great write-up.

 

[DSH]

Should have won 2005

He suffered a Frau-de-rer!

 

[MichaelNadal]

He suffered a Frau-de-rer!

Bad line call

 

[Bartelby]

Don Johnson, obviously, was a real player!

 

[DSH]

If this were a horse race, Agassi would win with his nose.

 

[thrust]

in 2011 also

Fact IS though he didn't, Accept the REALITY!

 

[tex123]

Alcaraz

 

[abmk]

Btw, Federer's late career resurgence at Miami was a hell lot surprising to me.

17 Miami came on the back of AO and IW wins.
mind you, still struggled vs Birdman, to some extent vs Agut.

lost in 18 in 1st match

19 Miami was of course on a clearly lower bouncing court.

 

[thrust]

Agassi did some elite vulturing from 01-03 though. Novak on the other hand dominated his prime and just doesn’t have the longevity due to not playing the tournament.

Surprised to see so many Andre votes.

Andre tends to be overrated here. Both have 6 titles, but Novak had the tougher competition. I saw Pete play twice in Miami and both times he lost, once to Goran the other, to Richard K.

 

[The Big Foe fan]

17 Miami came on the back of AO and IW wins.
mind you, still struggled vs Birdman, to some extent vs Agut.

lost in 18 in 1st match

19 Miami was of course on a clearly lower bouncing court.

Yes, agut served for the first set, and Berdych literally had match points (one on his own serve, one on Fed's). Although I'd say Federer had himself to blame for the struggle against Berdych, he failed to serve out the match at 5-3.
But the way he destroyed Nadal, especially after back to back tussles with Berdych & especially kyrgios, was something I didn't expect.

I'd not take 2018 loss seriously, it happened because Federer was all over the place mentally. The loss vs Delpo in IW final the week before broke him & his resurgence aura. All the mental demons which he swept aside starting from 2017, came back to haunt him again; and he was never the same player neither did he hit the ball with same convinction afterwards (yes, despite the 2019 resurgence).

Talking of 2019, despite being a low bouncing court, it was still slow & humid, conditions in which late career Federer had struggled for the last 6 months or so at that point (USO 2018 & AO 2019), but here, apart from the first matchagainst Radu Albot (in which fed was on the brink all the time), Fed didn't lose a set & only got broken just twice in 5 of the matches afterwards (once vs Anderson & once vs Medvedev)