Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Pro Match Results and Discussion (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   From now till Federer's retirement will his level be like Agassi when he was 32+? (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=470683)

JRAJ1988 07-19-2013 01:12 AM

From now till Federer's retirement will his level be like Agassi when he was 32+?
 
I still see the near 32 year old Federer as a slam contender, back in the day I saw an older Agassi as a slam contender, multiple ATP title winner...

At this stage of Roger's career after 77 titles can he echo what Agassi did when he was 32-35? like remain in the top ten? win titles, get to slam finals?

I know I can't compare those two career wise but a comparison could be made regarding their later careers of constantly winning titles getting to finals post 32.

ledwix 07-19-2013 01:58 AM

I don't think so. Agassi didn't move as well, but he had more strength than Federer and could boss people around from the baseline with easy power as is necessary in today's game. Federer doesn't have as much consistent power, especially on the backhand, and tries to rely on touch skills, which work, but are also on the decline.

Federer is also less okay with being ranked #6-10, as the name he made for himself raised his standards by a lot and he gets mad when he's not at the top.

Tennis_Hands 07-19-2013 04:20 AM

If Federer is as hungry as Agassi was in his time, he will.

gregor.b 07-19-2013 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRAJ1988 (Post 7600357)
I still see the near 32 year old Federer as a slam contender, back in the day I saw an older Agassi as a slam contender, multiple ATP title winner...

At this stage of Roger's career after 77 titles can he echo what Agassi did when he was 32-35? like remain in the top ten? win titles, get to slam finals?

I know I can't compare those two career wise but a comparison could be made regarding their later careers of constantly winning titles getting to finals post 32.

1. Only if he gets fitter.
2. Only if he meets the big 3 and they have a bad day.
3. Only if the kids are healthy at that tournament, or he is toast.

Fwiw, no he cannot emulate the A train. Tennis has changed. People don't want to have fun any more. They are professional athletes ( at the top level). Nothing more, nothing less.

I guess, if you have fun, it it is seen as being weak.

Instead of being human.

What a travesty.

tudwell 07-19-2013 04:34 AM

I think he'll definitely challenge for and even win slams for another two or three years.

Smasher08 07-19-2013 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands (Post 7600454)
If Federer is as hungry as Agassi was in his time, he will.

This. At this stage of someone's career, it's all about motivation. Conditioning takes more work, wins aren't as easy as they once were, your body needs more recovery time, physical issues from years of daily grind on the tour come up more often, and your reaction time may have declined by a few hundredths of a second.

Agassi was still hungry, Connors was always fired up. If Fed still has that kind of passion, no reason he can't still contend for every tournament he enters.

wangs78 07-19-2013 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor.b (Post 7600475)
1. Only if he gets fitter.
2. Only if he meets the big 3 and they have a bad day.
3. Only if the kids are healthy at that tournament, or he is toast.

Fwiw, no he cannot emulate the A train. Tennis has changed. People don't want to have fun any more. They are professional athletes ( at the top level). Nothing more, nothing less.

I guess, if you have fun, it it is seen as being weak.

Instead of being human.

What a travesty.

It's true. Tennis has reached a new degree of professionalism. Players go about their training and fitness like robots, it's insane. People like to talk about how the 80s and 90s were a strong era, but that's BS. All those guys were clowns compared to today's players. I'm not saying they were less talented, but they were less fit and less able to play at ridiculously high levels like today's top players are. In a way, I can see men's tennis having a sort of collective burnout soon.

mattennis 07-19-2013 01:20 PM

Agassi took the ball earlier than anyone, on the rise, and he would always take command of the points, he didn't have to run much (if he was clearly behind in a given point, he would just let the ball pass him).

He had the best ball control on forehand-backhand combined, possibly of all players ever.

That is why he was able to defeat top players when he was 32, 33, 34 and 35. He had that much control of his groundstrokes and hit it that early, that he didn't need to run much. He had the perfect combination of power, control and hitting on the rise groundstrokes.

Federer's game is totally different. Federer's game is more complex, he is overall more complete as a player, he does many different things and his variety has always been his main weapon. He is also much faster than Agassi, and moves way better than Agassi, but Federer's game really NEEDS his great movement on the court.

Federer could never be as successful as Agassi was playing Agassi's game. Agassi was a privileged, a real gifted player, that could play and win like that, controling the points and making the rival run all day long, whereas he could just stay there in the center of his baseline.

Federer can be as successful as Agassi was in his 30s, but Federer will need to conserve his great movement to be that successful, and that won't be easy when you are 32, 33, 34, 35 (all players lose a step or two in their 30s, even the fastest and greatest movers; Agassi's great advantage was that, for his special type of gameplan and talents, that was not a big problem for him).

Marius_Hancu 07-19-2013 01:33 PM

better: he's not bald:-)

BreakPoint 07-19-2013 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRAJ1988 (Post 7600357)
I still see the near 32 year old Federer as a slam contender, back in the day I saw an older Agassi as a slam contender, multiple ATP title winner...

At this stage of Roger's career after 77 titles can he echo what Agassi did when he was 32-35? like remain in the top ten? win titles, get to slam finals?

I know I can't compare those two career wise but a comparison could be made regarding their later careers of constantly winning titles getting to finals post 32.

Only if Federer switches to a smaller racquet than what he'd used for the last 10 years like Agassi did when he was in his 30's. :)

jhhachamp 07-19-2013 03:04 PM

He can play at as high a level as Agassi did, but it's unlikely he will be as successful, most notably due to the fact that there are 3 very dominant players on top of the game right now. When Agassi was that age, the field was weak.

mattennis 07-19-2013 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Dykstra (Post 7601848)
He can play at as high a level as Agassi did, but it's unlikely he will be as successful, most notably due to the fact that there are 3 very dominant players on top of the game right now. When Agassi was that age, the field was weak.

I don't think 2002-2006 was weaker than today. Today you have 31 years old David Ferrer at n3 in the world and 35 years old Tommy Haas at 11 in the world.

I would even say that in 2002-2006 there was a higher number of dangerous players than today.

mellowyellow 07-19-2013 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRAJ1988 (Post 7600357)
I still see the near 32 year old Federer as a slam contender, back in the day I saw an older Agassi as a slam contender, multiple ATP title winner...

At this stage of Roger's career after 77 titles can he echo what Agassi did when he was 32-35? like remain in the top ten? win titles, get to slam finals?

I know I can't compare those two career wise but a comparison could be made regarding their later careers of constantly winning titles getting to finals post 32.

I think AA benefitted from that transition period of multi number one players and Ste of play not yet being completely homogenized due to the older players hanging aroud and the young ones not yet being developed. If he had the guys then as consistent as today top 8 his later years would not have been quite so glorious.

Kalin 07-19-2013 07:04 PM

Agassi was supremely consistent and, as many have said, had the game to keep opponents running from the first stroke, whether his own serve out wide or an aggressive return.

Roger should probably take a sheet out of Pete's notebook instead- try to serve aggressively and finish points earlier with all the risks that entails. Getting into baseline slugfests with the new generation of Princes of Push isn't going to end well for him despite all his finesse and beauty of strokes.

TomT 07-19-2013 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRAJ1988 (Post 7600357)
I still see the near 32 year old Federer as a slam contender, back in the day I saw an older Agassi as a slam contender, multiple ATP title winner...

At this stage of Roger's career after 77 titles can he echo what Agassi did when he was 32-35? like remain in the top ten? win titles, get to slam finals?

I know I can't compare those two career wise but a comparison could be made regarding their later careers of constantly winning titles getting to finals post 32.

I think that if Federer is so inclined, then he is the sort of player and person who could remain in the top ten (or at least top 15) even beyond the age of 35. But, as has been mentioned, Federer does not seem at all happy with being at lower than the top, and he knows better than anybody that his days at the top are over. It will be interesting to see how the rest of his tennis career unfolds. I really hope that he loves the game and competition enough to stay on the tour until he's, say, 40 ... no matter what his ranking. I really think that his tennis and personal and training habits are sufficient to keep him in, say, the top 20 to that age.

cc0509 07-19-2013 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRAJ1988 (Post 7600357)
I still see the near 32 year old Federer as a slam contender, back in the day I saw an older Agassi as a slam contender, multiple ATP title winner...

At this stage of Roger's career after 77 titles can he echo what Agassi did when he was 32-35? like remain in the top ten? win titles, get to slam finals?

I know I can't compare those two career wise but a comparison could be made regarding their later careers of constantly winning titles getting to finals post 32.

I am skeptical about it based on what I have seen from Federer in the past year.

TomT 07-19-2013 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cc0509 (Post 7602397)
I am skeptical about it based on what I have seen from Federer in the past year.

Yeah. Unfortunately, you might be right. When the game of a player at that level has declined enough that even somebody like me can notice it, then that doesn't bode well for that player's future prospects.

Then again, Federer has the heart and mind of a champion. Tough to keep those sorts down. They tend to find a way to win, because they're willing to do what it takes, and smart enough to learn and know just exactly what it will take.

dominikk1985 07-20-2013 02:57 AM

fed is not in his prime anymore but he is still a lot better than old Agassi (at least if his back is healthy).

he is just facing better opponents than old Agassi did, those late 90s to early 00s were a very weak period.

if old Agassi had to face nole, murray and nadal he would not win much.

of course fed also lost to lesser Players this year but I mostly blame this to his back Problems. till Age 30 he basically had no injuries (which meant that he was very consistent with almost no drop off from 03 to early 10 with the exeption of early 08) but now his Body is starting to bother him.

if he is fit still only nole, nadal and murray can beat him...

mellowyellow 07-20-2013 09:18 AM

I agree, week in week out having 3 great players in the semi or final makes winning hard, in AA time there was nobody that did that week in week out. There were dangerous players but the consistency was not there.

Top Jimmy 07-20-2013 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dominikk1985 (Post 7602653)
fed is not in his prime anymore but he is still a lot better than old Agassi (at least if his back is healthy).

he is just facing better opponents than old Agassi did, those late 90s to early 00s were a very weak period.

if old Agassi had to face nole, murray and nadal he would not win much.

of course fed also lost to lesser Players this year but I mostly blame this to his back Problems. till Age 30 he basically had no injuries (which meant that he was very consistent with almost no drop off from 03 to early 10 with the exeption of early 08) but now his Body is starting to bother him.

if he is fit still only nole, nadal and murray can beat him...

That's funny, in 2005, the year before Agassi retired and Fed was entering or in his prime, he gave him a hell of a tough match at the US Open, won the second set and up a break in the third.

Not bad for a guy playing weaker competition.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse