Originally Posted by TheFifthSet
I think it seems that way because Federer is a much better all-around player. But if we judge "who was better at the baseline" by "who would win more points only from the baseline", then I think it has to go to Agassi IMO. His steadiness, lack of errors and punishing groundstrokes were amazing. Federer has more variety but if it was entirely a baseline war -- no drop shots allowed, no coming to the net, and their serves were equal (Federers serve is hugely superior, of course) -- Agassi would have the advantage I would say.
Federer is undeniably the better "baseliner" (in that he is primarily a baseliner just like Agassi, and is a better player) but "at the baseline" I think it's Andre. But to each their own. Two of my favourites of all time...I just wish prime Fed and prime Agassi would have squared off. Fed would have the advantage but I think they would have had some amazing matches. Their 2004 US Open match was sublime for the first three sets, but unfortunately the wind derailed it and the last 2 weren't quite as good.
on hardcourts, you could say andre was more steadier than federer. But i think federer's fh makes up for the difference in the bhs. Federer also has the slice which can hurt andre agassi. But i can understand that some would favor andre on the baseline strictly in terms of fh/bh with no footwork or movement in consideration.
On clay though, i would give the decisive edge to federer, and this is because fed's shots are weightier due to the spin he imparts on the ball.
On grass its a similar story except that federer covers up his bh inconsistency better with his slice which stays lower. The ball also stays in his strike zone longer on grass - fed likes the ball from knee to hip height. Andre like the ball higher especially on the backhand.