View Single Post
Old 11-18-2012, 09:43 AM   #99
90's Clay
90's Clay's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,475

Originally Posted by TMF View Post
Not necessary. There would be more chances for them to attack thus improve their net game, but they still can be a baseliner. Agassi strictly sticks behind the baseline and he had a great career, winning on fast court like Wimbledon, USO and Master Cup. And Agassi didn't have full commitment in the 90s. Since Nadal/Nole > Agassi, they would do just fine, and drastically reduce the level of domination from serve/volley players.
Agassi had an uncanny ability to get clean swipes at the ball and take the ball earlier which required less running around like Nole and Nadal. Agassi was probably the cleanest hitter in history and possibly the best return of serve ever.

In that respect Andre was much more of an attacker then other two which could help him see success on all surfaces. I doubt either would see the same success Andre did because of that.

Nadal would probably rack up French Open titles (though to the same degree? Who knows.. Hes more of a product of the poly era so he couldn't generate the same rpms on the spin without the poly).. Nole would win some AO titles but doubtful he would ever a wimbledon or USO under the old conditions).

They both could win some slams on their best surfaces, but to have the same success in the 90s as they do now? No way. They are slow court players.. Fast surfaces a different animal. Especially for those who require the conditions so they can thrive on their defensive abilities

Last edited by 90's Clay : 11-18-2012 at 09:49 AM.
90's Clay is offline   Reply With Quote