Originally Posted by Mick3391
I think he'd have a real hard time with the top 4. He had said there was no way he could have beat Federer, and said "there is no where to go with Federer, no opening or weakness", with the Gazelle type play and return of the other 3 guys, could it be "He had no where to go" as well?
Agassi was great, I think being able to play so close to a prime Fed I'd favor him over the other 3, but we are splitting hairs.
I tend to agree with this assessment. If Agassi could blend his early career shotmaking with his late career fitness, consistency and percentage tennis, maybe #2 or#3. However, he beats none of them on clay. Honestly, AO and US Open are probably his best chances to compete. US summer HC series would be the meat of Agassi's season. Similar to Roddick.
Agassi loves to blow smoke up these guys asses. Just to avoid giving Sampras his just due. Sure, they are the 4 fittest, fastest, most athletic pattern baseliners the game has ever seen. But their skill level and competitive desire is not above the champions of the past. They've perfected the baseline game and raised the bar on stamina and athleticism in tennis.
Djokovic would be the most difficult for Agassi. Djokovic is sort of like a blend of Lendl and Kafelnikov/Safin, IMO. Agassi would need all his weapons and a bag full of tricks for pull this off. Agassi played Nadal and Federer competitively as an old man. You can imagine he could give them all they want, in his prime.
How do you guys think Agassi matches up with Murray?