Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
Nadal got to play on slow baseliner friendly grass. Agassi got to play on slick lightning fast grass, with nasty and unpredictable bounches which are nightmarish for a baseliner, vs a slew of monsterous servers and serve and volleyers whose serves, slices, and shots zoomed low along the old slick grass. Of course we have to say Nadal is better than Agassi on grass, since Nadal was much better and more accomplished on todays slow grass he was blessed to get to play on than Agassi was on the old fast grass he played on. However would Nadal have been better than Agassi either had both played in the 90s on the old grass, or had both played today on todays slowed baseliner friendly grass? While we will never be able to prove it, it is quite likely Agassi would have been atleast as strong as Nadal on either one (or in the case of the 90s grass Nadal been atleast as weak, relatively speaking, as Agassi).
Grass rewards athleticism, footwork, touch, and the ability to make quick adjustments, no matter WHAT the speed of the surface. All of these things Nadal is FAR better at than Agassi, there's a reason he is such a good grass courter compared to players like Djokovic or Ferrer, he has a natural ability on the surface that is hugely underrated. There is absolutely no way Agassi, with his lackluster athleticism and overall physical ability would ever be as good as Nadal on today's grass. Nadal is just an inherently much better player on natural surfaces than Andre ever was.