Originally Posted by Steve Dykstra
This is stupid. Agassi was able to win slams during the period from 2000-2003 because the field was weak. Once Federer came along and started dominating, Agassi didn't win any more majors and Federer completely dominated Agassi. Agassi winning a set in one match doesn't mean jack.
Lets see Fed at 35 play the world #1 in the US Open final and see if he wins a set and up a break in the 3rd.
And in theory, if 2005 was a weak era, then Fed won those titles in a weak era. If not, Agassi at the end of his career was getting to finals at 35 years of age against better competition which means his era must have been ridiculous.