Andre during the Brad Gilbert era
You had 2 of the greatest tennis minds trying to break down an opponent.
Most of the time from say 1997 - 2000 Andre was good enough to execute the strategy
I think Agassi was tactically just plain brilliant. And in his latest years, he improved his strategics so much. One of the smartest players I've seen on a court.
Federer I think.
Can you point out a match where he strategized brilliantly?
Can you point out a match where he strategized brilliantly?
Of course, I was just giving a recent example, but he has always been a brilliant strategic player.
I had to vote Agassi. I cant say Federer isnt quite good in this area still. However if Federer was so tactically adapt, to be moreso then Agassi who was excellent in this area, he would not continue with his stubborn failed strategy against Nadal on clay. He might still lose, but he would adapt and change his game, which he doesnt even try to.
2004 cincinnati final vs Hewitt was brilliant..Andre played very different and it worked out well in the end. I wish I could get more detailed here but I didnt video tape it. I do remember alot of rallies where Andre kinda just pushed the ball down the middle and it created alot of problems for Hewitt.
Federer actually has some of Santoro's game. he actually throws constantly
different faces of shots at you. he won't give you any rhythm.
he also reads your next moves and pre-empts you. he also has great
court sense and where to hit and where to position.
but i'm not sure if you can call that "tactics". for example, chang was
a great thinker. he sets up a strategy and stick to it until the match
is over. i think he was a great tactician.
Federer actually has some of Santoro's game. he actually throws constantly
different faces of shots at you. he won't give you any rhythm.
he also reads your next moves and pre-empts you. he also has great
court sense and where to hit and where to position.
but i'm not sure if you can call that "tactics". for example, chang was
a great thinker. he sets up a strategy and stick to it until the match
is over. i think he was a great tactician.
FOr Agassi, he isnt that gifted but managed to win lot of matches against an opposition with variety (We no longer have S &V . do we?)
Federer doesn't need tactics or strategies, he just hits winners over and over. Except against Nadal.
AGASSI DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO WITH HIS TACTICS FOR A GAME, IT WAS ALL GILBERT, LOOK:
http://www.geocities.com/hovav13/art-A_90s_Kind_of_Rivalry.html
Andre Agassi, on the other hand, tends to run his psyche like an open house,
particularly if a visitor can help him play better tennis. On an early Friday
afternoon in the middle of this year's Wimbledon tournament, Agassi and Gilbert
were working out on the grass practice courts at Aorangi Park. In his first two
overpowering wins, against Andrew Painter and Patrick McEnroe, Agassi had hit
two or three stone-cold service return winners each game, often sending the ball
back 20 miles per hour faster than it had arrived. But for Agassi's third-round
opponent, David Wheaton, Gilbert was preaching the rewards of moderation,
and Agassi was listening intently.
"If you rip it, he just keeps charging in, where all he has to do is react,"
Gilbert explains. "Slow him down, make him hesitate,
and he's got to think about it. That's when he gets nervous." Instead of whaling
on the ball, Gilbert says, Agassi should hit low, dipping topspin returns that
will freeze Wheaton. Gilbert serves a half-dozen balls and Agassi responds as
instructed.
and
Now, as Gilbert and Agassi are nearing the end of their workout at Aorangi
Park, still plotting how to knock off David Wheaton, Agassi asks, "What
percentage should I serve to his forehand?" as if he'll be toting a calculator
in his shorts. They keep hitting as Gilbert spews out a steady stream of
exhortation and non sequitur. "When the bell goes off, you got to come strong!"
he shouts across the net. And: "Steffi's looking thin, she's looking
razor-thin."
And: "I swear, I couldn't get that broccoli soup out of my mind
last night," to which Agassi responds, "Yeah, that can give you a foot cramp."
The talk always returns to strategy, though, and Agassi can't get enough.
Despite the nearly miraculous results, there is something about Gilbert's
nonstop coaching and Agassi's rapt attention that is just a little much,
suggesting that the whole exercise serves more as an emotional balm than a
point-for-point battle plan. This seems especially true when, a few minutes
later, Gilbert and Agassi are replaced on the same court by Paul Annacone and
Pete Sampras, who, in their own practice session, casually hit for 45 minutes
without exchanging a single word.
Agassi didn't even figure out for himself what percentage he should serve to someone's forehand forehand.
One example of Chang's brilliant strategy to overcome his shotcomings:
Chang was being beaten badly by Sampras on carpets.
He lost many consecutive times. One day Chang decided to return
Sampras' 1st and 2nd serves 2 feet inside the baseline !
He did it at Master's final. It looked ridiculous in the beginning
but he sticked to it and eventually pulled off a semi-final win
over Sampras, on carpet, at master's final.
i vote for andre even though i deeply respect federer too.
my dream matchup is andre vs federer (both in their primes).