He must have thrown in the part about the surfaces for a reason
His game is great for grass, even the slow grass we have today. Don't really see him being a threat to Nadal, or top 4 in any given season, on clay. He hits flat, uses the other person's pace to redirect, good serve, etc, things that don't necessarily guarantee wins on clay. But all great things on grass. Add to that great racket skills, very good volleys, one of the best slice backhands on the tour, and compact strokes/great returns, I'd be surprised if he doesn't win Wimbledon once. Who knows, maybe they'll even speed it up a bit to give their hometown boy an edge (this would help Fed as well). He should make it to at least the semi's this year and if he's 3rd seed, that's good for Fed, cuz Murray doesn't have the same mental damage going on with Nadal so maybe he'll knock him out in the semis. If not this year, very soon.
You seem to be the one struggling with language. Agassi was making a point saying it the way he did, as if it's a foregone conclusion, he's emphasizing the confidence he has in Andy's abilities. Imagine a parent taking their 10 yo aside and saying "you're a winner" even though he hasn't won anything.
That was a very reasonable thing to say at the time. It was before Fed became a monster and it seemed like a lock that Roddick would win a Wimbledon or two.
He's entitled to his predictions.
Nice try. The "just kidding" was for the rant about his charity work. Two posts down you don't say "I was joking!" You say:
I was talking about Murray being seeded 3rd benefitting Fed. Don't the 2 and 3 seeds always go in same half of draw?
Not a horrible prediction. He didn't say that Murray will not win any majors with 100% certainty; he said Murray would not be winning anything "for awhile". It took 3 years and nearly 4 months for Andy to win his first major title.
