People are underestimating Agassi

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I know we had this conv. before. But people are really making fun of Agassi just because he was 34. The Agassi who played at the 2004 USO would have given any of the top 4 a run for their money.

He had the perfect game to trouble Nadal on fast HC (back then the USO was faster than now). Even nole and murray's defense would not last forever on those courts.

So even that Agassi would have had a similar run to wawrinka this year at the USO
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Wrong section;

Agassi of 2004 was still strong though I agree. He probably could have beaten Djokovic of this year at the USO.
 

NADALRECORD

Banned
Agassi's words in "Open" did not indicate he felt confident about beating Nadal at all. I think Agassi fancied his chances vs Federer more so.
 

Gonzalito17

Banned
Agassi is indeed underrated, he won the career slam. Something Pete never really came close to achieving. Agassi will always have that over Pete.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Agassi is indeed underrated, he won the career slam. Something Pete never really came close to achieving. Agassi will always have that over Pete.

Indeed. Agassi is one of only 7 men who have won all 4 Slams, the others being (alphabetically) Budge, Emerson, Federer, Laver, Nadal and Perry.

10 women have won all 4 Slams (alphabetically): Connolly, Court, Evert, Fry, Graf, Hart, King, Navratilova, Sharapova and S. Williams.
 

AngieB

Banned
People overestimated Andre early in his career. They underestimated him midway and late in his career. All those mini-breaks Andre took gave him longevity. Not Jimmy longevity, but longevity nonetheless.

AngieB
 

kiki

Banned
Indeed. Agassi is one of only 7 men who have won all 4 Slams, the others being (alphabetically) Budge, Emerson, Federer, Laver, Nadal and Perry.

10 women have won all 4 Slams (alphabetically): Connolly, Court, Evert, Fry, Graf, Hart, King, Navratilova, Sharapova and S. Williams.

and which woman was robbed of her fourth?

and which loset two Wimbledon finals which is the only title missing?

or two US open finals for the very same matter?

so much for memories¡¡¡
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
I don't think he's underrated at all. Many of the points made by posters here have been made by other posters, as well as columnists and commentators. No he's not viewed as the GOAT, but many people have a very healthy view of Agassi's career accomplishments.

"Underrated/overrated" usually means, "My subjective impression is that not enough people think exactly the same way about player X as I do."
 

Gonzalito17

Banned
biggest waste of talent in tennis history. he should have won 20 majors with his talent.

Marcelo Rios was 2-0 vs. Agassi, and was up a set and on serve to make it 3-0 in 2002 Miami SF but hobbled by a bad knee Rios lost the set and then tanked the match. Talk about wasted talent, Rios comes to mind more so than Agassi. Agassi maximixed his talent and fulfilled his potential with a great second half career. Took him a while to mature. But once he did, we saw the greatness. As did Sampras who always praised Agassi's game even when he was down.
 

Gonzalito17

Banned
Good book on Marcelo Rios The Man We Barely Knew in English), gives a lot of interesting insights into Rios and why he was the way he was.
 

MachiA.

Banned
Agassi won all 4 slams in the era with the most diversity.

You can not compare this to Fed and Nadal, they´ve won in the most homogenized era.

Indeed, Agassi is underrated.

KR
 
and which woman was robbed of her fourth?

and which loset two Wimbledon finals which is the only title missing?

or two US open finals for the very same matter?

so much for memories¡¡¡

Obviously the second could be either Henin or Mandlikova, but I assume you mean the latter. The third is Goolagong, but she lost four us open finals.

Do you mean Hingis was robbed of the 4th slam by the Parisian crowd and umpiring? Or that Seles would eventually have won Wimbledon but for the stabbing?
 

Azzurri

Legend
biggest waste of talent in tennis history. he should have won 20 majors with his talent.

That's the issue with Agassi. Talent alone is no where near enough. Mental game is bigger (IMO). Look at Safin and Goran....talent oozed out of them, but their mental game hurt them.

I agree, Agassi should have gotten double digit slams.
 
I know we had this conv. before. But people are really making fun of Agassi just because he was 34. The Agassi who played at the 2004 USO would have given any of the top 4 a run for their money.

He had the perfect game to trouble Nadal on fast HC (back then the USO was faster than now). Even nole and murray's defense would not last forever on those courts.

So even that Agassi would have had a similar run to wawrinka this year at the USO

Agassi couldnt even beat 19 year old Nadal when they met on hard courts in 2005, and by the 3rd set was dead from exertion of energy so forget him having any chance whatsoever at that point vs prime Nadal. Djokovic would be far too strong for old Agassi as well. Only against Murray would he have had a chance. I actually think he gave Federer more trouble than he would have given Nadal or Djokovic as their defense or agressive counterpunching style is just too much for him, and this would leave Agassi who liked to grind people down offensively in a measured sort of way, and who in his old age struggled badly with movement, no real options.

Prime Agassi might be a different story, but you seem to be attempting to imply prime Agassi is what Federer faced, and sorry but that is simply not the case as much as you might want it to be.
 
People overestimated Andre early in his career. They underestimated him midway and late in his career. All those mini-breaks Andre took gave him longevity. Not Jimmy longevity, but longevity nonetheless.

AngieB

I agree with this. People who expected dominance were always overrating Agassi.
 

90's Clay

Banned
I wouldn't call Agassi a waste of talent. Sampras was just BETTER on fast surfaces. Maybe if Pete wasn't around, Agassi would have a GOAT-like career but Pete cost him several slams

Andre's game is geared more for today's conditions
 
Agassi wasnt a waste of talent at all. He is still an all time great. But:

1. He should have played the Australian Open his whole career. Even though tough opponents for him generally won there like Lendl and Courier, he could have maybe won another 2 or 3 there considering it was his best surface.

2. He shouldnt have gone 0-3 in his first 3 slam finals, all which he was favored to win. He should have won 1 or 2 of those 3, and played better in all.

3. He shouldnt have tanked for 2 years after the heartbreak of the 95 U.S Open.
 

90's Clay

Banned
Agassi wasnt a waste of talent at all. He is still an all time great. But:

1. He should have played the Australian Open his whole career. Even though tough opponents for him generally won there like Lendl and Courier, he could have maybe won another 2 or 3 there considering it was his best surface.

2. He shouldnt have gone 0-3 in his first 3 slam finals, all which he was favored to win. He should have won 1 or 2 of those 3, and played better in all.

3. He shouldnt have tanked for 2 years after the heartbreak of the 95 U.S Open.



Very weird that Andre's best surface was the surface he played the least on. :shock: He should have 10-11 slams to his career (regardless of Sampras being the era) just playing the AO more.

He was good enough on that surface, he should have won it as many times as Federer and Sampras won wimbledon or as many times as Rafa won the French
 
Last edited:
Top