Prime Djokovic vs Prime Agassi - In the 90s, who wins?

m2nk2 · Mar 25, 2015

Agassi: 8 Slams, 17 Masters
Djokovic: 8 Slams, 21 Masters

They have similar playing styles, but who would win if the conditions were like they were in the mid 90s? For example: Faster courts/balls and gut strings.

Of course Agassi skipped a number of AOs and W and was fairly unmotivated through years of his career. And many would say his prime was in a very strong era. Djokovic has an equal number of Slams but more Masters. Then Djokovic has been more consistent, hasn't skipped Slams in the same way and played in what some people would describe as a rather weak era.

Who'd win if they met 10 times in each slam, both in their prime?

Russeljones · Mar 25, 2015

Nd - Aa
Ao - Aa
Rg - Nd
W - AA
Uso AA

bjsnider · Mar 25, 2015

Superior movement, by about a billion times, would lead to decisive Djokovic victory.

coloskier · Mar 25, 2015

Agassi wins most, for no other reason than all the courts except FO were faster in the 90's, and Agassi handled low bouncing balls better than Djoker ever has.

NatF · Mar 25, 2015

Djokovic of 11 to now would destroy Agassi across a 5 year prime stretch in the 90's, Agassi only had 2 consecutive years as a top 5 player in the 90's. He spent as much time outside the top 20 as he did inside the top 2.

The posters that have a hard on for the 90's seem to have not even watched the damn decade...

Djokovic2011 · Mar 25, 2015

AO- Djokovic 6-4
RG: Djokovic 6-4
W : Djokovic 6-4
US: Agassi 6-4

Flash O'Groove · Mar 25, 2015

NatF said:
Djokovic of 11 to now would destroy Agassi across a 5 year prime stretch in the 90's, Agassi only had 2 consecutive years as a top 5 player in the 90's. He spent as much time outside the top 20 as he did inside the top 2.

The posters that have a hard on for the 90's seem to have not even watched the damn decade...

Agassi's year end ranking.

1990: n°4
1991: n°10 first slam
1992: n°9
1993: n°24
1994: n°2 second slam
1995: n°2 third slam
1996: n°8
1997: n°122
1998: n° 6
1999: n°1 fourth and fifth slams
2000: n°6 sixth slam

"But it was a strong era euh!!"

RF-18 · Mar 25, 2015

9-1 Djokovic.

Sysyphus · Mar 25, 2015

NatF said:
Djokovic of 11 to now would destroy Agassi across a 5 year prime stretch in the 90's, Agassi only had 2 consecutive years as a top 5 player in the 90's. He spent as much time outside the top 20 as he did inside the top 2.

The posters that have a hard on for the 90's seem to have not even watched the damn decade...

He isn't saying specifically the Agassi of the 90's (as opposed to early 00's) but that they meet under 90's conditions.

------

I think the match-up is quite interesting. Would lack of poly-strings etc hinder the Djokovic game? Agassi didn't grind much, and was well suited to the gut-style.

NatF · Mar 25, 2015

Sysyphus said:
He isn't saying specifically the Agassi of the 90's (as opposed to early 00's) but that they meet under 90's conditions.

------

I think the match-up is quite interesting. Would lack of poly-strings etc hinder the Djokovic game? Agassi didn't grind much, and was well suited to the gut-style.

So...he's just calling the 99-03 period where Agassi played his most consistent tennis very strong?

There's no way to excuse the OP's extreme lack of balance, to put it bluntly he's an idiot.

Djokovic's movement and serve would be superior to Agassi's under any conditions. In terms of ball striking I think Djokovic could adapt, though perhaps he'd lack in comparison to Agassi who is the better ball striker.

m2nk2 · Mar 25, 2015

NatF said:
So...he's just calling the 99-03 period where Agassi played his most consistent tennis very strong?

There's no way to excuse the OP's extreme lack of balance, to put it bluntly he's an idiot.

Djokovic's movement and serve would be superior to Agassi's under any conditions. In terms of ball striking I think Djokovic could adapt, though perhaps he'd lack in comparison to Agassi who is the better ball striker.

Nah, I think 99-03 was a rather weak era. I think Agassi's prime was around 94-95. He did some great results in the 00s of course. But less competition then.

Again, this is prime vs prime in 90s conditions.

90's Clay · Mar 25, 2015

Agassi wins overrall. He was far more adaptable to all conditions (Slow and Fast) than Nole would ever be due to Andre's ability to dictate play from the baseline and take the ball early and relying less on lunging for every ball.

Its laughable to think Nole would win all 4 slams and the WTF in the 90s. Hell I don't know even know if he would win more than 2 of the 4 slams

Djokovic2011 · Mar 25, 2015

90's Clay said:
Agassi wins overrall. He was far more adaptable to all conditions (Slow and Fast) than Nole would ever be due to Andre's ability to dictate play from the baseline and take the ball early and relying less on lunging for every ball.

Its laughable to think Nole would win all 4 slams and the WTF in the 90s. Hell I don't know even know if he would win more than 2 of the 4 slams

Agassi was certainly better at dictating play but I don't think it's an area that Nole does too badly in either. I think he'd've done just fine in the 90s.

AnotherTennisProdigy · Mar 25, 2015

Throughout the whole decade? In that case it's Djokovic, Agassi had some serious consistency issues throughout his career.

If we're just talking about prime vs. prime, then I would have to pick Agassi on most hard courts and grass. Maybe Djokovic on clay, although Agassi was pretty good there too.

laughingcavalier · Mar 25, 2015

Agassi never had a big serve.Ergo,Novak would be at him constantly and never let up.Too consistent from the baseline and with his flexibility and sheer endurance he'd win over in the end.

AnotherTennisProdigy · Mar 25, 2015

Actually, I just noticed the last sentence of the OP. Oops

Australian Open- 5-5
This one's the toughest imo, it's the home slam of both of these guys. I give the edge to Agassi, but this is debatable.

Roland Garros- 4-6 Djokovic
I just think Djokovic would excel in clay in this match-up, but not by a significant margin.

Wimbledon- 7-3 Agassi
I've always felt grass is Djokovic's weakest surface, which isn't the case for Agassi.

US Open- 6-4 Agassi
Both court surface and home advantage goes to Agassi.

Overall 22-18 Agassi

Federator · Mar 25, 2015

Easily Djokovic on most surfaces. The only reason Djokovic doesn't have about 12 or 13 slams by now is because of one of the greatest players ever in Nadal and probably THE greatest player in Federer. Without them, no one would be putting Agassi above Djokovic anywhere. Conversely, Agassi had to deal with impotent Sampras who wasn't even there when Agassi was at his best late in his career. Djokovic in the 90s would have more slams than Pete.

swordtennis · Mar 25, 2015

Double A was the prototype. Djokovic was sprouted from Fedassi thus more complete.

Sysyphus · Mar 25, 2015

NatF said:
So...he's just calling the 99-03 period where Agassi played his most consistent tennis very strong?

There's no way to excuse the OP's extreme lack of balance, to put it bluntly he's an idiot.

Djokovic's movement and serve would be superior to Agassi's under any conditions. In terms of ball striking I think Djokovic could adapt, though perhaps he'd lack in comparison to Agassi who is the better ball striker.

Yeah, you're right of course—he is rather biased ;-)

Agreed that Djokovic has better movement and serve anyhow. I think their match-up would've been interesting if their careers had overlapped at some point. Say 2005 Agassi versus present Nole at the USO.

Federator said:
Easily Djokovic on most surfaces. The only reason Djokovic doesn't have about 12 or 13 slams by now is because of one of the greatest players ever in Nadal and probably THE greatest player in Federer. Without them, no one would be putting Agassi above Djokovic anywhere. Conversely, Agassi had to deal with impotent Sampras who wasn't even there when Agassi was at his best late in his career. Djokovic in the 90s would have more slams than Pete.

The same thing could be said for Agassi though. He could've easily had over 10 slams if he took life seriously instead of Meth and hairdos. Agassi had lots of tough opposition in his career. If you argue that Sampras was impotent at 29, then surely Fed and even Nadal are impotent too by now.

I see your point though, Djokovic is impressive and will gain more achievements. But I definitely don't agree with the last part. I don't see Djokovic outperforming Sampras at all in the 90's. No poly, no plexi-slam. Faster conditions, lots of opposition then as well.

RF-18 · Mar 25, 2015

Sysyphus said:
Yeah, you're right of course—he is rather biased ;-)

Agreed that Djokovic has better movement and serve anyhow. I think their match-up would've been interesting if their careers had overlapped at some point. Say 2005 Agassi versus present Nole at the USO.

The same thing could be said for Agassi though. He could've easily had over 10 slams if he took life seriously instead of Meth and hairdos. Agassi had lots of tough opposition in his career. If you argue that Sampras was impotent at 29, then surely Fed and even Nadal are impotent too by now.

I see your point though, Djokovic is impressive and will gain more achievements. But I definitely don't agree with the last part. I don't see Djokovic outperforming Sampras at all in the 90's. No poly, no plexi-slam. Faster conditions, lots of opposition then as well.

That's not comparable though? What agassi did had nothing to do with tennis and it was his choice.

Agassi was a weak man, the fact that he turned to drugs shows. He should not be compared to a pure professional and champion like Djokovic.

vanioMan · Mar 25, 2015

RF-18 said:
That's not comparable though? What agassi did had nothing to do with tennis and it was his choice.

Agassi was a weak man, the fact that he turned to drugs shows. He should not be compared to a pure professional and champion like Djokovic.

And who exactly are you and what have you achieved in order to talk about Agassi?

Gotta love basic tr0lls calling one of the greatest tennis players a "weak" man.

Sysyphus · Mar 25, 2015

RF-18 said:
That's not comparable though? What agassi did had nothing to do with tennis and it was his choice.

Agassi was a weak man, the fact that he turned to drugs shows. He should not be compared to a pure professional and champion like Djokovic.

That he still achieved what he did (CGS, 8 slams, etc) speaks volumes for how talented and how good he was when he was actually on. That's what I mean.

Just like Djokovic achieving what he did against tough competitors speaks about his competence!

Imo, Agassi is a legit contender for biggest natural talent I have witnessed. Too bad he wasn't a pure professional, as you say, until he was almost 30.

terribleIVAN · Mar 25, 2015

Right until he retired, people were calling him the greatest back courter ever.

He used to make adversaries work hard for the first hour, then would run all over them when their tank ran empty.

Novak isn't the most consistant player, but you need to stay with him, and Andre certainly could.

I favor Andre, because those who usually troubled him were serve and volleyers, and Novak gives you rythm. Andre would find the solution, and deconstruct him.

JanowiczJ · Mar 25, 2015

bjsnider said:
Superior movement, by about a billion times, would lead to decisive Djokovic victory.

This. If they played like 20 matches, at first Agassi may have a lead or keep it close but after like 8 games Djokovic would run him over.

Djokovic is simply a better version of Agassi, all around.

Now, Prime Agassi vs. Prime Andy Murray would be a better discussion.

scotus · Mar 25, 2015

RF-18 said:
Agassi was a weak man, the fact that he turned to drugs shows. He should not be compared to a pure professional and champion like Djokovic.

Agassi did meth, but I think there's a great chance that Djokovic has been on PED.

The emergence of Djokovic 2.0 in 2011 where the previously fragile player who habitually called for medical timeouts or quit in the middle of a match all of a sudden turned himself into a fitness giant whose stamina would be up there with that of Lance Armstrong cannot easily be explained by gluten-free diet alone.

But I tend to think that all of the current Big 4 has been on PED at some point, and I also suspect Agassi has used PEDs in addition to meth. After all, his fitness trainer used to be a college football coach.

JanowiczJ · Mar 25, 2015

vanioMan said:
And who exactly are you and what have you achieved in order to talk about Agassi?

Gotta love basic tr0lls calling one of the greatest tennis players a "weak" man.

Eh... Not that I agree with his comments but your rebuttal is pathetic.

Hitler achieved more than most humans in the history of humanity yet I believe you have the right to call him a weak man... Appealing to his authority would be simply a fallacy.

Agassi was just very good at a children game, vanioMan.

JanowiczJ · Mar 25, 2015

scotus said:
Agassi did meth, but I think there's a great chance that Djokovic has been on PED.

The emergence of Djokovic 2.0 in 2011 where the previously fragile player who habitually called for medical timeouts or quit in the middle of a match all of a sudden turned himself into a fitness giant whose stamina would be up there with that of Lance Armstrong cannot easily be explained by gluten-free diet alone.

But I tend to think that all of the current Big 4 has been on PED at some point, and I also suspect Agassi has used PEDs in addition to meth. After all, his fitness trainer used to be a college football coach.

LOL! Agassi confessed he was a cheater. Djokovic passes more tests in one year nowadays then Agassi ever had to take in his entire career.

fighting123 · Mar 25, 2015

I hate to say this but Djokovic with his professional attitude and strong will could be successful in any era, or dare I say, in any sport.

TadDavis · Mar 25, 2015

scotus said:
Agassi did meth, but I think there's a great chance that Djokovic has been on PED.

The emergence of Djokovic 2.0 in 2011 where the previously fragile player who habitually called for medical timeouts or quit in the middle of a match all of a sudden turned himself into a fitness giant whose stamina would be up there with that of Lance Armstrong cannot easily be explained by gluten-free diet alone.

But I tend to think that all of the current Big 4 has been on PED at some point, and I also suspect Agassi has used PEDs in addition to meth. After all, his fitness trainer used to be a college football coach.

I'm glad that you said this. I definitely think there's an interest in looking the other way as far as the big four are concerned. Why is it only the scrubs who ever get busted? And yeah, that was a pretty miraculous turn around for Djokovic. When was the last time you saw him look tired?

cc0509 · Mar 25, 2015

scotus said:
Agassi did meth, but I think there's a great chance that Djokovic has been on PED.

The emergence of Djokovic 2.0 in 2011 where the previously fragile player who habitually called for medical timeouts or quit in the middle of a match all of a sudden turned himself into a fitness giant whose stamina would be up there with that of Lance Armstrong cannot easily be explained by gluten-free diet alone.

But I tend to think that all of the current Big 4 has been on PED at some point, and I also suspect Agassi has used PEDs in addition to meth. After all, his fitness trainer used to be a college football coach.

+1.

10plusones

chjtennis · Mar 25, 2015

Djokovic all the way. I cannot see any 1 department where Djokovic cannot be at least as good as Agassi.

AnotherTennisProdigy · Mar 25, 2015

I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating Agassi. If the match up happened today, during this slower era I would agree. Also, I don't see what meth has to do with this.

Keep in mind, courts are faster and spin is way less potent than what Djokovic is accustomed to. This clearly give a bigger edge to Agassi.

m2nk2 · Mar 25, 2015

Sysyphus said:
Yeah, you're right of course—he is rather biased ;-)

I always think of 94-95-96 as Agassis prime. Sure he did some nice results in the 00s. But that was a pretty weak era and competition wasn't as hard. 95 Agassi around definitely beat 02 Agassi imo.

chjtennis · Mar 25, 2015

AnotherTennisProdigy said:
I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating Agassi. If the match up happened today, during this slower era I would agree. Also, I don't see what meth has to do with this.

Keep in mind, courts are faster and spin is way less potent than what Djokovic is accustomed to. This clearly give a bigger edge to Agassi.

Even though we take different court speed and conditions into account, I think Djokovic is more than equal to Agassi. Djokovic hits the ball clean and early, has great accuracy and he seems to be improved version of Agassi's brand of tennis. He also serves extremely well and his 2nd serve is up there at the top.

AnotherTennisProdigy · Mar 25, 2015

chjtennis said:
Even though we take different court speed and conditions into account, I think Djokovic is more than equal to Agassi. Djokovic hits the ball clean and early, has great accuracy and he seems to be improved version of Agassi's brand of tennis. He also serves extremely well and his 2nd serve is up there at the top.

Agassi's serve has always been an underestimated part of his game. At worst it's at the same level as Djokovic's. I think the hardest part of comparing the two is predicting how Djokovic's game would be affected by 90s conditions. Just look at Federer pre-2005 and compare him to today, his game used to be a lot faster.

I just can't imagine Djokovic's game meshing well with the 90s. I still think he would win a couple of slams, but not as many.

FreeBird · Mar 25, 2015

m2nk2 said:
Agassi: 8 Slams, 17 Masters
Djokovic: 8 Slams, 21 Masters

They have similar playing styles, but who would win if the conditions were like they were in the mid 90s? For example: Faster courts/balls and gut strings.

Of course Agassi skipped a number of AOs and W and was fairly unmotivated through years of his career. And many would say his prime was in a very strong era. Djokovic has an equal number of Slams but more Masters. Then Djokovic has been more consistent, hasn't skipped Slams in the same way and played in what some people would describe as a rather weak era.

Who'd win if they met 10 times in each slam, both in their prime?

Yes, some of the butt-hurt Rafa and Fed fans.

Idiot gonna spam and cry forever...

captainbryce · Mar 25, 2015

m2nk2 said:
Nah, I think 99-03 was a rather weak era. I think Agassi's prime was around 94-95. He did some great results in the 00s of course. But less competition then.

Again, this is prime vs prime in 90s conditions.

How was long hair Agassi in his "prime" when he was a meth-head in the mid 90's and barely showed up to most of the events? He didn't actually commit himself to tennis and "fitness" until 99! I'd say his prime (physically, mentally, and results wise) was 99-03.

Deleted member 307496 · Mar 25, 2015

m2nk2 said:
I always think of 94-95-96 as Agassis prime. Sure he did some nice results in the 00s. But that was a pretty weak era and competition wasn't as hard. 95 Agassi around definitely beat 02 Agassi imo.

Do you know the difference between "peak" and "prime"? Agassi was in his prime from 1990-1995 and again from 1999-2003. His peak was 1995.

ultradr · Mar 25, 2015

Under 90's surface conditions. I would bet my money on:

AO: Djokovic
French Open: Djokovic.
Wimbledon: Agassi
US Open: Agassi.

Federer might do better but all of current big 4 are not optimal for fast courts of 90's.

Especially Wimbledon and US open. French stayed pretty much same.

West Coast Ace · Mar 25, 2015

Djokovic2011 said:
Agassi was certainly better at dictating play but I don't think it's an area that Nole does too badly in either. I think he'd've done just fine in the 90s.

Why even consider his very biased opinion. Rating Agassi higher just pumps his idol.

I'd rate Djokovic a slight victor, based on the work he's done on his serve and fitness level. But Agassi would make it tight.

tennisaddict · Mar 25, 2015

The Agassi euphoria is off the roof these days. He is a great player , no doubt, but Novak has crossed him with his recent achievements.

Folks need to be reminded Agassi lost most matches to Sampras and took advantage of a really really weak era to amass 5 of his 8 majors against the likes of Medvedev, Martin, Schuttler, Kafelnikov(AO) and Arnaud Clement.

I give the edge on grass to Agassi, every where else it is Novak.

spinovic · Mar 25, 2015

I think Djokovic is a better and more complete player, so I'd give him the nod regardless of conditions, especially if we're just looking at their best.

I would say Agassi forehand is/was better, but it's not a massive advantage. Outside of that, I'm having a hard time seeing anything that would favor him.

Djokovic has a bigger, better serve. Movement is not even a question. He is at least Agassi's equal as a returner, and since he has a better serve, he'd likely do more damage than Agassi in this particular matchup. His backhand is at least as good.

Where exactly does Agassi gain an advantage? He'd have a hard time getting through Djokovic's defense.

90's Clay · Mar 25, 2015

spinovic said:
I think Djokovic is a better and more complete player, so I'd give him the nod regardless of conditions, especially if we're just looking at their best.

I would say Agassi forehand is/was better, but it's not a massive advantage. Outside of that, I'm having a hard time seeing anything that would favor him.

Djokovic has a bigger, better serve. Movement is not even a question. He is at least Agassi's equal as a returner, and since he has a better serve, he'd likely do more damage than Agassi in this particular matchup. His backhand is at least as good.

Where exactly does Agassi gain an advantage? He'd have a hard time getting through Djokovic's defense.

Agassi gains an advantage under 90s conditions because of all the much faster surfaces and due to his ability to dictate play from the baseline better than Nole.

AO- Rebound Ace was faster than current AO surface
Wimbledon- Obviously no comparison
Flushing- Faster hardcourt in the 90s than now.
Indoors- Fast Carpet, fast hards compared to today slows hards

Due to this, the only advantage i give Nole over Andre is at the French.

Nole is more of a product under current slow homogenized conditions.. His game (as is now) doesn't translate onto 90s conditions.

90s conditions benefit the aggressor 9 times out of 10. Except for Clay.

So when people say "Nole is the better player". No, hes probably the better players under THESE Conditions. He wouldn't be a better player under 90's conditions

chjtennis · Mar 25, 2015

West Coast Ace said:
Why even consider his very biased opinion. Rating Agassi higher just pumps his idol.

I'd rate Djokovic a slight victor, based on the work he's done on his serve and fitness level. But Agassi would make it tight.

This. They will match up very closely but Djokovic is just slightly better.

terribleIVAN · Mar 25, 2015

chjtennis said:
Djokovic all the way. I cannot see any 1 department where Djokovic cannot be at least as good as Agassi.

chjtennis said:
Djokovic hits the ball clean and early, has great accuracy and he seems to be improved version of Agassi's brand of tennis. He also serves extremely well and his 2nd serve is up there at the top.

Agasi: better forehand, better backhand, better returner ( in my opinion), takes the ball early, better serve ( doesn't choke on break points), better accuracy

Nole: better stamina ( after PEDS), better gymnast, better competitor

AnotherTennisProdigy · Mar 25, 2015

terribleIVAN said:
Agasi: better forehand, better backhand, better returner ( in my opinion), takes the ball early, better serve ( doesn't choke on break points), better accuracy

Nole: better stamina ( after PEDS), better gymnast, better competitor

After this post goes through the troll filter it looks more like this:

Agassi: Flatter, more penetrating shots, arguably better serve, more aggressive return, hits shots on the rise.

Djokovic: Better stamina, better movement/court coverage, gets more returns in play, more spin on shots.

NatF · Mar 26, 2015

m2nk2 said:
I always think of 94-95-96 as Agassis prime. Sure he did some nice results in the 00s. But that was a pretty weak era and competition wasn't as hard. 95 Agassi around definitely beat 02 Agassi imo.

Agassi from 2002 > Agassi 1996

m2nk2 · Mar 26, 2015

AnotherTennisProdigy said:
After this post goes through the troll filter it looks more like this:

Agassi: Flatter, more penetrating shots, arguably better serve, more aggressive return, hits shots on the rise.

Djokovic: Better stamina, better movement/court coverage, gets more returns in play, more spin on shots.

But playing with gut strings doesn't generate as much spin of course.

Deleted member 307496 · Mar 26, 2015

NatF said:
Agassi from 2002 > Agassi 1996

Easily >>.. Didn't he win multiple Masters shields?

NatF · Mar 26, 2015

Sabratha said:
Easily >>.. Didn't he win multiple Masters shields?

3 and made a slam final, finished the year #2 as opposed to #6.

Prime Djokovic vs Prime Agassi - In the 90s, who wins?

Hall of Fame

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

Legend

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Talk Tennis Guru

Talk Tennis Guru

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Banned

Bionic Poster

Professional

Rookie

Professional

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Talk Tennis Guru

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Rookie

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Professional

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Bionic Poster

Similar threads