Agassi record against Federer

[barry]

http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/headtohead/head2head.asp?player1=Agassi,+Andre&player2=federer

Agassi won the first 3 times they played, and since then is 0-7. Should be a rout!

Federer in straight sets, hopefully Agassi will retire while he is on top.

 

[Clutch]

Hopefully he doesn't retire. We all know Agassi, he wants to show these younger guys his game, and if a loss comes here to Federer, he'll go further knowing he is still capable of reaching a final of a slam which I think will fuel him to keep working.

Agassi hasn't been doing well against Federer as of late, but I don't think it is out of question for us to see a score similar to last year's quarters.

 

[Matthew]

Yea no matter what this is quite an accomplishment for Andre. He can be proud of a result like this at 35, no matter how dissappointing a loss might be.

However, win or lose, he isn't going to be retiring any time soon.

 

[barry]

Hopefully he doesn't retire. We all know Agassi, he wants to show these younger guys his game, and if a loss comes here to Federer, he'll go further knowing he is still capable of reaching a final of a slam which I think will fuel him to keep working.

Agassi hasn't been doing well against Federer as of late, but I don't think it is out of question for us to see a score similar to last year's quarters.

Maybe so, but Agassi has not played a player in the top 25 all tournament. Meaning, he has not been tested. I like Robby, he is my favorite American player, but he is not as good as Hewitt at this point. Give him a year, and things will change.
Agassi has benefited from an easy draw to reach the finals, but struggled against lower ranked players. In the old days, Agassi blew lower ranked player off the court, now he is almost even with them.
I think todays match is more about Federer. If he plays like yesterday, average, it will be over in 3 sets with Federer winning. If he brings the A game, will be a rout.

 

[idj49]

Didn't Robby and Blake give Federer a hard time the last they played him?

 

[barry]

Didn't Robby and Blake give Federer a hard time the last they played him?

Robby did (3 sets). Federer had not played since Wimbledon which could have been a factor.

 

[andfor]

As negative as your post is (and most of your posts are negitive) I have to agree with your assessment of todays potential outcome. I hope I am wrong. As for your desire to see Agassi retire I find your reasoning ridiculous. Your notion of him retiring on top is one that makes sense to you. It's Agassi's career and how he goes out should be left entirely up to him. Not the press or for the fans to decide.

What does Goldie have to say about this? ;-)

 

[idj49]

Also the fact that Nicolas Kiefer gives Federer a hard time everytime they play and he's not top 25? And that Federer didn't face anyone who was in the top 25 until the Quarters? But he didn't have an easy draw right?

 

[arosen]

When it comes down to the match like this, all kinds of records go out of the window. Sure, Fed is a favorite on paper, but if he doesn't come out firing like he usually does in finals (Miami v.s Nadal notwithstanding) Agassi will sneak into the match and put himself in the position to win it. For Fed, its paramount to open an early lead on Andre.

 

[andfor]

When it comes down to the match like this, all kinds of records go out of the window. Sure, Fed is a favorite on paper, but if he doesn't come out firing like he usually does in finals (Miami v.s Nadal notwithstanding) Agassi will sneak into the match and put himself in the position to win it. For Fed, its paramount to open an early lead on Andre.

I would like to agree that records go out the window. But I really feel fitness in the sense of ones ability to recover from the previous day is going to be a major factor. Fed has a huge edge in this department. Obviously its the age difference. If it was only a one set match I would feel stongly about Agassi chances. Unfortunately for Aggasi as we all know it's best 3 of 5 today.

The crowd will help Agassi, but after that Fed has the edge in almost every area. Is the crowd alone enough to carry a player in this situation? Doubt it. Maybe for a set.

Good luck to both players for a great match. Go Agassi, prove me wrong! Please.

Pick Fed in 4 sets. 3 of them will be easy. Fed wins 6-3, 5-7, 6-1, 6-4.

 

[127 mph]

Andre will throw caution to the wind and pound the ball like days of old and will connect on most his shots and Roger will think about retiring. Agassi forever.

 

[DashaandSafin]

Its not Agassi's fault that he did not play a top 25 player. Its Blake and Robby. They beat the seeds, which means they are better than them.

 

[BjornBorg]

[Agassi has benefited from an easy draw to reach the finals, but struggled against lower ranked players. In the old days, Agassi blew lower ranked player off the court, now he is almost even with them.
I think todays match is more about Federer. If he plays like yesterday, average, it will be over in 3 sets with Federer winning. If he brings the A game, will be a rout.[/QUOTE]

Barry, you have to stop this nonsense about the easy draw. Blake was plying like a top 5 player. He beat the second best player in the world in Nadal. Ginepri has improved immensely and beat Coria.

Andre just took Nadal to three sets in Canada Masters. He's playing at a top five level. He won a Masters series event in '04, beating Roddick in the finals. He's gone the distance with many top players. Your point is dumb.
Agassi would have beaten Roddick in this event--no question. He'd have beaten Nadal and any other top 10 guys with the exception of Fed. He'd probably have beaten Hewitt as well--beat him here in '02 semis.

 

[sliceroni]

Fed plays his best in finals and has played a lot less tennis than Agassi. Doesn't look too good for him but I hope he gives Fed a good match. Win or lose Agassi should should be proud of his accomplishment, especially if he loses to one the greats of all time.

 

[barry]

[Agassi has benefited from an easy draw to reach the finals, but struggled against lower ranked players. In the old days, Agassi blew lower ranked player off the court, now he is almost even with them.
I think todays match is more about Federer. If he plays like yesterday, average, it will be over in 3 sets with Federer winning. If he brings the A game, will be a rout.

Barry, you have to stop this nonsense about the easy draw. Blake was plying like a top 5 player. He beat the second best player in the world in Nadal. Ginepri has improved immensely and beat Coria.

Andre just took Nadal to three sets in Canada Masters. He's playing at a top five level. He won a Masters series event in '04, beating Roddick in the finals. He's gone the distance with many top players. Your point is dumb.
Agassi would have beaten Roddick in this event--no question. He'd have beaten Nadal and any other top 10 guys with the exception of Fed. He'd probably have beaten Hewitt as well--beat him here in '02 semis.[/QUOTE]

consistent performance earns rankings, not couple of good matches. I think we all know the top half of the draw had all the good players. Lets see, it had Federer, Hewitt, and Safin. Bottom half Nadal coria, and Nadal was injured.

Ranked players beat lower ranked players, or they would not have a high ranking!

Give Robby 1 more year and he will move into the top 20. He is currently 49th. My point is Agassi is in the final of an grand slam event, but has not played a top 25 player. As pat Mac says, "that is roddick like"

 

[idj49]

Answer my questions.

 

[Babblelot]

This post has nothing to do with Agassi. barry's simply trying to "distract" us from the fact that Lleyton has lost 18 out of 19 sets to Fed.

...and that Karlovic is 2-0 v. Hewitt

 

[jhhachamp]

I think we all know the top half of the draw had all the good players. Lets see, it had Federer, Hewitt, and Safin. Bottom half Nadal coria, and Nadal was injured.

OK you try and diminish how tough the bottom half by saying that Nadal was injured yet you try to argue that the top half is tougher because it had Safin. Nadal played the event and played very well but lost to the better player at this point, James Blake, while Safin was the one who was really injured and did not even play.

Face it, everything you say is ridiculously biased. You try to distort the facts to back up your ridiculous claims but it is easy for intelligent people with knowledge of the game to see through your bull. Please get a clue or at least learn how to argue a point.

 

[barry]

OK you try and diminish how tough the bottom half by saying that Nadal was injured yet you try to argue that the top half is tougher because it had Safin. Nadal played the event and played very well but lost to the better player at this point, James Blake, while Safin was the one who was really injured and did not even play.

Face it, everything you say is ridiculously biased. You try to distort the facts to back up your ridiculous claims but it is easy for intelligent people with knowledge of the game to see through your bull. Please get a clue or at least learn how to argue a point.

Only important facts:

Agassi made it to the finals of the U.S. Open and did not play a single player ranked in the top 25.
Federer has beaten Agassi the last 7 times they played.
Any other facts you need to know?
Tell us the tough draw Agassi had, and what were the rankings of the players he faced. In the old days, Agassi would walk through anyone ranked outside the top 20, not anymore.
Just saying he got an easy draw. Funny how all these American players who have done nothing all year, show up and do well at the open.

 

[idj49]

Only important facts:

Agassi made it to the finals of the U.S. Open and did not play a single player ranked in the top 25.
Federer has beaten Agassi the last 7 times they played.
Any other facts you need to know?
Tell us the tough draw Agassi had, and what were the rankings of the players he faced. In the old days, Agassi would walk through anyone ranked outside the top 20, not anymore.
Just saying he got an easy draw. Funny how all these American players who have done nothing all year, show up and do well at the open.

You come back with same things you said 20 times already. Answer my questions.

 

[andfor]

Barry, you have to stop this nonsense about the easy draw. Blake was plying like a top 5 player. He beat the second best player in the world in Nadal. Ginepri has improved immensely and beat Coria.

Andre just took Nadal to three sets in Canada Masters. He's playing at a top five level. He won a Masters series event in '04, beating Roddick in the finals. He's gone the distance with many top players. Your point is dumb.
Agassi would have beaten Roddick in this event--no question. He'd have beaten Nadal and any other top 10 guys with the exception of Fed. He'd probably have beaten Hewitt as well--beat him here in '02 semis.

consistent performance earns rankings, not couple of good matches. I think we all know the top half of the draw had all the good players. Lets see, it had Federer, Hewitt, and Safin. Bottom half Nadal coria, and Nadal was injured.

Ranked players beat lower ranked players, or they would not have a high ranking!

Give Robby 1 more year and he will move into the top 20. He is currently 49th. My point is Agassi is in the final of an grand slam event, but has not played a top 25 player. As pat Mac says, "that is roddick like"

Why is Barry addressing himself? A--whole!

 

[jhhachamp]

Only important facts:

Agassi made it to the finals of the U.S. Open and did not play a single player ranked in the top 25.
Federer has beaten Agassi the last 7 times they played.
Any other facts you need to know?
Tell us the tough draw Agassi had, and what were the rankings of the players he faced. In the old days, Agassi would walk through anyone ranked outside the top 20, not anymore.
Just saying he got an easy draw. Funny how all these American players who have done nothing all year, show up and do well at the open.

No Barry, Im sorry, but these are not the "only" important facts. Only a moron would think that. And also, Blake and Ginepri did very well this summer, so I am not sure why you claim that they came out of no where to do well at the open.