Agassi took a lot of shots at Pete in Open

[Gonzalito17]

ePowershares is now running a TV commercial on Tennis Channel announcing their new senior tour for this year. The very first marquee name they are using to sell the tour is of course not Sampras or McEnroe or Courier but..."Agassi."

Agassi is like Reggie Jackson, the star that stirs the drink. And makes it all happen.

 

[tennis4josh]

ePowershares is now running a TV commercial on Tennis Channel announcing their new senior tour for this year. The very first marquee name they are using to sell the tour is of course not Sampras or McEnroe or Courier but..."Agassi."

Agassi is like Reggie Jackson, the star that stirs the drink. And makes it all happen.

Just because AA got into News more often does not mean he did more for the game. In fact he portrayed the game in bad light. Both AA and Steffi Graf got a lot out of tennis and still continue to cash in but they never credit the game. A couple of years ago Steffi Graf played an exhibition in SAP Open at San Jose. She was asked if their kids play tennis and she came up with big "Nooooo.. Tennis!" as if it was something really bad.

If you hated the game so much and were forced into it by your parents, then why the hell do you still participate in exhibitions?

They are acting just like their parents by "forcing" the kids to stay away from tennis.

-Josh

 

[TadDavis]

Just because AA got into News more often does not mean he did more for the game.

He did more for the game in the sense that he generated a lot of interest, not only in terms of viewership but also participation. I knew so many kids who started playing tennis solely because of Andre. It was probably the closest that tennis got to mainstream appeal (in the States) since the Mac/Connors days.

My take on the Sampras comments was that they were mainly to emphasize how fundamentally different these two were. They weren't offered as harsh criticisms or attacks on his character. You can see how much respect he had for Pete, and he's actually pretty complementary towards him, particularly in regards to his game.

 

[hoodjem]

He did more for the game in the sense that he generated a lot of interest, not only in terms of viewership but also participation. I knew so many kids who started playing tennis solely because of Andre. It was probably the closest that tennis got to mainstream appeal (in the States) since the Mac/Connors days.

I knew kids who bought Canon cameras because of Agassi, but none that took up tennis.

 

[TadDavis]

I knew kids who bought Canon cameras because of Agassi, but none that took up tennis.

He did a lot for photography as well.

 

[Blocker]

it is ironic that Agassi married the female version of Sampras.

if you can't beat them...join them???

 

[Azzurri]

it is ironic that Agassi married the female version of Sampras.

Oh my gosh...he did.:shock:

 

[hoodjem]

Pete was cut from the same mold as the older Aussies and players like Stan Smith. Class acts. . . let their games speak for them. Pete was never in the news outside of tennis. . . . never tanked a match that I saw.

Pete never felt the need to make camera commercials or wear a toupé or do meth.

What a boring guy.:wink:

 

[Tshooter]

Pete never felt the need to make camera commercials or wear a toupé or do meth.

What a boring guy.:wink:

Pete was boring. Doesn't make him a bad guy but he was boring. I didn't care for Agassi myself but arguably he did more for the game.

 

[Fedchamp]

I can remember an exhibition they played together in Australia. Pete started it by pulling his shorts down a bit and waddling around imitating Agassi (quite funny actually). Agassi then came back with a line referencing Pete's "cheapness".

I found it...

http://youtu.be/4QSK9t6OrgU

it wasn't in Australia.

To be fair to AA, Pete started it

 

[Fedchamp]

That's not the issue I'm taking contention with. For the record, I think the answer to your question is 'yes' (whether or not He actually does is a debate for another day), but Chang just really ticked me off when he repeatedly trumpeted THAT as his reason for winning, like God looked down and decided to give Edberg the finger because Chang prayed a little bit more. I remember John Feinstein recalling in his latest book when someone incredulously asked Chang how he could have possibly known that he had a better relationship with God then Edberg did, he answered 'Because I do.' I've yet to see anyone in tennis match that kind of sheer arrogance. I can understand the concept of answered prayer, but thinking that God plays favourites is a bridge too far for me.

Christians do this sort of thing, a lot.

BTW I was raised a Catholic, but I've turned my back on it.

The Philipinnes is one of the most devout Christian/Catholic nations there is on this planet, and then God goes and unleashes a typhoon on them. I know many Christians who would say that "He" is punishing them for something.
Ridiculous.

Paedophile priests, and the Churches willingness to protect them, have also contributed to my decision.

Sorry for dragging this into a religious debate

 

[Blocker]

I can remember an exhibition they played together in Australia. Pete started it by pulling his shorts down a bit and waddling around imitating Agassi (quite funny actually). Agassi then came back with a line referencing Pete's "cheapness".

I found it...

http://youtu.be/4QSK9t6OrgU

it wasn't in Australia.

To be fair to AA, Pete started it

Actually, Agassi started it by mentioning how serious Pete was.

 

[Azzurri]

Actually, Agassi started it by mentioning how serious Pete was.

Yep, AA started it. Wasn't Pete actually mad?