Andre Agassi shows Carlos Alcaraz how to be an ATG potential

So i have been discussing with people on this forum about alcaraz's atg potential and have gotten a lot of emotional backlash with no rebuttals from some posters stating carlos doesn't have what it takes at the moment to go from TTG to ATG looking at his h2h with big 2 and comparing with other atgs. The best evidence for this is when we look at Andre Agassi versus Jimmy Connors at the 1988 US Open in their first meeting ever. Agassi is 18 and Connors is 36 so around an 18 years age difference. Agassi straight sets connors on his best surface on agassi's weaker surface with no issues as should be done by a younger atg potential with a large age gap. On the other hand when we compare alcaraz and nadal in their first match at madrid clay, alcaraz is 18 nadal is almost 35 so around 17 years age difference almost akin to the connors/agassi age difference. Alcaraz on his best clay surface gets straight setted by nadal on his worst clay surface. He also loses the first set of their next match at indian wells so he loses 3 straight sets to nadal from the get go. Agassi at the same age as alcaraz wins three straight sets against older atg connors while alcaraz on the other hand loses three straight sets against older atg nadal. That's the difference between Agassi a real ATG and Alcaraz a TTG.
 
So i have been discussing with people on this forum about alcaraz's atg potential and have gotten a lot of emotional backlash with no rebuttals from some posters stating carlos doesn't have what it takes at the moment to go from TTG to ATG looking at his h2h with big 2 and comparing with other atgs. The best evidence for this is when we look at Andre Agassi versus Jimmy Connors at the 1988 US Open in their first meeting ever. Agassi is 18 and Connors is 36 so around an 18 years age difference. Agassi straight sets connors on his best surface on agassi's weaker surface with no issues as should be done by a younger atg potential with a large age gap. On the other hand when we compare alcaraz and nadal in their first match at madrid clay, alcaraz is 18 nadal is almost 35 so around 17 years age difference almost akin to the connors/agassi age difference. Alcaraz on his best clay surface gets straight setted by nadal on his worst clay surface. He also loses the first set of their next match at indian wells so he loses 3 straight sets to nadal from the get go. Agassi at the same age as alcaraz wins three straight sets against older atg connors while alcaraz on the other hand loses three straight sets against older atg nadal. That's the difference between Agassi a real ATG and Alcaraz a TTG.
LOL. Nadal >>> Connors... and so is Djokovic. Also, Connors was pretty much toast in 1988, doomed to just a few more good runs. I don't think anyone thinks that of Djokovic or Nadal barring career ending injury.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
So i have been discussing with people on this forum about alcaraz's atg potential and have gotten a lot of emotional backlash with no rebuttals from some posters stating carlos doesn't have what it takes at the moment to go from TTG to ATG looking at his h2h with big 2 and comparing with other atgs. The best evidence for this is when we look at Andre Agassi versus Jimmy Connors at the 1988 US Open in their first meeting ever. Agassi is 18 and Connors is 36 so around an 18 years age difference. Agassi straight sets connors on his best surface on agassi's weaker surface with no issues as should be done by a younger atg potential with a large age gap. On the other hand when we compare alcaraz and nadal in their first match at madrid clay, alcaraz is 18 nadal is almost 35 so around 17 years age difference almost akin to the connors/agassi age difference. Alcaraz on his best clay surface gets straight setted by nadal on his worst clay surface. He also loses the first set of their next match at indian wells so he loses 3 straight sets to nadal from the get go. Agassi at the same age as alcaraz wins three straight sets against older atg connors while alcaraz on the other hand loses three straight sets against older atg nadal. That's the difference between Agassi a real ATG and Alcaraz a TTG.
Are you saying DecoTurf is a weaker surface for Agassi?
 

big ted

Legend
wasn't Agassi already ranked higher than Connors at the USO?
Connors had 0 chance of winning the USO that year but nadal/djoko in their 30s are still contenders...
apples and oranges
 
LOL. Nadal >>> Connors... and so is Djokovic. Also, Connors was pretty much toast in 1988, doomed to just a few more good runs. I don't think anyone thinks that of Djokovic or Nadal barring career ending injury.
doesn't matter. andre got it done. if you are gonna be atg you better clean sweep the grandpas and alcaraz couldn't do it, he is just a ttg.
 
wasn't Agassi already ranked higher than Connors at the USO?
Connors had 0 chance of winning the USO that year but nadal/djoko in their 30s are still contenders...
apples and oranges
we ain't looking at the rankings. we looking at does the younger atg overcome a geriatric atg. agassi did it, carlos didn't. big 2 is in carlos way to become atg so he gotta deal with it no excuses.
 
love how you guys making excuses for carlos oh nadal djoker are playing well blahblah. doesn't matter. he's gotta deal with them and destroy them. Andre did it, carlos didn't.
 

Hawaiian grip

Professional
seems like this bitter poster is bitter about having no argument. agassi owns you boy.
You got exposed in your last thread and came back for more. There is no point in discussing anything with a poor fvck like you, you just disregard anything that doesn't suit your stupid narrative. Good school Will be back soon and you won't have the time to troll here.
 
You got exposed in your last thread and came back for more. There is no point in discussing anything with a poor fvck like you, you just disregard anything that doesn't suit your stupid narrative. Good school Will be back soon and you won't have the time to troll here.
what i did expose was your tears and butthurt at having no argument. you got owned. again. agassi style.
 
looks like all these alcaraz huggers are deer in the headlights when they realize agassi did it, but carlos didn't. also the argument that nadal is greater than connors is nonsensical, as a younger atg, you have to dominate the way older atgs in front of you, can't give alcaraz free passes like he is a weakling.
 
False equivalency. Connors and Nadal at a similar older age are at completely different levels. They don’t represent an equal physical challenge to Agassi and Alcaraz respectively. This test won’t yield anything important as you don’t have parity of opponents to calibrate from.

The by-age thing might be a suitable way to measure young players across eras in terms of assessing their progress but it’s tricky to use that tool when you’re talking about older players across eras as ageing in tennis has changed quite a bit in the last 35-40 years of the open era.
 
Last edited:

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
What an awful troll.

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get me to argue against Agassi in anything?
I saw Andre play live in 13 juniors matches from 1983-85 so don't even go there. I didn't read OP since he/she is illiterate.

Anyway, Agassi's FH is 100 times what Carlos's is and Andre used wood and graphite.
 

Sudacafan

Bionic Poster
I saw Andre play live in 13 juniors matches from 1983-85 so don't even go there. I didn't read OP since he/she is illiterate.

Anyway, Agassi's FH is 100 times what Carlos's is and Andre used wood and graphite.
Everything 1983-85 I remember now is better than today. Any bias?
 

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
I saw Andre play live in 13 juniors matches from 1983-85 so don't even go there. I didn't read OP since he/she is illiterate.
Absolutely. He is an idiot.
Anyway, Agassi's FH is 100 times what Carlos's is and Andre used wood and graphite.
Absolutely. Agassi’s compact FH technique and ability to hug the baseline and redirect the ball that early with such pace is revolutionary. Great post.
 

Rafa4LifeEver

G.O.A.T.
I saw Andre play live in 13 juniors matches from 1983-85 so don't even go there. I didn't read OP since he/she is illiterate.

Anyway, Agassi's FH is 100 times what Carlos's is and Andre used wood and graphite.
He definitely had a much better forehand, although 100 times is a bit too much imo, Beatie. Plus, Alcaraz is a work in progress.
Agassi was the best ballstriker off both wings the game has ever seen; so clean, early, penetrating and acute.
 
Absolutely. He is an idiot.

Absolutely. Agassi’s compact FH technique and ability to hug the baseline and redirect the ball that early with such pace is revolutionary. Great post.
kralingen you prove to be worse being an idiot with no argument. agassi does it, carlos didn't and you will have to live it while you kiss alcaraz's azz.
 
I saw Andre play live in 13 juniors matches from 1983-85 so don't even go there. I didn't read OP since he/she is illiterate.

Anyway, Agassi's FH is 100 times what Carlos's is and Andre used wood and graphite.
no one is more illiterate than you beatles with your wrong asinine predictions. You have no logic and no argument, andre would be so disappointed in you.
 
False equivalency. Connors and Nadal at a similar older age are at completely different levels. They don’t represent an equal physical challenge to Agassi and Alcaraz respectively. This test won’t yield anything important as you don’t have parity of opponents to calibrate from.

The by-age thing might be a suitable way to measure young players across eras in terms of assessing their progress but it’s tricky to use that tool when you’re talking about older players across eras as ageing in tennis has changed quite a bit in the last 35-40 years of the open era.
thanks for trying to counter argue unlike the emotional mugs here. You are right connors isn't on the same level as nadal obviously. however the point i am making isn't that agassi faced the exact same level of atg opponent like carlos. i am making the point that in order for agassi to have an atg career he had to destroy way older connors just like every other atg. If you you are a way younger atg and you can't handle the way older atg, you can't take over the field enough to be an atg because to be atg you have to rack up slams whether it be against a 10 time slam atg or a 50 time slam atg. we can't keep giving alcaraz free passe like he is a snowflake. He has to destroy big 2 no way around it in order to be atg cuz they are in his way.
 

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
If Agassi had the movement of Alcaraz he'd have been a scary matchup for Pete.

True, Agassi had such an average movement for his height. As far as match up is concerned, Pete's game suited 90s condition perfectly and he would have smoked anyone in 90s condition. With poly and bit slower court it would have been a different story though.
 

kevin qmto

Hall of Fame
I saw Andre play live in 13 juniors matches from 1983-85 so don't even go there. I didn't read OP since he/she is illiterate.

Anyway, Agassi's FH is 100 times what Carlos's is and Andre used wood and graphite.
Andre was using graphite in 1981 (original Wilson Ultra), when did he change back to wood in 83-85, and what model was it?
 

big ted

Legend
we ain't looking at the rankings. we looking at does the younger atg overcome a geriatric atg. agassi did it, carlos didn't. big 2 is in carlos way to become atg so he gotta deal with it no excuses.

in carlos' defense, the big 3 are 3x as successful as agassis competition
 
Top