On what criteria? In terms of impact on the game, it's clearly Connors. In terms of tennis skills, it's a bit of a crapshoot. Accomplishments, a slight (?) edge to Connors, depending on how you look at it. Head to head, they really did not meet until Connors was 36 yrs old. The '89 USO QF is an interesting match to watch....highs and lows abound with some tremendous groundstroking from both of them. Andre was a bit too strong for Jimmy at this point, tho' they did play a few exos where Jimmy got the better of him by playing nearly inside of the baseline and being incredibly opportunistic. That was the only way (at this stage of his career).
Andre was never as consistent as a Connors or a Lendl, that's the other thing. Those guys were Top 10 for many years running, whereas Andre had his 'drop off' periods.Jimmy also had a more dominant peak in the mid 70s, whereas Agassi doesn't have a concrete peak, although probably circa 94-95.
Jimmy also had a more dominant peak in the mid 70s, whereas Agassi doesn't have a concrete peak, although probably circa 94-95.
I'm not sure about that.
Agassi did manage to win 3 of 4 slams (from the French Open 1999 through the Australian Open 2000.)
It's close, but I'd give Agassi the edge in the achievement department.
He's one of only 7 or 8 players to have achieved the career grand slam.
8 vs. 8...and Jimmy's are a bit shinierConnors. Not even close. Remember as well the fact that Connors often skipped the A.O and F.O. So not a fair comparison if baseing on slam count.
All though talented Agassi kind of waited for a lull in competition to win Majors. He was No3 in 88 and by the end of his prime 96 he didn't have much of a Major count. It wasn't always Sampras as some make out.
People underrate Connors. I can’t think of any who underrate Agassi.
Yeah, Agassi fans have created this narrative where in a world without Pete, Andre had no equals in the 90s.
They ignore the fact that Courier had his number, and even Chang had success against him, though to a much smaller extent.
Pertaining to this topic, if matched in both their primes, mid 70s Connors vs mid 90s Agassi, I have little doubt Jimmy would win.
Both were deadly on the return, but Jimmy was a helluva lot quicker, with farrrrr better footwork, and far better at the net.