Has Agassi ever been overpowered from the baseline?

jrepac

Hall of Fame
In his early career, Agassi lost a lot to Lendl, who had a much more penetrating and heavy forehand. Sampras at his peak could go toe to toe with Agassi from the baseline, his backhand was reliable against Agassi, more than against others. Courier on clay could also match Agassis power.
Agree...Andre was a great baseliner, but he wasn't the only one. I was always surprised by Pete taking Andre down at USO, playing heavily from the baseline. As if he wanted to prove that he was better all around (and he was).
 
If so who and in which match did that happen?
Few people will remember this match, but Argentine journeyman ballbasher Agustin Calleri beat Agassi playing completely in the zone tennis
He was like a Fernando Gonzalez who hit the ball as hard as he could every single time, both with the forehand and one handed backhand. Unlike Gonzalez he didn't run around his backhand to hit forehands because he also liked ballbashing with his one handed backhand. The full match is in youtube.



The only man who could consistently overpower Agassi, was Safin. Lendl could overpower teen Agassi. But he was a much lighter nimble tennis player back then, not the guy who could lift a lot from training daily with Gil Reyes.
 

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.

Federer - Agassi US Open 2005. One of the best hard court matches of all time. The pace is absolutely insane. Agassi wasn't bowled over, but Federer really did tear him apart for most of the match.
True. Still pretty remarkable that Agassi wasn't entirely bowled over the entire match given he would retire the following year and his previously 3 matches had all been 5 setters he arguably was lucky to survive.
 

socallefty

Legend
Agassi didn’t try hard during a lot of matches in the first decade of his career until he started training hard on his fitness and got over some of his mental hangups about being forced to play tennis by an obsessive tennis dad. In those first few years, it was hard to tell if he was being beaten badly or tanking in some of his matches as his error count would be much higher than usual for no apparent reason.

The Big 3 has made us used to incredible consistency by top players to go deep in every Slam, but it wasn‘t like that before them when players partied late, drank, did drugs etc. during Slams and smaller tournaments. Becker even has confessed to morning drinking of whisky before one of his Wimbledon finals against Edberg that he lost. We should be grateful for the level of professionalism that is displayed by most players nowadays except for a few head cases like Kyrgios.
 
Agassi was overpowered from the baseline pretty consistently by Courier, which is why Courier at one point won six straight matches against him. Agassi had much more variety and versatility but in a simple slugfest, Courier's greater strength would usually be decisive if Agassi didn't mix it up more. For whatever reason, Agassi in the mid-1990s usually got sucked into just ball bashing against Courier, which was the one way he would reliably lose the match.
 
Man.. Andre could bludgeon the ball. Hard and deep. Yeesh. Id love to see him play today. These kids would be crapping their pants dealing with that power and pace
 
Agassi was overpowered from the baseline pretty consistently by Courier, which is why Courier at one point won six straight matches against him. Agassi had much more variety and versatility but in a simple slugfest, Courier's greater strength would usually be decisive if Agassi didn't mix it up more. For whatever reason, Agassi in the mid-1990s usually got sucked into just ball bashing against Courier, which was the one way he would reliably lose the match.
Ego. The same reason Becker stayed on the baseline only with Agassi for years, until Bolleteiri became his coach, and told him he was being an idiot trying to beat Agassi exclusively from the baseline. Players always want to win with their game, and it is the toughest way to win, they hunker down even more with the idea.
 

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
Agree...Andre was a great baseliner, but he wasn't the only one. I was always surprised by Pete taking Andre down at USO, playing heavily from the baseline. As if he wanted to prove that he was better all around (and he was).
+1
 
Last edited:

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
2005 Montreal Final!
Rafa has the highest net clearance in history. And the best defensive court coverage. There is no way Agassi hangs with Rafa in a long rally. Rafa is just too consistent.

Agass also liked to crowd the baseline. Tough to do that against Rafa. Agassi should have played back.
 

AceyMan

Semi-Pro
Agassi in the mid-1990s usually got sucked into just ball bashing against Courier
If nothing else, modern coaching using stats could have shown Andre how to avoid this kind of trap.

These threads seem always to 'resolve' by someone saying 'well: modern fitness | frames | strings' but we do a disservice not to cite changes in modern tennis coaching.

/Acey
 
If nothing else, modern coaching using stats could have shown Andre how to avoid this kind of trap.

These threads seem always to 'resolve' by someone saying 'well: modern fitness | frames | strings' but we do a disservice not to cite changes in modern tennis coaching.

/Acey
true. Though it is one thing knowing what to do and another thing overcoming one’s ego and actually doing it. I suspect Bolletieri did suggest moving Courier around more, varying the pace, etc., but Agassi wanted to prove he could outhit him, which he couldn’t. Incidentally, when Agassi finally did beat Courier (from two sets down in the 1996 Australian Open quarter-finals), he did it, if my memory serves, by finally taking pace off the ball and using more angles.
 
true. Though it is one thing knowing what to do and another thing overcoming one’s ego and actually doing it. I suspect Bolletieri did suggest moving Courier around more, varying the pace, etc., but Agassi wanted to prove he could outhit him, which he couldn’t. Incidentally, when Agassi finally did beat Courier (from two sets down in the 1996 Australian Open quarter-finals), he did it, if my memory serves, by finally taking pace off the ball and using more angles.
It sounds like some male testerone/male ego type thing. Then again I can think of women who stubbornly keep doing the same thing against someone and losing- Sharapova vs Serena anyone. And even Evert vs Austin for awhile, where unthinkably Evert kept losing playing her own game to someone, until she changed her game and strategy just for Austin in their 1980 U.S Open match, and some of their future matches.
 

goldengate14

Professional
Ego. The same reason Becker stayed on the baseline only with Agassi for years, until Bolleteiri became his coach, and told him he was being an idiot trying to beat Agassi exclusively from the baseline. Players always want to win with their game, and it is the toughest way to win, they hunker down even more with the idea.
Back then these guys were very macho. Ego was huge. They did not give an inch
 

goldengate14

Professional
Agassi didn’t try hard during a lot of matches in the first decade of his career until he started training hard on his fitness and got over some of his mental hangups about being forced to play tennis by an obsessive tennis dad. In those first few years, it was hard to tell if he was being beaten badly or tanking in some of his matches as his error count would be much higher than usual for no apparent reason.

The Big 3 has made us used to incredible consistency by top players to go deep in every Slam, but it wasn‘t like that before them when players partied late, drank, did drugs etc. during Slams and smaller tournaments. Becker even has confessed to morning drinking of whisky before one of his Wimbledon finals against Edberg that he lost. We should be grateful for the level of professionalism that is displayed by most players nowadays except for a few head cases like Kyrgios.
He then revised that to saying he had taken sleeping pills night before. This was the match where he went 2 sets to love down inthink
 

Jason Swerve

Hall of Fame
You don't typically overpower pros outright, and especially not Agassi. You make them run by taking more risks on your strokes to open up angles they have to cover. That was how Sampras won this point.


Agassi wasn't thinking at all here, and Sampras directed most of the play. Agassi was normally smarter with his angles. But I'd be hard-pressed to think of any player who could consistently hit downright through him at his best.
 

goldengate14

Professional
You don't typically overpower pros outright, and especially not Agassi. You make them run by taking more risks on your strokes to open up angles they have to cover. That was how Sampras won this point.


Agassi wasn't thinking at all here, and Sampras directed most of the play. Agassi was normally smarter with his angles. But I'd be hard-pressed to think of any player who could consistently hit downright through him at his best.
Courier often did. Sampras could as well in FH to FH rallies
 
Top