How would rate Agassi of the USO 05 final?

From a scale of 1 to 9


  • Total voters
    44

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
So I was partly correct:D

Do you think Sampras and Agassi would be Murray level or lower today?
It's 2021.

Murray's level isn't that high.

If born in 87, Agassi is close I think. Sampras how the hell would I know. Completely unsuited to the slow courts of Murray's prime.
 

RS

Legend
It's 2021.

Murray's level isn't that high.

If born in 87, Agassi is close I think. Sampras how the hell would I know. Completely unsuited to the slow courts of Murray's prime.
I would have guessed you rated Murray higher than that.

When I meant today I was counting the whole modern era so I guess based on this you have them all on a similar level.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
In all seriousness, this was back when Super Saturday was still a thing right? Agassi played 5 sets the day before, and in the QF?

So while I'm not high on this match at all, it's also very logical. Agassi wasn't that much of a threat anymore in 2005 and mostly rode joke draws to deep runs at the HC tournaments. His only top 10 wins in 2005 were Gaston Gaudio (2x) and Guillermo Coria, all on HC.
2005 USO Blake was tough though, who cares if he wasn't top 10?
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
Let's put it like this: the 2005 Agassi of the USO, even with cortisone injections and moving poorly, would have taken Djokovic to 4 sets last Sunday, something like 6-4, 2-6, 7-6, 7-5. His ball striking was still unparalleled even if his movement was seriously degraded.
 

Ocean Drive

Hall of Fame
He was hitting the ball well, he could have won the final had he not been crippled. He was playing beautifully in parts, it was exciting. Although it was a great final, it was a bit of an anti-climax

there was a big difference between Agassi 2004 and Agassi 2005, as there was from that to Agassi 2006...every year it seemed to get a lot worse
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
Pretty sure Agassi here is the sort of match that gets massively inflated by highlights. He gets aced 18% by Federer way before the latters serving peak. Lol draw, all top 10 wins that year were Argie mudballers.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Pretty sure Agassi here is the sort of match that gets massively inflated by highlights. He gets aced 18% by Federer way before the latters serving peak. Lol draw, all top 10 wins that year were Argie mudballers.
Again, Blake was really good, who cares that he wasn't a top 10 player?

Who did 2015 Fred even beat on that level at the USO? LOL.
 

ElisRF

Rookie
Pretty sure Agassi here is the sort of match that gets massively inflated by highlights. He gets aced 18% by Federer way before the latters serving peak. Lol draw, all top 10 wins that year were Argie mudballers.
Federer was serving very well I think it was 75% or over in the first 3 sets when Agassi was competitive.

His serve was better from 2007 onwards though but he could serve at that level in some matches back then.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Again, Blake was really good, who cares that he wasn't a top 10 player?

Who did 2015 Fred even beat on that level at the USO? LOL.
Well Blake is mentally weak, try facing the murderer's row of Raonic, Cilic, and Berdych in wind instead.

Also, Fed beat 45% serving with UFE every third point TOP FIVE IN THE WORLD Stan in 2015, put some serious respect on that.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Federer was serving very well I think it was 75% or over in the first 3 sets when Agassi was competitive.

His serve was better from 2007 onwards though but he could serve at that level in some matches back then.
Yup, contrary to popular belief Federer wasn't a glorified Ferrer before 2007, spinning in serves and running all over the place with youthful exuberance.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Pretty sure Agassi here is the sort of match that gets massively inflated by highlights. He gets aced 18% by Federer way before the latters serving peak. Lol draw, all top 10 wins that year were Argie mudballers.
Fed served really well in this match. And the draw wasn’t that bad lol. Blake in the QF saves it.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
Fed served really well in this match. And the draw wasn’t that bad lol. Blake in the QF saves it.
Still meh IMO. I just don't see how Agassi who played 3 5setters in a row, who can't run and who will 100% of the time every time run out of steam by the time the clock passes 2 hours is a brilliant Slam final opponent.

That's also not to knock on Fed. Coulda put any 2005 player in there he wins that final anyway so I don't really care about the circumstances.

I also don't really get talking about the 2005 final when the 2004 QF is right there.
 

RS

Legend
Still meh IMO. I just don't see how Agassi who played 3 5setters in a row, who can't run and who will 100% of the time every time run out of steam by the time the clock passes 2 hours is a brilliant Slam final opponent.

That's also not to knock on Fed. Coulda put any 2005 player in there he wins that final anyway so I don't really care about the circumstances.

I also don't really get talking about the 2005 final when the 2004 QF is right there.
Murray of the AO 13/15 finals a lot younger than Agassi lost 20 of the last 22 games combined.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Still meh IMO. I just don't see how Agassi who played 3 5setters in a row, who can't run and who will 100% of the time every time run out of steam by the time the clock passes 2 hours is a brilliant Slam final opponent.

That's also not to knock on Fed. Coulda put any 2005 player in there he wins that final anyway so I don't really care about the circumstances.

I also don't really get talking about the 2005 final when the 2004 QF is right there.
Nobody is saying he was a terrific slam final opponent anyway. Who actually said that?

Now the better question is why is a dude who can't keep the ball in court for 2 sets a terrific slam final opponent just because his name is Novak Djokovic?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Still meh IMO. I just don't see how Agassi who played 3 5setters in a row, who can't run and who will 100% of the time every time run out of steam by the time the clock passes 2 hours is a brilliant Slam final opponent.
Well, at least Agassi ran out of steam after 2 hours. Murray in the FO final did it after 30 minutes LOL.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Why do I feel like this thread was made for me haha?

Here's all I'll say:

Watch this:

and Watch this:

and tell me who's moving better between Fed and Agassi.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Why do I feel like this thread was made for me haha?

Here's all I'll say:

Watch this:

and Watch this:

and tell me who's moving better between Fed and Agassi.
So you picked one match where Fed didn't even a set against a 33 year old Novak, who wasn't even that great and wish to compare it to someone who actually won a set against a 24 year old peak Fed.

Yeah, not looking good here....
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
So you picked one match where Fed didn't even a set against a 33 year old Novak, who wasn't even that great and wish to compare it to someone who actually won a set against a 24 year old peak Fed.

Yeah, not looking good here....
I swear sometimes you think age literally equals form. Like there is nothing else to consider except how old you are. Also, I made no statements about at all just asked a question. Who moved better physicall hampered ancient Fed or Agassi in 05? And as @Red Rick so astutely pointed out the answer is the same as if you asked who's serving better.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Still meh IMO. I just don't see how Agassi who played 3 5setters in a row, who can't run and who will 100% of the time every time run out of steam by the time the clock passes 2 hours is a brilliant Slam final opponent.

That's also not to knock on Fed. Coulda put any 2005 player in there he wins that final anyway so I don't really care about the circumstances.

I also don't really get talking about the 2005 final when the 2004 QF is right there.
No one’s saying that though. But his form in the middle two sets is certainly enough to get him into the “good” category at the very least.
 
Top