How would rate Agassi of the USO 05 final?

From a scale of 1 to 9


  • Total voters
    47

NatF

Bionic Poster
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.
So you think AO SF 2020 Fed > USO F 2005 Agassi?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
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.
I mean, I would get your case if Novak actually played great. But did he? Got pushed to 5 by Thiem LOL.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
I mean, I would get your case if Novak actually played great. But did he? Got pushed to 5 by Thiem LOL.
Novak played well. Certainly better than he did against Thiem. I mean just the difference in second serve from SF-F warrants a distinction between the two in Novak's level. Not to mention the 3rd set dip LOL. Novak was no world beater in the SF for sure but then again neither was 05 USO Fed.
 
Last edited:

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
2005 USO Fed really does get a lot of flack here lol

People keep pretending he was terrible or something but other than his backhand being below-par, what was honestly wrong with his game? FH was pretty much the best it’s ever been, serve was nice, movement was peak Fed-quality, etc.

No way that’s comparable with AO 2020 Novak.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
So you think AO SF 2020 Fed > USO F 2005 Agassi?
No but the fact that he was worse at the two most important things in tennis and by a pretty large amount in serve should speak volumes. 2020 AO Fed is considered laughably weak and @Third Serve is saying it's blasphemous if you consider 05 Agassi anything but good at the very least. I'm sorry but it's completely laughable. 05 Agassi is more overrated by Fed fans on TTW more than any fanbase overrates any performance in all of TTW. It's completely ridiculous. The truth is the difference between the two is negligible because either of them will die if you just win one set and grind them down and after 2 1/2 sets or so they'll be easy pickings for any remotely solid player. Any good player has a win rate against both that approaches 100 because of their physical state. 05 Hewitt is easily the better opponent and Fed played better in that match too.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Novak played well. Certainly better than he did against Thiem. I mean just the difference in second serve from SF-F warrants a distinction between the two in Novak's level. Novak was no world beater in the SF for sure but then again neither was 05 USO Fed.
Was more of a world beater than 2020 Novak anyway.

I don't get it. What's with this constant stubborness to make Agassi look like he was trash when no one even considers him a terrific slam final opponent anyway? Why is considering him just good rattle you so much that you have to put him down at every step.

And comparing him with 2020 AO SF Fred is just BS and I'm saying this as politely as I can. Fed couldn't win a set against an arguably worse opponent than Agassi was facing. Who cares if he was moving or serving better if that didn't amount to jack in the end? And he almost lost to Milllman and Sandgren FFS. Agassi at least beat an on fire Blake.

And yeah, sorry, not on board with the idea that 2020 Djokovic was about as good as 2005 Fed. Fed didn't get pushed to 5 by anyone at his USO. And of course Djokovic looked good in the semis, Fed was injured LOL. You're basically saying 2005 Fed = 2020 Djokovic and we're being ridiculous? LMAO. What's next? 2011 Djokovic = 2017 Fed? LMAO.

And even if Fed moved and served better, he didn't measure up to Agassi' ballstriking, which you conveniently dismiss.
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
No but the fact that he was worse at the two most important things in tennis and by a pretty large amount in serve should speak volumes. 2020 AO Fed is considered laughably weak and @Third Serve is saying it's blasphemous if you consider 05 Agassi anything but good at the very least. I'm sorry but it's completely laughable. 05 Agassi is more overrated by Fed fans on TTW more than any fanbase overrates any performance in all of TTW. It's completely ridiculous. The truth is the difference between the two is negligible because either of them will die if you just win one set and grind them down and after 2 1/2 sets or so they'll be easy pickings for any remotely solid player. Any good player has a win rate against both that approaches 100 because of their physical state. 05 Hewitt is easily the better opponent and Fed played better in that match too.
Dude, you're getting your knickers in a twist for nothing. Nobody overrates Agassi in that final. You're literally having a meltdown over nothing.

If anyone's doing any rating, it's you, constantly putting him down like he's some trash on the level of the no.1000 player. You're comparing him with 2020 AO Fed and we're the one being ridiculous? LOL.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Was more of a world beater than 2020 Novak anyway.

I don't get it. What's with this constant stubborness to make Agassi look like he was trash when no one even considers him a terrific slam final opponent anyway? Why is considering him just good rattle you so much that you have to put him down at every step.

And comparing him with 2020 AO SF Fred is just BS and I'm saying this as politely as I can. Fed couldn't win a set against an arguably worse opponent than Agassi was facing. Who cares if he was moving or serving better if that didn't amount to jack in the end? And he almost lost to Milllman and Sandgren FFS. Agassi at least beat an on fire Blake.

And yeah, sorry, not on board with the idea that 2020 Djokovic was about as good as 2005 Fed. Fed didn't get pushed to 5 by anyone at his USO. And of course Djokovic looked good in the semis, Fed was inured LOL.

And even if Fed moved and served better, he didn't measure up to Agassi' ballstriking, which you conveniently dismiss.
I don't get it what's with this constant stubbornness calling Agassi a strong opponent when he really wasn't. It doesn't rattle me I just find that it's a very poor assessment and I give my assessment which you perceive to be dragging him down and I perceive it to be appropriately evaluating him.

Comparing him to 2020 AO Fed is completely fair. Both had 5 setters against journeymen and both were physically compromised to the point where their odds of winning were more or less zero. Saying that Fed couldn't win a set is true but it's not like he couldn't have. He was very competitive in sets 1 and 2 and really should've won set 1. Not converting one point doesn't make the comparison ridiculous and you saying that it does is ridiculous. Agassi's better ballstriking didn't amount to jack in the end so why are we talking about that if we can't talk about Fed serving and moving better.

Djokovic played better in the semis than in the final. If you can't see that you have no business evaluating tennis. I'm sorry but you're just being obstinate for the sake of it here. Djoko dropped 3 sets Fed dropped 4 whoopty doo. Just because Djoko happened to lose two in one match doesn't make it that different.

I don't dismiss it. In fact I acknowledged unlike you completely ignoring Fed's advantages and hand waiving the whole comparison because it doesn't suit your narrative.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Dude, you're getting your knickers in a twist for nothing. Nobody overrates Agassi in that final. You're literally having a meltdown over nothing.

If anyone's doing any rating, it's you, constantly putting him down like he's some trash on the level of the no.1000 player. You're comparing him with 2020 AO Fed and we're the one being ridiculous? LOL.
Nope you just have a incredibly bad opinion and are trying to laugh in the face of arguments you can't stand up to. It's all good if your strawmans and mocking allow you to overlook the inconsistencies in your beliefs I can't force you to recognize it.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I don't get it what's with this constant stubbornness calling Agassi a strong opponent when he really wasn't. It doesn't rattle me I just find that it's a very poor assessment and I give my assessment which you perceive to be dragging him down and I perceive it to be appropriately evaluating him.
You're just rattled for no reason. What's the big idea of calling Agassi a good opponent? You're rattled because in your view Federer should have trashed him like he did 2008 Murray. But that's just your ridiculous view. Why didn't Djokovic trash Federer like he did 2019 Rafa?

Comparing him to 2020 AO Fed is completely fair. Both had 5 setters against journeymen and both were physically compromised to the point where their odds of winning were more or less zero. Saying that Fed couldn't win a set is true but it's not like he couldn't have. He was very competitive in sets 1 and 2 and really should've won set 1. Not converting one point doesn't make the comparison ridiculous and you saying that it does is ridiculous. Agassi's better ballstriking didn't amount to jack in the end so why are we talking about that if we can't talk about Fed serving and moving better.
No, it's not fair. Agassi at least beat an on-fire Blake. Federer didn't beat a single such player.

And yes, Federer failing to win a set does make this comparison ridiculous. You either win or you don't. You're scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

Agassi's ballstriking ability did amount to something. The man won a set and almost won another. You're just being dense on purpose now.

Djokovic played better in the semis than in the final. If you can't see that you have no business evaluating tennis.
So Federer looked like crap against Agassi, but Djokovic looked great against his compromised opponent? And you're criticizing my tennis evaluation? LMAO. Double standards at their finest.

So Djokovic looked great against a compromised old man in the semis, but conveniently didn't look good anymore against a younger uncompromised opponent. Sure thing, bud.

I'm sorry but you're just being obstinate for the sake of it here. Djoko dropped 3 sets Fed dropped 4 whoopty doo. Just because Djoko happened to lose two in one match doesn't make it that different.
Djokovic was down 1-2 against Thiem and you're saying that doesn't matter? That he was still about as good as 2005 Fed who'd actually crush Thiem? It's getting ridiculous at this point.

I don't dismiss it. In fact I acknowledged unlike you completely ignoring Fed's advantages and hand waiving the whole comparison because it doesn't suit your narrative.
Yeah, sorry, I thought the purpose of tennis was who played better. Agassi won a set and nearly won another, but Fed gets the clear edge here because he has some intangibles that please your eyes LMAO.
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Nope you just have a incredibly bad opinion and are trying to laugh in the face of arguments you can't stand up to. It's all good if your strawmans and mocking allow you to overlook the inconsistencies in your beliefs I can't force you to recognize it.
I did give you arguments, but you dismiss them and instead throw me your own ridiculousness in my face, like 2005 Fed = 2020 Djokovic LMAO.
 
No but the fact that he was worse at the two most important things in tennis and by a pretty large amount in serve should speak volumes. 2020 AO Fed is considered laughably weak and @Third Serve is saying it's blasphemous if you consider 05 Agassi anything but good at the very least. I'm sorry but it's completely laughable. 05 Agassi is more overrated by Fed fans on TTW more than any fanbase overrates any performance in all of TTW. It's completely ridiculous. The truth is the difference between the two is negligible because either of them will die if you just win one set and grind them down and after 2 1/2 sets or so they'll be easy pickings for any remotely solid player. Any good player has a win rate against both that approaches 100 because of their physical state. 05 Hewitt is easily the better opponent and Fed played better in that match too.
what is this, peak propagandonery?

senilerer couldn't win extended rallies for schyt and could do jack all on return after 1 set when his stroke sharpness went down
yeah, one-two punch stronk, 6-4 6-3 is the best you can get with this against a nicely focused joe
Agassi had less spring in his step - not by a 'pretty large amount' lol - but the footwork aspect was no less at least, and of course the quality of his strokes was significantly better. Watch the middle stretch again, he kept hitting rally strokes within a foot from the baseline, disallowing Federer to move him around while allowing AA to go on full attack.

one thing is that 05erer got kinda coot with the slice returns / didn't trust the topspin BH return enough, wanted to turn rallies his way with physical superiority but Agassi hit too well for a while. Joe was more pressing on returns so less wiggle room. That said, 05erer could easily slicebot 20vic, no dreams the latter could match physically rofl.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
You're just rattled for no reason. What's the big idea of calling Agassi a good opponent? You're rattled because in your view Federer should have trashed him like he did 2008 Murray. But that's just your ridiculous view. Why didn't Djokovic trash Federer like he did 2019 Rafa?


No, it's not fair. Agassi at least beat an on-fire Blake. Federer didn't beat a single such player.

And yes, Federer failing to win a set does make this comparison ridiculous. You either win or you don't. You're scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

Agassi's ballstriking ability did amount to something. The man won a set and almost won another. You're just being dense on purpose now.


So Federer looked like crap against Agassi, but Djokovic looked great against his compromised opponent? And you're criticizing my tennis evaluation? LMAO. Double standards at their finest.

So Djokovic looked great against a compromised old man in the semis, but conveniently didn't look good anymore against a younger uncompromised opponent. Sure thing, bud.


Djokovic was down 1-2 against Thiem and you're saying that doesn't matter? That he was still about as good as 2005 Fed who'd actually crush Thiem? It's getting ridiculous at this point.


Yeah, sorry, I thought the purpose of tennis was who played better. Agassi won a set and nearly won another, but Fed gets the clear edge here because he has some intangibles that please your eyes LMAO.
The issue is that Agassi was not a strong opponent. Even a mediocre Djokovic like 2020 Djokovic has an 100% win rate against him because he had no stamina. Played 3 straight 5 setters including one on Super Saturday at 35 in the last relevant tournament of his career. A great Djokovic like 2019 Djokovic would've trashed 2020 Federer. I never claimed 2020 Djokovic was that great you put those words in my mouth. That's exactly my point. Federer was not that good in USO 05. If he was he would've beaten Agassi more routinely.

Sure he beat Blake (not exactly all that good to beat blake in a 5th set tiebreak lol) but also went 5 with two scrubs like guess who? 2020 Fed.

Fed was one point (three times) from a 6-1 set. It's not a ridiculous comparison and you saying it is is ridiculous. You win or you don't lol what garbage analysis. Djokovic W 2019>>>>>>>>>Fed W 2019 cuz hey you win or you don't right? lmfao. Clownery.

Agassi's ballstriking good as it was gave him a 0% win probability because of his physical state so in the end it really didn't do much.

Djokovic played better in the semis. The fact that you're disputing this is making me lose so much respect for you. Djokovic did not have like a 45 minute period where he looked like he was going to retire lol. And that was 2nd-3rd set so it's not like Thiem drew it out of him haha. Whatever I've said enough on this and quite frankly it's embarrassing that we're even discussing this. Djokovic 2020 is his worst AO win I'm not really hyping it you're just hyping USO 05. That's what you're not grasping.

Thiem was better than Agassi and Fed didn't crush Agassi so unlikely.

Literally have already said Agassi was better lmao I was just making a comparison and lol at calling serve and movement intangibles ROFLMAO
 
Last edited:

NatF

Bionic Poster
No but the fact that he was worse at the two most important things in tennis and by a pretty large amount in serve should speak volumes. 2020 AO Fed is considered laughably weak and @Third Serve is saying it's blasphemous if you consider 05 Agassi anything but good at the very least. I'm sorry but it's completely laughable. 05 Agassi is more overrated by Fed fans on TTW more than any fanbase overrates any performance in all of TTW. It's completely ridiculous. The truth is the difference between the two is negligible because either of them will die if you just win one set and grind them down and after 2 1/2 sets or so they'll be easy pickings for any remotely solid player. Any good player has a win rate against both that approaches 100 because of their physical state. 05 Hewitt is easily the better opponent and Fed played better in that match too.
Don't think the difference between D and C tier movement matters that much. Agassi returned and hit the ball way better. The serve is significant yes but Agassi's ability to get hot on the return is also significant - Federer actually only broke Agassi four times in a longer match, same as Djokovic broke Federer in 2020. In 2020 Federer redlined for about 6 games, Agassi redlined for probably 2 sets. I don't agree that he would be easy pickings for any remotely solid player, that seems ridiculous to me. Don't know what would have happened if the adrenaline from winning the third carried over or if he was able to use the fourth to conserve energy for a fifth. Most players may not have been able to push Agassi as hard in the first three sets either so maybe he's in better shape in the latter stages.

You calling it the most overrated performance on TTW is crazy man. Its baffling how different our takes are on so many matches...I think if you believe that Agassi's physical conditioning means he never had a chance of winning the match then that's fair enough I guess? But its quite obvious he played with a lot of quality in the middle two sets. To give an example this would be like me totally downplaying 2011 USO final Djokovic for having no serve in the fourth...
 
Last edited:

RS

G.O.A.T.
No but the fact that he was worse at the two most important things in tennis and by a pretty large amount in serve should speak volumes. 2020 AO Fed is considered laughably weak and @Third Serve is saying it's blasphemous if you consider 05 Agassi anything but good at the very least. I'm sorry but it's completely laughable. 05 Agassi is more overrated by Fed fans on TTW more than any fanbase overrates any performance in all of TTW. It's completely ridiculous. The truth is the difference between the two is negligible because either of them will die if you just win one set and grind them down and after 2 1/2 sets or so they'll be easy pickings for any remotely solid player. Any good player has a win rate against both that approaches 100 because of their physical state. 05 Hewitt is easily the better opponent and Fed played better in that match too.
Would you rate Agassi at least a 6?
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Don't think the difference between D and C tier movement matters that much. Agassi returned and hit the ball way better. The serve is significant yes but Agassi's ability to get hot on the return is also significant - Federer actually only broke Agassi four times in a longer match, same as Djokovic broke Federer in 2020. In 2020 Federer redlined for about 6 games, Agassi redlined for probably 2 sets. I don't agree that he would be easy pickings for any remotely solid player, that seems ridiculous to me. Don't know what would have happened if the adrenaline from winning the third carried over or if he was able to use the fourth to conserve energy for a fifth. Most players may not have been able to push Agassi as hard in the first three sets either so maybe he's in better shape in the latter stages.

You calling it the most overrated performance on TTW is crazy man. Its baffling how different our takes are on so many matches...I think if you believe that Agassi's physical conditioning means he never had a chance of winning the match then that's fair enough I guess? But its quite obvious he played with a lot of quality in the middle two sets. To give an example this would be like me totally downplaying 2011 USO final Djokovic for having no serve in the fourth...
Might do the USO 11 final next.
 

President

Legend
I remember being really impressed by his ball striking and the power and depth he was getting. Compared to any of the Big 3, even the old versions, his movement was atrocious though. I give him a 7.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Would you rate Agassi at least a 6?
It depends what else is considered a 6. People are using different scales for example Meat Tornado is treating it like grades where a 6 would be a D-/F. All I can say is that most people calling it 7.5/8 or so while calling like 11 Nadal a 6.5 or Med a 3 or 12 AO Murray an 8(and I've even heard 12 USO Murray at 6.5/7 :-D) or 15 Fed a 7 is just the peak of insanity. Peoples opinions on this match make absolutely no sense. I strongly disagree with people's take on 09 W F (the other match I take a lot of flack for my opinion) but I at least understand where the people who rate it higher are coming from. I see the way that you can draw the conclusions that they do. This match makes absolutely zero sense. My overall point is that this match is incredibly overrated. Laughably so. Far beyond any amount of overrated I've seen from any fanbase that's not trolling.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
It depends what else is considered a 6. People are using different scales for example Meat Tornado is treating it like grades where a 6 would be a D-/F. All I can say is that most people calling it 7.5/8 or so while calling like 11 Nadal a 6.5 or Med a 3 or 12 AO Murray an 8(and I've even heard 12 USO Murray at 6.5/7 :-D) or 15 Fed a 7 is just the peak of insanity. Peoples opinions on this match make absolutely no sense. I strongly disagree with people's take on 09 W F (the other match I take a lot of flack for my opinion) but I at least understand where the people who rate it higher are coming from. I see the way that you can draw the conclusions that they do. This match makes absolutely zero sense. My overall point is that this match is incredibly overrated. Laughably so. Far beyond any amount of overrated I've seen from any fanbase that's not trolling.
Depends on how you rate things no? Seems like your way of rating emphasises "winning potential" quite a bit rather than mostly the points played - or at least that's what it seems like. So you would value someone with perhaps a lower average level of play in a match with greater fitness for the distance over someone who perhaps peaked higher but ultimately probably didn't have the conditioning to last a full five sets? Ultimately on the day Agassi displayed a good level for most of the match, the majority of people have voted for it as a 7...that doesn't seem like incredible overrating.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Checked out bits of the Agassi match again and dropped my rating down from a 7.5 to a 7. The fourth set was just bad but the middle two? Good as I remembered.

Probably won't go below a 7 though.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
It depends what else is considered a 6. People are using different scales for example Meat Tornado is treating it like grades where a 6 would be a D-/F. All I can say is that most people calling it 7.5/8 or so while calling like 11 Nadal a 6.5 or Med a 3 or 12 AO Murray an 8(and I've even heard 12 USO Murray at 6.5/7 :-D) or 15 Fed a 7 is just the peak of insanity. Peoples opinions on this match make absolutely no sense. I strongly disagree with people's take on 09 W F (the other match I take a lot of flack for my opinion) but I at least understand where the people who rate it higher are coming from. I see the way that you can draw the conclusions that they do. This match makes absolutely zero sense. My overall point is that this match is incredibly overrated. Laughably so. Far beyond any amount of overrated I've seen from any fanbase that's not trolling.
Alright. Based on your ranking and scale how would you have all these matches you mentioned?

I would have Nadal of USO 11 as 7 and Med as a 4.5 in AO 2021 maybe. What’s wrong with 8 for Murray of AO 12 anyway? 2015 Fed will be much disagreed depending on your bias and same with Nadal 05-06 and other names.
 
Last edited:

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Depends on how you rate things no? Seems like your way of rating emphasises "winning potential" quite a bit rather than mostly the points played - or at least that's what it seems like. So you would value someone with perhaps a lower average level of play in a match with greater fitness for the distance over someone who perhaps peaked higher but ultimately probably didn't have the conditioning to last a full five sets? Ultimately on the day Agassi displayed a good level for most of the match, the majority of people have voted for it as a 7...that doesn't seem like incredible overrating.
I mean yeah. Duh. Of course it does. But even on a point by point basis its overrated. When you have quite possibly the worst movement of a slam finalist ever (or at least that I've watched) and no stamina you better be serving like Sampras or something to make up for it but no he's a baseliner. His combination of movement/stamina/serve alone drags him way down. Sure he returns well and strikes the ball well but those strengths aren't enough to make him strong. Again it depends on what 7 means and when 7 is used to describe 11 Nadal 15 Fed and 12 Murray it's incredible overrating. If it's as Meat Tornado suggested and it's a C- that seems fair.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
I mean yeah. Duh. Of course it does. But even on a point by point basis its overrated. When you have quite possibly the worst movement of a slam finalist ever (or at least that I've watched) and no stamina you better be serving like Sampras or something to make up for it but no he's a baseliner. His combination of movement/stamina/serve alone drags him way down. Sure he returns well and strikes the ball well but those strengths aren't enough to make him strong. Again it depends on what 7 means and when 7 is used to describe 11 Nadal 15 Fed and 12 Murray it's incredible overrating. If it's as Meat Tornado suggested and it's a C- that seems fair.
I disagree. Those weapons were what made Agassi a great player in the first place.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Alright.

I would have Nadal of USO 11 as 7 and Med as a 4.5 in AO 2021 maybe. What’s wrong with 8 for Murray of AO 12 anyway? 2015 Fed will be much disagreed depending on your bias and same with Nadal 05-06 and other names.
So you're giving Nadal the same rating as Agassi. Wow. That hypothetical match goes Nadal's way 100% percent of the time. Nadal would probably dominate him because he wouldn't be as tactically poor as Fed and doesn't have as attackable of a wing. He could yank him off the court so easily with serve or forehand and the points over because Agassi couldn't move. That's before we start talking about movement/stamina. 05 Nadal beat NA HC swing 05 Agassi lol. 8 for Murray is fine if like RG 08 Nadal is 10 and like Djokovic 15 W is 9 but again depends on scale. If Agassi is 7.5 Murray is not an 8 lmao.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
So you're giving Nadal the same rating as Agassi. Wow. That hypothetical match goes Nadal's way 100% percent of the time. Nadal would probably dominate him because he wouldn't be as tactically poor as Fed and doesn't have as attackable of a wing. He could yank him off the court so easily with serve or forehand and the points over because Agassi couldn't move. That's before we start talking about movement/stamina. 05 Nadal beat NA HC swing 05 Agassi lol. 8 for Murray is fine if like RG 08 Nadal is 10 and like Djokovic 15 W is 9 but again depends on scale. If Agassi is 7.5 Murray is not an 8 lmao.
Nadal served badly himself in the USO 11 for his standards and he got beaten up in the last so I think it is similar. I agree Nadal beats him most times H2H.

Okay by your scale how do you rate all these matches in question? So I include this Agassi and 2015 Federer in the 2 finals.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Nadal served badly himself in the USO 11 for his standards and he got beaten up in the last so I think it is similar. I agree Nadal beats him most times H2H.

Okay by your scale how do you rate all these matches in question? So I include this Agassi and 2015 Federer in the 2 finals.
Nadal did serve badly for his standards and he got beaten up by 11 Djok (who's a freaking monster) while at a matchup disadvantage and with a lot of mental scar tissue. Different circumstances.

I mean it's really hard to do without a frame of reference. I don't want to give ratings but they wouldn't be consistent but I'd probably give Agassi like a 5.5 if Nadal USO is like a 7.5 and Med is a 4.5. That seems about right to me.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Nadal did serve badly for his standards and he got beaten up by 11 Djok (who's a freaking monster) while at a matchup disadvantage and with a lot of mental scar tissue. Different circumstances.

I mean it's really hard to do without a frame of reference. I don't want to give ratings but they wouldn't be consistent but I'd probably give Agassi like a 5.5 if Nadal USO is like a 7.5 and Med is a 4.5. That seems about right to me.
Mental scar is a bit of a different topic and isn’t really applicable when rating how them did. 2011 Djokovic was great at the USO but he himself was not serving that well for his standards so he was unbeatable.

Alright fair enough for your ratings even though I feel it is a little harsh on AA. What about Murray 12 AO/USO and Fed 15 Wim/USO in the finals since they came up as well?
 
Last edited:

NatF

Bionic Poster
Alright. Based on your ranking and scale how would you have all these matches you mentioned?

I would have Nadal of USO 11 as 7 and Med as a 4.5 in AO 2021 maybe. What’s wrong with 8 for Murray of AO 12 anyway? 2015 Fed will be much disagreed depending on your bias and same with Nadal 05-06 and other names.
The actual most overrated match :p
 
So you're giving Nadal the same rating as Agassi. Wow. That hypothetical match goes Nadal's way 100% percent of the time. Nadal would probably dominate him because he wouldn't be as tactically poor as Fed and doesn't have as attackable of a wing. He could yank him off the court so easily with serve or forehand and the points over because Agassi couldn't move. That's before we start talking about movement/stamina. 05 Nadal beat NA HC swing 05 Agassi lol. 8 for Murray is fine if like RG 08 Nadal is 10 and like Djokovic 15 W is 9 but again depends on scale. If Agassi is 7.5 Murray is not an 8 lmao.
if that's how it goes then for example peak Fred would phuck 2013 Mandy at Wimbledon so what was mury's rating? and what was joe's? something like 6 and 4, lawl.
 
Agassi would eat 2011usodoll's serve so bad ROFLMAO, I can totally see him go up two sets to one by hitting pissdal off court despite the movement difference. Doll's strokes were pretty shiet, he had to pour 9000% effort just to eke out a set vs mug-serving joe (although the rest of joe was on point, and if he had cool serve as well doll would get phucked AO 19 style).
 
Depends on how you rate things no? Seems like your way of rating emphasises "winning potential" quite a bit rather than mostly the points played - or at least that's what it seems like. So you would value someone with perhaps a lower average level of play in a match with greater fitness for the distance over someone who perhaps peaked higher but ultimately probably didn't have the conditioning to last a full five sets? Ultimately on the day Agassi displayed a good level for most of the match, the majority of people have voted for it as a 7...that doesn't seem like incredible overrating.
Peak hypocritical doublethink, what else is new. Say, we know pretty much for certain Peak Fedr cuts Stanimoll to size off clay, and by that I mean a routine win possibly in straight sets, because of the nature of their match-up, yet of course Stoon gets great marks for the actual effort he showed vs Djoel, with no regard for "it's just the joe matchup making Stan look good, Fedal bust his ass peak to peak roflmao".
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I mean yeah. Duh. Of course it does. But even on a point by point basis its overrated. When you have quite possibly the worst movement of a slam finalist ever (or at least that I've watched) and no stamina you better be serving like Sampras or something to make up for it but no he's a baseliner. His combination of movement/stamina/serve alone drags him way down. Sure he returns well and strikes the ball well but those strengths aren't enough to make him strong. Again it depends on what 7 means and when 7 is used to describe 11 Nadal 15 Fed and 12 Murray it's incredible overrating. If it's as Meat Tornado suggested and it's a C- that seems fair.
His movement wasn't actually that bad - it was below par but it's not like he was letting neutral balls zip by him. Don't know how we could possibly know whether it was the worst of any slam finalist ever, the fact is he moved adequetely to execute his game to a high standard for most of the match. Don't know why you're mentioning serve either tbh, don't think he served badly - better than either of the 2011 finalists ;) His return and ballstriking were all top tier as well. It's like when a ballbasher gets hot, when they're seeing the ball like a beachball their movement is less of an issue because they're making their opponents move.

So you're giving Nadal the same rating as Agassi. Wow. That hypothetical match goes Nadal's way 100% percent of the time. Nadal would probably dominate him because he wouldn't be as tactically poor as Fed and doesn't have as attackable of a wing. He could yank him off the court so easily with serve or forehand and the points over because Agassi couldn't move. That's before we start talking about movement/stamina. 05 Nadal beat NA HC swing 05 Agassi lol. 8 for Murray is fine if like RG 08 Nadal is 10 and like Djokovic 15 W is 9 but again depends on scale. If Agassi is 7.5 Murray is not an 8 lmao.
lol at Nadal dominating him. Nadal served poorly in that final, he ain't yanking Agassi anywhere when Fed serving at 70%+ had big issues on serve. Even off the ground Nadal was dropping balls short for most of the match, don't think he did anything better than Fed in that match. Also more hyperbole about how Agassi couldn't move as well like I said he moved enough to hang with peak movement, serve and forehand Fed...if anything it's Agassi that runs Nadal ragged. The funny thing is injured Djokovic throwing down two second serves still breadsticked that Nadal in the fourth...so for all the talk about conditioning Nadal faded just as badly against a worse opponent.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Peak hypocritical doublethink, what else is new. Say, we know pretty much for certain Peak Fedr cuts Stanimoll to size off clay, and by that I mean a routine win possibly in straight sets, because of the nature of their match-up, yet of course Stoon gets great marks for the actual effort he showed vs Djoel, with no regard for "it's just the joe matchup making Stan look good, Fedal bust his ass peak to peak roflmao".
Djokovic 2011 is just a 7.5 at the USO because any prime Fed beats him in five max when he starts chucking in 80 mph first serves. So by association Nadal can be no higher than a 6.5.
 
You answer that.
7 for mandy and 5,5 for joe seem adequate. The idea that Murray GOATed in the fina out of nowhere after struggling with the great Grassdasco and Janowicz is quite unfounded.

My scale as I'm using it now is bit different from what this thread etc implies it seems. 10 is virtually unattainble perfection at mythical peak from start to finish, peak goats would get like 9,5 max.
 
Top