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.