Where does Andre sit on your radar? I've been reading the GOAT threads and Andre doesn't get much of a mention. I guess his inconsistency cost him. In saying that he did win all four Grand Slams on different services. Borg couldn't do it, neither could Pete. Fed is finding out how hard it is. Edberg had his chance vs Chang, Becker failed and so did Lendl. Laver did it though not on different surfaces (I think). If Andre had won 2 or 3 more finals against Pete he would be in my top 3. But he didn't, so he's about 5 or 6 for me. I remember Fed saying 'many people don't quite understand how hard it is to go from clay to grass, it's not easy!!!' In this regard Andre's achievement is truly insane because of the mental and physical changes required to pull it off!! Who else has achieved this feat in the last 50 years? (please let me know)
If only Andre had win a few More GS finals!
- Thread starter richied
- Start date
anointedone
Banned
Agassi is a top 30 player all time.
Don't understand Federer. From clay to grass he was perfect. He won every match. (and he went till the end in every clay tournament, like Borg). But on clay (not from grass to clay, but from clay to clay ;-)) he didn't win Paris, Rome, Montecarlo. Nadal won everything when he became able to paly on grass. From clay to grass? No problem.
In my opinion it's not a problem to play from clay to grass, the problem is to play well in grass and on clay, if you do it in two months or once in february and once in september it's the same.
In my opinion it's not a problem to play from clay to grass, the problem is to play well in grass and on clay, if you do it in two months or once in february and once in september it's the same.
grafrules
Banned
If he had won a few more finals vs Sampras is silly speculation since he wasnt even close to winning any of them really. Sampras was by far the better player on any of Sampras's best surfaces. At the U.S Open, Agassi wasnt even close to winning any of the 90, 95, or 2002 finals, he was pretty much dominated in all 3. The 2001 quarters was close, but this wasnt a final or a semifinal, and Agassi played the best he could have played and still lost. At Wimbledon he was destroyed in the 1999 final so a what if is pointless.
If anything he might be lucky to have won as many times over Sampras in a grand slam as he did as opposed to vice versa. In 1995 he faced an emotionally spent Sampras who had learnt of his coach's brain tumours, and was having a hard time keeping it together emotionally during the 2nd week and struggling in every match. Yet Sampras still would have probably won had he taken 1 of 3 set points in the 3rd set tiebreaker. In 2001 he was down in the 4th set tiebreaker and very close to a 4 set loss to an injured Sampras, who even said himself he might have had to default the final due to his injury (and missed 5 weeks after the event because of it). The two times he played Sampras in Australia his timing couldnt have been better.
If anything he might be lucky to have won as many times over Sampras in a grand slam as he did as opposed to vice versa. In 1995 he faced an emotionally spent Sampras who had learnt of his coach's brain tumours, and was having a hard time keeping it together emotionally during the 2nd week and struggling in every match. Yet Sampras still would have probably won had he taken 1 of 3 set points in the 3rd set tiebreaker. In 2001 he was down in the 4th set tiebreaker and very close to a 4 set loss to an injured Sampras, who even said himself he might have had to default the final due to his injury (and missed 5 weeks after the event because of it). The two times he played Sampras in Australia his timing couldnt have been better.
marc45
G.O.A.T.
i don't know about top 5, but top 30 is ridiculous....i'm a huge pete fan rich, but as i've stated before here i've gained in respect for agassi over the years...the career slam on all surfaces, and i actually think the old rebound ace at oz should really count as a separate surface from u.s. open deco-turf, is a wonderful, and difficult achievement...if it wasn't why haven't more people done it?...and his late-career burst was quite impressive and noble...he didn't take himself or his game as seriously in the beginning and middle of his career and obviously struggled with pete on the quicker surfaces (no shame there).....top ten player all-time i can live with, certainly open era
thalivest
Banned
Sure if tennis started only 25 years ago maybe. Federer is barely a top 10 player all time, and he obviously ranks far above Agassi. Only someone with a very narrow concept of tennis history would rate Agassi in the top 5 all time.
Similar threads
