Medvedev underrated on HC? Win rate 91% in 10 months

[Milanez82]

I have 2004 Agassi as a better HC player than 2011 Nadal and the results back up my statement.

Rafa lost IW and Miami finals barely to Djokovic who was on a tear, demolished Murray(who just won Cincy by beating Djokovic) on his run to Us Open final.

Agassi notable result was winning Cincy 04 by beating 2 'amazing' players in Hewitt and Roddick and pushing Federer to 5 sets at Us Open QF.

So lol get out of here

 

[tudwell]

Rafa lost IW and Miami finals barely to Djokovic who was on a tear, demolished Murray(who just won Cincy by beating Djokovic) on his run to Us Open final.

Agassi notable result was winning Cincy 04 by beating 2 'amazing' players in Hewitt and Roddick and pushing Federer to 5 sets at Us Open QF.

So lol get out of here

It's not really unreasonable. They both have 5 top-10 wins for the season on hard courts. Even if we remove Novak from Nadal's hard court tally, he went 33-8 on the year, with no titles. Agassi in 04, minus Federer (who was a lot like 2011 Djokovic, on a tear and the dominant hard courter by far), went 37-8 and won a Masters title. Lost in 5 to an in-form Safin at the Australian (his first loss there since 1999) and then in 5 to an in-form Federer at the US Open. This is vs. a straight-sets loss to Ferrer in Australia for Nadal and a 4-set loss to Novak at the US.

Not saying it's definitive either way, but there's certainly an argument to be had.

 

[Third Serve]

I have 2004 Agassi as a better HC player than 2011 Nadal and the results back up my statement.

I wasn't particularly sure about this so I pulled up the big events for a comparison:

AO: This one goes to Agassi for sure. Nadal bowed out rather meekly to Ferrer in the QF while Agassi played and lost one of the best matches I've seen at the AO (at least for the first half) against a zoning Safin in the SFs.

IW: This might be even. Both guys lost to the eventual champion in deciding sets (Nadal did so in the final while Agassi drew Fed in the semis) and I don't think there's much between the two. However, I've not seen the 2011 final in a long time and I've only ever seen a few points from the 2004 SF so the jury's out here.

Miami: Yeah, this is obviously Nadal. Though this was historically Agassi's most successful tournament, he lost to a guy I've never even heard of in an early round while Nadal put up a very good fight against Djokovic in the final that ranks among the pair's best Bo3 matches.

Canada: Both guys had disappointing tournaments here but Agassi advanced one round further while Nadal lost in the opening round to Ivan Dodig (weird scoreline too). Agassi was better here, but there's not much in it.

Cincinnati: Clearly Agassi. Nadal got straight-setted by Mardy Fish in the QF while Agassi won the whole thing beating a fairly respectable draw including Fish, Johansson, Moya, Roddick, and Hewitt.

US Open: I do wonder if Agassi would have reached the US Open final had he been placed in the opposite half of the draw. After all, Hewitt stunk up the court a bit in the final while Agassi played a great match against Fed (awful fourth and fifth set conditions notwithstanding). I genuinely think that's what would have happened and the fact that the Federer match was a QF rather than a F unfairly taints it in this comparison. Meanwhile, Nadal had a nice road to the final including a win over Murray. I wasn't impressed at all with his match against Djokovic though. Outside of the third set, Nadal was well below his 2010 level. His serving, for example, was perhaps the poorest I've ever seen from him in a Slam final. Now, that third set redeems the performance somewhat (even if his languid fourth set tried its hardest to undo all of that), but I still didn't walk away terribly impressed. Agassi takes this imo. However, Federer from the 2011 SF beats Agassi.

The fall Masters are tricky to compare between these two eras because Shanghai and Madrid Indoors don't line up all that well, so I'll just list what they did at each event without comparing them:

Agassi:

Madrid: Made it to the SF and lost to Safin in straight sets.
Paris: Skipped
ATP Finals: Did Not Qualify

Nadal:

Shanghai: Made it to R3 and lost to Florian Mayer in straight sets
Paris: Skipped
ATP Finals: Qualified, lost to Federer and Tsonga in the RR, prematurely ending his campaign

I think 2004 Agassi's hard court results were better than 2011 Nadal's due to his advantage at the AO and US Open. Where 2011 Nadal picks up the slack are his performances on clay and grass where he played quite well overall while 2004 Agassi straight-up sucked there (he didn't even win any matches on either surface).

 

[Aabye5]

I wasn't particularly sure about this so I pulled up the big events for a comparison:

AO: This one goes to Agassi for sure. Nadal bowed out rather meekly to Ferrer in the QF while Agassi played and lost one of the best matches I've seen at the AO (at least for the first half) against a zoning Safin in the SFs.

IW: This might be even. Both guys lost to the eventual champion in deciding sets (Nadal did so in the final while Agassi drew Fed in the semis) and I don't think there's much between the two. However, I've not seen the 2011 final in a long time and I've only ever seen a few points from the 2004 SF so the jury's out here.

Miami: Yeah, this is obviously Nadal. Though this was historically Agassi's most successful tournament, he lost to a guy I've never even heard of in an early round while Nadal put up a very good fight against Djokovic in the final that ranks among the pair's best Bo3 matches.

Canada: Both guys had disappointing tournaments here but Agassi advanced one round further while Nadal lost in the opening round to Ivan Dodig (weird scoreline too). Agassi was better here, but there's not much in it.

Cincinnati: Clearly Agassi. Nadal got straight-setted by Mardy Fish in the QF while Agassi won the whole thing beating a fairly respectable draw including Fish, Johansson, Moya, Roddick, and Hewitt.

US Open: I do wonder if Agassi would have reached the US Open final had he been placed in the opposite half of the draw. After all, Hewitt stunk up the court a bit in the final while Agassi played a great match against Fed (awful fourth and fifth set conditions notwithstanding). I genuinely think that's what would have happened and the fact that the Federer match was a QF rather than a F unfairly taints it in this comparison. Meanwhile, Nadal had a nice road to the final including a win over Murray. I wasn't impressed at all with his match against Djokovic though. Outside of the third set, Nadal was well below his 2010 level. His serving, for example, was perhaps the poorest I've ever seen from him in a Slam final. Now, that third set redeems the performance somewhat (even if his languid fourth set tried its hardest to undo all of that), but I still didn't walk away terribly impressed. Agassi takes this imo. However, Federer from the 2011 SF beats Agassi.

The fall Masters are tricky to compare between these two eras because Shanghai and Madrid Indoors don't line up all that well, so I'll just list what they did at each event without comparing them:

Agassi:

Madrid: Made it to the SF and lost to Safin in straight sets.
Paris: Skipped
ATP Finals: Did Not Qualify

Nadal:

Shanghai: Made it to R3 and lost to Florian Mayer in straight sets
Paris: Skipped
ATP Finals: Qualified, lost to Federer and Tsonga in the RR, prematurely ending his campaign

I think 2004 Agassi's hard court results were better than 2011 Nadal's due to his advantage at the AO and US Open. Where 2011 Nadal picks up the slack are his performances on clay and grass where he played quite well overall while 2004 Agassi straight-up sucked there (he didn't even win any matches on either surface).

No way - that final is worth way more than a QF, unless Agassi lost o Sampras (which he didn't), although I agree with your analysis of the Masters.

 

[Third Serve]

No way - that final is worth way more than a QF, unless Agassi lost o Sampras (which he didn't), although I agree with your analysis of the Masters.

Agassi was screwed by his seeding (though that's on him since he failed to acquire enough points on HC and grass). He was definitely the second best player of the tournament and most likely would have reached the final had he been placed in the opposite half of the draw, but his lower seeding meant that he drew Federer much earlier than the final. Nadal didn't have to face Djokovic till the final because he was seeded #2.

My general rule of thumb is that if you lose to the eventual champion, the round doesn't necessarily matter.

 

[Red Rick]

Agassi was screwed by his seeding (though that's on him since he failed to acquire enough points on HC and grass). He was definitely the second best player of the tournament and most likely would have reached the final had he been placed in the opposite half of the draw, but his lower seeding meant that he drew Federer much earlier than the final. Nadal didn't have to face Djokovic till the final because he was seeded #2.

My general rule of thumb is that if you lose to the eventual champion, the round doesn't necessarily matter.

Jack draper moral Wimbly semifinalist.

 

[Aabye5]

Agassi was screwed by his seeding (though that's on him since he failed to acquire enough points on HC and grass). He was definitely the second best player of the tournament and most likely would have reached the final had he been placed in the opposite half of the draw, but his lower seeding meant that he drew Federer much earlier than the final. Nadal didn't have to face Djokovic till the final because he was seeded #2.

My general rule of thumb is that if you lose to the eventual champion, the round doesn't necessarily matter.

r
That's on him, like you said. Nadal has a record at #2 because he didn't want to play Federer (and later Djokovic) early. If Nole and Rafa had played this year's RG final instead of in the QFs, we might be calling Rafa the Slam leader. But that's Rafa's fault for not keeping up his seed. It is what it is.

 

[Aabye5]

Jack draper moral Wimbly semifinalist.

He could have done it if he had ended up in Zverev's draw, I'm sure of it (only mostly joking)

 

[Third Serve]

r
That's on him, like you said. Nadal has a record at #2 because he didn't want to play Federer (and later Djokovic) early. If Nole and Rafa had played this year's RG final instead of in the QFs, we might be calling Rafa the Slam leader. But that's Rafa's fault for not keeping up his seed. It is what it is.

It is on Agassi, but it's on him because of something he did in a completely different tournament months prior. We're only looking at how he performed at the US Open in 2004 vs. how Nadal performed at the US Open in 2011. I think Agassi played better overall.

 

[InsideOut900]

It is on Agassi, but it's on him because of something he did in a completely different tournament months prior. We're only looking at how he performed at the US Open in 2004 vs. how Nadal performed at the US Open in 2011. I think Agassi played better overall.

It's hard to put Nadal's performance at USO 11 out of context because he was mentally shot against Djokovic.

It explains how he was able to beat the field really hard at both Wimbledon and US Open, but couldn't quite replicate it against Djokovic. Call it mental weakness, but overall Nadal was pretty good at those two venues in 2011.

 

[Aabye5]

It is on Agassi, but it's on him because of something he did in a completely different tournament months prior. We're only looking at how he performed at the US Open in 2004 vs. how Nadal performed at the US Open in 2011. I think Agassi played better overall.

You're stretching this too much. That's your opinion and I bet not many agree with you. Rafa reached 3 out of 4 Slam finals in 2011, and overall had a better year than 2004 Agassi on all surfaces.

 

[Third Serve]

You're stretching this too much. That's your opinion and I bet not many agree with you. Rafa reached 3 out of 4 Slam finals in 2011, and overall had a better year than 2004 Agassi on all surfaces.

Yeah, Nadal unquestionably had a better year than Agassi overall due to his successes on grass and clay.

It's only when we restrict the discussion to hard courts and only hard courts that things change imo

It's hard to put Nadal's performance at USO 11 out of context because he was mentally shot against Djokovic.

It explains how he was able to beat the field really hard at both Wimbledon and US Open, but couldn't quite replicate it against Djokovic. Call it mental weakness, but overall Nadal was pretty good at those two venues in 2011.

Fair enough. I think the only thing we can say with a reasonable degree of certainty is that Agassi put up a better fight against Federer than Nadal did against Djokovic. Now how would that version of Agassi do against that version of Nadal? That's harder to say.

 

[InsideOut900]

I think the only thing we can say with a reasonable degree of certainty is that Agassi put up a better fight against Federer than Nadal did against Djokovic. Now how would that version of Agassi do against that version of Nadal? That's harder to say.

Specifically.

 

[myth]

I understand people being disappointed about the AO F where he was pasted but this guy is incredible on HC.
He has 2 GS F’s
4 masters
100 wins in 2 and a half seasons.
Is 33-3 in last 10 months(91% win rate)
Has beaten Djokodal in masters.

My question is yes he is poor on Clay, only decent on grass but is he underrated on HC ? It feels like people only consider slams when judging him and then say he is a awful #2. Yes he might have a bad loss etc but overall his consistentcy on HC is incredible.

Since i saw him play against Novak at the AO 2019 i knew he would be unbelievable....
I never underestimated him since that match. Only his match up against Fed hasn't been great.....

 

[Milanez82]

It's not really unreasonable. They both have 5 top-10 wins for the season on hard courts. Even if we remove Novak from Nadal's hard court tally, he went 33-8 on the year, with no titles. Agassi in 04, minus Federer (who was a lot like 2011 Djokovic, on a tear and the dominant hard courter by far), went 37-8 and won a Masters title. Lost in 5 to an in-form Safin at the Australian (his first loss there since 1999) and then in 5 to an in-form Federer at the US Open. This is vs. a straight-sets loss to Ferrer in Australia for Nadal and a 4-set loss to Novak at the US.

Not saying it's definitive either way, but there's certainly an argument to be had.

There is a big difference between losing in a QF of a slam and the Final.
Agassi also beat guys ranked 47,37,26 and 54 getting to that QF while Rafa took out in form Murray in SF who just mopped up Djokovic in Cincy final(and had AO final earlier in the year)
Agassi AO run was equally easy to his UO run and forgetable until he met a proper opponent and lost.
Rafa also destroyed Federer 6-3 6-2 in Miami semis and lost in 3rd set tb to Djoko
18 year old Rafa took Hewitt to 3 sets just a week before in Toronto masters which tells a lot what kind of level Agassi produced to beat the very same Hewitt in 3 sets in Cincy final.

 

[Ray Mercer]

The only thing that matters is his pitiful
performance in the AO final given that everyone thought it would be a battle. I can’t take the guy serious after that until he beats Djokovic in a slam.

 

[mike danny]

There is a big difference between losing in a QF of a slam and the Final.
Agassi also beat guys ranked 47,37,26 and 54 getting to that QF while Rafa took out in form Murray in SF who just mopped up Djokovic in Cincy final(and had AO final earlier in the year)
Agassi AO run was equally easy to his UO run and forgetable until he met a proper opponent and lost.
Rafa also destroyed Federer 6-3 6-2 in Miami semis and lost in 3rd set tb to Djoko
18 year old Rafa took Hewitt to 3 sets just a week before in Toronto masters which tells a lot what kind of level Agassi produced to beat the very same Hewitt in 3 sets in Cincy final.

All that matters is that Agassi had overall better results on HC in 2004 than 2011 Nadal. Results don't lie.

Nadal's AO and USO runs were also pretty easy until he met Djokovic in the latter.

LOL at in form Murray. The guy played a pitiful USO SF against Nadal after struggling mightily with Haase and nearly going 5 with Isner too.

Fact is Agassi played Federer tougher than Nadal played Djokovic. There's really nothing in Nadal's favor. Plus he also won a masters.

Agassi's ranking simply pitted him against Federer in the QF. It is what it is. He was still the second best player of that tournament, IMO.

 

[mike danny]

Rafa lost IW and Miami finals barely to Djokovic who was on a tear, demolished Murray(who just won Cincy by beating Djokovic) on his run to Us Open final.

Agassi notable result was winning Cincy 04 by beating 2 'amazing' players in Hewitt and Roddick and pushing Federer to 5 sets at Us Open QF.

So lol get out of here

AO - Agassi better here clearly.
IW- slight edge to Agassi. Lived with Federer until the very end unlike Nadal with Djokovic.
Miami - Nadal clearly better
Canada - even
Cincy - Agassi clearly better. He even won it vs Nadal's 0 HC masters.
USO - considerable edge to Agassi. Played Federer tougher than Nadal played Djokovic.
Madrid/Shanghai - clear edge to Agassi
Paris/WTF - doesn't really matter.

Result: Agassi better and you really have no arguments.

 

[mike danny]

No way - that final is worth way more than a QF, unless Agassi lost o Sampras (which he didn't), although I agree with your analysis of the Masters.

It doesn't really matter which round you face the dominant guy once you reach the later stages. Agassi played Federer tougher than Nadal played Djokovic despite Nadal being 9 years younger. That's not something in Nadal's favor at all.

Should Stan's win over Djokovic in the AO 2014 QF be dismissed because it didn't come in a final?

 

[mike danny]

We're talking 5-sets to beat a 34-year-old Agassi? And Fed is truly a better player than Tsitsipas. And Djokovic (even old Djokovic) is a better player than Agassi.

We could be saying the same thing about Berrettini in 15 years. He lost the first three matches, then goes on a tear...

Such a flawed argument, dude. It only shows that Agassi shouldn't be dismissed just because of his age, while Federer deserves to be propped up as peak by Djokovic fans.

 

[mike danny]

And Agassi is famously a wind player. And night conditions help Djokovic. It still took five sets for young Fed to dispatch ol' Agassi. And Tsitsipas took ol' Djokovic to 5-sets, too. And Djokovic is a better player than Agassi.

Tsitsipas pushed Djokovic to 5 on the latter's weakest surface. I sincerely doubt he woukd have done it on HC.

And the less said about Tsitsi's last 3 sets, the better. Comparing that match to Fed's is ridiculous. The Greek was literally beaten physically at 23 by a 34 year old.

 

[mike danny]

Jack draper moral Wimbly semifinalist.

Did Jack Draper face Djokovic in the later stages? Thought so.

 

[mike danny]

It's hard to put Nadal's performance at USO 11 out of context because he was mentally shot against Djokovic.

It explains how he was able to beat the field really hard at both Wimbledon and US Open, but couldn't quite replicate it against Djokovic. Call it mental weakness, but overall Nadal was pretty good at those two venues in 2011.

Mentally shot is no excuse. Fed was mentally shot against Nadal too in 2008-early 2009 and still didn't lie down against the Spaniard.

 

[mike danny]

You're stretching this too much. That's your opinion and I bet not many agree with you. Rafa reached 3 out of 4 Slam finals in 2011, and overall had a better year than 2004 Agassi on all surfaces.

We're talking HC here. Not overall. And on HC 2011 Nadal doesn't edge out 2004 Agassi.

 

[mike danny]

There is a big difference between losing in a QF of a slam and the Final.
Agassi also beat guys ranked 47,37,26 and 54 getting to that QF while Rafa took out in form Murray in SF who just mopped up Djokovic in Cincy final(and had AO final earlier in the year)
Agassi AO run was equally easy to his UO run and forgetable until he met a proper opponent and lost.
Rafa also destroyed Federer 6-3 6-2 in Miami semis and lost in 3rd set tb to Djoko
18 year old Rafa took Hewitt to 3 sets just a week before in Toronto masters which tells a lot what kind of level Agassi produced to beat the very same Hewitt in 3 sets in Cincy final.

Yeah, of course Nadal got to beat more opponents since he didn't draw Djokovic in the QF, no sh*t.

All it matters is how they both performed against the dominant guy and Agassi edges out Nadal here.

 

[Fabresque]

The reason why Medvedev and a lot of these other guys are being underrated is because Djokodal have set the standards so high the last 2-3 years that it basically makes it impossible for any younger player to be seen as good if they aren’t winning slams alongside them.

That aside, Medvedev’s 91% win rate on hard courts is a batshit crazy number. Doesn’t get talked about enough.

 

[mike danny]

The reason why Medvedev and a lot of these other guys are being underrated is because Djokodal have set the standards so high the last 2-3 years that it basically makes it impossible for any younger player to be seen as good if they aren’t winning slams alongside them.

That aside, Medvedev’s 91% win rate on hard courts is a batshit crazy number. Doesn’t get talked about enough.

Murray, Stan and Cilic have won slams alongside them...

 

[InsideOut900]

Mentally shot is no excuse. Fed was mentally shot against Nadal too in 2008-early 2009 and still didn't lie down against the Spaniard.

He did at RG 08 and displayed clear mental weakness in the RG 06 final too.
He also went down 2 sets in the Wimbledon final in 2008 because of mental lapses and had some in the AO 09 final too.

Federer was on his own turf at Wimbledon, the same way I expect Nadal to play well if Djokovic met him at RG 11. He also played well at AO 12, on Novak's own turf this time, while AO 09 match was on neutral ground.

And again, I expect Nadal to play much better against anyone not named Djokovic at Wimb/USO 11.

 

[mike danny]

He did at RG 08 and displayed clear mental weakness in the RG 06 final too.
He also went down 2 sets in the Wimbledon final in 2008 because of mental lapses and had some in the AO 09 final too.

Federer was on his own turf at Wimbledon, the same way I expect Nadal to play well if Djokovic met him at RG 11. He also played well at AO 12, on Novak's own turf this time, while AO 09 match was on neutral ground.

And again, I expect Nadal to play much better against anyone not named Djokovic at Wimb/USO 11.

Fed played great epics at Wimb 2008 and AO 2009 vs Nadal, while Nadal bent over in the 2011 slam finals.

And yet Fed gets accused of mental weakness, whe Nadal gets a pass.

 

[InsideOut900]

Fed played great epics at Wimb 2008 and AO 2009 vs Nadal, while Nadal bent over in the 2011 slam finals.

And yet Fed gets accused of mental weakness, whe Nadal gets a pass.

Well, I obviously don't think Nadal should get a pass, but this was a one-off that's easily explainable.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Roddick had a perfect grass record against non-Federer opponents for three years but nobody cares, duh.

 

[mike danny]

Well, I obviously don't think Nadal should get a pass, but this was a one-off that's easily explainable.

Don't think it shoukd be treated as a one-off. Might as well treat 2008-2009 as a one-off for Fed too considering he's been going toe to toe with Nadal since.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

btw Fedr played The Nadal closer in 2012 AO than The Nadal himself played Joe in either 2011 final, despite the apparently then-insurmountable mental block.

 

[NoleFam]

All that matters is that Agassi had overall better results on HC in 2004 than 2011 Nadal. Results don't lie.

Nadal's AO and USO runs were also pretty easy until he met Djokovic in the latter.

LOL at in form Murray. The guy played a pitiful USO SF against Nadal after struggling mightily with Haase and nearly going 5 with Isner too.

Fact is Agassi played Federer tougher than Nadal played Djokovic. There's really nothing in Nadal's favor. Plus he also won a masters.

Agassi's ranking simply pitted him against Federer in the QF. It is what it is. He was still the second best player of that tournament, IMO.

Funny how 34 year old Agassi was such great competition in 2004, even better than 25 year old peak Nadal, but 34 year old Federer wasn't great competition from 2015 Wimbledon-USO. Some of you try to have your cake and eat it too.

 

[RS]

Funny how 34 year old Agassi was such great competition in 2004, even better than 25 year old peak Nadal, but 34 year old Federer wasn't great competition from 2015 Wimbledon-USO. Some of you try to have your cake and eat it too.

Here we go again

 

[NoleFam]

Here we go again.

It's the truth though. What do hear about it over and over? Past his prime. Past his prime Agassi was better than prime Nadal though.

 

[RF-18]

Fed played great epics at Wimb 2008 and AO 2009 vs Nadal, while Nadal bent over in the 2011 slam finals.

And yet Fed gets accused of mental weakness, whe Nadal gets a pass.

USO 11 wasn't bending over. What the hell. Nadal was killing himself out there and fought till the end and managed to create drama and tension against a player who was simply the superior HC player. Nadal went down honorably. It was anything but bending over

You are not even being fair here. Federer in Wimby and AO played on his favourite and one of the most successfull tournaments/surfaces for him. Nadal wasn't even a champion of either of the tournaments before those meetings, and you gonna give Federer some sort of medal for making it close while saying Nadal was bending over in USO 11? Jesus christ.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

I think Agassi peaked in 2004.

 

[RS]

It's the truth though. What do hear about it over and over? Past his prime. Past his prime Agassi was better than prime Nadal though.

Annoying is it not?

I think the debate from mike is around HC only though and not clay and grass but I might be wrong.

 

[helterskelter]

Judging from quite a few of these hypothetical threads, some people view '04 Agassi as far better than '21 Djokovic at the AO and possibly the USO as well.

It takes the unreality of hypotheticals to an extreme to imagine a hypothetical between Agassi 04 and Djokovic 21 at the Us Open before the tournament has started.

 

[mike danny]

USO 11 wasn't bending over. What the hell. Nadal was killing himself out there and fought till the end and managed to create drama and tension against a player who was simply the superior HC player. Nadal went down honorably. It was anything but bending over

You are not even being fair here. Federer in Wimby and AO played on his favourite and one of the most successfull tournaments/surfaces for him. Nadal wasn't even a champion of either of the tournaments before those meetings, and you gonna give Federer some sort of medal for making it close while saying Nadal was bending over in USO 11? Jesus christ.

Lost honorably? What? He got breadsticked in the 4th by an injured Djokovic and you think this is honorable?

Slow plexicushion is not a good surface for Federer, especially in the Nadal match-up, so not sure why you brought it up. But he still fought honorably in those matches against a Nadal at the peak of his abilities, despite the mental block.

Djokovic wasn't a Wimb and USO champpion either before those matches with Nadal so don't see why Nadal deserves a medal for fighting "honorably" just to get a measly set.

 

[mike danny]

Funny how 34 year old Agassi was such great competition in 2004, even better than 25 year old peak Nadal, but 34 year old Federer wasn't great competition from 2015 Wimbledon-USO. Some of you try to have your cake and eat it too.

Fed was good competition from Wimb-USO that year, though 2004 Agassi was better on HC, IMO. I just have a problem with those propping up 2015 Fed while dismissing Agassi as a broken back old retired man.

And yes, both their HC results point out to 2004 Agassi being a better HC player than 2011 Nadal. And peak 25 year old Nadal also ran out of gas against an injured Djokovic in the 4th set of USO 2011, which is rarely mentioned while 2005 Agassi constantly gets crap thrown at him.

 

[mike danny]

Annoying is it not?

I think the debate from mike is around HC only though and not clay and grass but I might be wrong.

This guy gets it.

I've repeatedly talked about HC so not sure why people get worked up over this.

Read before criticizing.

 

[mike danny]

Funny how 34 year old Agassi was such great competition in 2004, even better than 25 year old peak Nadal, but 34 year old Federer wasn't great competition from 2015 Wimbledon-USO. Some of you try to have your cake and eat it too.

And yes, 2015 Fed and 2004 Agassi are both good competition. Never stated otherwise so get off your high horse.

 

[RF-18]

Lost honorably? What? He got breadsticked in the 4th by an injured Djokovic and you think this is honorable?

Slow plexicushion is not a good surface for Federer, especially in the Nadal match-up, so not sure why you brought it up. But he still fought honorably in those matches against a Nadal at the peak of his abilities, despite the mental block.

Djokovic wasn't a Wimb and USO champpion either before those matches with Nadal so don't see why Nadal deserves a medal for fighting "honorably" just to get a measly set.

Every set was constested with breaks and hard fought points and epic 3rd set where Nadal brought it back. 4th set was the only bad one but tbf after the warzone for 3 sets both were pretty exhausted. Nadal did not bendover.

I don't wanna give out a medal to anyome but you are the one saying Federer went down honorably on his prefered surfaces mind you while saying Nadal was bending over in USO 11 final when he didn't, and you totally disregard the fact that Federer was even playing on his prefered surfaces compared a player who wasn't.

 

[Fabresque]

Murray, Stan and Cilic have won slams alongside them...

And those 3 (+ Delpo) were also great players. It doesn’t negate how good Meddy is.

 

[RF-18]

This guy gets it.

I've repeatedly talked about HC so not sure why people get worked up over this.

Read before criticizing.

But you brought up wimbledon 08.

 

[tudwell]

There is a big difference between losing in a QF of a slam and the Final.
Agassi also beat guys ranked 47,37,26 and 54 getting to that QF while Rafa took out in form Murray in SF who just mopped up Djokovic in Cincy final(and had AO final earlier in the year)
Agassi AO run was equally easy to his UO run and forgetable until he met a proper opponent and lost.
Rafa also destroyed Federer 6-3 6-2 in Miami semis and lost in 3rd set tb to Djoko
18 year old Rafa took Hewitt to 3 sets just a week before in Toronto masters which tells a lot what kind of level Agassi produced to beat the very same Hewitt in 3 sets in Cincy final.

You're spinning it as much as possible for Nadal. Someone could easily do the same for Agassi, if they wanted. Note Nadal lost 8 matches in 2011 to a player not named Djokovic. Djokovic was a sizable reason for Nadal not winning a single title (even a minor one!) on hard courts that year, but he was far, far from the only one. And note the one title Agassi did win is a place where Nadal lost to Mardy Fish in 2011. Nadal could have very well won Cincinnati if he'd been in any kind of form, but he wasn't, so he didn't, while Agassi did, beating some great players on the way. Nadal played three good hard court tournaments in 2011 and a lot of poor ones. Agassi also easily played at least three good hard court tournaments. I'm not saying you have to anoint ancient Agassi superior in every way to Nadal – but, like, it's not at all unreasonable to consider 2004 Agassi slightly better on hard courts. It's unreasonable to think it's unreasonable.

(It's also not unreasonable to give the edge to Nadal, either, by the way. But you seem to be arguing for a lot more than an edge.)

 

[RS]

But you brought up wimbledon 08.

I think mike was saying Federer was playing better in Wim 08 than Nadal was in the 2 finals vs Djokovic in 2011.

 

[NoleFam]

Fed was good competition from Wimb-USO that year, though 2004 Agassi was better on HC, IMO. I just have a problem with those propping up 2015 Fed while dismissing Agassi as a broken back old retired man.

And yes, both their HC results point out to 2004 Agassi being a better HC player than 2011 Nadal. And peak 25 year old Nadal also ran out of gas against an injured Djokovic in the 4th set of USO 2011, which is rarely mentioned while 2005 Agassi constantly gets crap thrown at him.

You would have a hard time proving that being that Federer was 12-3 against the top 10 on hardcourt in 2015, only losing to Djokovic, and Agassi was 5-3. Yea in Slams, you could argue Agassi was better but outside of that, no chance.

2011 Nadal is just a better player than 2004 Agassi, period, and let's not even get into the difference in athleticism. If you want to say he was better on hardcourt then fine, since it's not worth arguing over.