Mayonnaise
Banned
And why were there so many Slam winners? Because Agassi was taking so many breaks, and Sampras couldn't dominate, year-round.Ok mayonnaise if you're going to be a child about it - the point of that quote about any of his years was that during years he was 1 he must have competed against 10 other players with slams, if not more.
Look at the year-end rankings for Agassi and Nadal the years Sampras/Federer ended #1:again - everyone needs to stop arguing with just stats on here because it never tells the whole story. Rafa didn't even play 3 months of 09 after french. So when you say agassi was too busy 'doing meth and shopping wigs" (for 6 years really?) I'm not sure what goes thru your head when making comments about rafa in 09. Bias perhaps?
Agassi: 24, 2, 2, 8, 110, 6
Nadal: 51, 2, 2, 2, 2
Agassi was ranked 110 in 1997. Why? Because he played just 1 Slam that year. Who was away for longer? Nadal who missed 1 Slam in 2009 or Agassi who missed 3 Slams in 1997? Are you that ignorant? Did you start watching Tennis last year?
Then why dismiss Hewitt and Roddick as not worthy rivals? Just because Federer was good enough to dominate them, while Sampras was a mug on Clay, and nowhere near as consistent as Federer anywhere else?Again, your sampras stats don't tell the story - sampras played the vast majority of their matches well after his prime (probably all the ones he lost came after 2000). It's like taking fed's h2h with the players he played only after 2008 and comparing them. Silly