D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Which is quite more impressive.
Prime Djokovic vs Prime Agassi - In the 90s, who wins?
- Thread starter m2nk2
- Start date
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
NatF
Bionic Poster
Not that much easier, don't kid yourself. He only played 52 matches in 96 and won just 73% :lol:
Prime Agassi sure. He won as many matches in 2002 as Agassi played in 1996.
It's not like 96 was a strong year anyway.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=9180015&postcount=161
The top 10 won a couple of percentage more matches. Hardly enough to account for Agassi's poorer results.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
Dunno, Agassi won 1 slam and 3 Masters and another slam and masters final in 95.
1995
1. Pete Sampras
2. Andre Agassi
3. Thomas Muster
4. Boris Becker
5. Michael Chang
6. Yevgeny Kafelnikov
7. Thomas Enqvist
8. Jim Courier
9. Wayne Ferreira
10. Goran Ivanišević
11. Richard Krajicek
12. Michael Stich
13. Sergi Bruguera
14. Arnaud Boetsch
15. Marc Rosset
2002
1. Lleyton Hewitt
2. Andre Agassi
3. Marat Safin
4. Juan Carlos Ferrero
5. Carlos Moyà
6. Roger Federer
7. Jiří Novák
8. Tim Henman
9. Albert Costa
10. Andy Roddick
11. Tommy Haas
12. David Nalbandian
13. Pete Sampras
14. Thomas Johansson
15. Guillermo Cañas
I'd say 1995 is tougher competition.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
Yeah, my point was to highlight that you can't necessarily base someone's prime on his results alone, but you need also look at his opponents.
I think competition was similar in 95 compared to 96, with a slidge edge for 95 maybe. So even if Agassi did better results in 02 compared to 96 I still think Agassi was a better player in 96.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Yes and his opponents performed much better in 1995...
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
Terrible indeed.
Can't see Agassi being the better server at all. Penetration on the shots are also an area I wouldn't give edge to Agassi. Djokovic takes the ball early as well and that's why he is such a good returner.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
That Becker wasn't quite the Becker from the 80s. Courier was also in serious decline.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
So you're going to argue Washington and Pioline > Lleyton Hewitt and Andre Agassi.. Are you kidding?
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
1996 wasn't stronger than 2002.. Ferrero of '02 in my opinion > Muster of '96 and Moya was virtually equal to Chang (both ranked 5 and both won Masters shields IIRC).
If anything they're pretty similar and 1997/1998 is slightly weaker than 2002..
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Based on 90's conditions, Agassi would take around 60-65% of the meetings IMO. It's pretty simple really. I think if you transplanted Agassi at his best to this era, he'd be beaten soundly by Novak, but in the 90's (as the OP states) any surface that favoured Agassi, he would win.
He would likely beat Novak in Australia (especially if the match is in the day as the later matches were in the 90's and mid 2000's) because the court is rebound ace. Novak would take most of the RG meetings. And Wimbledon and the USO I would give to Andre.
The match up itself looks ominous for Andre I agree, but the 90's courts were Andre's time. I think all the top guys today have benefited quite a bit from the slowing of the courts in general. Even Federer has admitted this. As such, Djokovic would have to make spome pretty big adjustments, and Andre would be absolutely fine. That's what changes the match up entirely IMO.
He would likely beat Novak in Australia (especially if the match is in the day as the later matches were in the 90's and mid 2000's) because the court is rebound ace. Novak would take most of the RG meetings. And Wimbledon and the USO I would give to Andre.
The match up itself looks ominous for Andre I agree, but the 90's courts were Andre's time. I think all the top guys today have benefited quite a bit from the slowing of the courts in general. Even Federer has admitted this. As such, Djokovic would have to make spome pretty big adjustments, and Andre would be absolutely fine. That's what changes the match up entirely IMO.
Last edited:
PMChambers
Hall of Fame
This is easy one, Djokovic easily.
Prime Agassi lasts 6 month at best probably 94/95. When he's on, he's on, but most of 90's he was a "hair cut with a forehand". Djokovic is stronger at nearly every shot and better physically and mentally.
AO - 8-2 Djokovic
FO - 9-1 Djokovic
Wim - 7-3 Djokovic
USO - 7-3 Djokovic
31-9 - DJOKOVIC
Masters - 80% Djokovic They had 5 set finals in 90's.
Too big, to strong, too fast, does not miss. If Chang can rank higher than Agassi for half 90's Djokovic would dominate.
Agassi played better in 1999+ but did so by playing more conservative which means he's playing Djokovic's game but a lower level.
Agassi would also be ranked bellow Djokovic who at peak would be 1 or 2 in 90's. So Agassi v Djokovic would likely be SF & QF meetings.
Djokovic v Sampras is more of the question. I think they would be split on surface but Djokovic ability to play and get points would likely split the No.1, even if PS won Wim, USO & WTF in a year. As indicated above Djokovic is far superior to Agassi which would put pressure on Sampras, he;d have to play a lot more volleys and face serve only slightly worse than his own. Sampras below net lewvel volleys are adverage so would be interesting match up.
Prime Agassi lasts 6 month at best probably 94/95. When he's on, he's on, but most of 90's he was a "hair cut with a forehand". Djokovic is stronger at nearly every shot and better physically and mentally.
AO - 8-2 Djokovic
FO - 9-1 Djokovic
Wim - 7-3 Djokovic
USO - 7-3 Djokovic
31-9 - DJOKOVIC
Masters - 80% Djokovic They had 5 set finals in 90's.
Too big, to strong, too fast, does not miss. If Chang can rank higher than Agassi for half 90's Djokovic would dominate.
Agassi played better in 1999+ but did so by playing more conservative which means he's playing Djokovic's game but a lower level.
Agassi would also be ranked bellow Djokovic who at peak would be 1 or 2 in 90's. So Agassi v Djokovic would likely be SF & QF meetings.
Djokovic v Sampras is more of the question. I think they would be split on surface but Djokovic ability to play and get points would likely split the No.1, even if PS won Wim, USO & WTF in a year. As indicated above Djokovic is far superior to Agassi which would put pressure on Sampras, he;d have to play a lot more volleys and face serve only slightly worse than his own. Sampras below net lewvel volleys are adverage so would be interesting match up.
Dedans Penthouse
Legend
And who are YOU again? Agassi's in the HOF, has won every single major (something that Djoko's yet to accomplish) and you?.....a fanboy whining on a message board.RF-18 said:
^^^
This +100.
Last edited:
terribleIVAN
Hall of Fame
Get the eyes checked.
Agassi was standing closer to the baseline than Nole, while being much shorter. Better at cutting trajectories, better hand-eye coordination, better reflexes, better anticipation, much smoother return motion.
Agassi was so good at adding pace to the returning serve that his adversairies after a little nwhile were hesitant in serving at full power.
It's just that people seem to have short memories.
AnotherTennisProdigy
Professional
It's not a matter of whether Djokovic can hit on the rise. I mean, everybody in the big four hits on the rise, except maybe Nadal (although he's learned very well how to do it as well). But I feel like Agassi's timing surpasses even Federer when hitting it off the bounce.
terribleIVAN
Hall of Fame
Rafa CAN take the ball on the rise, as we've seen at WIM2014.
It's just that he stubbornly refuses to do it regularly.
I would tend to favor Andre most of the time. I think that Andre would be able to dictate the point against Novak, as he did against most of his opponents. Novak's ability to retrieve would be less of a factor on the 90's hard courts. Also, going from defense to offense would be more difficult using 90's gear. Novak would make him hit the extra shot, but Andre didn't have any problems with finishing points. Novak would have to play a more offensive game on the 90's courts.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
What do you mean?
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
I would favor Novak at the AO (even on rebound ace which was still slower than people think) and RG. Wimbledon, Novak a slight favorite. Maybe dead even on 90s grass. Agassi a favorite at USO maybe.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
My eyes are good enough. Agassi being able to stand close is not just because he has better hand-eye coordination or reflexes. It's just different technique. Agassi hits more flat while Djokovic applies more spin, hence Agassi shots can be faster in general. There are times Agassi get pushed back and Djokovic stands on or inside the baseline and it all has to do with the depth of opponents shots. Agassi can however afford to stand closer because, again, Djokovic needs more time to produce spin. Agassi could do what he did because of the way he hit the ball. However, when the opponent has good depth on the ground strokes, Agassi couldn't stand on the baseline. With poly strings, players hit with so much top spin and the ground strokes generally have more depth. Agassi would have to stand further back to deal with these shots. Djokovic, with his more loopy swing, still stands close to baseline very often, which is quite amazing.
tennis_commentator
Hall of Fame
That's useless on fast hardcourts and fast grass vs an attacking genius like Agassi.
Djokovic has no big shot to hit Agassi off the court with, while Agassi can crack winners easily on 90s surfaces.
Heck, even at 2014 Wimbledon, Djokovic almost lost to 33-year-old Federer :lol:
And Djokovic has lost to Nadal in 2 of their 3 US Open meetings because Nadal can hit winners down-the-line while Djokovic is just a gymnast which doesn't always work at the US Open (but always works in Australia).
Anton
Legend
Thats ridiculous, Djoker can crack winners just fine given positional opportunity, which I believe his superior speed, stamina and serve, compared to Aggasi, would give him.
Of course the only way to know for sure would be for the two to actually play, but I believe Djoker would dominate Agassi. He is just a faster, fitter, bigger player.
One thing though - are there any stroke statistics we can use to compare the two?
I think Djoker has about 10 MPH avg. speed advantage on both first and second serve, but what about forehand/backhand statistics?
OrangePower
Legend
What? Similar playing styles? Agassi liked to take the ball earlier than Novak and was more aggressive from the baseline - liked to step in and change direction of the ball more often. Whereas Novak is much more solid and a better defender. Both great returners of course, but that does not mean 'similar playing styles'.
Anyway on faster low-bouncing courts I give the edge to Agassi, slower higher-bouncing to Novak.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
What you described here are similar playing styles. I didn't say exactly the same playing styles. Similar.
People can't read on TW. Move along.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
Yeah, but people need to sharpen up a bit, no?
OrangePower
Legend
Oh, I see what you mean. Like, Fed and Delpo both hit a big forehand, so they have similar styles. :shock:
Similar means you see one play, and you think to yourself, wow, that reminds me of ____.
That's not happening with Agassi and Novak.
Of course many here are too young to have actually seen Agassi play, so there's that.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
For me, their playing styles are similar enough to grant the use of the word similar to describe their styles.
Edberg and Sampras has also got similar styles. But of course if you break down their gameplay to the smallest details then they too will be very different. But that's just silly, no?
OrangePower
Legend
Ok, fair enough, we can agree to disagree. Personally I don't think Edberg and Sampras are similar at all. Yes they were both serve-and-volley players and liked to control points, but Sampras played using power on serve and forehand, while Edberg relied more on finesse and a fantastic backhand (pretty mediocre forehand). If anything I would say Sampras and Becker were more similar than Sampras and Edberg.
Anyway if you define similar as broadly as 'serve-and-volley', ok. For me though similar means when you see one play, you can imagine that you are seeing the other playing.
Adv. Edberg
Legend
I think Agassi would win. Conditions were a bit faster and Djoko can't rely on his poly strings. I think this favours Agassi.
Similar threads
- Poll
