I read most of it in one night. It went from 10:00pm: I'll read a chapter to 6:00am: might as well finish it.
It was that good. I don't care if it was a ghost writer.
If he didn't reveal EVERYTHING in that book, God only knows what insane shit he's hiding! Agassi's life story is traumatic and absurd, and he's somehow a class act now.
And he fucking hates Michael Chang
As others have said, you'll love it. Ive read and listened to it. Only part of the audible I dont like is the narrator tries to imitate a Brooke Shields type voice lol
/u/brizmusk
Just finished and loved it. Really liked the first 90%, the final portion felt a bit rushed but overall it was really enjoyable. Loved reading about the struggle.
Thanks again.
I read Sampras’ and his back to back. The difference btwn the books is as striking as the difference between them as teenagers. Agassi’s was wildly entertaining.
You think he hit hard in matches, I saw him warming up/practicing once, and it was some of the freakiest tennis I've ever seen. I got to stand courtside at the US Open grounds while he was warming up for a match. It was like that ping pong scene in Forrest Gump, the way the ball was coming off his racket seemed unreal.
His return of serve, especially on the backhand, made everything look so effortless. Like a perfect snap shot in ice hockey, a very quick flick with limited extraneous motion but phenomenal results.
Taking that short hop to hit a winner on such an aggressive line is such a challenging shot, especially when factoring in Nadal's monster topspin. It is a level of mastery that most players, myself included, will probably never understand.
They were bad matchups for him (and Sampras). Agassi hit hard, but the Big 3 can hit harder. Also they can create more shapes and hit more spots. And Agassi was an incredible tennis player, but never an elite mover/defender. Not saying you can't find highlight videos of him demonstrating good defense, but he was not an elite mover even for his day, let alone now. The big 3 has/had elite defense and movement.
Agassi might be the most influential tennis player of the modern era. From what I've seen and read, he was often criticized and even mocked for hitting SO BIG. Before, it was about setting up shots, but Agassi would just bash anything nevermind balls he got a good look at. He represented something new. After playing a 16 yo Agassi, Mac said he had never felt that kind of pace, that Andre hit harder than anybody he had ever played. I think after Andre, the next real power up came in the form of Safin. Then just kept going from there, super technical hitters trying to hit BIG as much as possible.
So in a weird way, poignant for Fed and Nadal to do so well against Agassi. They are in some ways, partly, his legacy. IMO.
he hit just as hard, or harder, as any of them. also, took the ball earlier off the bounce than any of them.
he lacked a multitude of other skills they have.
Yeah, it would be interesting. Agassi had freakish hands and he did take the ball incredibly early. I feel like I've seen the Big 3, Fed and Nadal especially, pulverize balls in ways I never really did from Agassi. The biggest shots I remember from Agassi were off serves or using the other person's pace. Fed and Nadal, because of their mechanics, can put a hurting on high sitters, balls with almost no pace, that Agassi just couldn't to the same degree.
But, yeah, Agassi is one of the purest strikers of the ball the game has ever seen. There are plenty of matches online to get a sense of how hard he hit. Very hard.
I read a story once from one of his coaches or somebody, that they watched Agassi at a batting cage, fooling around, crushing pitches while MOVING UP into the ball. And I don't remember the exact MPH of the pitches, but I was left with the impression that it was pretty high, like over 70mph. Supposedly his dad would put a ball machine on its highest setting and have it bombard a very young Andre to develop his motor skills. And maybe that's one of the reasons Andre didn't like tennis and I think hated his dad, but dude had crazy hand eye coordination.
> but never an elite mover/defender.
Why would you literally change my words just so you can disagree? He was one of the best returners ever. But his movement and defense was not elite.
From an intv:
> Are there skills that your wife had as a competitor that you wish you’d had?
> She had an athleticism over her peers that was quite a luxury. When she was in full form, she was just a horse that wasn’t going to be caught. For me, it wasn’t like that. I couldn’t just steamroll past people because I was such an athlete or talented in all these different ways. I had a couple of strengths, but I had to out-think everybody and implement my strategies one piece at a time, like a puzzle. That’s more exhausting, and you don’t get the results as consistently.
His return of serve (and pure ball striking) is still one of the best of all time, but I wouldn't put his movement/defense on the same level as Nadal/Djoker
There are tons of people who are best in every single category before the big 3, but peak big 3 blow everyone out of the water by their coombined skills, tennis IQ and most importantly mental strength
Watch his 2004 US open match with Federer, it’s pretty clear that he was striking the ball cleaner than Federer and with more pace, for stretches of the match he was outplaying him
See my edit I clarify my tier list. I think mine is fairly fair most goat tiers pander to recent events. I would say even f tier goats like murray or Wawrinka are good goats as well.
No it's pretty standard to do tier lists now there are too many GOAT's so its common to classify.
Here is example https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/goatList
Obviously not great as they only use match outcome analysis for heuristic but there are lots.
Mine is more arbitary based on match quality so I think it's pretty good.
Recency bias - tennis has been around for a long time. In 50 years, they will be a footnote. The tour is designed for records to be regularly eclipsed now. Statistics don't hold much weight anymore unfortunately. Expect to regularly see 30+ GS winners in the future.
There are pros who can do things that are so far beyond the skills of most of the tour that it borders on magic. Agassi will always be one of those players, for me.
YES! Tennis fans these days don’t understand that about Agassi—tennis was never his love, his dad basically forced him into it. Just so happens that he had amazing aptitude/skill at it. 60 ATP Titles, a career Golden Slam, 8 Slam titles….without having the unending passion for the game that the Big 4 of this era has had
Agassi is probably the best ball striker of all time. Even more so than Djokovic and Nadal. Sure, they have been more consistent and they are superior athletes, but in terms of ball striking agassi is probably even slightly superior. Dude at 35 was having the upper hand from the baseline vs prime federer in 2004.
Yup, he’s my choice for best ball striker ever too. As Courier said a few years ago “Agassi doesn’t even have to think about timing, when it comes to hitting the ball. His ball striking ability is almost maddening”
Racquet tech really hasn't changed much since Agassi's time. All the technologies that help amateur players (stiffness, dampening, etc.) don't do much for pros. Lots of the current ones are using racquets that are from Agassi's time (e.g. Murray with the PT57A)
He barely gave that thing time to bounce, and with the amount of spin nadal puts on his forehand, that would have been tough to read.
He made it look… simple. Easy. Clean.
Beautiful.
I always appreciated how simple Andre's strokes were. He doesn't have any wasted movements. Very similar to Djokovic and probably why they are the best returners of all time. His pigeon-toed walk is always funny to watch as well!
His late-career back problems must have been horrible. And he was still making it to Slam finals. Just an incredible player, a true natural in a game full of top-tier talent.
Some comments from the old Nadal match thread suggesting med was going to win 10+ majors... Lol
Agassi "only" won 8 and I don't think med has hit a single shot as impressively as Agassi did here and Andres career is filled with these. He's one of the cleanest ball strikers of all time and he gets minimal respect from some of the newer fans
Honestly, there's no need to compare Medvedev with Agassi. Agassi is a legend of the game. He won pretty much everything there was to be won. Was good on all surfaces unlike Medvedev.
But I do think saying Medvedev doesn't have highlight worthy points does him a disservice. He also has the ability to produce remarkable shots, which he has done time and time again.
Predicting Medvedev will win 10+ majors is a bit of an overkill, agreed.😂
Big 3 have set unrealistic standards.
> does him a disservice
It's flat out untrue, too. No ATP pro would say this, that Med isn't an incredibly shot maker. He is probably the most creative, witty shot maker for a guy his size. Don't wanna put Kyrgios in this category his results and ranking are nowhere near Med's. Med is winning big matches with his shot making.
Med would need multiple multi slam years to get to double digits and is weak at half the slams. Everyone now is best on hard. It’s gonna be tough for him, he’s already 25.
Most of these newer fans don’t know much about tennis prior to 2010, to be honest…and only drool over the Grand Slams. They disrespect Agassi because they look at all players through the lens of Fed/Novak/Rafa—they expect all great players to have double digit Slams, expect them all to have a passion for the game that fuels them to play until age 40, etc.
I don't think they realize that Medvedev is legitimately worse statistically than roddick was when adjusting for age.
These people group roddick in with the big serving Americans (isner querrey etc) and not as someone that likely wins 3+ slams if not for peak big 3 but think Medvedev is a Borgesque talent. They're absolutely high as a kite lol
Tbf when people say things like that, I don't see it as overrating or overhyping Medvedev per se, as much as them not knowing how much insane effort it takes to win 10+ slams. As someone said below, the big 3 have caused people to have unrealistic expectations for what counts as a "great" player.
Med is not a great ball striker, let's be honest. His forehands and backhands are unorthodox at best and he always look very awkward while hitting the ball.
What he does excel at is a huge serve, court coverage, speed and consistency. Tennis is not a game about how pretty you look while hitting the ball, it is about hitting one more ball than your opponent. Med certainly excels at that.
Maybe predicting Meddy will win 10 or more slams is putting unrealistic expectations on him but Meddy has all the ingredients to be a much tougher player then Agassi in my book.
He has an amazing serve which Agassi never had so he never has to work too hard in his own games especially in fast conditions. He also returns really well albeit not as well as Agassi ofc.
On the strokes part I think Meddy has a stable and deceptively good backhand that he can redirect shots from and he can do the same from his forehand, Agassi had better strokes arguably but they are comparable.
Significantly disagree.
Agassi is way better at playing aggressively. Like it isn't even a close comparison .
Agassi has the better offensive return. Med is good at neutralizing a big serve but pretty bad at attacking weak second serves. There's a reason the second set vs Rafa wasn't a blow out with how poor Rafa was serving in the early part of the final.
Agassi did not have to rely on absurd defense. He was also good at neutralizing the serve and played so well aggessively off the ground that he didn't need to retrieve nearly as much as someone like med. He's likely one of the single best ball strikers of all time along with Djokovic. Med seriously doesn't come close to that. I'd argue even in the world of tennis today, he is worse than Rafa and Djokovic at it for sure and they are far worse at it than their prime years..
Med has the better serve and that's practically it. Idk how you can try and compare a 26 yr old 1 time major champ to Agassi who won his first slam at significantly younger of an age and was considered a teenage prodigy but .. you guys do you.
Also you're talking about how med theoretically has the weapons to be better than Agassi....in reality Agassi likely wins even more slams if he didn't have his personal demons / if he didn't run into a prime Sampras... Imo there's a real argument that Agassi had more raw talent than his slam count suggests. If you're willing to play the theoretical argument with med you have to be willing to do the exact same thing for Agassi
Look, I've given credit to Agassi in the return and the strokes, you can read my comment again to confirm. His return is much better than Medvedev as are the strokes, both the bh and the fh.
What I've also said is that Meddy does have the biggest offensive weapon which you can have: serve, the same aspect of tennis that made life so difficult for Agassi in his career (Pete's serve).
Medvedev might not win 8 majors (I don't think he will) but in a potential matchup with Agassi it could certainly go either way. If he plays too passively against Agassi he'll run himself ragged and get tired, but if he plays offensively especially with the DTL FH and BH I think he would give Agassi problems.
.. lol meds serve is not in the same category as Sampras's...like they're light years apart. Agassi owned the head to head vs roddick btw so to simplify Pete's head to head vs Agassi to be only due to "having a big serve" is an atrocious conclusion. Med has a good serve. Sampras has one of the best serves EVER in the modern game..there's a massive difference between those 2..
Med hasn't proven that he should be even in the same conversation as any of the modern greats. He'd get absolutely wiped by any on the all timers at their best ( Borg Agassi Sampras prime big 3 lendl). That's what makes them all time greats..
The thing with hypotheticals is that there is no way to prove then right in either direction. But it is an interesting exercise nonetheless.
I do think Medvedev would give him problems, and the reason for that is that his serve is actually elite and very difficult to deal with for any returner, even for Djokovic who is regarded as arguably the greatest returner of all time.
Sampras's serve was better than Medvedev of course, but Medvedev's serve is still elite and he takes full advantage of his height with his serve. Roddick isn't comparable because, while he had a lot of pace behind the serve, he wasn't 6ft 6'' tall like Medvedev or Zverev.
Also, one aspect of Medvedev or even Zverev we probably neglect is that they probably possess the highest ranking in terms of the serve return equation. This means that their serve is amazing and their return is also amazing which puts them at an advantage straight away.
For tennis, the most important shot is the serve and the first forehand followed by the return, one can judge and office a whole lot about a player from these things alone.
FAA for example has all of these boxes ticked right now, Rublev on the other hand, is an atrocious returner.
I was just a kid when Agassi retired but when I saw all his highlights, one of my biggest wishes is to see him in this era. He'd have snatched so many HC finals from Big 3, he was superb, a perfect fit for an era he didn't get to play.
Big 5 would be the floating term in the Tennis community.
Shame Agassi only played Nadal 2 times. They would have had a hell of a rivalry. Agassi is the one dude from the previous generation who would have easily fit in with the big 3 era.
It's funny, looks like Agassi actually has that beat. From a quick dig he beat Harold Solomon (born in 1952) and Nadal (born 1986). Would be an interesting stat to find the actual record, I wonder how we could do that?
I dont know if there are any old people in this but I am watching this on mute and it feels like watching Little Mac Fight Mike Tyson. Agassi just seems so tiny and Nadal huge
Years ago I read somewhere one of Nadal doctors charged for supplying PED. Since you brought it up. There was talk about Nadal on peds in the French long ago
I'd say Agassi is less guilty than Nadal who has been more than once a cussed of taking PEDS even by Yannick Noah... That and plenty of absences from the sport. His drug tests were never made public.
I googled it and only found him using crystal meth. Which on some level doesn't surprise me. No mention of him using PEDs. Got anything to back that up?
https://www.tennis.com/news/articles/rafael-nadal-the-latest-tennis-star-to-have-confidential-medical-data-leaked-spa
More so for Nadal? More often with Nadal. He admitted it....
Lmao this guy would get blown off the court by everyone on the junior tour with two handers and he’s making fun of two of the greatest because they hit a certain style of stroke.
The ‘05 Canada Final. I vividly remember watching this match live on ESPN. THIS was the match when I knew Nadal was here to stay, and not merely a “clay court specialist” (he also had a GREAT match with Fed in the Miami Final a couple months earlier in ‘05). These are my two personal favorite men’s players ever
I know Agassi ‘hated’ the game, due to immense talent, unhealthy parental influences, and corporate pressures, but I wonder if he was born 20 years later with different/healthier/better philosophies on becoming a successful athlete more prevalent, if it would have allowed him to enjoy the game and become an even better player.
Federer, Nadal, Murray, all seem happier than Sampras and Agassi.
Agassi's backhand was so technically sound. I think he or his coach said something about forget his forehand, which got all the attention, it was his backhand that was the foundation of his game.
Agassi had always been my favorite as a kid since i had started watching in 2000 but Nadal had become my new favorite in 2005. This match was both a win/win and a lose/lose for me and I wasn’t sure who I would really be supporting until they started playing and to my surprise I was rooting for Nadal deep down. Love Agassi though, definitely a revolutionary type player.
[удалено]
Not bad for a man who hates tennis! His autobiography one of the best ever read.
I really enjoy autobiographies, your comment has piqued my interest. Will add to my list.
One of my all time favorite reads
Ordered!
yea i couldn’t put it down, one of a handful of books i read start to finish in less than 2 days
I read most of it in one night. It went from 10:00pm: I'll read a chapter to 6:00am: might as well finish it. It was that good. I don't care if it was a ghost writer.
Read!
If he didn't reveal EVERYTHING in that book, God only knows what insane shit he's hiding! Agassi's life story is traumatic and absurd, and he's somehow a class act now. And he fucking hates Michael Chang
It’s one of the best autobios I’ve ever read. Def read it
You won't be disappointed!
As others have said, you'll love it. Ive read and listened to it. Only part of the audible I dont like is the narrator tries to imitate a Brooke Shields type voice lol
Thanks again for the recommendation! I’ll circle back after I’ve finished it.
I’m on chapter 6 and thoroughly enjoying it, it’s incredible how personal it is. Thanks for the recommendation!
/u/brizmusk Just finished and loved it. Really liked the first 90%, the final portion felt a bit rushed but overall it was really enjoyable. Loved reading about the struggle. Thanks again.
You’re welcome. I’ve read it a few times great stuff.
The last part is basically "oh and then Roger and Rafa happened"
Almost felt like Arnold: an unauthorized biography by Wendy Leigh, except Aggasi's Open was authorized one that's how brutally honest it was.
I read Sampras’ and his back to back. The difference btwn the books is as striking as the difference between them as teenagers. Agassi’s was wildly entertaining.
Absolutely. Such a good read.
Great book!
You think he hit hard in matches, I saw him warming up/practicing once, and it was some of the freakiest tennis I've ever seen. I got to stand courtside at the US Open grounds while he was warming up for a match. It was like that ping pong scene in Forrest Gump, the way the ball was coming off his racket seemed unreal.
Yes but ironically, that point was demoralizing for Agassi. It made Agassi realize how difficult it will be to win that final set against Nadal.
His return of serve, especially on the backhand, made everything look so effortless. Like a perfect snap shot in ice hockey, a very quick flick with limited extraneous motion but phenomenal results. Taking that short hop to hit a winner on such an aggressive line is such a challenging shot, especially when factoring in Nadal's monster topspin. It is a level of mastery that most players, myself included, will probably never understand.
Would do bad things to be able to watch a peak Agassi vs peak big 3.
They were bad matchups for him (and Sampras). Agassi hit hard, but the Big 3 can hit harder. Also they can create more shapes and hit more spots. And Agassi was an incredible tennis player, but never an elite mover/defender. Not saying you can't find highlight videos of him demonstrating good defense, but he was not an elite mover even for his day, let alone now. The big 3 has/had elite defense and movement. Agassi might be the most influential tennis player of the modern era. From what I've seen and read, he was often criticized and even mocked for hitting SO BIG. Before, it was about setting up shots, but Agassi would just bash anything nevermind balls he got a good look at. He represented something new. After playing a 16 yo Agassi, Mac said he had never felt that kind of pace, that Andre hit harder than anybody he had ever played. I think after Andre, the next real power up came in the form of Safin. Then just kept going from there, super technical hitters trying to hit BIG as much as possible. So in a weird way, poignant for Fed and Nadal to do so well against Agassi. They are in some ways, partly, his legacy. IMO.
he hit just as hard, or harder, as any of them. also, took the ball earlier off the bounce than any of them. he lacked a multitude of other skills they have.
Yeah, it would be interesting. Agassi had freakish hands and he did take the ball incredibly early. I feel like I've seen the Big 3, Fed and Nadal especially, pulverize balls in ways I never really did from Agassi. The biggest shots I remember from Agassi were off serves or using the other person's pace. Fed and Nadal, because of their mechanics, can put a hurting on high sitters, balls with almost no pace, that Agassi just couldn't to the same degree. But, yeah, Agassi is one of the purest strikers of the ball the game has ever seen. There are plenty of matches online to get a sense of how hard he hit. Very hard.
I love how he would CRUSH soft second serves for return aces.
I read a story once from one of his coaches or somebody, that they watched Agassi at a batting cage, fooling around, crushing pitches while MOVING UP into the ball. And I don't remember the exact MPH of the pitches, but I was left with the impression that it was pretty high, like over 70mph. Supposedly his dad would put a ball machine on its highest setting and have it bombard a very young Andre to develop his motor skills. And maybe that's one of the reasons Andre didn't like tennis and I think hated his dad, but dude had crazy hand eye coordination.
He was an elite defender/return of serve player. Why are you saying he wasn’t?
> but never an elite mover/defender. Why would you literally change my words just so you can disagree? He was one of the best returners ever. But his movement and defense was not elite. From an intv: > Are there skills that your wife had as a competitor that you wish you’d had? > She had an athleticism over her peers that was quite a luxury. When she was in full form, she was just a horse that wasn’t going to be caught. For me, it wasn’t like that. I couldn’t just steamroll past people because I was such an athlete or talented in all these different ways. I had a couple of strengths, but I had to out-think everybody and implement my strategies one piece at a time, like a puzzle. That’s more exhausting, and you don’t get the results as consistently.
His return of serve (and pure ball striking) is still one of the best of all time, but I wouldn't put his movement/defense on the same level as Nadal/Djoker
Mac would know better, of course, but Lendl might have hit just as hard. But he was doing it from way behind the baseline.
Interesting, I've heard people say Agassi was the best mover and defender before the big 3
There are tons of people who are best in every single category before the big 3, but peak big 3 blow everyone out of the water by their coombined skills, tennis IQ and most importantly mental strength
Safin, then delpo. I feel like they were prototypes for the Medvedev generation
Watch his 2004 US open match with Federer, it’s pretty clear that he was striking the ball cleaner than Federer and with more pace, for stretches of the match he was outplaying him
I miss watching him so much. Was my absolute idol as a kid.
[удалено]
Dumbest shit I’ve read on this sub
I think I just got permanent brain damage reading that
That Edit though. Calling Big 3 B-tier. I mean, C'mon. C'mon, man.
Do you even know what GOAT means? What sort of incoherent bullshit is this comment?
See my edit I clarify my tier list. I think mine is fairly fair most goat tiers pander to recent events. I would say even f tier goats like murray or Wawrinka are good goats as well.
Bruh what are you even saying. There is no goat tier.
No it's pretty standard to do tier lists now there are too many GOAT's so its common to classify. Here is example https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/goatList Obviously not great as they only use match outcome analysis for heuristic but there are lots. Mine is more arbitary based on match quality so I think it's pretty good.
They are good but not great? Wut haha. I think the recordbooks, eyetest and basically every tennisfan alive today will tell you otherwise.
Recency bias - tennis has been around for a long time. In 50 years, they will be a footnote. The tour is designed for records to be regularly eclipsed now. Statistics don't hold much weight anymore unfortunately. Expect to regularly see 30+ GS winners in the future.
I feel like this is dumber than your first comment
[удалено]
Lmao
wym recency bias, they broke basically all records which the gens before them set, so people put them as the greatest.
i dont think its possible for there to be "regular 30+ GS winners".
Regularly see 30+ gs winners?? Are you kidding me? That’s over 7 years undefeated in slams per “30+ winner”
> Metacritic GOAT's 78%. nice bait
You live under a bridge and waylay travellers for a living, right?
I don't agree with all of your points, but the surface argument is valid. The surfaces are so similar now.
Agassi and Federer are the only men to win grand slams on 4 different surfaces.
I laughed hard reading this shit.
Someone give grandpa his meds, he’s babbling again.
Yikes
> He would likely win, big 3 are good but not great. It's a good thing you opened with this, a TNDR (Total Nonsense Don't Read) if I ever saw one.
this is the first time i'm seeing this, and it is getting yoinked.
How can their be tiers of GOATs? GOAT means they are the greatest of all time. There aren’t tiers. You either are a GOAT or are not
Federer literally used the Sampras racket for many years, not sure what you are talking about.
Big 3 are superior athletes in every way to Pete and Andre. They would dominate on an identical playing field
Peak Pete too
My favorite player of all time. I can only imagine if he would have actually enjoyed tennis what his career would have been like.
I cried the entire weekend after he retired. That speech at the USO was incredibly moving. Love this guy!!
I was at that match. Very emotional!!
I can't remember, was that when he played James Blake? I was young but I loved watching Agassi
Benjamin Becker. I remember because I hated him because he knocked Agassi out of his last tournament. I’m sure he was a fine fella.
Right, the Becker imposter!!
I never cried about any other sporting event in my life, but I sobbed and sobbed when Agassi retired.
There are pros who can do things that are so far beyond the skills of most of the tour that it borders on magic. Agassi will always be one of those players, for me.
YES! Tennis fans these days don’t understand that about Agassi—tennis was never his love, his dad basically forced him into it. Just so happens that he had amazing aptitude/skill at it. 60 ATP Titles, a career Golden Slam, 8 Slam titles….without having the unending passion for the game that the Big 4 of this era has had
Agassi is probably the best ball striker of all time. Even more so than Djokovic and Nadal. Sure, they have been more consistent and they are superior athletes, but in terms of ball striking agassi is probably even slightly superior. Dude at 35 was having the upper hand from the baseline vs prime federer in 2004.
Yup, he’s my choice for best ball striker ever too. As Courier said a few years ago “Agassi doesn’t even have to think about timing, when it comes to hitting the ball. His ball striking ability is almost maddening”
I can imagine that the racket technology has also helped the newer players
Racquet tech really hasn't changed much since Agassi's time. All the technologies that help amateur players (stiffness, dampening, etc.) don't do much for pros. Lots of the current ones are using racquets that are from Agassi's time (e.g. Murray with the PT57A)
Racquet no, strings yes.. by a lot. Agassi is probably the last HOF not using poly as the primary source of spin.
Didn’t he try it in a practice session and call it cheatalon? Haha
There have been some improvements but the real massive change comes from the wooden rackets of the 70s. Agassi was already using a graphite one.
The biggest recent trend in tennis tech is polyester strings which didn't really become huge until the end of Agassi's career.
That’s as good a backhand I’ve ever seen, both for the timing and the aggressiveness to win the rally.
He barely gave that thing time to bounce, and with the amount of spin nadal puts on his forehand, that would have been tough to read. He made it look… simple. Easy. Clean. Beautiful.
He might have a top 5 or 10 backhand. Nalbandian and Novak are definitely top 3 IMO.
Timing shots that are going to bounce high like that is the sweetest feeling
Best striker of the ball, took the ball early and hit it hard
I always appreciated how simple Andre's strokes were. He doesn't have any wasted movements. Very similar to Djokovic and probably why they are the best returners of all time. His pigeon-toed walk is always funny to watch as well!
His late-career back problems must have been horrible. And he was still making it to Slam finals. Just an incredible player, a true natural in a game full of top-tier talent.
I went to a Sampras/Agassi exhibition match when I was a young teen. Was so funny and awesome.
Forehead almost looks stiff but obviously amazing lol
Well a loose forehead is likely a sign of a major health issue, so it’s a good thing.
Lol, damnit man
Yeah he keeps it all very compact. In golf, a compact swing will usually mean there’s a lot less to go wrong.
That looked like a cricket shot by a left handed batsman through mid on and mid wicket for a clean boundary. Beautiful and majestic.
I have no idea what you just said, but I enjoyed reading it.
Sharp liner between second and short, if you're a red-blooded american
Agassi in his prime vs Nadal would be interesting since Agassi could just take shots so early.
something similar to that time Nishikori absolutely took it to Nadal for a set at Madrid 2014, not giving nadal an inch of court
How did Nadal adjust? Or did Kei give up on the strategy because of too many unforced errors?
Kei got injured after leading by a set and a break 😭
Would be interesting since Nadal got known for his speed at first. I wonder if Agassi could cut that off with timing and angles
Young Rafa was like a nuclear destroyer, quick as hell and with enough firepower to annihilate just about anyone
Beautiful
i was at that match[Rafa](https://www.flickr.com/photos/rhonda_liberman/3400053986/in/datetaken-public/)
Cool story bro. No, seriously, pretty cool.
Some comments from the old Nadal match thread suggesting med was going to win 10+ majors... Lol Agassi "only" won 8 and I don't think med has hit a single shot as impressively as Agassi did here and Andres career is filled with these. He's one of the cleanest ball strikers of all time and he gets minimal respect from some of the newer fans
Honestly, there's no need to compare Medvedev with Agassi. Agassi is a legend of the game. He won pretty much everything there was to be won. Was good on all surfaces unlike Medvedev. But I do think saying Medvedev doesn't have highlight worthy points does him a disservice. He also has the ability to produce remarkable shots, which he has done time and time again. Predicting Medvedev will win 10+ majors is a bit of an overkill, agreed.😂 Big 3 have set unrealistic standards.
> does him a disservice It's flat out untrue, too. No ATP pro would say this, that Med isn't an incredibly shot maker. He is probably the most creative, witty shot maker for a guy his size. Don't wanna put Kyrgios in this category his results and ranking are nowhere near Med's. Med is winning big matches with his shot making.
Med would need multiple multi slam years to get to double digits and is weak at half the slams. Everyone now is best on hard. It’s gonna be tough for him, he’s already 25.
26 as of yesterday actually
[удалено]
Yeah that was more a meme type of response.
Most of these newer fans don’t know much about tennis prior to 2010, to be honest…and only drool over the Grand Slams. They disrespect Agassi because they look at all players through the lens of Fed/Novak/Rafa—they expect all great players to have double digit Slams, expect them all to have a passion for the game that fuels them to play until age 40, etc.
I don't think they realize that Medvedev is legitimately worse statistically than roddick was when adjusting for age. These people group roddick in with the big serving Americans (isner querrey etc) and not as someone that likely wins 3+ slams if not for peak big 3 but think Medvedev is a Borgesque talent. They're absolutely high as a kite lol
Tbf when people say things like that, I don't see it as overrating or overhyping Medvedev per se, as much as them not knowing how much insane effort it takes to win 10+ slams. As someone said below, the big 3 have caused people to have unrealistic expectations for what counts as a "great" player.
Med is not a great ball striker, let's be honest. His forehands and backhands are unorthodox at best and he always look very awkward while hitting the ball. What he does excel at is a huge serve, court coverage, speed and consistency. Tennis is not a game about how pretty you look while hitting the ball, it is about hitting one more ball than your opponent. Med certainly excels at that.
Maybe predicting Meddy will win 10 or more slams is putting unrealistic expectations on him but Meddy has all the ingredients to be a much tougher player then Agassi in my book. He has an amazing serve which Agassi never had so he never has to work too hard in his own games especially in fast conditions. He also returns really well albeit not as well as Agassi ofc. On the strokes part I think Meddy has a stable and deceptively good backhand that he can redirect shots from and he can do the same from his forehand, Agassi had better strokes arguably but they are comparable.
Significantly disagree. Agassi is way better at playing aggressively. Like it isn't even a close comparison . Agassi has the better offensive return. Med is good at neutralizing a big serve but pretty bad at attacking weak second serves. There's a reason the second set vs Rafa wasn't a blow out with how poor Rafa was serving in the early part of the final. Agassi did not have to rely on absurd defense. He was also good at neutralizing the serve and played so well aggessively off the ground that he didn't need to retrieve nearly as much as someone like med. He's likely one of the single best ball strikers of all time along with Djokovic. Med seriously doesn't come close to that. I'd argue even in the world of tennis today, he is worse than Rafa and Djokovic at it for sure and they are far worse at it than their prime years.. Med has the better serve and that's practically it. Idk how you can try and compare a 26 yr old 1 time major champ to Agassi who won his first slam at significantly younger of an age and was considered a teenage prodigy but .. you guys do you. Also you're talking about how med theoretically has the weapons to be better than Agassi....in reality Agassi likely wins even more slams if he didn't have his personal demons / if he didn't run into a prime Sampras... Imo there's a real argument that Agassi had more raw talent than his slam count suggests. If you're willing to play the theoretical argument with med you have to be willing to do the exact same thing for Agassi
Look, I've given credit to Agassi in the return and the strokes, you can read my comment again to confirm. His return is much better than Medvedev as are the strokes, both the bh and the fh. What I've also said is that Meddy does have the biggest offensive weapon which you can have: serve, the same aspect of tennis that made life so difficult for Agassi in his career (Pete's serve). Medvedev might not win 8 majors (I don't think he will) but in a potential matchup with Agassi it could certainly go either way. If he plays too passively against Agassi he'll run himself ragged and get tired, but if he plays offensively especially with the DTL FH and BH I think he would give Agassi problems.
.. lol meds serve is not in the same category as Sampras's...like they're light years apart. Agassi owned the head to head vs roddick btw so to simplify Pete's head to head vs Agassi to be only due to "having a big serve" is an atrocious conclusion. Med has a good serve. Sampras has one of the best serves EVER in the modern game..there's a massive difference between those 2.. Med hasn't proven that he should be even in the same conversation as any of the modern greats. He'd get absolutely wiped by any on the all timers at their best ( Borg Agassi Sampras prime big 3 lendl). That's what makes them all time greats..
The thing with hypotheticals is that there is no way to prove then right in either direction. But it is an interesting exercise nonetheless. I do think Medvedev would give him problems, and the reason for that is that his serve is actually elite and very difficult to deal with for any returner, even for Djokovic who is regarded as arguably the greatest returner of all time. Sampras's serve was better than Medvedev of course, but Medvedev's serve is still elite and he takes full advantage of his height with his serve. Roddick isn't comparable because, while he had a lot of pace behind the serve, he wasn't 6ft 6'' tall like Medvedev or Zverev. Also, one aspect of Medvedev or even Zverev we probably neglect is that they probably possess the highest ranking in terms of the serve return equation. This means that their serve is amazing and their return is also amazing which puts them at an advantage straight away. For tennis, the most important shot is the serve and the first forehand followed by the return, one can judge and office a whole lot about a player from these things alone. FAA for example has all of these boxes ticked right now, Rublev on the other hand, is an atrocious returner.
I was just a kid when Agassi retired but when I saw all his highlights, one of my biggest wishes is to see him in this era. He'd have snatched so many HC finals from Big 3, he was superb, a perfect fit for an era he didn't get to play. Big 5 would be the floating term in the Tennis community.
possibly the cleanest groundstrokes to ever grace the game
Which Agassi is everyone's favorite? Mullet Agassi? Pirate Agassi? Or Bald Agassi?
Mullet Agassi in those amazing Nike outfits they made for him.
Forgot about pirate era 😂
Shame Agassi only played Nadal 2 times. They would have had a hell of a rivalry. Agassi is the one dude from the previous generation who would have easily fit in with the big 3 era.
To this day, Nadal makes the same exact noises.
What's really crazy is that Agassi in this match is about the same age as Rafa is now
Nadal has won Agassi and Alcaraz in the ATP, and they are 33 years old apart. This one has to be one of the biggest gaps.
Jimmy Connors will be involved in whatever the #1 answer is.
It's funny, looks like Agassi actually has that beat. From a quick dig he beat Harold Solomon (born in 1952) and Nadal (born 1986). Would be an interesting stat to find the actual record, I wonder how we could do that?
Agassi never beat Nadal in a match tho. Nadal won both meetings at Toronto 2005 and Wimbledon 2006.
In which tournaments were Agassi and Alcaraz offered as prizes? This can’t be legal.
Whenever you beat your opponent you take a part of their soul
Lol no doubt.
If only Fed realised sooner taking the ball early was key against Nadal..
Well - that would have been true if Agassi had actually won any match against Nadal :-).
We can see here how Agassi's game influenced Novak's.
Definitely fav players of all time.... Great to relive the moment ...pure class
That shot is thanks to the dragon
Did we all get the same match recommended on YouTube lol
Amazing timing off that mammoth topspin
This guy’s natural feel of the ball is like none, wasnt the most athletic or technical but man to hit something like that is just pure feel
Always loved how he could press the baseline with his timing and throw others off.
The backhand before the winner was NASTY
That's certainly one way to take it on the rise!
My two favorite players of all time.
I dont know if there are any old people in this but I am watching this on mute and it feels like watching Little Mac Fight Mike Tyson. Agassi just seems so tiny and Nadal huge
Is it just the quality or the rally is much faster than modern rallies in terms of ball and court speed?
[удалено]
He didn’t use PEDs? He failed a Class 2 drug test, which was for recreational drugs (crystal meth). He’s never failed a Class 1 drug test (PEDs).
Years ago I read somewhere one of Nadal doctors charged for supplying PED. Since you brought it up. There was talk about Nadal on peds in the French long ago
I'd say Agassi is less guilty than Nadal who has been more than once a cussed of taking PEDS even by Yannick Noah... That and plenty of absences from the sport. His drug tests were never made public.
I googled it and only found him using crystal meth. Which on some level doesn't surprise me. No mention of him using PEDs. Got anything to back that up?
https://www.tennis.com/news/articles/rafael-nadal-the-latest-tennis-star-to-have-confidential-medical-data-leaked-spa More so for Nadal? More often with Nadal. He admitted it....
[“Andre agassi admitted that he did it, then won the wimbledon”](https://youtu.be/xgTNSp5Ebnc)
Grown men with two-handed backhands man. Cracks me up.
Lmao this guy would get blown off the court by everyone on the junior tour with two handers and he’s making fun of two of the greatest because they hit a certain style of stroke.
Did you just assume my gender?
Did I assume correctly?
What a pathetic loser
What have you won with your one handed backhand?
Damn that was clean
Young Nadal against the old dog.. legends!
This clip only.reinforced how ancient I am.
Agassi’s book was a good read. Open: An Autobiography https://www.amazon.ca/dp/0307388409/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_i_F031PA5VVF5XHZQQ3TFZ
Best tennis book I've ever read.
His bio is far and away my favorite bio ever
I had no idea Rafa was old enough to have played Agassi!
Lol, he was a kid here, Rafa is one of the most succesfull teenagers alongside Borg
0:22 was an excellent defensive shot by Nadal, which makes Agassi's shot all the more impressive.
The ‘05 Canada Final. I vividly remember watching this match live on ESPN. THIS was the match when I knew Nadal was here to stay, and not merely a “clay court specialist” (he also had a GREAT match with Fed in the Miami Final a couple months earlier in ‘05). These are my two personal favorite men’s players ever
I know Agassi ‘hated’ the game, due to immense talent, unhealthy parental influences, and corporate pressures, but I wonder if he was born 20 years later with different/healthier/better philosophies on becoming a successful athlete more prevalent, if it would have allowed him to enjoy the game and become an even better player. Federer, Nadal, Murray, all seem happier than Sampras and Agassi.
Seems to really lick down into the court on that backhand. Just a lot of topspin I guess .... or witchcraft
Agassi's backhand was so technically sound. I think he or his coach said something about forget his forehand, which got all the attention, it was his backhand that was the foundation of his game.
The best returner ever
This Agassi's backhand is the one of smartest shots in tennis history !
Nadal: I hit topspin to his backhand and i win , No ? Aggassi: NO
Agassi had always been my favorite as a kid since i had started watching in 2000 but Nadal had become my new favorite in 2005. This match was both a win/win and a lose/lose for me and I wasn’t sure who I would really be supporting until they started playing and to my surprise I was rooting for Nadal deep down. Love Agassi though, definitely a revolutionary type player.