Is Agassi Going to Beat Federer?

It's been a long time since I practically spit coffee all over my monitor at such an absurd post.

c.g._eads said:
this was a very difficult match to watch, as if you were paying attention, you'd know that federer threw the second set.......So for him to be floating up slices on 80 mph second serve returns, was a tell-tale sign that he was throwing that set so as not to embarrass Agassi in front of his home crowd.
Click to expand...
Throwing the second set in the final of the U.S. Open? Come on. Your insulting not only Federer but Agassi as well with that statement. I suppose he was just coasting in the 3rd set tie-breaker as well? This isn't an exhibition match. Agassi broke Federer twice in the second set playing superb tennis. You can pimp Roger but don't take away from Agassi's accomplishment's man. The reality is that Federer just couldnt get into a groove. A slice is always a high percentage shot to keep the ball in play when trying to find your groove. Federer was rattled.

I hate to say it, cause i love Agassi, and i still think that if Agassi had dedicated himself 100% for his entire career he would've won more majors than Sampras, but Federer is far and away the best player in history. He is so good it's scary. Even when he has a bad day he still crushes people.
Click to expand...
I agree (As most do and have in this post) if Agassi wasn't such a spoiled punk-ass during the first half of his career he most likely would have more Grand Slams (as we balk at 8). But calling Federer the best player in the history of the game is a bit premature. You're dismissing a ton of players who have left their marks on the game:

Pete Sampras: 14 Grand Slams (No. 1 on the ATP world rankings for a record six consecutive years)
Rod Laver 11 Grand Slams (Won all four Slams in the same year TWO TIMES)
Bjorn Borg: 11 Grand Slams
Andre Agassi: 8 Grand Slams (First player to win a Slam on four different surfaces; first player in history to win career golden slam)
Ivan Lendl: 8 Grand Slams (19 Finals Appearances)
Jimmy Connors: 7 Grand Slams (He's my all-time favorite)
Johnny Mac: 7 Grand Slams
Mats Wilander: 7 Grand Slams
Boris Becker: 6 Grand Slams
Stefan Edberg: 6 Grand Slams
Roger Federer: 6 Grand Slams

And let's look at the competition these guy's played against:

Mac -vs- Borg
Mac -vs- Connors
Connors -vs- Borg
Connors -vs- Lendl
Mac -vs- Lendl
Becker -vs- Mac
Becker -vs- Edberg
Sampras -vs- Edberg
Edberg -vs- Lendl
Sampras -vs- Agassi
Sampras -vs - Courier (Won 4 Slams)
Wilander -vs- Mac
Wilander -vs- Lendl

Federer is no doubt a great talent and no doubt has every opportunity going for him to not only win more majors but fall into the best ever category; but he's playing against a generation of top talent players but not greats; Nadal? Safin? Hewitt? Agassi at 35? I wonder who Federer's rivals will be? (Forget about Roddick)

From Federer's own mouth: "The best player of this generation, yes. Nowhere close to ever," Federer said. "Just look at the records that some guys have. I'm a little cookie." I repect and applaud his humility.

The only knock on him is that his girlfriend's ugly. Dude, you're the best player in history and that's the best you can do?? I'm sure she's really really nice, and that somewhere deep inside her there's a dream... but take a look at Safin's girlfriend, or Blake's for that matter. You can do a whole lot better!
Click to expand...
c.g.
Click to expand...


Now this we can agree on.
 
now this is something i never expected to have on DVXuser, a tennis debate. John, all your points are valid, and well-thought out. However, the main basis for my argument is simply how Federer swings the racket. The guy has the purest form in tennis. you'd be hard-pressed to find a tennis expert who wouldn't rate Federer's forehand, backhand, forehand volley, and backhand volley as the best in the history of the game. The only reason, i believe, his serve isn't the best in the game, is because it doesn't have to be. it's like he's saving that part of his game until there's someone out there who really begins to challenge him.

As for losing a set on purpose, it's not as ridiculous as you think.

I've been a tennis pro for 15 years and it's my job, a lot of the time, to lose points on purpose, in order to keep the student motivated/reward them for playing well. It's a delicate balance of looking like you're giving everything, yet barely missing at the key moments. Federer NEVER misses short balls. Ever! Yet he's got a point-blank open-court forehand putaway and he steers it half a foot wide?? Come on! Federer knew he could've gone down 0-6, 0-6, 0-5 and still won. He owns Agassi, just like he owns everybody else on the tour.

If throwing sets at the U.S. Open is so absurd, then why did Agassi admit to it against Conners?

But let's just say, for agrument's sake, he was in a funk and couldn't hit a backhand. That's even scarier, since it means Federer won the U.S. Open final without a backhand, the mark of... well the mark of someone who's probably the best ever.

as for Federer saying he's nothing compared to the previous champions of the game, let's not fool ourselves here. the guy's being respectful.
 
c.g._eads said:
now this is something i never expected to have on DVXuser, a tennis debate.
Click to expand...


I love tennis. Played a good part of my life! And where a better debate than at dvxuser in our beloved Cafe? I'll talk tennis anytime! (As will David I'm sure)


all your points are valid, and well-thought out. However, the main basis for my argument is simply how Federer swings the racket. The guy has the purest form in tennis. you'd be hard-pressed to find a tennis expert who wouldn't rate Federer's forehand, backhand, forehand volley, and backhand volley as the best in the history of the game. The only reason, i believe, his serve isn't the best in the game, is because it doesn't have to be. it's like he's saving that part of his game until there's someone out there who really begins to challenge him.
Click to expand...



Federer's game is pure. It's beautiful. I will not dispute that fact. But your basis for arguing he's the best ever is how he swings the raquet? I admit, that's a first for me. Let's talk about accomplishments and longevity at least?


As for losing a set on purpose, it's not as ridiculous as you think.
Click to expand...
Oh I know. It's called tanking. Agassi did it when he was a punk-ass. Saying Federer did it in the Final of the US OPEN is; well I can't even begin to think you believe this. IN the 1st Set at Key Biscayne? Sure. But not here baby.


I've been a tennis pro for 15 years and it's my job, a lot of the time, to lose points on purpose, in order to keep the student motivated/reward them for playing well. It's a delicate balance of looking like you're giving everything, yet barely missing at the key moments. Federer NEVER misses short balls. Ever! Yet he's got a point-blank open-court forehand putaway and he steers it half a foot wide??
Click to expand...


Federer has never missed a short ball? He's never hit one wide? Never? Ever? Not one unforced error? No winners by the opponent ever? What about the 37 Unforced Errors yesterday?

And What you do for the sake of a keeping your student in the game and motivated isn't the same thing. How old are your students? (Curious)


0-6, 0-6, 0-5 and still won. He owns Agassi, just like he owns everybody else on the tour
Click to expand...


Dude. Dude. Bro. 0-6, 0-6, 0-5 ? Who are you talking to? You sure about this? You gonna bet the mortgage on this one? He owns Agassi the last 8 out of the last 11 times they played. Yes. He is the Number 1 player in the world, yes. He is most definately the most dominant player on the tour RIGHT NOW. Yes.


Is he the BEST EVER? Not yet.


If throwing sets at the U.S. Open is so absurd, then why did Agassi admit to it against Conners?
Click to expand...


I am specifically saying that The Number One Player in the World purposely TANKING the 2nd Set in the U.S. Open Final is absurd.


Throw me this link about Agassi and Connors. I believe it but also want to see it with my own eyes please. Agassi was notorius for tanking in his early years, this I am aware of. And I'm talking before he became a legitimate player. Agassi was 19 when this happened; at the prime of his punkedness.


But let's just say, for agrument's sake, he was in a funk and couldn't hit a backhand. That's even scarier, since it means Federer won the U.S. Open final without a backhand, the mark of... well the mark of someone who's probably the best ever.
Click to expand...


Oh I'm saying it. Happens to all atheletes. I've seen Jordan go 1 for 20. I've seen Woods miss the cut and I've seen the best player in Tennis spray it all over the court. Federer was in a funk; then he got out of it and railed off 7 games in a row.


as for Federer saying he's nothing compared to the previous champions of the game, let's not fool ourselves here. the guy's being respectful.
Click to expand...


Of course and I was acknowleding and applauding his humility. I'm not a pro but have played competitively (Ranked 4.5 by USTA. I'm a hack. (Was, haven't played in years) but do think I have an ounce of input here. If you wan't to intelligently discuss this (THE BEST EVER) then fine but let's keep it intelligent. K ?
 
NOTHING will convince me that Federer threw that set except Federer himself coming out and saying it. I've seen a lot of great players never catch their groove. An excellent example is when Zina Garrison (Zina Garrison??) beat Graf in the semis, 1990 Wimbledon. This was at the height of Graf's dominance. No one could beat her. No one. Everything that Federer is, she was, and with an actual Grand Slam under her belt at that point.

But Garrison did. (Garrison??) It happens.
 
OMG I forgot about that. Too true.

Greatness is defined at the end of the career not at the beginning. Jordan was the exception. Gretzky was the exception. Ali was the exception.

Calling Federer TODAY the greatest ever is premature.
 
I think you hit the nail on the head earlier, John -- taking NOTHING away from Federer, he also doesn't have the competition that other greats did. Really, who's he got? Hewitt? Good player; never destined to be a great. Roddick? I like the kid, but he's no Sampras or Agassi or even Courier. Blake? Already past his prime, the Tim Mayotte of his generation. Henman? No. So, really, who's there?

It's not out of the question that Federer could just get bored and lose interest, like Courier. Or Wilander -- what did they call him? A legend in his spare time? Dominated when interested, but that wasn't often.

As well, there could be some 15 year-old kid in Poughkeepsie or Shropshire or Canberra or Baden-Baden who's going to come along in 2007 and just blow the doors off everyone, including Federer.
 
okay john, so my understanding is not that you don't think Federer "did" tank, it's that you don't think he "would" tank. I don't understnad why you'd think this was so implausible. Put yourself in Federer's position. You own Agassi (you've beat him the last 7 times you've played). Agassi knows he can't beat you (Agassi can no longer move). You (Federer) know that the whole country wants your opponent to win. You know that everybody in that stadium paid a shitload of money to possibly see one of the biggest upsets in history. You want to be liked. You don't want to piss all these people off by basically wasting their time with a 6-3, 6-2, 6-3 drubbing. So what do you do? You make it seem close. You give the people their money's worth. Federer is far and away better than Agassi. Both players know that. So to say a) that he wouldn't do that, and b) that he couldn't do that, is not being honest. I personally believe that Federer could do it. And, having been toyed with before and being the "toyer" before, my experience tells me I saw signs of someone who was playing bad on purpose. I mean jesus, let's bring out something that everybody on this board can comment on, acting. I know when Federer's really pissed off or when he's really down on himself. I've been watching him since he was 19 and just another "potential" good player. Those pathetic fake shoulder slumps wouldn't have won him an Independent Spirit Award.

As for my credentials, I'm a level 1 USPTA tennis pro who's had a couple years experience on the tour. I teach ages 3-90 and I'm pretty good, although what I really want to do is direct. If it's any consolation, a couple of my fellow pros aren't completely buying my theory, but they're acknowledging that it's a possibility.
 
I HIGHLY doubt that Federer tanked..I mean did you see the game? Andre was absolutely man-handling Federer in the second set, hitting pure winners. It was the confidence of winning that third set tiebreaker that changed the whole tempo of the match. If anything, it looked like Andre tanked on purpose in that final set (Which I know he didn't, Federer is just too good). Andre, while not the best player ever to hold a raquet, can still give people a run for their money (did Blake tank on purpose too?), even Federer.

**On a side note...I am very impressed with your tennis knowledge, John. I never thought I'd see an intelligent discussion on tennis here. This really is the best site ever! :thumbsup: **
 
c.g._eads said:
(Agassi can no longer move).
Click to expand...
Tennis pro or not, that's just ridiculous. Give the man his props. Maybe he can't win a US Open, but he got to the finals and I thought he moved pretty damn good. To go from literally not being able to move a few months ago (with his sciatic nerve troubles), to the US Open finals, I'd say he can still move. Unbelievable.
 
Let me prep this by saying that I believe Agassi is the most talented player in the history of the game. Had he not dicked around, I think we'd be saying that Agassi is the greatest player of all time. But the guy watches shots go by him now that two years ago he would have ran over and hit winners on. I'm astonished and proud that Agassi made it to the finals. It was very inspiring. But Agassi had a dream draw. Nadal and Roddick both got knocked out of his half. His two toughest opponents (blake and gnepri) are players who grew up idolizing him, who had posters of him on their walls. Like they're going to believe they can beat Agassi on the grandest stage of American Tennis. And he gets to play them in the quarters and semis??

Anyway, I'm astonished that this thread has made it to the fourth page, and if there's anyone else interested in arguing over whether Federer is the greatest player of all time, there's a few good threads over on the ESPN site:

http://forums.espn.go.com/espn/thread?forumID=774&threadID=2347573&lastPostID=13717098
 
Yeah, I'd say he's not as spry as he was a couple of years ago when he was only 33, but to watch him go out there and still kick ass and take names is truly inspiring.
 
I don't think he did nor would he tank in the Final of the U.S. Open c.g. eads and I believe you're living on a cloud.

I tend to stay away from sports forums as the people there tend to be handicapped in having a rational discussion or debate about the sports world. Myopia central.

And I'm out of this debate for that very reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top