• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Where does Andre Agassi Rank?

P

PlatinumGold

Lifer
obviously very few players rank with Pete Sampras. He's up there with Laver etc.

Is Agassi on the level of say a Jimmy Conners, John Mac etc?

 
i think you would have to mention agassi in with the greats.
hes won every slam. thats a tremendous feat.
i wouldnt hesitate at all to consider him one of the top 4-5 players of all time.
 
Agassi is pretty much on the same level as Pete Sampras believe it or not. The two were the best of friends, and the best of rivals. They honestly were the only two that could consistently beat each other at their prime, making it a draw to call.

Pete rode a constant high I would say, while Andre shot up high early, faded from view, and then matured into an incredible player later on. By far, in the club of McEnroe, Connors, Lendel, Borg, Ash, Laver. The best of the best - hands down.
 
agassi is 1 of the best

but pete bet him on a lot of occasions, specially in the slams

but that said, pete never did well on french and andre won on every surface


both are pretty good

but pete ofcourse with his consistency will rank up better than andre when hez done with his career
 
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Agassi is pretty much on the same level as Pete Sampras believe it or not. The two were the best of friends, and the best of rivals. They honestly were the only two that could consistently beat each other at their prime, making it a draw to call.

Pete rode a constant high I would say, while Andre shot up high early, faded from view, and then matured into an incredible player later on. By far, in the club of McEnroe, Connors, Lendel, Borg, Ash, Laver. The best of the best - hands down.
Click to expand...

damn. spot on. couldn't have said it sny better
 
Had Agassi not had that "episode" with Brooke Shields (possible cause for his fade), the rivalry between Agassi and Sampras could have been legendary.
 
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Agassi is pretty much on the same level as Pete Sampras believe it or not. The two were the best of friends, and the best of rivals. They honestly were the only two that could consistently beat each other at their prime, making it a draw to call.

Pete rode a constant high I would say, while Andre shot up high early, faded from view, and then matured into an incredible player later on. By far, in the club of McEnroe, Connors, Lendel, Borg, Ash, Laver. The best of the best - hands down.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. A comple players, like McEnroe for example, said if Agassi had bothered to work harder during his prime, like he's playing now a couple of those slams he lost *to* Sampras would've been his, even two or three would've bought them a lot closer together "in the numbers". He's always been my fav outta the two (Agassi), but results are results and even though he's in the same class as Sampras, easily, I don't think you could call him the best... which you could probably do with Sampras, and not many would argue with you.
 
Originally posted by: Spoooon
Had Agassi not had that "episode" with Brooke Shields (possible cause for his fade), the rivalry between Agassi and Sampras could have been legendary.
Click to expand...

I think it is pretty legendary as it is, especially the way it ended.
 
Originally posted by: Spoooon
Had Agassi not had that "episode" with Brooke Shields (possible cause for his fade), the rivalry between Agassi and Sampras could have been legendary.
Click to expand...

The rivalry IS/WILL BE legendary. I remember the constant battle between the two for 1st place. It went on for years.
 
Originally posted by: Crimzon
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Agassi is pretty much on the same level as Pete Sampras believe it or not. The two were the best of friends, and the best of rivals. They honestly were the only two that could consistently beat each other at their prime, making it a draw to call.

Pete rode a constant high I would say, while Andre shot up high early, faded from view, and then matured into an incredible player later on. By far, in the club of McEnroe, Connors, Lendel, Borg, Ash, Laver. The best of the best - hands down.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. A comple players, like McEnroe for example, said if Agassi had bothered to work harder during his prime, like he's playing now a couple of those slams he lost *to* Sampras would've been his, even two or three would've bought them a lot closer together "in the numbers". He's always been my fav outta the two (Agassi), but results are results and even though he's in the same class as Sampras, easily, I don't think you could call him the best... which you could probably do with Sampras, and not many would argue with you.
Click to expand...

McEnroe is a HUGE Agassi fan. it's kind of ironic because Agassis game is much more like Jimmy Connors than John McEnroe.
 
if you read the huge article on sampras/agassi in tennis magazine a couple of months ago, it pretty much states they aren't friends at all.


they respect each other, but they have nothing in common really.

That being said...watching sampras and agassi play has been a blessing. I love both of their games and personalities and what they represent and brought to the game.

Without a doubt pete is the best tennis player ever.

As far as I'm concerned, Agassi is #2 in my book...now being 18 I know I can't fully appreciate connors, I love mac, laver, ashe, bjorg, becker, edburg ...list goes on and on. But I think Agassi has simply accomplished more, maybe not so much in terms of #of majors...but just what he's done to popularize the game, the dedication he has, his comeback, and then his amazing tennis it just adds up to become a wonderful story, knowing his personality and will...it's an honor to see him play everytime.

 
Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
if you read the huge article on sampras/agassi in tennis magazine a couple of months ago, it pretty much states they aren't friends at all.


they respect each other, but they have nothing in common really.

That being said...watching sampras and agassi play has been a blessing. I love both of their games and personalities and what they represent and brought to the game.

Without a doubt pete is the best tennis player ever.

As far as I'm concerned, Agassi is #2 in my book...now being 18 I know I can't fully appreciate connors, I love mac, laver, ashe, bjorg, becker, edburg ...list goes on and on. But I think Agassi has simply accomplished more, maybe not so much in terms of #of majors...but just what he's done to popularize the game, the dedication he has, his comeback, and then his amazing tennis it just adds up to become a wonderful story, knowing his personality and will...it's an honor to see him play everytime.
Click to expand...

sorry, no way you can put agassi in front of laver. Laver and Sampras are the two best EVER with Laver having an edge because he actually won the Grand Slam.

Connors also ranks ahead of agassi in my mind. talk about dedication to the game.

Agassi COULD have been like connors but his time with brooke shields thru him off track.
 
agassi was great, but not up there with sampras IMO.

his lack of power (forehand) and height (serve) is what kept him from being the best.
the only thing he had was a good backhand, and decent speed.

sampras was the complete package.
his serve/volley game and overhead smash is unstoppable.
 
Originally posted by: Lifer
agassi was great, but not up there with sampras IMO.

his lack of power (forehand) and height (serve) is what kept him from being the best.
the only thing he had was a good backhand, and decent speed.

sampras was the complete package.
his serve/volley game and overhead smash is unstoppable.
Click to expand...

Agassi's game was a ground it out game. it wasn't a power game. to dismiss him on those terms is stupid. the same could be said of jimmy connors.

 
his lack of power (forehand) and height (serve) is what kept him from being the best.
Click to expand...

wow do you you even know what you are talking about? agassi has a crappyforehand? lol

and you mentioned pete's overheads as one of his strengths? umm how many overheads do you actually see during an actual pro match? most pros hardly lob...it's much easier to try and pass a 6 footer than lob over him.

agassi has argueably the best return of serve in the game...it doesnt matter if you had the fastest serve ever...if you can't break someone else's serve you're not gonna get very far. service return requires good groundstrokes...i don't know where you get off saying Agassi has a bad forehand...their styles are totally different, pete is a serve and volleyer while agassi hugs the baseline

in my opinion agassi groundstrokes > pete's(not by much mind you) but pete's serve + volleys > Agassi
 
Originally posted by: HenHowC
his lack of power (forehand) and height (serve) is what kept him from being the best.
Click to expand...


in my opinion agassi groundstrokes > pete's(not by much mind you) but pete's serve + volleys > Agassi
Click to expand...


Pete's backhand has always been a weakness though. I would say that Andre's baseline play >> than Pete. But Pete's service game >>>>>>> everyone else that ever lived on this planet. And that's what always put Pete ahead. He was never ever broken when it mattered. I can't even begin to count how many times Pete produced clutch serve n' volleys when it mattered most. No one can ever claim to deliver Pete did.

I don't know much about Laver, but I would put him ahead of Andre because Andre had that huge collapse in the 90's.

1. Sampras
2. No one is even close to Pete
3. Laver
4. Andre
4.1 Connors


I don't understand why people knock Sampras because he never one on clay. So what? I'd gladly give up one major in exchange for being the most dominant player ever in the other three. I remember hating Sampras so much because he always won.

But I was a huge fan the past few years. Last years Open finals against Andre and 2001's Open in which he faced Andre in the semi's (maybe quarters) are the best matches I've ever seen. The 2001 Open match would've been the best match ever if it had gone 5 sets. (They played four sets, no one broke serve, and each set went to tie breaks.)

edit: Lol /wondering if I have those years in the last paragraph messed up.
 
Originally posted by: spidey07
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Agassi is pretty much on the same level as Pete Sampras believe it or not. The two were the best of friends, and the best of rivals. They honestly were the only two that could consistently beat each other at their prime, making it a draw to call.

Pete rode a constant high I would say, while Andre shot up high early, faded from view, and then matured into an incredible player later on. By far, in the club of McEnroe, Connors, Lendel, Borg, Ash, Laver. The best of the best - hands down.
Click to expand...

damn. spot on. couldn't have said it sny better
Click to expand...

Agree.

I give Andre bigtime props because he fought back from his down period to play top 3 tennis at an age that many would be really tailing off ... and he's still up there. Shaved the head and got serious and put the effort coupled with the inherent talent and newfound maturity. One of the all time greats really. I wouldn't say "hands down" but considering that the game has changed quite a bit over the last 10 years from a technical perspective - he's taken all that in stride and come out on top at his age - he's a front runner in a group that includes all the above.
 
It's really hard to judge where Agassi belongs in the rank of history. Same with Sampras. Sampras I would say had the full-time dedication to be placed firmly on the top. Andre - as I've already mention is hard to say where he belongs, but definitely hall-of-fame material.

The problem is, you can't really compare Agassi and Sampras to Connors and McEnroe, Laver, Ash, Borg, et al. They all had different styles, different era's. Granted McEnroe and Connors played Agassi and Sampras when they were young, but this was when they were at the tail-end of their careers, just giving it a go to show the world that they weren't leaving without a fight. It was like comparing apples to oranges at that point. Hence why McEnroe has a very fond memory of Agassi (getting his butt whipped by a kid).

Definitely, the best of the best, no matter how you cut it.

BTW: Lendel never won Wimbledon.
 
I know Pete is probably considered better than Agassi by most because of the sheer number of titles he won. But I personally thought Agassi was a MUCH more well-rounded player and I preferred watching a match with Agassi playing as opposed to Pete because of his style of play. Pete helped usher in the era we're in now where it's almost exclusively about how well you serve. That's not saying Samprass wasn't a great player in other areas as well. But if you could turn back the clock and bring Samprass' serve performance back down to the same level as others at the time he would've only been an average elite player from what I can tell. But obviously you can't diminish the importance of a strong serve. However, I personally find watching tennis these days MUCH more boring as it seems like half the guys out there now lob up 130+ mph serves that few people have the skills to return; and even if they do they're pinned so far back and put up such a weak return that Ray Charles could return the volley win the point against them. The days of long rallys seem all but gone now because service games are so dominating. That's what makes Agassi one of the greatest ever IMO. Agassi didn't have a strong serve to lean on so he had to beat you in all the other areas in order to win. He's arguably the best returner ever and his backhand and baseline play are possibly the best ever. The fact that he's been able to flourish the past few years (up until recently) amid this new generation of super-servers really is a testament to how much stronger his all-around game is IMO.
 
Girls ruin a guy's game--like in almost everything else. Priorities change (i.e. snatch), and thus wane in their professional careers.

+++ We saw what Brooke "The Succubus" Shields did to Agassi (downward spiral in rankings)

+++ We saw what Bridgette Wilson did to Sampras (accelerated his retirement)

+++ We saw what it did to my Dad 😉

The ONLY reason Agassi ain't floundering is b/c he married the GREATEST female tennis player of ALL TIME (Steffi Graf). Those 2 probably strategize and play tennis together for hours on end every day. What better companion? It's like marrying a coach!


FWIW, Pete Sampras has won the most titles and thusly will be considered the greatest. Still, Sampras win record over Agassi (20 vs 13) is close..........too close....especially when one considers that Agassi has been rolling high and low hills with his personal life (i.e. women) during these match-ups (lots of his losses to Sampy came during the Brooke/succubus days).

The jury is still out on whether Agassi could still be considered the greatest. He feels great right now and his game is as good as it has ever been (according to him). The titles will begin to pile up now that Sampras (his achilles heel) is out of the game.
 
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: Lifer
agassi was great, but not up there with sampras IMO.

his lack of power (forehand) and height (serve) is what kept him from being the best.
the only thing he had was a good backhand, and decent speed.

sampras was the complete package.
his serve/volley game and overhead smash is unstoppable.
Click to expand...

Agassi's game was a ground it out game. it wasn't a power game. to dismiss him on those terms is stupid. the same could be said of jimmy connors.
Click to expand...

when did i "dismiss" him? learn to read. i said agassi was good, but not as good as sampras. you wanna argue who's better?

Originally posted by: HenHowC
his lack of power (forehand) and height (serve) is what kept him from being the best.
Click to expand...

wow do you you even know what you are talking about? agassi has a crappyforehand? lol

and you mentioned pete's overheads as one of his strengths? umm how many overheads do you actually see during an actual pro match? most pros hardly lob...it's much easier to try and pass a 6 footer than lob over him.

agassi has argueably the best return of serve in the game...it doesnt matter if you had the fastest serve ever...if you can't break someone else's serve you're not gonna get very far. service return requires good groundstrokes...i don't know where you get off saying Agassi has a bad forehand...their styles are totally different, pete is a serve and volleyer while agassi hugs the baseline

in my opinion agassi groundstrokes > pete's(not by much mind you) but pete's serve + volleys > Agassi
Click to expand...

you too henhowhow, when did i say he had a "crappy" forehand? i said it was weak compared to sampras' and i'd like to see you argue against that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top