Is Andre Agassi overrated or underrated?

[Mr. Friscus]

Let me put my cards on the table... Andre Agassi is my favorite tennis player of all time, and not so much the young guy with the hair (wig), but the post-Brooke Shields, bald Andre who dedicated himself. The man was so gifted as having a natural ground stroke motion, and his footwork was incredible. watching a baseline rally of Agassi from behind (come on now, hold the dirty comments on that one LOL) is a delight to watch as he his feet and base of support are unique, he moves like noone else.

That being said, I think he underperformed in his career as far as his talent goes. I read his book "Open", and he was entirely forward about his drug use, his personal issues.. and even how he basically threw away a French Open final because he was afraid his wig would fall off.

Andre won 1 Wimbledon, 1 French, 2 US Opens, and 4 Aussie Opens. He was one of the first to take the Aussie openly completely seriously, and would show up in the best shape compared to others who hadn't yet dedicated themselves for the year yet.

Thats 8 majors, a number that used to be seen as pretty legit. But now, you have guys like Djokavic, Federer, Nadal, Sampras with so many more major wins, yet While Agassi lags behind in numbers, his influence remains to an extent.

Is Agassi still relevant to discuss when talking all-time greats?

 

[Hs0022]

Let me put my cards on the table... Andre Agassi is my favorite tennis player of all time, and not so much the young guy with the hair (wig), but the post-Brooke Shields, bald Andre who dedicated himself. The man was so gifted as having a natural ground stroke motion, and his footwork was incredible. watching a baseline rally of Agassi from behind (come on now, hold the dirty comments on that one LOL) is a delight to watch as he his feet and base of support are unique, he moves like noone else.

That being said, I think he underperformed in his career as far as his talent goes. I read his book "Open", and he was entirely forward about his drug use, his personal issues.. and even how he basically threw away a French Open final because he was afraid his wig would fall off.

Andre won 1 Wimbledon, 1 French, 2 US Opens, and 4 Aussie Opens. He was one of the first to take the Aussie openly completely seriously, and would show up in the best shape compared to others who hadn't yet dedicated themselves for the year yet.

Thats 8 majors, a number that used to be seen as pretty legit. But now, you have guys like Djokavic, Federer, Nadal, Sampras with so many more major wins, yet While Agassi lags behind in numbers, his influence remains to an extent.

Is Agassi still relevant to discuss when talking all-time greats?

Agassi was somewhat unfortunate because for every great player the timing and conditions ( era, opponents, rival/peers, health etc) all have to align for an outcome of Glory and Fame to be written in one’s name. His nemesis was in the form of Pete And Fed toward the tail end of his career.

He used an oversized racquet to maximise whatever potential he had but that raw overpowering talent and presence like Pete he did not possess.

I can even say that if Sampras had switched AND adapted to a larger headstone racquet he would have won a French open. He simply had that level of raw talent despite his thalassemic condition he would have found a way to win FO, like Henman did playing a serve and volley game to reach the semis once.

Federer also would have had better success rate against Nadal had he not have been obstinate enough to stick to his 85 and later 90 square inch frames for a very long time until he switched it to 98 square inch and a slightly different backhand grip and taking the ball early on the rise against Nadal to beat him several times back to back at the tail end of his career.

Agassi has neither under rated nor over rated and neither did he under achieve nor overachieve given the circumstances. On the other hand Becker I feel underachieved because of his personal problems and mental instability and lack of self discipline. He should have won more slams than Agassi in my opinion given his talent. He burned out too quickly.

 

[Old Lion]

He admittedly just underachieved because he let life get in the way. He was one of the greats but as time goes on he is moving down the totem pole. Certainly still tops if you are looking at raw ball striking. Modern racket tech has given that ability to most everyone now.

 

[UK Cowboy]

To me, Agassi = Jimmy Connors. Never really the best player of an era, but right there nipping at the best

 

[rmilia1]

If you had given Agassi the work ethic of Courier or Chang he probably wins 12-15 Slams

Unfortunately quite often Supreme talent causes laziness

The truly great ones are the players who have both

 

[saturdaysarebetter]

Agassi underperformed early in his career. It was about style not substance. Wasn't it his commercial that said, "Image is everything." Once he started eating better and taking it more seriously, he won eight majors which is nothing to sneeze at especially winning each Grand Slam tournament.

 

[nuraman00]

Agassi underperformed early in his career. It was about style not substance. Wasn't it his commercial that said, "Image is everything." Once he started eating better and taking it more seriously, he won eight majors which is nothing to sneeze at especially winning each Grand Slam tournament.

I believe that commercial was for Canon cameras. The Canon Rebel.

That was the company's tagline for cameras.

 

[saturdaysarebetter]

I believe that commercial was for Canon cameras. The Canon Rebel.

That was the company's tagline for cameras.

Ah, that's it. Thank you.

 

[Pure Steel]

To me, Agassi = Jimmy Connors. Never really the best player of an era, but right there nipping at the best

I think you are underrating Connors, he had a stellar career and finished #1 in 5 seasons…..

 

[UK Cowboy]

I think you are underrating Connors, he had a stellar career and finished #1 in 5 seasons…..

I disagree. Connors was 14-20 vs Mac. 8-15 vs Borg. He wasn't the best of an era. Sampras was better than Agassi. Not saying either guy wasn't great

 

[Hs0022]

I never liked Andre. Despite his struggles with pain and Pete. There was something about him that put me off from liking him. Same with Djokovic. I liked Nadal toward the late stages of his career because unlike the others he actually had some substance in his demeanor and game that helped him transcend the barrier that divided him and Federer fans.