FEd is a spoiled cry baby- like all genius people-Just take a look at some of his matches from his younger days. He never gives opponents credit, but always comes up with something ridiculous to dis his opponents. He can't understand how jok. could hit such a return on match point-"I was brought up to play with hard work and talent"-claiming that his shot was luck not skill. Jokovic does it all the time in big moments-he was just pissed and embarassed that he lost again to him again.
FEd is most talented yes-but has had gimme draws every grand slam, while the few who can beat him don't and are out of gas when they play him. Plus he always serves first thus giving him an imm. advantage from the start. If u can beat him in the first set he is only a 500 player. Then there are the matches where his opp. have myst. collapsed when blowing him off the court- Haas and Berdych being the two obvious ones. Fed can't stand the joker cause he can now outlast him. He disses him
This was probably the last match agassi played his best.There were some ridiculously good points agassi played.
When federer first started dominating,He was like the djokovic of today.Consider this,Federer was hewitt's bitch at first,but from 2003 onwards.Federer destroyed hewitt,made him lost his manhood especially at USO 2004.
Djokovic now is on the verge of doing the same thing to Nadal
Every champion has one last great match, much like Sampras had in 2002 after everyone said he didn't have what it took to win a major anymore he took the US Open. Now people are saying the same about Federer now and it's totally unjustified! Federer still has the ability to win!
To all those who don't give Federer the credit of beating Andre,and say that Roger struggled against a 34-yr old is plain unfair to the both of them;Andre is one of the greatest athlete in tennis(notwithstanding the meth that he took,which may have prolonged his career that little bit),a legend in his own right,but Roger is the GOAT for now,when all is said and done;as for lack of competition,thts a total misconception....
Djokovic will be fucked playing against this kind of shots. Federer baseline game really worsen by a margin since his prime. 2008 was still fine there.
holy shit this federer is literally the greatest player who ever lived. i was listening to the little BB gun-sounding shots from when the racquet hits the ball. then, at 1:31, he hit a cannon ball-sounding shot right down the line.
Yep Fed was a fucking bullet at his peak, movement like no other, ball striking as if he was holding a liquid whip. I still think Fed at his best would beat Nadal at his best. If Fed can still match Nadal now imagine what he could have done at 25-23
@donnadonzz I think Fed was going for it less for a time this year and that is part of why he was struggling, more recently he is being more aggressive - in his latest match he hit 32 winners in 25 games and that was against Nadal!
Also look for example at his 08 Us Open final against Murray - a real lesson in first strike tennis or even the 09 Semi vs Novak or Aussie 10. With Annacone guidance I think Rog has started to play like this again, lets hope it continues!
Fed's game has defo improved since he won his first GS, he doesn't, at 29, produce his best form as consistently as he did at 25, that's natural but think London just past proves that his best now is better than ever!
Federer has lost the advantage since he abandoned the nCode to adopt the K-Factor and the BLX. He should have kept this racquet red or do a cosmetic disguise. This racquet was more powerful and had more ball control than his racquet today. That's why he made fewer winners.
@TheFuckingDestroy I agree. I think the Federer played a NOTICEABLY different game when he was using the nCode. His shots seemed heavier but possibly had less pace than they do now. His entire game seemed to change after this new racquet was adopted, yet his results would suggest that the change perhaps wasn't the right one (although it is good to experiment).
Still some say that he has been playing with the same Pro Staff racquet painted over, but I find that quite hard to believe.
@ougoah Paul Annacone was brought in to get Federer to play more aggressively. Roger knows he is moving to the backend of his career, and thus needs to play shorter points.
i disagree that his backhand has improved, not since 2007, his serve definately has though. This was the tournament where he hit 1 unforced error the whole first round match. 1. A lot of this, however, is players know how to make life difficult for him now. He struggles with balls that bounce higher, especially to the backhand. The highlights from this match are so good because aggassi plays how players used to play, flat and hard, and the way federer like the ball coming onto his racquet.
federer now is just a lot more fine tuned and controlled. He doesn't play with as much variety or go for shots that make you say "where did that come from" anymore. It started a couple of years back, but he is still winning slams, like he has found a formula that can work for him most times, its just not quite as fun to watch anymore. his forehand is not as accurate as it was at this stage, and prior. Before, if anybody hit to his forehand, he would explode onto it, its not as venomous
Federer, the man who truly plays the perfect game. There is no one true way to play against this man, the only option you have is to keep going for your shots and tear him apart. Because he continuously exerts pressure on you on pretty much every point, you must exit your comfort zone and play out of your skin to beat the man. Short balls? The guy have too much options, he will pound you whenever he sees one. He simply have the best offensive game of all time.
@reedb10 This is possibly true, but Fed definitely displayed his extremely powerful forehand and backhand at the Auzzie 2010 and US open 2009. He may be playing with a little more consistency and patience then he used to, as a tactic to tire his opponent out (when do you ever see Fed tired on court?). He is also not bored at all, thats just called extreme focus (the Zone).
Good points. I think he's probably less althetic now, obviously, but he is definitely smarter on court. If anything, I think his forehand has changed the most. It's a lot "flatter" now (even though it still has huge spin). I think he may have altered the grip so he could use the forehand drop shot, which is devastating.
@eveevie hit it right on the head. For some reason when a great player doesn't dominate as much as in the past people automatically assume he's not as good. But they don't take into account how NEW players are always coming up which are slightly better than the ones in the past. It is a constant EVOLUTION of the sport. In fact as eveevie alluded to, it's in part because of Federers level that many players play that much better than they would otherwise. I think people get so focused on Roger
I think parts of federer's game have actaully improved.. his second serve, his backhand, his net work. I think the thing is that, there is more competition now... nadal, djokovic, del potro. BUT i still think federer has it.. i mean he got to all major finals in 2009 and won 2!!! hardly losing it! I think the quality of players has increased because of federer, i don't believe nadal, djokovic or any of the male player would be as good if it were not for roger! KING FOR LIFE!
@eveevie - Yes he has improved on most of the shots accept its a great shame his movement is slowing down and footwork, if those were the same as they are here he would be again unstoppable, even against all the new upcomers, thats what has stopped him from beating people like soderling, delpo etc. Hope he wins US this year again :P
@eveevie I completely agree about the second serve, but his backhand reached its peak in shanghi 06, and his net play was better in the beginning of 07 at the AO and I woudl say his voleys were even better when he was younger...look at 03 for instance at wimbledon, or 01 against sampras. Its funny, the most technically easy thing to learn is probably the volley, and it has definately deserted him (not all the time) but at times he just doesnt low enough like he use to..........
@eveevie ..I know people like to say that there is suddenly more competition now, but when you really analyse it, comparing this fed with the one in 2010 (except for parts of the AO) his level has dropped about 5% or even only 2%, which is massive at the top of the game, and looking at players like dep potro, he has only recently challenged him, looking at all their previous meetings, fed has won comfortably, and delpo only started to challenge recently, and should not have really won the USO..
@eveevie ..i understand what your saying, but even since 07, the masters havent been a priority and they are the places that someone like djokovic has only been able to consitently challenge him. I believe he can, but djokovics 08 AO performance has not been repeated, and you can argue that fed certainly wansnt even 90% for that match
@eveevie You're totally right. I don't think people give enough credit to other players (and Federer for forcing them to improve so they don't get embarrassed like Hewitt in the 2004 us open final!). Players just play a game suited to tackling the current style.
@eveevie i agree with you, but i also think that no player such as them, nadal's batch and the others can do the same as federer plays like. federer really still dominates any of these players. anyways he will not retire yet, let see if these younger player can take advantage of the style of roger's play. im excited and even getting more excited this following year and these years.
@eveevie I completely agree, it's simply a case of Federer raising the standard, and all the rest working their butts off to keep up. Only Nadal has managed it so far.
It's hard to compare decades, but it's also hard to deny numerical records. Fed has won the most grand slams in history at the age of 28 (he could win 2+ more imo), 5 STRAIGHT Wimbledon, 5 SRAIGHT U.S. Open, career Slam, most consecutive weeks as world #1. All things Sampras never achieved. Fed could def break Pete's total weeks at #1 record too. About Rafa, already I think hes one of the best ever, but him being ahead of Fed head-to-head doesn't exactly make him the overall superior player.
Federer at his absolute peak. Unfortunately for Agassi, Fed always loved to play hard, flat hitters. Watch him play Nadal and suddenly he looks like an awful amateur. I've never seen a great player fall apart so much against one opponent, which makes me question Federer's all-time greatness. But how can you say Agassi wasn't on the same level as Fed? There was a point during this match when it looked like 35 year old Agassi was going to go 2 sets to 1.
its just a bad match up for fed with nadal. and he's got a severe confidence problem against him so its impossible for him to show his best against him, ive always noticed against nadal he never seems to play with flair. but its just one bad match up. like nalbandian is for nadal. their head to head should be 3-0 nalbandian but for a hugely massively enormous choke from david early this year.
Think what you want, but the fact is that Agassi says that Federer is the best player he has ever played. I think that Borg would've been a piece of cake for both of them.
Nop. They're all rather one dimensional when compared to next-gen players. That's like telling me Jordan would get owned Wilt Chamberlain. You see , Chamberlain's 100 points record is a bit irrelevant cause he had no legit competition back then. On the other hand , pulling the same shit today would be quite impressive. (something Kobe Bryant almost did). Same goes for Borg and co...None of them had to face specimens like Nadal & Fed...
Listen, it's difficult to compare eras, different technology, conditioning,style of play, dieting of players,etc. Sampras one dimensional hahhahaha, you never saw sampras play and your making rubbish arguments. Sampras was the whole package during his era of domination: serve, volleys, athleticism, smashes, amazing forehand, great backhand in his prime, no weaknesses in his game, there's no question in my mind that a prime sampras vs Federer would go five sets and a tie break.
If it did, Federer would win. He's always embarassed guys who played heavy serve and volley. A prime Federer has/had every shot in the bag, confidence so deep that he turns opponents' best shots into his own effortless winners, and he's simply the most complete, all-court player the game has ever known.
Sampras was not complete. He played power tennis, and he was absolutely lousy on clay. Guys like Nadal and Federer would chew his game up with returns and passing shots.
"Guyd like Nadal and Federer would chew his game up with returns and passing shots" aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Ask Agassi who's been the best returner ever if that's true. Sampras faced awesome returners and won most of the time. You seem to not understand that Sampras played the big points better than anyone else in history. You could argue that Federer is the best ever but sampras is clearly the second best ever and a match between them would be a match for the ages.
"you never saw sampras play and your making rubbish arguments"
You don't know me personally , so you have no legit proof of that. Also , prime for prime Federer is a whole different (and more complete) specimen. You're a deluded fan who can't let go of the past. Let the weeping continue...
Whatever, Ultraworshipp, i can't debate with a person from Switzarland, you can't be fair to Sampras coz Federer is a God in your country. Sampras vs Federer in their primes would be the match of the ages and everybody agrees on it but you and who are ya anyway?
yeah a 150 percent sure. Sampas was a kiling machine and his shots were even stronger than fed's. His serve and his strong mind set.........Nobody has played the most important points better than sampras in history.
neither of them were at their primes, exactly. thats why there can be a comparison. neither had some big generational advantage, they were both 5 or 6 years away from their prime.
You seem not understand what "talent" means, if Borg was 27 today and had the equipment, rackets, conditioning, etc of today he'd win many slams and you can ask anybody about it. Nadal is the new Borg and Nadal is winning multiple slams. The game is faster these days due to technology advancements. You can't deny Borg's metal toughness and raw talent of a super star otherwise you are overlooking history. Besides Borg has a hell of competition: Connors, Mac, Lendl, Vilas, etc.
Watching the Nadal vs Fed wimbledon final (the one in which Nadal defeated fed)...should give anyone a solid idea and reality check on the amazing elite level of tennis of these two. Prime Sampras , Prime Agassi , Connors...none of them were playing at that level...none.
You might want to check out Sampras & Agassi (2000 AO Open, 2001 US Open Quaterfinals, and the 1995 US Open) if you do not think they didn't play at that level that was the same as Federer & Nadal in 2008.
Of course, 2008 Wimbledon is the greatest match of all time, but some of the Sampras-Agassi matches were a tad below (but not much) that level. The closest thing to a 2008 Wimby is 2001 US Open match up... I rate those two mathces as THE two greatest matches of all time.
Unfortunately those two matches had both of the players I wanted to win on the losing end . . . so I try and block those out ; P Probably two of my favorite players of all time too.
Ok Sampras had to deal with Agassi dumb..................................Who do you think you are underestimating great players of the 90's. An old Agassi(35) gave your Roger Federer a hell run for his money in 2005. Can you imagine a peak Agassi playing roger in 2005, it would've gone 5 sets for sure. I hate your disrespect for all time greats like sampras, agassi, borg. Roger was lucky he won 7 of his 14 slams in a relatively weak era without Nadal.
repost lol. Let's not forget that this is Injured Back Agassi. It wasn't revealed until later that he spent the entire day before (and hours up to the match) bed-ridden trying to heal his back. This was a great run to the Final for Andre, he went through three 5-set matches to get to the final!!! (Malisse, Blake, Ginepri) at age 34!!. Considering how much attention Nadal got for his 5-set match this year...at age 22, Andre was a true champion
The one that speaks at 0:49 is Patrick McEnroe, while the one that speaks at 1:43 seems to be Mary Carillo. The other(s) one(s) I can't recognize right now.
Let's not forget that this is Injured Back Agassi. It wasn't revealed until later that he spent the entire day before (and hours up to the match) bed-ridden trying to heal his back. This was a great run to the Final for Andre, he went through three 5-set matches to get to the final!!! (Malisse, Blake, Ginepri) at age 34!!. Considering how much attention Nadal got for his 5-set match this year...at age 22, Andre was a true champion
This video is very misleading. I have this match on tape and it looked nothing like this. Why are you only showing Federer's winners and none of Agassi's? Agassi dominated the 2nd set and you don't even show the best points of his. This was a very competitive match but you wouldn't know it based on these "highlights".
who you callin dick douchbag, u dnt even realise how retarded u sound, if nadal fuked fed in wimb 07 how cum he lost the fifth set 6-2, srry but u do sound like a dumb fuk n, ur comments suggest that u just wana suk nadal's dick all day i bet u do.. o yes u do, get a life u fukin looser lolllll
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
that is natural you dick. Federer played in an era with no competition, all his peers had such incomplete games. Nadal had federer, will have djokovic. Nadal absolutely fucked federer at wimbe 07, even borg said Federer was lucky to win that one as nadal had two 40-15 on feds serve in the fifth.
Federer is lucky nadal is 5 freking years youunger than him. I would have liked to see how fed would have done had nadal been in the same era of fed.
i saw your name and thought id remind you of an interesting fact; federer is better than sampras. this is why he beat him in 100% of the wimbledon meetings they had. roger also has a far superior record on clay and at RG
Federer does play like this against Nadal. But Nadal makes him hit too many balls. Still the only thing preventing Federer from beating Nadal of late has been his horrendous break point conversion ratio. Agassi is a classic champion. I hope Nadal doesn't surpass Agassi's 8 majors.
lollz. Amazing logic dumbass. The only thing different now is that Nadal n djokovic are not federer's bunnies like roddick, hewitt, safin, old agassi were. Ok. Federer and Nadal have completely different styles. Nobody played like both of them in the history of tennis. Federer doesnt like top spin balls and nadal doesnt like flat shots.
Nadal n nole dont beat themselves by giving up or admiring fed during match or making errors like rod safin hewitt, whom fed beat countless times.not anymore.
nadal beats federer because he has a lefty western forehand and federer has a one handed eastern backhand. the critical flaw of a one handed eastern is handling high balls. and what does a western forehand give you a huge amount of? bounce. nadal is at a huge advantage right from the start. its like nadal plays with scissors and federer with paper.
lollz. He cant. Nadal is not as slow as agassi is here. I dont think you know that Agassi is fucking 35 years old. Federer is 24. This sucks to say the least. That is who federer is, beats old players in finals, beats 20 yo's in finals, beats players like rodick safin hewitt in finals. This sucks.
Yes. He has won 13 slams. I respect federer. I think Fed is the greatest player of his era, but please do not compare him to great players of all time like borg, sampras, laver, gonzalez, bud collin, tilden, agassi.Mcenroe, connors.
I beg to differ. Federer's class and sheer talent beats all the players you mentioned.Hey, I respect your opinion, so lets just agree to disagree. Peace, bro.
Yes Peace bro. that is exactly what i tell dumb people like Casper. everybody has their own opinion. There is and will never be a universal greatest player of all time in tenis unlike in other sports like football cricket squash.
Definitely the most talented we've seen, no doubt. I fully recognize that, but in a prime-to-prime Sampras vs Federer, I still think Pete would've had a winning record over Roger due to Pete's "unbreakability".
I think Roger is a better serve returner than Sampras ever faced, and that Pete wouldn't have been so unbreakable against him. Agassi might have been a more aggressive returner but being 5'10" with a 2hander meant a lot of balls got past him that wouldn't get by Roger.
Rog does gets rackets on more balls than anyone; & he's perhaps the best returner Pete faced, but at the same time, Pete was the best server Rog faced too.
When we're talking about match-ups, I've got to go with the superior serve vs the superior return simply because that classic confrontation is determined by the server. He's the one dictating what happens in that scenario. So when Pete serves above 60%, he'll probably win. No blow out, but I think Pete can hold more often and thus win more.
I don't think Pete would have been able to break Roger's serve at all, so the only way he was going to win was in tiebreaks...but of course speculation isn't worth much. Seems to me Rog would have had a much better shot at breaking the Sampras serve than vice versa.
Yes but that match was played long before Federer became a dominant player, when he was just 19. He hadn't won a slam yet and he wasn't nearly the player he would be a few years later.
I agree with you. Well Pete missed a smash, and a crucial one at that. I'm just speculating that if they were both playing in their prime, Rog would have a better chance at breaking Pete than vice versa. But of course all either of us can do is just that...speculate.
yeah...it's pretty clear agassi was intending to close out his career with a bang a la sampras '02. if it weren't for fed, he would have done just that, judging by the way he was hitting the ball.
he might just be this year..let´s just see how it goes in cincinatti and the olympics..I don´t think we can count out roger just yet, he´s having up and owns..but he did make the wimbledon final..it´s going to be an interesting outcome..
I know it's just the highlights and i know Roger is not a machine...but he sure plays like one! This video is a JOY to watch :D 2005-Federer is indeed one of the best we've ever seen!
3:05 reminds me of semis against djokovic :(
musicandminastirith 4 months ago
FEd is a spoiled cry baby- like all genius people-Just take a look at some of his matches from his younger days. He never gives opponents credit, but always comes up with something ridiculous to dis his opponents. He can't understand how jok. could hit such a return on match point-"I was brought up to play with hard work and talent"-claiming that his shot was luck not skill. Jokovic does it all the time in big moments-he was just pissed and embarassed that he lost again to him again.
75yellowraven 4 months ago
FEd is most talented yes-but has had gimme draws every grand slam, while the few who can beat him don't and are out of gas when they play him. Plus he always serves first thus giving him an imm. advantage from the start. If u can beat him in the first set he is only a 500 player. Then there are the matches where his opp. have myst. collapsed when blowing him off the court- Haas and Berdych being the two obvious ones. Fed can't stand the joker cause he can now outlast him. He disses him
75yellowraven 4 months ago
Wow! His shots were much deeper and he hit the ball harder than he is doing now. He also took more chances and more importantly pulled them off!
galacticsurfer1983 4 months ago
This was probably the last match agassi played his best.There were some ridiculously good points agassi played.
When federer first started dominating,He was like the djokovic of today.Consider this,Federer was hewitt's bitch at first,but from 2003 onwards.Federer destroyed hewitt,made him lost his manhood especially at USO 2004.
Djokovic now is on the verge of doing the same thing to Nadal
KaminariKatta 5 months ago
Every champion has one last great match, much like Sampras had in 2002 after everyone said he didn't have what it took to win a major anymore he took the US Open. Now people are saying the same about Federer now and it's totally unjustified! Federer still has the ability to win!
montycfc1 5 months ago
This match was such a good one, its almost a waste of time to only show the Federer points; Agassi had some that were as good as his.
TheJwaffle 6 months ago
To all those who don't give Federer the credit of beating Andre,and say that Roger struggled against a 34-yr old is plain unfair to the both of them;Andre is one of the greatest athlete in tennis(notwithstanding the meth that he took,which may have prolonged his career that little bit),a legend in his own right,but Roger is the GOAT for now,when all is said and done;as for lack of competition,thts a total misconception....
pranavkumarmohanty 6 months ago
Its a shame that Agassi retired...
Sileni 6 months ago
the balls are heavier and slower now... the demand of physical strength is so vital these days :(
pickepoe 6 months ago
Djokovic will be fucked playing against this kind of shots. Federer baseline game really worsen by a margin since his prime. 2008 was still fine there.
kumoasis 6 months ago
Federer is on fire, he loves the flat balls.
dvh065 7 months ago
holy shit this federer is literally the greatest player who ever lived. i was listening to the little BB gun-sounding shots from when the racquet hits the ball. then, at 1:31, he hit a cannon ball-sounding shot right down the line.
yurkler 7 months ago
someone needs to show Fed this video and remind him "this was you, now go beat the Djoker"
victor178ddd 8 months ago 3
@victor178ddd nice comment
skatetennis123 6 months ago
Agassi's forehand at like 1:27 is incredible. But Federer was hitting forehands like that throughout the entire match!
jfusion10 9 months ago
@jfusion10 Pity Agassi had to play Fed at his peak...He would have a chance against the Fed today....but as for the '04-'07 Fed...no chance!
cathwitness 9 months ago
I was the 132 000 yeess
MrTennisguy007 9 months ago
federer needs to hit with the same power and depth as when he used to.
brucewillis2 10 months ago
Roger is spraying his forehand all over the court
djdenns 10 months ago
The young Federer is amazing
DrSABEE 10 months ago
GO FED!!!!!
389gerald 1 year ago
Yep Fed was a fucking bullet at his peak, movement like no other, ball striking as if he was holding a liquid whip. I still think Fed at his best would beat Nadal at his best. If Fed can still match Nadal now imagine what he could have done at 25-23
opium1510 1 year ago
Agassi played ridiculously well for a man with an aching back.
MaratSafinVideos 1 year ago
3 ppl couldnt see where the winners comming from
tommos1 1 year ago
@donnadonzz I think Fed was going for it less for a time this year and that is part of why he was struggling, more recently he is being more aggressive - in his latest match he hit 32 winners in 25 games and that was against Nadal!
Also look for example at his 08 Us Open final against Murray - a real lesson in first strike tennis or even the 09 Semi vs Novak or Aussie 10. With Annacone guidance I think Rog has started to play like this again, lets hope it continues!
Wilde4Ever 1 year ago
Fed's game has defo improved since he won his first GS, he doesn't, at 29, produce his best form as consistently as he did at 25, that's natural but think London just past proves that his best now is better than ever!
Wilde4Ever 1 year ago
Wow. Aggresive baseliner here. he should do that more often. (Federer,)
alexsong94 1 year ago
Federer a beast back in 2005 dammmn
supertrex2 1 year ago
Federer has lost the advantage since he abandoned the nCode to adopt the K-Factor and the BLX. He should have kept this racquet red or do a cosmetic disguise. This racquet was more powerful and had more ball control than his racquet today. That's why he made fewer winners.
TheFuckingDestroy 1 year ago
@TheFuckingDestroy I agree. I think the Federer played a NOTICEABLY different game when he was using the nCode. His shots seemed heavier but possibly had less pace than they do now. His entire game seemed to change after this new racquet was adopted, yet his results would suggest that the change perhaps wasn't the right one (although it is good to experiment).
Still some say that he has been playing with the same Pro Staff racquet painted over, but I find that quite hard to believe.
ougoah 1 year ago
@ougoah Paul Annacone was brought in to get Federer to play more aggressively. Roger knows he is moving to the backend of his career, and thus needs to play shorter points.
mrbobevans 1 year ago
I still cant believe Federer can hit those power backhand and power forehand with 90" headsize. How!
supertrex2 1 year ago
i disagree that his backhand has improved, not since 2007, his serve definately has though. This was the tournament where he hit 1 unforced error the whole first round match. 1. A lot of this, however, is players know how to make life difficult for him now. He struggles with balls that bounce higher, especially to the backhand. The highlights from this match are so good because aggassi plays how players used to play, flat and hard, and the way federer like the ball coming onto his racquet.
donnadonzz 1 year ago
federer now is just a lot more fine tuned and controlled. He doesn't play with as much variety or go for shots that make you say "where did that come from" anymore. It started a couple of years back, but he is still winning slams, like he has found a formula that can work for him most times, its just not quite as fun to watch anymore. his forehand is not as accurate as it was at this stage, and prior. Before, if anybody hit to his forehand, he would explode onto it, its not as venomous
donnadonzz 1 year ago
While the advantage lies in its racket. His racket much control.
Well placed, it was very powerful.
He can put the ball anywhere.
TheFuckingDestroy 1 year ago
@darthhelmethead Federer is so good at every aspect of the game that taking balls on the rise is not his specialty, while that is Agassi's specialty
vmarthala 1 year ago
Not really "Highlights" as opposed to "Roger's Highlights"
rlagywns 1 year ago
Sorry to completely diverge from the point of the video, but I love Roger's yellow bandana! HAHAHA....
4pirsquared 1 year ago
Federer needs to start playing like this era again.
bgtakingrule 1 year ago
Federer's serve was not as good as it would be later, but his groundies were so much more consistent then 07-present.
manco82 1 year ago 2
Federer, the man who truly plays the perfect game. There is no one true way to play against this man, the only option you have is to keep going for your shots and tear him apart. Because he continuously exerts pressure on you on pretty much every point, you must exit your comfort zone and play out of your skin to beat the man. Short balls? The guy have too much options, he will pound you whenever he sees one. He simply have the best offensive game of all time.
GyariSan 1 year ago
inst the real game tenis . Lol
omarwank 1 year ago
This is the federer i liked the most
305Andyy305 1 year ago
It seems like 2005 Fed had more power and spin than the 2009 model. All of his shots have a ton of pace and spin and are landing deep.
Also, anybody else notice how bored Fed looks after the first few games? He knows he's miles above Agassi.
reedb10 1 year ago
@reedb10 This is possibly true, but Fed definitely displayed his extremely powerful forehand and backhand at the Auzzie 2010 and US open 2009. He may be playing with a little more consistency and patience then he used to, as a tactic to tire his opponent out (when do you ever see Fed tired on court?). He is also not bored at all, thats just called extreme focus (the Zone).
showbiz216 1 year ago
Good points. I think he's probably less althetic now, obviously, but he is definitely smarter on court. If anything, I think his forehand has changed the most. It's a lot "flatter" now (even though it still has huge spin). I think he may have altered the grip so he could use the forehand drop shot, which is devastating.
reedb10 1 year ago
federer's forehand is the most beautiful shot in the history of tennis IMO - i can watch it all day long.
MrChiffy 1 year ago 5
that they ignore the other players coming up and the continuing evolution. A commom mistake in reasoning.
ridewave444 2 years ago
@eveevie hit it right on the head. For some reason when a great player doesn't dominate as much as in the past people automatically assume he's not as good. But they don't take into account how NEW players are always coming up which are slightly better than the ones in the past. It is a constant EVOLUTION of the sport. In fact as eveevie alluded to, it's in part because of Federers level that many players play that much better than they would otherwise. I think people get so focused on Roger
ridewave444 2 years ago
his game in this match is so flawless!!! it seems his forehand power has decreased now compared to this video but he's still the best.
azn3oi 2 years ago
I think parts of federer's game have actaully improved.. his second serve, his backhand, his net work. I think the thing is that, there is more competition now... nadal, djokovic, del potro. BUT i still think federer has it.. i mean he got to all major finals in 2009 and won 2!!! hardly losing it! I think the quality of players has increased because of federer, i don't believe nadal, djokovic or any of the male player would be as good if it were not for roger! KING FOR LIFE!
eveevie 2 years ago 31
@eveevie
I agree 110% with your comments...if the game got this level...thanks to Roger !
In reality, Roger is the King and the other 5 or 6 trying to get , at least,a photo in the trone...but never with the crown...
olympoBR 2 years ago
@eveevie - Yes he has improved on most of the shots accept its a great shame his movement is slowing down and footwork, if those were the same as they are here he would be again unstoppable, even against all the new upcomers, thats what has stopped him from beating people like soderling, delpo etc. Hope he wins US this year again :P
TJFederer15 1 year ago
@eveevie I completely agree about the second serve, but his backhand reached its peak in shanghi 06, and his net play was better in the beginning of 07 at the AO and I woudl say his voleys were even better when he was younger...look at 03 for instance at wimbledon, or 01 against sampras. Its funny, the most technically easy thing to learn is probably the volley, and it has definately deserted him (not all the time) but at times he just doesnt low enough like he use to..........
Jamus182 1 year ago
@eveevie ..I know people like to say that there is suddenly more competition now, but when you really analyse it, comparing this fed with the one in 2010 (except for parts of the AO) his level has dropped about 5% or even only 2%, which is massive at the top of the game, and looking at players like dep potro, he has only recently challenged him, looking at all their previous meetings, fed has won comfortably, and delpo only started to challenge recently, and should not have really won the USO..
Jamus182 1 year ago
@Jamus182
yep. Federer lost that match more than DelPo won it
splendid1000 1 year ago
@eveevie ..i understand what your saying, but even since 07, the masters havent been a priority and they are the places that someone like djokovic has only been able to consitently challenge him. I believe he can, but djokovics 08 AO performance has not been repeated, and you can argue that fed certainly wansnt even 90% for that match
Jamus182 1 year ago
@eveevie You're totally right. I don't think people give enough credit to other players (and Federer for forcing them to improve so they don't get embarrassed like Hewitt in the 2004 us open final!). Players just play a game suited to tackling the current style.
asdfuogh 1 year ago
@eveevie i agree with you, but i also think that no player such as them, nadal's batch and the others can do the same as federer plays like. federer really still dominates any of these players. anyways he will not retire yet, let see if these younger player can take advantage of the style of roger's play. im excited and even getting more excited this following year and these years.
TheDane023 1 year ago
@eveevie I completely agree, it's simply a case of Federer raising the standard, and all the rest working their butts off to keep up. Only Nadal has managed it so far.
farhannius 1 year ago
@eveevie his backhand???????EPIC FAIL MY FRIEND..Worst backhand in top 10 is Fed's.......
MrSaberq 9 months ago
@MrSaberq what are you talking about? He has 3 different slices, and his drive is explosive!
jfusion10 6 months ago
Federer doesn't get nearly enough credit for being able to take the ball on the rise as well as Agassi, whose career was defined by that skill.
darthhelmethead 2 years ago 25
@darthhelmethead
yep, Fed may be the king of the rise
splendid1000 1 year ago
@darthhelmethead you might say he was able to do that and credited for such a tactic until Nadal and his crazy-ass topspin came along.
imavaughanstar 11 months ago
@darthhelmethead Davydenko too gets the ball early but noone sees it ..
mechkapechka 6 months ago
This Federer would kill the 2009 Federer.
mrbobevans 2 years ago 2
or any other Federer in my opinion. Absolutely ridiculous shots.
AnimeIntroStyles4 2 years ago
Agassi played well here, and that's the worst part. Federer was in my mind in his absolute prime in this match.
AnimeIntroStyles4 2 years ago
federer crushed agassi
Subzro777 2 years ago
It's hard to compare decades, but it's also hard to deny numerical records. Fed has won the most grand slams in history at the age of 28 (he could win 2+ more imo), 5 STRAIGHT Wimbledon, 5 SRAIGHT U.S. Open, career Slam, most consecutive weeks as world #1. All things Sampras never achieved. Fed could def break Pete's total weeks at #1 record too. About Rafa, already I think hes one of the best ever, but him being ahead of Fed head-to-head doesn't exactly make him the overall superior player.
SpaceClav3737 2 years ago 6
this is true, it looked like at one point somewhere in the match when agassi looked like he would take the lead.
cyrusgreg 2 years ago
Federer at his absolute peak. Unfortunately for Agassi, Fed always loved to play hard, flat hitters. Watch him play Nadal and suddenly he looks like an awful amateur. I've never seen a great player fall apart so much against one opponent, which makes me question Federer's all-time greatness. But how can you say Agassi wasn't on the same level as Fed? There was a point during this match when it looked like 35 year old Agassi was going to go 2 sets to 1.
superman11978 2 years ago
its just a bad match up for fed with nadal. and he's got a severe confidence problem against him so its impossible for him to show his best against him, ive always noticed against nadal he never seems to play with flair. but its just one bad match up. like nalbandian is for nadal. their head to head should be 3-0 nalbandian but for a hugely massively enormous choke from david early this year.
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
federer playing so godly
Adudewithastick 2 years ago
GEEZ. look at his split step on the last slomo. So emphatic and beautiful.
BWpepperr 2 years ago
love rog's outfit.
BWpepperr 2 years ago
Federer fast forehand and its on slow motion.
supertrex2 2 years ago
federer's forehand is incredible
yangus3691 2 years ago
federer of 2005 would beat nadal evan today. mayb not on clay but on every other surface he would
danytarshish 2 years ago
that shot on 1:33 is really scary...he was sooooo good back in the time...!
kdadon84 2 years ago
Federer is playing so much better here than 2008 or 2009
Leziii 2 years ago
1:33 - stoooooop iiiiiit!
Achilles94627 2 years ago
It's interesting that only americans say that Agassi in his prime would beat Federer in his prime. Very interesting indeed. ^^
niclassj 2 years ago
Comment removed
LDis1 2 years ago
Think what you want, but the fact is that Agassi says that Federer is the best player he has ever played. I think that Borg would've been a piece of cake for both of them.
niclassj 2 years ago
Borg was lucky there was no such specimens as Federer & Nadal during his prime....Same goes for Sampras.
ultraworshipp 2 years ago
Very SILLY comment.
Borg: Lendl, Johnny Mac, Connors.
Sampras: Agassi, Becker, Courier and others.
All of those players would give Federer and Nadal a hell of a run for the money.
LDis1 2 years ago
Nop. They're all rather one dimensional when compared to next-gen players. That's like telling me Jordan would get owned Wilt Chamberlain. You see , Chamberlain's 100 points record is a bit irrelevant cause he had no legit competition back then. On the other hand , pulling the same shit today would be quite impressive. (something Kobe Bryant almost did). Same goes for Borg and co...None of them had to face specimens like Nadal & Fed...
ultraworshipp 2 years ago
Listen, it's difficult to compare eras, different technology, conditioning,style of play, dieting of players,etc. Sampras one dimensional hahhahaha, you never saw sampras play and your making rubbish arguments. Sampras was the whole package during his era of domination: serve, volleys, athleticism, smashes, amazing forehand, great backhand in his prime, no weaknesses in his game, there's no question in my mind that a prime sampras vs Federer would go five sets and a tie break.
juandi2570 2 years ago
If it did, Federer would win. He's always embarassed guys who played heavy serve and volley. A prime Federer has/had every shot in the bag, confidence so deep that he turns opponents' best shots into his own effortless winners, and he's simply the most complete, all-court player the game has ever known.
Sampras was not complete. He played power tennis, and he was absolutely lousy on clay. Guys like Nadal and Federer would chew his game up with returns and passing shots.
whutbrush 2 years ago
I am sorry... NADAL vs Sampras's Serve and Volley?
He would lose...
Federer would give Sampras a great run, yes, all right, I agree.
LDis1 2 years ago
At roland garros > for sure. But on wimbledon i bet sampras would win most of his matches against nadal.
(if sampras was around the same age as nadal)
noordflank105144 2 years ago
I agree...
If the courts speed where the same as the 1990s, Nadal wouldn't stand a chance.
LDis1 2 years ago 2
"Guyd like Nadal and Federer would chew his game up with returns and passing shots" aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Ask Agassi who's been the best returner ever if that's true. Sampras faced awesome returners and won most of the time. You seem to not understand that Sampras played the big points better than anyone else in history. You could argue that Federer is the best ever but sampras is clearly the second best ever and a match between them would be a match for the ages.
juandi2570 2 years ago
"you never saw sampras play and your making rubbish arguments"
You don't know me personally , so you have no legit proof of that. Also , prime for prime Federer is a whole different (and more complete) specimen. You're a deluded fan who can't let go of the past. Let the weeping continue...
ultraworshipp 2 years ago
Comment removed
LDis1 2 years ago
Whatever, Ultraworshipp, i can't debate with a person from Switzarland, you can't be fair to Sampras coz Federer is a God in your country. Sampras vs Federer in their primes would be the match of the ages and everybody agrees on it but you and who are ya anyway?
juandi2570 2 years ago
even against january 07 Federer?
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
yeah a 150 percent sure. Sampas was a kiling machine and his shots were even stronger than fed's. His serve and his strong mind set.........Nobody has played the most important points better than sampras in history.
juandi2570 2 years ago
even though fed beat sampras at wimbledon?
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
Sampras was on decline. He was almost 31 and Roger 19 so there can't be a comparison. Neither of em' were at their primes.
juandi2570 2 years ago
neither of them were at their primes, exactly. thats why there can be a comparison. neither had some big generational advantage, they were both 5 or 6 years away from their prime.
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
ok, fed beat sampras 7-5 in the fifth so they played at their primes, it would be same result and it could go either way period.
juandi2570 2 years ago
actually, sampras was 29 (they're almost exactly 10 years apart). but yes, he wasn't at his prime anymore.
johnsteinbeck 2 years ago
as you said: there can't be a comparison. the game changes and evolves.
there's only one thing that federer has going for him in the "greatest" debate: sampras calling him the greatest ever.
personally, i think that fed has the most beautiful style (playing, not clothing!), but more than that, you can hardly compare between decades.
johnsteinbeck 2 years ago
Borg never would've pulled what he did back then in today's era....You're deluded if you think the contrary.
ultraworshipp 2 years ago
You seem not understand what "talent" means, if Borg was 27 today and had the equipment, rackets, conditioning, etc of today he'd win many slams and you can ask anybody about it. Nadal is the new Borg and Nadal is winning multiple slams. The game is faster these days due to technology advancements. You can't deny Borg's metal toughness and raw talent of a super star otherwise you are overlooking history. Besides Borg has a hell of competition: Connors, Mac, Lendl, Vilas, etc.
juandi2570 2 years ago
Watching the Nadal vs Fed wimbledon final (the one in which Nadal defeated fed)...should give anyone a solid idea and reality check on the amazing elite level of tennis of these two. Prime Sampras , Prime Agassi , Connors...none of them were playing at that level...none.
ultraworshipp 2 years ago
You might want to check out Sampras & Agassi (2000 AO Open, 2001 US Open Quaterfinals, and the 1995 US Open) if you do not think they didn't play at that level that was the same as Federer & Nadal in 2008.
LDis1 2 years ago
Seen before (come on ! it's a classic man) . But no...sorry , i've yet to see a nadal vs fed wimbledon equivalent....
ultraworshipp 2 years ago
Of course, 2008 Wimbledon is the greatest match of all time, but some of the Sampras-Agassi matches were a tad below (but not much) that level. The closest thing to a 2008 Wimby is 2001 US Open match up... I rate those two mathces as THE two greatest matches of all time.
LDis1 2 years ago
Unfortunately those two matches had both of the players I wanted to win on the losing end . . . so I try and block those out ; P Probably two of my favorite players of all time too.
markjamesn 2 years ago
Ok Sampras had to deal with Agassi dumb..................................Who do you think you are underestimating great players of the 90's. An old Agassi(35) gave your Roger Federer a hell run for his money in 2005. Can you imagine a peak Agassi playing roger in 2005, it would've gone 5 sets for sure. I hate your disrespect for all time greats like sampras, agassi, borg. Roger was lucky he won 7 of his 14 slams in a relatively weak era without Nadal.
juandi2570 2 years ago
Well said...
Plus...In 1995, Agassi was the best player that year...
I am convinced... if this Federer faced a 1995 Andre Agassi, he would lose...
LDis1 2 years ago
repost lol. Let's not forget that this is Injured Back Agassi. It wasn't revealed until later that he spent the entire day before (and hours up to the match) bed-ridden trying to heal his back. This was a great run to the Final for Andre, he went through three 5-set matches to get to the final!!! (Malisse, Blake, Ginepri) at age 34!!. Considering how much attention Nadal got for his 5-set match this year...at age 22, Andre was a true champion
khale4nia 2 years ago 2
What are the names of the match commentators?
xxdahlia 2 years ago
Well, I think there are at least 3 commentators.
The one that speaks at 0:49 is Patrick McEnroe, while the one that speaks at 1:43 seems to be Mary Carillo. The other(s) one(s) I can't recognize right now.
Grimmjowjaguarjack 2 years ago
Actually the one speaking at 0:49 is John McEnroe. The other two are Dick Enberg and Mary Carillo.
lqchamp 2 years ago
Comment removed
captainbryce1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The commentators are Dick Enberg, John McEnroe and Mary Carillo. And if you want to see the real version of this match, go here:
watch?v=LJHmsTPMXJg&feature=related
This is just a collection of Federer winners from the match.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
does anybody know what shoes federer is wearing here?
asianx7 2 years ago
Roger is wearing Nike Air Zoom Vapor Speed shoes.
Grimmjowjaguarjack 2 years ago
haha, federer agassi highlights? not really, more like roger federer highlights...
SoooBlue 2 years ago
Let's not forget that this is Injured Back Agassi. It wasn't revealed until later that he spent the entire day before (and hours up to the match) bed-ridden trying to heal his back. This was a great run to the Final for Andre, he went through three 5-set matches to get to the final!!! (Malisse, Blake, Ginepri) at age 34!!. Considering how much attention Nadal got for his 5-set match this year...at age 22, Andre was a true champion
khale4nia 2 years ago 2
thank you i was hoping someone would say something cause these Federer fans are annoying. Agassi in his prime would dust Federer
jimmybarger3 2 years ago
fed here is very erratic on his forehand...................
he hit it with so much force, kinda different with his forehand of today
loveneo89 3 years ago
Are u sure around that loveneo? He wuz going for more shots a few yrs. ago.
curlymyhero 3 years ago
Federer is amazing, he is hitting his forehands extremely flat here btw.
mysteriekiller 3 years ago
This video is very misleading. I have this match on tape and it looked nothing like this. Why are you only showing Federer's winners and none of Agassi's? Agassi dominated the 2nd set and you don't even show the best points of his. This was a very competitive match but you wouldn't know it based on these "highlights".
captainbryce1 3 years ago
cause fed is the shit
jtag8907 3 years ago 3
WTF does that have to do with not showing Agassi winners dipshit?
captainbryce1 2 years ago
who you callin dick douchbag, u dnt even realise how retarded u sound, if nadal fuked fed in wimb 07 how cum he lost the fifth set 6-2, srry but u do sound like a dumb fuk n, ur comments suggest that u just wana suk nadal's dick all day i bet u do.. o yes u do, get a life u fukin looser lolllll
ab786 3 years ago
well fed did beat nadal in 2 wimby finals, nadal is luky dat he is left handed
ab786 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
that is natural you dick. Federer played in an era with no competition, all his peers had such incomplete games. Nadal had federer, will have djokovic. Nadal absolutely fucked federer at wimbe 07, even borg said Federer was lucky to win that one as nadal had two 40-15 on feds serve in the fifth.
Federer is lucky nadal is 5 freking years youunger than him. I would have liked to see how fed would have done had nadal been in the same era of fed.
fcshahzaib 3 years ago
when Nadal won his first major federer was won only four, so Federer win 9 and nadal only 4 in the same period, but you not see that loser
mestredosbares 3 years ago
nadals a natrual right hander
rockerduff1231 3 years ago 3
Roger Federer - Lessons in tennis.....
a legend.
CASPER10666 3 years ago
yup cause federer is just that good
Clocky91 3 years ago
So...apparently Agassi only won one point in this "highlight" reel.
Samprasisthebest 3 years ago
i saw your name and thought id remind you of an interesting fact; federer is better than sampras. this is why he beat him in 100% of the wimbledon meetings they had. roger also has a far superior record on clay and at RG
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
Sampras wasn't at his prime in 2001 when he lost against Roger. 100% percent of the meeting they had" sampras and fed played ONLY one time........
juandi2570 2 years ago
Federer was nowhere near his prime in 2001 either. no one had an advantage in that area so it was fair.
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
Federer does play like this against Nadal. But Nadal makes him hit too many balls. Still the only thing preventing Federer from beating Nadal of late has been his horrendous break point conversion ratio. Agassi is a classic champion. I hope Nadal doesn't surpass Agassi's 8 majors.
Bobby61189 3 years ago
lollz. Amazing logic dumbass. The only thing different now is that Nadal n djokovic are not federer's bunnies like roddick, hewitt, safin, old agassi were. Ok. Federer and Nadal have completely different styles. Nobody played like both of them in the history of tennis. Federer doesnt like top spin balls and nadal doesnt like flat shots.
Nadal n nole dont beat themselves by giving up or admiring fed during match or making errors like rod safin hewitt, whom fed beat countless times.not anymore.
fcshahzaib 3 years ago
nadal beats federer because he has a lefty western forehand and federer has a one handed eastern backhand. the critical flaw of a one handed eastern is handling high balls. and what does a western forehand give you a huge amount of? bounce. nadal is at a huge advantage right from the start. its like nadal plays with scissors and federer with paper.
butterflycaught900 2 years ago 4
Federers forehand has been awesome in this match.
quest8899 3 years ago 2
I'd love to see Federer play like this against Nadal.
PabasamDee 3 years ago 3
federer is not the player he was back then :(
RastafarianPikachu 3 years ago 3
lollz. He cant. Nadal is not as slow as agassi is here. I dont think you know that Agassi is fucking 35 years old. Federer is 24. This sucks to say the least. That is who federer is, beats old players in finals, beats 20 yo's in finals, beats players like rodick safin hewitt in finals. This sucks.
Nadal knows feds weaknesses,
fcshahzaib 3 years ago
Dude I agree with you on Nadal, but have a little respect for Fed. 13 grand slams in fewer appearances than Sampras means something.
PabasamDee 3 years ago
Yes. He has won 13 slams. I respect federer. I think Fed is the greatest player of his era, but please do not compare him to great players of all time like borg, sampras, laver, gonzalez, bud collin, tilden, agassi.Mcenroe, connors.
fcshahzaib 3 years ago
I beg to differ. Federer's class and sheer talent beats all the players you mentioned.Hey, I respect your opinion, so lets just agree to disagree. Peace, bro.
PabasamDee 3 years ago
Yes Peace bro. that is exactly what i tell dumb people like Casper. everybody has their own opinion. There is and will never be a universal greatest player of all time in tenis unlike in other sports like football cricket squash.
fcshahzaib 3 years ago
Sampras never made the finals in Paris even less won there just like McEnroe,Connors.
Borg never won the USO.
NONE of these players you've mentioned except for Laver and Federer can and have made ALL 4 major FINALS in a year although Agassi won RG.
please discuss your opinions with others here but there is no need to insult anyone;this is just not necessary.
Sampras,Connors were horrible on clay I'll remind you and would get crushed by Roger.
timafi 3 years ago
That's funny because Laver Agassi and McEnroe have all said he's the greatest they've ever seen.
bobomber 3 years ago
Definitely the most talented we've seen, no doubt. I fully recognize that, but in a prime-to-prime Sampras vs Federer, I still think Pete would've had a winning record over Roger due to Pete's "unbreakability".
miltyu97 3 years ago
I think Roger is a better serve returner than Sampras ever faced, and that Pete wouldn't have been so unbreakable against him. Agassi might have been a more aggressive returner but being 5'10" with a 2hander meant a lot of balls got past him that wouldn't get by Roger.
bobomber 3 years ago
Rog does gets rackets on more balls than anyone; & he's perhaps the best returner Pete faced, but at the same time, Pete was the best server Rog faced too.
When we're talking about match-ups, I've got to go with the superior serve vs the superior return simply because that classic confrontation is determined by the server. He's the one dictating what happens in that scenario. So when Pete serves above 60%, he'll probably win. No blow out, but I think Pete can hold more often and thus win more.
miltyu97 3 years ago
I don't think Pete would have been able to break Roger's serve at all, so the only way he was going to win was in tiebreaks...but of course speculation isn't worth much. Seems to me Rog would have had a much better shot at breaking the Sampras serve than vice versa.
bobomber 3 years ago
Well hang on one sec, Pete and Rog did play once; and Pete did break Rog. So it's not like it's impossible.
I also agree that these two would have played multiple tie-breaks.
But who knows. It's only a dream match.
miltyu97 3 years ago
Yes but that match was played long before Federer became a dominant player, when he was just 19. He hadn't won a slam yet and he wasn't nearly the player he would be a few years later.
bobomber 3 years ago
And Pete was hardly in his physical prime nor was he playing typical Pete either. He was missing smashes? That's unheard of for Pete.
miltyu97 3 years ago
I agree with you. Well Pete missed a smash, and a crucial one at that. I'm just speculating that if they were both playing in their prime, Rog would have a better chance at breaking Pete than vice versa. But of course all either of us can do is just that...speculate.
bobomber 3 years ago
thats the number 1 ranked federer. this year he isnt playing like this.
danytarshish 3 years ago
this federer would rape the current federers ass
MesenkoHadow 3 years ago
This is Agassi close to retiring against super class federrer, not bad for an old man huh.
swiv2d 3 years ago
yeah...it's pretty clear agassi was intending to close out his career with a bang a la sampras '02. if it weren't for fed, he would have done just that, judging by the way he was hitting the ball.
03hz94 3 years ago
roger always seems to be in super great form at the us open..always.
reefric 3 years ago
we'll see this time around.
thereisnoel 3 years ago
it will be interesting..
reefric 3 years ago
im saying Djokovic will be the heavy favorite
291TENNIS 3 years ago
he might just be this year..let´s just see how it goes in cincinatti and the olympics..I don´t think we can count out roger just yet, he´s having up and owns..but he did make the wimbledon final..it´s going to be an interesting outcome..
reefric 3 years ago
Djoks has been relatively quiet since his exit at Wimbledon. He's really going to have to pick up his game if he wants to be the "heavy favourite".
JesterToy 3 years ago
I know it's just the highlights and i know Roger is not a machine...but he sure plays like one! This video is a JOY to watch :D 2005-Federer is indeed one of the best we've ever seen!
chloewhite 3 years ago 4