Federer vs Agassi - 2004 QF UsOpen (Part 5-8)

[zzasdadsdk]

I don't know why people are attributing decline of federer to his age...he is still in perfect condition.he is playing big shots. Only thing which he is currently lacking off is the confidence .I do not understand why he could not hold his nerves during big points.I never saw him losing match after having 2 match points.he should take some inspiration from Aggassi who was world no. 1 at the age of 33 years and 4 months.I believe that he has the potential to win at least 2 more majors.

[Globox822]

@zzasdadsdk few months ago I said Feder is better then ever, and look at him in last couple of months. He even said so himself few days ago. The thing is competition is much stronger these days and fed lovers don't want to admit to that. Anyone of top for could win 3 GS next years (for example), and guys like Del Potro and Tsonga can beat anyone. You guns like Tomic and Raonic might explode next year. It's not easy these days.

[zzasdadsdk]

@Globox822 I am really pleased with the current form of federer and I strongly believe that he would win at least a major next year. No doubt Tsonga and Del Potro have potential to win majors and for that matter one should not underestimate Tomic and Raonic... but to be honest they do not stand anywhere near to big 4s. As far as competition is concern I don't think the competition during the time of agassi was any smaller compare to current level competition (Dont forget Sampras, Kuerten etc).

[syncroneyes]

Wow, they don't have this kind of angle anymore ):

[AandresHernandezZ]

Agassi was playing a legend,  and a king.

[thisnamealsotaken]

@AandresHernandezZ LOL if i was beating a guy at that age i would be called a king too. stop riding federers dick so much man, its making u blind.

[Sallar21]

GO AGASSI

[kleefton]

I know he lost this match, but Andre was crushing the ball in that match LOL. OMG, I don't think I've ever seen any one take such big swings at the ball with so much accuracy in my life. It just goes to show how Good federer was in 04'. The way Andre was hitting the ball, nobody else would have beaten him that day. Incredible to watch.

[mousavsm]

@kleefton Andre definitely emptied the tank....at that age, he had no choice but to hit the cover off the ball. Another thing that showed his age because when he started playing smarter tennis, he actually would rally with his opponents and was incredibly good at covering the court. In this match, he went for broke much more often because he simply was too old to try and run down balls, etc. But you're right, the way Andre hit it was unbelievable to watch...

[fucker1029]

2:18 ..........nasty

[fucker1029]

2:18 .........shiiiiiiiiiittt

[gos2488]

Agassi hits harder than any other player

[hattrickster33]

It sucks that the ball is invisible.

[destinykaizer]

it seems agaasi is better though O.o

[bowen1030]

overhead views of matches don't really do justice as to how fast these guys hit the ball and how quickly that they react in a match. The opening part of the video did just that, Agassi's shot was brutal

[masterofmucus]

agassi was different....he got better with age jud like wine ;)

[trepo99]

como se ven de bien las pelotas en youtube!!

[Kalipathekid]

@trepo99 No seas wey, Federer y Agassi son tan buenos, que juegan con pelotas especiales que se tornan invisibles, si no la partida nunca acabaria

[Imhot06]

Mousavsm. Agassi moved better before yes...but he did not have the same quality in his groundstrokes as he had in eg. this match. Not at all the same speed in his shots when he was younger.

[Imhot06]

Mousavsm. Agassi moved better before yes...but he did not have the same quality in his groundstrokes as he had in eg. this match. Not at all the same speed in his shots when he was younger.

[federerbestclass]

Roger is true class. true king. love Roger

[cro91Maderfaker]

@federerbestclass dude will u shut the fuck up already ? on every tennis video u comment : roger is true class.true king.love roger. omfg you are gettin boring , get a life retard

[dennisholly73]

I so wanted Agassi to win this match. And he was a great wind player from playing in Las Vegas which surprised me that he lost.

[mousavsm]

@dennisholly73 He lost because he was 35 years old and age caught up with him (as well as a gimp back). No doubt, Federer is a great player but both of Agassi's matches vs him in the US open (04 and 05) I think would have gone to a prime Agassi. As Agassi got older, he got smarter and in better shape, but that was probably until he turned 33-34, then he started having back troubles and was not the same player. IMO, a prime Agassi would have beaten Fed here.

[youziness]

@mousavsm a prime agassi as u stated is worse than this agassi. Plump, slow movement and slower strokes. He actually got better when he slim down and cut his hair, after 1999. This is the prime agassi for me. He only beat federer when he haven't strengthen up, after it happens he didnt have chance. His game lacks some areas against fed and sampras, which explains why always lost. Today the pros are all rounders and top players have a safer style which prevents upset, its not that standards drop.

[mousavsm]

@youziness The Agassi in 99 played smarter....the Agassi in 95 ascended to world number 1 and played at a very high level. He only fell of the perch due to his off-court issues. Agassi was like 34 in this video. Sure, he was extremely fit but to say he was in better shape than a 25 year old, number 1 ranked, Agassi....not sure about that. I watched him throughout his whole career...Federer only beat Agassi because Agassi was 35 and Fed was prime....Prime agassi at 34, are you serious?????

[Thutmosis7]

@mousavsm Good point. I don't know why this federinas using a old washup agassi as if he is in his prime. Agassi last good win came in 03 at AO. After that he seem to be a non factor the rest of his career. He probably overachieve later in his career than previous, but that's about it. This agassi is nowhere near his best. That's to show you how weak that era was prior before nadal came on the scene. Without nadal it would of be the weakest era of tennis since the 60s.

[mousavsm]

@Thutmosis7 He's saying to make Federer look better than he really was...No doubt, Fed was great and still is. But, Agassi in his prime, in my opinion, could beat Federer a lot. Agassi was slowed down by his own off-court issues, his arrogance early in his career to miss so many Aussie and French Opens, and Sampras' serve. Vs Sampras, the serve was unreal sometimes and Agassi literally had no chance. WIth Roger's serve being great, but not Sampras great, Agassi would have been him a lot.

[Thutmosis7]

@mousavsm Great post.

[Sykermeetikko]

"Old man"? C'mon, he's like 40 years old and you call him old man?

[89Pleasek]

Agassi sometimes seems to me as in 2003-2005 he was better than in 95, at least playing with Federer.

[splendid1000]

@89Pleasek

his strokes look pretty good here but his movement is worse

[89Pleasek]

Agassi is an offensive baseliner so his movement didn't matter all that much cause he got most of the balls in the middle of the court. The only player who could not only go toe-to-toe with him from the baseline but also make him run was Federer at the time + he was younger, quicker and had a better serve that's why he didn't lose a single match to the American since 2002.

[splendid1000]

@89Pleasek

.... movement always matters LOL

U think Sampras never made him run?

[splendid1000]

Agassi was injury plagued by the end of 2003, losing to lots of mediocre players. He withdrew from Wimbledon twice due to injury, had two first round losses in the French Open.

[splendid1000]

I think i'm gona just be an offensive baseliner too. That way i'm guaranteed to get all my balls in the middle of the court and i'll never even have to move. Why doesn't everyone do this!!?? Shhhh, we'lll keep this our little secret bro.

[mousavsm]

@splendid1000 Yea, that's very true. Pleasek said that it seems as though Agassi played better vs Fed in 03-05 than he did in his prime (when he was number 1 in 1995). My only comment would be to go back and watch his matches. Agassi was no where near his 95 level in his 30's, especially his late 30's, when, as you pointed out, he was hurt often and just too old for the game really. The game is just too demanding to play at that high a level at age 35.

[89Pleasek]

Dont get me wrong, movement always matters but you certainly need more speed when you're just throwing balls on the other side of the court (Nadal) rather than make your oponent run from left to right (Agassi)

[splendid1000]

@89Pleasek

yah i agree, agassi did run less than most because of his superior strokes. but like you said, he couldnt just dictate play from the baseline against fed like he could against others. fed made his ass run, which is why i mentioned his deteriorated speed and footwork hurting him towards the end of his career, especially against Fed

[mousavsm]

@splendid1000 Uhm, he was 35 years old lol. Agassi was getting beaten by a lot of guys around this time so the fact he took a set off Federer at that age and Fed being in his prime....well, you can just believe what you want I guess, if they faced in their primes, but clearly, only one guy was in his prime here. In my opinion, Agassi would have run Fed around a lot if they were both primed, pretty much like Nadal does to him, come to think of it...

[splendid1000]

@mousavsm

Uhm yah? Thats pretty much what i had said? I never said a prime Fed could dominate a prime Agassi nor did i say their primes ever met. I just said Agassi clearly couldnt move like he could in his 20s, and though movement didnt affect him too much against most players because of his baseline dominance, against Fed it did because Fed was fast himself and obviously has great groundsrokes and talent....

[EmceeNolan]

@splendid1000 Agassi was never a very good mover. He was actually in much better shape in 99-through-the-early 2000's than he ever was during the 90's. That's how he was able to win the 3 Australian Open titles in the scorching heat during the 2000's and pad his career resume.

[splendid1000]

@EmceeNolan

yah he was never a great runner, but he was faster in his early years and had more stamina in his later yeras

[mousavsm]

@EmceeNolan Well, maybe you don't know this, but Agassi never even played the Aussie Open till he was 25 (he missed like 10 opportunities to play it). Considering he won 4 of them, he could have had many more since it was his best major (by far). He also missed a bunch of French Opens, too. He won Aussie Opens for many of the same reasons that he did so well at the US Open - that is, he hit the ball hard and those surfaces are the fastest.

[EmceeNolan]

@mousavsm A fair point about the AO, but the arrogant skipping early in his career was at Wimbledon, not the French. I think of Agassi a lot like I think of Djokovic, only Agassi didn't move nearly as well as Djokovic. He could get a few wins and put up some good fights, but in the end, Federer isn't overly troubled by hard, flat hitters. It's the combination of defense and heavy top spin from Nadal that really troubles him.

[mousavsm]

@EmceeNolan Agassi would have posed many problems for Roger had he not been over 30 when they faced. If you recount some Agassi-Sampras matches, Agassi put up more than a good fight. Sampras' serve saved him on MANY occasions when he could have easily lost with a serve like Roger's (which is fantastic but as good as Sampras', NO WAY). Also, another thing that bothers Roger vs Nadal is the fact that Nadal constantly pounds his backhand. Nadal exposes Roger's biggest flaw, his backhand.

[EmceeNolan]

@mousavsm But Federer has a much better ground game than Sampras had and in his prime, he completely dominated the hard, flat hitters. Nadal pounds Federer's backhand with his forehand, which is one of the greatest forehands in tennis history. There aren't too many who can win forehand to forehand rallies with Nadal, much less backhand to forehand rallies. & two of Federer's best shots - his inside-out forehand, and his cross-court backhand, play right into Nadal's best shot, his running FH DTL.

[mousavsm]

@EmceeNolan I don't think Federer completely dominated the hard, flat hitters as you say. I think he made less errors and was better at finishing points. Federer's serve also saved him on many occasions when he wasn't playing better than his opponent. Just take a look at Federer and Nadal's first ever match. Nadal hit the ball very flat then, and he completely dominated Federer on a hard court. And you may be right about the match-up problem with Nadal. But......

[mousavsm]

@EmceeNolan But Nadal's backhand has improved a lot over the last 2 years or so. You're right, he hits it heavy and it kicks up on Federer. However, he also continually just pounds Fed's backhand an inordinate amount of times and seemingly always gets errors from Federer. Also, Nadal may finish points with his down the line forehand, but he likes to play the cross court forehand more often. Federer simply hasn't been able to adjust because Nadal is pretty damn complete and has everything.

[randykarmakum]

@mousavsm no, nadal's bh has deproved since 2008. 80% of nadal winners come from his fh now which is the reason djokovic beats him easy. Furthermore all clay courters afraid low level flat balls, djokovic kept pounding on his thigh(most shots to center of court) if u analyse their match. The only reason federer lose because his loopy bh cannot land at nadal's thigh, yes only federer fh side able to do that but not quite enough. If he had a flat bh then he completely dominates rafa.

[mousavsm]

@randykarmakum I respect your opinion but I disagree. Djokovic beating Nadal is more mental than physical. Nadal has just made more errors against Djokovic when compared to other players. Djokovic has also gotten better. Federer losing to Nadal is partially mental, too. Nadal is in his head. But, to add to that, Nadal is better on the baseline than Federer. Also, go loook at Nadals backhand progression over the last 3-4 years. Then come tell me it's gotten worse and not better (no way).

[randykarmakum]

@mousavsm watch and analyse again. Nadal hit like 0 backhand winners against djokovic, always land short. Djokovic place low shots to make nadal bend down, there is nothing mental about it. He always have the game to win now that his endurance improved this is only normal. His game against nadal never changed since 2007. Its natural that clay courters' slower topspin stroke and western grip has weakness against knee level balls

[mousavsm]

@89Pleasek We've talked at length so I won't start another convo but you can't be serious about Nadal just throwing the ball over. First of all, these guys are the top players in the world so if Nadal did that, then they would put away a lot of those shots. Secondly, guys who face Nadal get more beat up than him, and run more than they are used to, because Nadal, when on, runs his opponents all over the court, just like Agassi did in his prime, and even vs Fed when he was 35. Peace out.

[libatako]

That old man's pretty good :)

[MsTennisplayer]

andre, thank you for all!!

[ccccorean]

I can't see the ball.

[hurricanewinzz]

where is 6 7 8 parts

[satishsatishiyer]

Where is Part 8-8