Agassi vs. Edberg

Agassi vs. Edberg. The Indian Wells finals 1990 (from VHS)
Both players were in form, Edberg was better this time and won 6:4, 5:7, 7:6, 7:6

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• Agassi
• vs.
• Edberg
• stefan
• edberg
• andre
• agassi
• tennis
• agassivsedberg
• serve
• volley
• serve&volley

[alin1975]

@nocode61

This is an old one, but you did not press "reply", so I never knew you wrote to me.

Whether pros customise their racquets or not, many of them have spoken out on the changes from string & racquet tech.

I do agree about court speed.

I think its three things: court speed, tech, and changes in technique (i.e. for far more topspin - which goes hand in hand with the tech).

All in all, a sad development imo, and I do not understand how people can watch modern tennis.

[rockerkid26]

here agassi played with pure strategy, you can see how he just hit the ball higher to Edberg backhand. Is well known that to a singlebackhand player, higher balls are harder to hit and always the ball will go slower. The thing that i think is the most stunning, is the tallent of edberg, just think... he is playing against an incredible baseliner, whos playing heavy against his backhand. PURE TALLENT!!! sorry for my english :)

[cindygirlification]

this was edberg at his very best and we can see the beginings of why the volleyer's disappeared. There is no real advantage coming in off agassi's backhand.whereas priviously, 75% of the time a good approach or serve to the opponents weaker wing would have met with success.Only rafter and sampras would ever have success with this stratergy again and only on super fast courts.

[hifromhenry]

whoever dislikes this would be crazy. awesome showcase of both players' strengths that helped make legends of each.

[bengtmartin]

It is true, like someone pointed out, that it´s way more difficult to hit the ball hard back and forth against a player like Edberg, who never gave much rythm to his opponents to work with. He approached the net more willingly, more often and more successfully than any other player I can think of, so there´s obviously not going to be a whole lot of baseline rythm for his opponents. That was the beauty of his game – finesse and agility over power.

[gardenvarietypenis]

Wonderful upload: era's best ball striker meets era's best volleyer.

[nocode61]

I incline to think that the most important attribute if the game is just the court surface. Court is slower, so everyone prefers baseline game, where bigger racket with better torsion stability and "new" strings with better longevity helps a bit.

[nocode61]

Hi alin1975, Thanks for the input. But it is difficult for me to see how much this "new" racket tech improves pro's shot. First pros customize their racket anyways. Their rackets are heavy, probably just as heavy as old ones. String may help more than racket. But Roger uses gut as mains and still manages to hit about 99% of new tech tours. I do not know what serving harder means. If you account for the increased accuracy of speed gun. Service speed has not really increased since Pete's days.

[alin1975]

@nocode61

I completely disagree about the racquets. Even more so if you look at the development in string technology.

Saw a video with Ivanisevic where they asked him if he can still serve as hard as he used to when he was on tour. He said he serves harder now because the racquets are continuously improving.

Heres Federer on strings: "With gut you could hit hard but with the strings now you can hit hard and create angles with spin. And everybody can do it, so the game has changed a lot..."

[nocode61]

mikatagahara1212, If that is true, a top notch sprinter would be finishing the race in like 7 seconds by now. Humans do not get faster like that. Comparing different era does not work either. For instance, court conditions and ball nowadays are considerably slower compared to 5~10 years ago while string tech probably got better. Quality of tennis? Baseline games improved but other aspects of game like volley deteriorated a lot. How do you compute that? :-]