Agassi and Nadal- only in history...

@@richardhall4830 I had not heard of that. Super interesting! I would've called it the career golden super slam.

@@mategradac199 Agassi: all 4 majors, Olympic Gold Medal in singles, and WTF title Nadal: all of the above except WTF title

@@richardhall4830 Yeah, no. Alcaraz's playing style is far from efficient.

Agreed, and you realize that he truly "hated" the game while also respecting his own talent and achievements. It was a paradox.

Icc final

I just finished reading it. It was well written. It's just hard to read those parts where you know he was suffering. I love Andre and I live him even more after reading the book.😊 Very inspiring person.

He was juiced the last 5,6 years of his career..maybe more..

Markoni Johnson Juiced? Yeah ok

Yeah Johnny Depp started dressing like a pirate. Lol

@MUFCyou call yourself a football fan but calls it "soccer"? Shame on you

Him and a young rafa

He was refreshing

Dress like a pirate life

He was seeded 13?

The same show was by Rafa this year against Daniil.. Australian open final.. Being 2 sets down and winning the match is seriously epic.. 💞

@@SigmaCap84 Yep, two of the greatest comebacks in tennis, both against opponents named Medvedev.

@@justinholland9844 yes... Medvedev's bad luck at finals..

He improved his fitness with Gil Reyes. That's what made that comeback possible.

The dizzying heights of the FO win in 1999, then brought down to earth just one month later at Wimbledon with a dazzling display of grass court tennis by Pete Sampras.

Disagree. He’d tell u his crowning achievement was beating Pete Sampras at Wimbledon.... He only ever did it once.

Same here

@@johnklaus9111 he never beat Sampras at Wimbledon. He beat him three times in grand slams, at the Australian Open (final 1995, and QF 2000), and once at the French Open (1992). So really only one over Sampras in his prime, the AU Open final, since Sampras was declining by 2000, and can't play properly on clay, not to mention he hadn't reached no1 yet in 1992. The Agassi-Sampras rivalry was never one-sided like Federer-Roddick, but still, Sampras beat Agassi 4 times out of 5 where it counts the most, grand slam finals... And I say that as an Agassi fan, I wish Agassi could've handled better the insane power play of Sampras. But omg Sampras was so good.... Hs ridiculous serve, his movement, his volleys, his legendary running forehand (and they had no luxilon string at the time), and just ability to stay composed under pressure, all on fast surfaces that favored his power game, that was just too much... People forget how good Sampras was, but just like the new guys like Alcaraz are Federer fans, Federer was a Sampras fan!

He won his wife there, what an athlete 😉

Well, you can say that of pretty much every era... It was difficult against Borg, it was difficult against Lendl-Connors, it is difficult against Federer-Nadal-Djokovic...

Yeah, but Sampras was better then most of those players you just mentioned except maybe Federer and Agassi was playing against him too.

@@jeeperscreepers8902 Sampras is very good, but there was not a sustained top 3 as good as Djokovic-Nadal-Roger in that period

Sampras was most dominant in his era than Federer in 2005-19. Today all the surfaces are very similar. In 90's, no. Agassi won the 4 majors - in very different surfaces!

@@ooR4 prime Roger is shitting on Sampras lmao. 10 consecutive GS finals, Pete could never

i loved that book

Sam's Movies I noticed that too.

Sam , you see the match between Goran Ivanosivich in wimbledon 1992 and US open in 2002 when both are in retiring stage . Astonishing matches and they had to beat Leyton Hewitt and Roddick , Saafin . If they were in 20's and enters now , most of theto days champions would have packed off.

Wtf? Today's champions are still overwhelmingly Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. Ivanesevich couldn't hold a candle to them. Not sure he was even better than Murray or Wawrinka at their best. If you mean the 20-something guys, then sure, but those guys aren't really the champions of today. A. Zverev has a few Masters titles, and Kyrgios 1 or 2, but not much else for the 20-somethings.

What are you talking about, today's top three champions Nadal Federer and Djokovic are all three over 30 and totally dominate the tour.

Andre was probably the least-liked guy on the tour when he was younger. After he cut his hair and grew up, he got more popular.

...and along came steffi Graf and stole all his monies !! . LoL

​@@benlotus2703 I don't get the joke, considering Graf already had just as much money as him before they met, she's like, the second most successful female tennis player ever (after S. Williams), and won 22 grand slam tournaments on her own, that's 14 more than him...

@@MrTresto It called Divorce! LoL Tis is Joke !

@@benlotus2703 are you ok?! Bizarre comment. You do know she has more money than him!

@@trustorbust2009 just like a child....”someone else made me do it”......you wouldn’t accept that reason from a child and certainly not a “grown up” woman

Why she is ugly

@@davids2742 why your heart is ugly?

@@SuperPaulza why your name is ugly?

I think his another real price is that he has married Brooke Shields before.

@MUFC Soccer is the only sports where players try to cheat on penalties, rolling on the ground, and so on and always contest the referee decisions. Moreover, except germany, soccer is the sport of poor countries. That is why soccer is more practised all over the world!

Connors and McEnroe still knew how to win matches even with their flaring tempers. Players nowadays cannot even hold serve at 15-30 🤣

@Roger Edgerton I think he was referring to personality and charisma, which Agassi had in spades. Sampras in comparison came off as awkward and wooden. He didn't seem as comfortable in the spotlight as the other stars of that era. Thats not a knock on Sampras the tennis player, he just wasn't a very relatable person off the court the way Agassi always was.

Not forgetting of course that Sampras almost single-handedly won the 1995 Davis Cup for the USA (played 2x singles and doubles as well), on clay, in Russia, against the likes of Kafelnikov. And to think, the only reason he even played the singles was due to Agassi's withdrawal. Sampras could play and win on clay (he also won a Masters 1000 on clay), it's just the stars didn't align for him at the French Open.

@@thepsychologist8159 did sampras win olympic or not? i wasnt born in his era

@@bibek6713 The information is freely available on the internet. Olympics? The care factor? No, but Sampras almost single-handedly won the 1995 Davis Cup for the USA (played 2x singles and doubles as well), on clay, in Russia, against the likes of Kafelnikov. And to think, the only reason he even played the singles was due to Agassi's withdrawal

The most electric exciting player ever to walk on court. The Big Three are the goats but this man always was the most exciting person to watch... not one single solitary boring bone in his body

I'm still surprised that Maria Sharapova has done it but not Henin

Absolutely. Andre was an amazing returner. One of the best. Borg was a great returner too.

Yes, Djokovic the best and he is the second best returner

During his time, his return was the most feared in the game.

No novak djokovic

He is still unmatchable

ferzy09 Yes they are 😊.

He also won the career Golden Slam....incl the Olympic gold.

He won all the major event in the 90s, Year End Championship in 1990 and Olympic Gold in 1996. And the only one to do so. Djokovic now is the one who could surpassing him if he wins Olympic Gold Next Year - by becoming the first player in history to have won all majors event in this sport - All Four Slam, Golden Masters, ATP World Tour Championship, Olympic Gold.

@@user-hh9sk4ft1s Djokovic also has a good shot to be the first man to repeat all 4 slams at least once , at this year´s Roland Garros.

@@Nycku007 if he did he will be the 2nd player after Rod Laver to have won 4 consecutive slam twice.

And ATP finals too...

I think his wife did it first.

it is scary to think, what can do their kids one day :-O

Among men, he's the only singles player so far to win all 4 Grand Slams, an Olympic Gold medal, and the ATP Finals. Federer is missing the Gold Medal. Nadal is missing the ATP Finals. Djokovic is missing the Gold Medal.

@@bobhilton2643 not many big players give so much care to Olympic . People only talks about grand slams .and at second place people talks about atp world tour finals. But Olympic gold who cares .aggasi can't be put in sampras Federer nadal djokovic s league ..he is in becker edberg lendle a league

The let cord in the 4th set tiebreak saved Andre.

Yes, but if you take into account the complete record of Pete before that, it was 13 wins in 15 finals in the GS.

Yer, not forgetting Sampras wasn't in the right head-space considering it wasn't too long before this he found out his coach and good friend had brain cancer. It was a mighty good effort that he even made the final. But that's OK, Sampras got his revenge at the 1995 US Open, on home soil, in front of thousands of US fans. If you're going to beat another American, there could be no better place than to do it on home soil.

Robert Hurley Jr He did admit to using meth while playing so there's that.

@@aerobars9227 I hear ya. But who could dislike meth jk

Steffi the best forehand in the history of female tennis,Andre the best returner ever.Two living legends with 30 Slams(22+8).

💯%

I had to check this. Brad Gilbert did not compete in Aus 1995. His name was neither in the main draw nor the qualifying draw.

@@ahmedmosa1265 Yes he did. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Australian_Open_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_singles

Ya, Agassi was the best player from 1999 to 2003 or 2004, when Federer came on the scene. Saffin, Hewitt, and Sampras, till 2001, were around then. In 2003 Agassi became the oldest number one.

Going from John and Jimmy into the greatest era of USA tennis was just great to be alive I also saw him Pete Mike and Jim

@@denisdaly1708 Agreed. He was most definitely the best player at those times. A whole level above everyone else.

Oh yes !!

@@denisdaly1708 he can't be matched with Sampras .sampras is miles better than him in all aspects .14 grand slams compares to 8 .5 grand slam final win in head to head compares to only 1 from andre .he is nowhere .in my opinion aggasi is very much overated

Both won Wimbledon in 92 as well

But the time they started dating was around french open 99...

Hands down greatest returner and ONLY man to ever achieve the "Career Super Slam"

@@Skazellino I was going to say Nadal did the career super slam as well but is the world tour finals included?

every agassi video: ANYONE ELSE AGREEEEE??????

No

8 slams was a lot because it was a different era. Nowadays, anyone can win on any surface. That wasn't the case 20+ years ago. For example, Nadal wouldn't sniff a Wimbledon in the 80's and 90's and would have a difficult time winning a US Open or Australian Open. Now that the balls and courts are slower combined with racket and string technology, any surface is fair game.

Blake Martin We don’t know that for sure.

Well, with his current style of play we know that. If he had a different style, anything is possible.

Blake Martin any surface is fair game yet 3 guys have taken like 90 % of the Slams? You got it backwards. Back then you had unknown fools like Andreas Gomez winning slams. Do you see a Donald Young sniffing at the doorsteps of a slam since Roger Federer first won a slam? Roger and Rafa are so damn good, they’d have dominated back in the days even more. And I can tell you’re a Rafa hater because you didn’t say Roger wouldn’t win anything in the past. But... The clay of Roland Garros hasn’t changed, do you think any of the past guys on clay would have taken a slam away from Rafa there? Hell no. Not even the great Bjorn Borg. 11 slams is a safe floor for Rafa. He probably wouldn’t lose any at all in the 70’s 80’sor 90’s. The only reason he lost at all is because of Novak. Novak hurt him in Madrid of 2009 that’s how Soderling beat Rafa at the French, and Djokovic again got Rafa in 2015 when Rafa was recovering from a multitude of injuries, that something not even Federer could do. Back in he day, there was no Djokovic. The US Open hasn’t changed since the 70’s? You don’t think Rafa could beat the likes of Roddick Hewitt Safin Agassi Wilander rafter at the USO??? You don’t think Rafa could beat Thomas Johansson, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Petr Korda, Boris Becker, Jim Courrier, Ivan Lendl, Mats Wilander, Stephan Edburg, Johan Kriek at the Aussie? You don’t think Rafa could beat Lleyton Hewitt, Goron Ivanisevic, Agassi, Richard Krajicek, Michael stitch, Stephen Edburg, Boris Becker, pat Cash, at Wimbledon? Those are all past champions. WEAK past champions. Rafa could have taken them all out. Obviously Pete was the stud back in the 90’s yet you don’t mention how Roger probably wouldn’t have been able to beat Pete on grass.... says so much about how much a Rafa hater you are. Pete and Roger would have battled for supremacy at the uso with Agassi and Rafa fighting for the scraps and Agassi and Roger would have battled at the Aussie with Pete and Rafa fighting for the scraps Rafa would own clay and so, Rafa would emerge as the top dog in that era too. He is the king of tennis. Once he passes Roger all time, you rafa haters will be real salty. No matter to me, I still believe that he and Roger are the 2 best players of all time.

You're taking this way too personal. First of all, quit calling him "Rafa." You and everyone else who does sounds like a damn idiot. His name is Nadal, just like you say "Roger" and not Federer. This modern weird shit of calling athletes by their first name or nicknames is embarrassing. I didn't bring up clay because Nadal is in my opinion the best clay court player to ever live. Yes, you teleport him back to the 80's and 90's and he still wins French Opens, although I don't think he would have won so many. Probably five or six, because I don't know how his game would translate to yesterday's clay 30 years ago. It was impossible with the equipment and string technology of the day to get the massive topspin Nadal plays. Couldn't be done, so with that being said, you have to strike that against him. Even so, I still think he would be the best clay court player ever. I didn't mention Federer because he has more of an all-court game that would translate. He's a good server and a good volleyer, and I would see less of a problem with him adjusting his game. He wouldn't be as dominate as today, but he'd still be an all-time great in any era. What are you talking about the US Open not changing since the 70's? The surface is MUCH slower, almost like the gray clay used in the US. And no, Nadal couldn't consistently win a US or Australian Open back then. No way. I don't think you understand how different the racket and string technology are compared to now. Nadal could've possibly won A US or Australian Open, but consistently a contender? No. And the Wimbledon comment made me actually laugh. No chance in hell he beats Cash, Ivanisevic, Rafter, Becker, or Edberg on grass in that era. None. In fact, he probably couldn't win a set. He might be able to beat Agassi or Hewitt, but they were baseliners. Remember, old ass Agassi with a bad back gave prime Federer all he wanted at the US Open in 2005, so I'll take that back, prime Agassi would consistently beat Nadal in a 90's era Wimbledon match. I've already mentioned racket and string technology, but add to that the slower grass and slower balls. You think Nadal could use a Prince Graphite with VS gut and generate anything close to his topspin on the grass that was equivalent to playing on ice? The ball skids, that's why baseliners like Lendl and Borg served and volleyed at Wimbledon. You couldn't win from the baseline, and the only guy in that era to do it was Agassi who was one of the very few players ever to perfect hitting the ball on the rise so he could offset that hurdle. Your logic is way off in this discussion, and frankly it's probably because of ignorance. I don't have anything against any modern player, but I know how different the game is compared to what it was. That's why I don't have an opinion on the "best ever" players because the game has changed so much. When I started playing in the early 80's, we were taught to serve and volley. That changed about a decade later and kids were taught to play from the baseline more because equipment was evolving. It's a different game. A boring game. Everyone plays from the baseline and slugs it out with heavy topspin. It's sad. If Nadal was a player from yesterday, he'd have six or so French Open titles and maybe one US or Australian Open title, so he'd be right there with Agassi. Great player, but a guy who would find it difficult to win on anything other than red clay. Period.

Mochi Balls Rafa has

@@jjh2456 But no ATP finals to his credit unlike Agassi who won that too...

ATP final nothing to compare with gold Olympic nd career golden slam

true facts rafa nadal has a chance if he wins the tour finals but i do not think he will cos of federer and djokovic!

Agassi was never a counter puncher. He was out and out aggressive, looking to end the points in the shortest manner possible.

Both the surface and the climate. He wrote in his book that growing up in the Las Vegas desert enabled him to play through the heat better than a lot of his opponents.

L' angolo del Tennis why ?

Nah.. dude cammon Federer - Nadal - Sampras ( I know he didnt won RG but overall He was better ) - Djokovic and maybe... Agassi ( cause he has a career slam but its questionable )

Ay Caramba yep

C’mon now.... Agassi is my all-time favorite player, by far. But even I can admit that he isn’t even in the first tier of all-time greats. In my opinion, and in the opinion of many others, the first tier of all-time greats (in no particular order) is Laver, Sampras, Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. I believe that Agassi is on the 2nd tier of all-time greats with Borg, Connors, Lendl, and McEnroe. Although personally I put Agassi ahead of all those guys, except for maybe Borg. At very least Agassi is the 7th greatest male player ever. Maybe 6th at best.

Lendl had a better career than Andre. More wins, more titles, more slam finals, more year end finals and wins, way more weeks at number one, a higher winning percentage, and he did it in about five fewer years.

And olympic gold

kid gloves I agree

Sampras was the better fast court player...Agassi the better all court player in my opinion

true and later he admitted he took drugs, and Pete didn't

@@Walkman0007 😋😋😱😱😝

Hell yes. Go Armenia. We are fighters.

For the Majors, you'll usually hear some combination of "Game, Set, Match Championship," or "Set, Match, Championship." But, for the Finals, the Chair Umpire will always denote the winner by including "Championship" in their call.

@@LV_FUD80 Wrong - it has to be "Game Set and MATS" (Mats Wilander) haha

Avatar Roku and beat the hell out of everybody...but yeah, I can see that.

What about Todd Martin in there? Was he ever not 57 years old?