2004 was a 5 setter though I believe

Actually he perked higher after 2011. He claimed he would had beaten his own person from 2003. Roger stopped winning because nadal and novak showed up. Roger was a great, but the best.

This is not even close to prime Federer lol

​@@Kink_LordOk, if 2004 Federer is not prime Federer then what do you consider prime Federer

Federer was like 22 age here but prime? But when 22 age djokovic lost against federer then djokovic casual fans will make an excuse that djokovic was still a baby? Lmao !

Especially the 2003 year end tournament during the round robin stage - just epic!

Yes they brought the best out of each other, very clean hitting.

Agassi started to have back problems in late 2003 and that's when young prime Roger emerged and beat him everytime. I think a prime Andre would split or even win their h2h matchup.

@@outatime16 100% agree! Especially in 5 setters where Andre's conditioning won him alot of matches. Have you read his book Open? Great read if u haven't and can't believe they never made a movie from it. Andre saved tennis in the late 80s and early 90s. He should be talked about more than just the big 3!

I agree. The footwork also.

The best 2 hitters of the ball ever

Very boring to me. No deep balls, almost all in the middle of the court. Glad Djokovic changed all that

Agassi yes but Federer shanks the ball a lot. Best striker is debatable but the cleanest strikers are Djokovic Agassi and mabye Wawrinka and Murray

@@kakashihatake1029 behave, were you even alive in 2005?

@@lanapearce9968 least condescending Federer neo nazi

@@lanapearce9968 I am right. Whether you want to admit it or not

@@kakashihatake1029 lmao Murray hahahaha

100% agree.

Winners?

Winners???

@@cruzcaster8576winners. As in less unforced errors and more winners

Ahhh, someone else who appreciates the art of Safin. Although he won't be remembered that well, Safin was the most talented human being ever to pick up a tennis racquet. He could do things to the ball that no one else (including Federer) could. Marcelo Rios was close behind him, but Safin was just ridiculous for the combo of power and touch.

@@josephbarbarie692 I think that people are aware of Marat Safin. I don’t think he’s been forgotten at all. Safin was probably a little bit too intelligent for tennis. He got bored with the sport kind of easily. Sometimes people of high intellect have to deal with this. You can tell from the way he speaks and expresses himself even in English (2nd language) that’s he’s a thinker. I saw it in Agassi, and I see it in Kygrios. To be a great tennis player you have to be pseudo narcissistic, have tunnel vision, compartmentalize, and enjoy routines. Does any of this sound like characteristics of a well socialized, and functional human being? Lol.

@@josephbarbarie692 Safin wasn't the most talented. He was ONE of the most talented. And he probably has the most pure power in terms of ball-striking ability, and if he's on, he can go for the lines and hit those massive down the line backhands like Delpo's forehand, troubling everyone on hard court. Nalbandian is the most talented player in my opinion. His natural talent was on par with Federer's, if not better. When he focused on the match with 100% concentration, he could beat Federer.

Who the fuck is "Del Porto" and why do I see his name everywhere in comments?

@@sananton2821 just some overrated blackhorse who won a major in his career, nothing more

He had not only war with Blake.he had also 5 sets vs Ginepri.

Courts slowed dramatically a few years later though, and the rest is history.

total bullshit of fedtrad fan, wimbledon was a fast pace surface and look waht

​@tariqjoseph3562 they really didn't though. The courts slowed down at the end of the 90's. Eg Wimbledon has been the same speed for over 20 years. And Djokovic has won masters tournaments on some of the fastest court index speeds of all time.

Grass was technically slowed down in 2002.

You are absolutely 100 percent correct on this.

@@aleksamilosevic8792 No it wasn't so just stop.

@@DRA25dra It was

@@aleksamilosevic8792 Prove it

He was like 22 age in this match, but when federer beat 22 age djokovic how come djokovic casual fans kept making excuses that djokovic was still baby.

Whole tour had faster courts back then

The ball speed back then when court was still faster was bullet like, now the court was slower the ball speed was slower and its easier for baseliner like djokovic to return the ball.

Nahhh, this is youngish Fed approaching his peak but playing at a tournament that was never his most successful throughout his career against a still quality Andre (had been world #1 the previous year). Agassi knows he wasn't quite on Fed's level.

Agassi has always said Federer is the best player he has played against.

No.

absolutely, agassi in this match was playing with a bad back that started in late 2003 until he retired in 2006. he's a step slow but still managed to take a young prime fed to a deciding set.

Agassi had a good match here but Federer destroyed him in the world tour finals at the end of 2003.

Yes but Nadal and Djoker were 5 years younger to Federer. They could hit with him because they could afford to keep up with him and not be completely exhausted. Agassi was 10 years older than Federer and couldn't keep up with Roger hence he was always looking to pull the trigger against Federer.

@@Fed_Express Agassi was extremely fit in 2004. He’s only 34 and djoker at 35 is dominating the game. Agassi also doesn’t have the bad back like in 2005. He’d actually get more energized the longer a match went. What was happening was he wasn’t getting into the points. He thought he had to prevent fed from playing offense. If you look at the shots agassi plays in these rallies it’s usually after ball 4 that he tries to go on offense and fed just stays relaxed and keeps playing and Agassi is mostly beating himself. It’s like watching Westbrook play basketball. Agassi literally played that way against nobody else. Even against Sampras he would relish the long rally’s and let Pete beat himself going for too much.

​@@supermovietimebros6770federer fans will always use an age excuse without understanding the broken logic behind it. Djokovic at 36 is fighting guys half his age to 10 years younger.

@@kakashihatake1029 I think Feds game was ahead of it’s time in 2004-2008 compared to Hewitt safin and roddick. Also he was completely peaking athletically so it was a perfect storm. Nadal was too much for him though once he figured him out. But the rest all sort of panicked against him. I just believe that if this Agassi was this age in 2015, he’d have beaten fed. But this era and way of approaching the game was just behind. Fed exploited it. I think he won 10 majors in 3 years or something all basically against roddick Hewitt and safin and this Agassi

@supermovietimebros6770 well you can't say he'd beat Federer of 2015 just like that. Mabye it would be a 50 50 scenario. But the rest I agree with

No. Not at all. Agassi is the crowd favourite. Federer no where near him. Agassi had more fans at that time

Novak is weak, playing in the weakest era the sport has ever witnessed.