Lendl's dominance in the Atp was shared by Boris Becker in the late 80's. The very young German then suddenly hit the tennis master tracks forcefully Wimbledon, the champion came out with just 18. Becker seemed destined to be the next candidate to give meaning to the term 'best player of all time', but quickly joined the race two new Americans who stole the focus and the proper name of the decade.
The 90 have gone down in history for the match Pete Sampras-Andre Agassi, a colored repeat duel between Borg and McEnroe, the papers more flexible, more elongated over time, but less forcefully in the history of tennis. In this case it was Sampras, the player's serve and network, touch and one-handed backhand, McEnroe attack and, obviously more educated on the court, which dominated the matchup (in 34 fighting 34! Pete won 20) and inscribed his name on a higher level of tennis history.
And why should be given much weight to direct confrontation in this case? Because
Agassi, with a lot more media personality in the beginning (he was perhaps the first man who used dress successfully to break the closed world of tennis), with a very direct game background, spent two very different stages in their careers, both under the common denominator among the public charisma (only matched previously by John McEnroe) as well as their successes. He was able to conquer earth once at Roland Garros to join the exclusive club of seven winners of the 'Big 4' (Australia, Roland Garros, Wimbledon and U.S. Open). And even opened a more exclusive, the 'Big 4' and the gold medal in the Olympics, the only Rafa has been able to join. All with a career also almost as long as Jimmy Connors, which talk about their competitiveness and their impact on more than one generation of fans.
Agassi may well therefore have a place of precedence over Sampras in the heart of many fans. And this is where the origin of tennis (direct confrontation between two players) takes all his strength: beyond that pushed Sampras Grand Slam record of Borg and take him to 14-digit number has been exceeded, only Federer, he did overwhelmingly dominate the melee against the only player with which he could then fight for a place among the best ever. The previous data (20-14 in total direct duels), add two others: in 5 matches Grand Slam in late (after Wimbledon, three U.S. and one in Australia) could only beat Agassi Sampras on the hard court of Melbourne Park, less prestigious top 4 'Himalayan' tennis. And above all, he could never fight him rule in the 'Cathedral of Tennis', the All England Tennis Club was the garden of Sampras as he had never been to one before.
0 comments:
Post a Comment