No. 2 seed Michael Chang vs No. 6 seed Andre Agassi | US Open 1996 Semifinal

No. 2 seed Michael Chang faces No. 6 seed Andre Agassi in the 1996 US Open semifinals.

After making the semifinals in 1992, Chang will be hoping to go a step further and reach his first US Open final. If successful, it would be the American's second Grand Slam final of the year having reached the Australian Open final in January. Meanwhile, 1994 US Open champion Agassi is aiming to reach his third US Open final in three years. After a disappointing French Open and Wimbledon, the 26-year-old is going for his first Grand Slam title of the year and the fourth Grand Slam title of his career. Prior to this, the pair have faced each other twice in Flushing Meadows with Agassi coming out on top on both occasions.

Who will emerge victorious in this thrilling semifinal encounter?

[thecatvirusgotme]

Chang was amazing! Reached #2 in the World and had to face the likes of Sampras, Agassi, Courier, Becker and Edberg.

[WhyHandleYouTube]

Ah, 1996. When life was much simpler and I played tennis. 🎾

[vectorthurm]

The acoustics of ball striking in this is amazing!!

[vectorthurm]

Michael Chang & Agassi! My idols!!

[jm]

Agassi was such a clean ball striker. There were no goofy hitches in any of his groundstrokes. Just great footwork, very consistent strike zone, terrific racquet acceleration, firm wrists, stepping into the shot/never anything off his back foot....his mechanics were just so solid.

[youngsuit]

People seriously underrate Chang's Game as though he only could get by on speed and moon balling but he was a good ball striker and knew how to play aggressively

[suzeel]

Michael Chang´s endurance always pay off!! Congratalutions to Mikey! ♥♥♥

[MuvoTX]

These two were such a pleasure to watch... really put on a footwork clinic, best of the era.

[kidpagronprimsank]

This time no tanking from AA. Chang beat him fair and square with real point to prove

[rizwanramzan]

Agassi has amazing timing...he makes taking the ball on the rise look easy....and it NOT easy to master taking the ball on the rise....especially doing it, consistently...

[michaellane]

Fabulous and excellent play by Chang! Phenomenal player!

[vanmayhem]

This was Chang’s best hard court tournament effort. Hit top hard-court form. Agassi supposedly had a tough time this year, but he actually looks great and had just won the gold medal at the Olympics that summer of ‘96.

[musicphilebd]

Seems like the commentators were favoring Agassi. But Chang ruined their party lol

[SDSFG]

Ive saw a ton of Chang's matches....especially the ones against his American peers. And to me?...this match was the best match Ive ever seen him play. He played that cleanly. And I was struck by how much he shelved the Harold Solomon approach of just getting everything back and waiting for his opponent to drop. Nope....he took it to Andre, and played the match as if HE was Andre....hitting the ball harder, than at any other point in his career.

[TheTopspin]

This is something you probably will never see anytime soon. 2 guys using Oversize rackets in a Major semi-final. I don't think there is any one on the ATP tour who uses an oversize racket now. Chang is using a Prince Graphite at 110 sq. inches and Agassi is using a Head Radical at 107 sq. inches. People say you can't use Oversize rackets on the ATP tour, but these guys did very effectively.

[dadsfreetimeclassicgaming]

9 minutes 😩. How is there an echo with the game but the announcers sound great?

[doctorgarbonzo]

By 2001 You had 10 Grand Slam winners competing in the Mens! With all due respect to Djokovic today! The Competitions is weak

[paulz]

People say Mike didn't achieve his potential or peaked too soon. Peaking early maybe but he went very far as a counter puncher who relied on out rallying

[taylorpack]

Michael chang was the original Nadal, he just didn’t have the power.

[tomsd]

These commentators were severely biased against Chang and ignorant at the same time. I don't miss that ignorance at all from the 90's. They said Chang was 5-1 up in the third set, about to go to the final and still went after everything, then said that's the only way he knew how to play, as in if you have no talent then you grind. Well look at tennis now. You don't play like that, you can easily lose, no matter how talented and how much you are ahead. Players like Nadal can beat you if you let up the gas pedal just a wee bit, no matter how much you are ahead.