Andre Agassi made his much-anticipated TV appearance on last night's 60 Minutes sitting down with Katie Couric to discuss "Open" and the revelations that have shocked much of the tennis world. The first half of the segment is above while the second is below.
I began reading his autobiography this weekend (thanks to the Knopf for the advanced copy) and although I'm not finished I can say it's absorbing stuff - revealing in so many ways. Andre's humanity really comes through here, and the revelations take on a different tone when read in the context of his life rather than as singular, isolated incidents.
More later!
Watch CBS News Videos Online
UPDATE: Martina Navratilova responds to AA's call for "compassion"...
(videos via cbsnews)
Monday, November 9, 2009
(UPDATED) VIDEO VAULT: Agassi on 60 Minutes, discusses "Open" revelations
Labels: 60 Minutes, Andre Agassi, autobiography, celebrity, publicity, tennis, video
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's a great book, isn't it? I feel like Andre's the little brother I always wanted. Sometimes I want to kick his a$$, but, in the end, I'm just so proud of him.
ReplyDeleteIt's a shame Katie Couric did the interview. She's terrible, imo. (I'm sure Andre chose her, so it's another reason I want to kick his a$$. ;))
I can't wait to read the book and I agree that the book taken as a whole probably reads better than the dribbles that have been spewed out by the media.
ReplyDeleteAfter hearing the "60 Minutes" interview and Agassi saying how his dad told him how unimportant school was, I get the sense that's the main reason Agassi is so dedicated to his Prep School.
natch: it's really a human story and i can relate to the some of the ways he felt about himself, life, etc. Obvs his is on a hugh scale and not the normal trajectory most of us live but the feelings are relatable.
ReplyDeleteTim: Isn't that how life really is? Not a bunch of random, isloated incidents but an evolution from one place to another and one situation influencing the next and so on? you really do feel compassion at time, but also anger, frustation mixed with all the LOL moments in the book.
Navs is badass. I LOVE HER.
ReplyDeleteSaw the 60 mins interview with Agassi and was just kinda like "whatever." The problem I have (besides him lying & the ATP covering it up) is that I don't understand how someone who supposedly hates the sport so much, can 1) win important titles like Grand Slams; and 2) fall to his knees & tear up with happiness upon winning those titles. That part doesn't make sense to me. And when he told Couric he didn't think about the ramifications of taking the drugs when he was using because he "didn't care" then why the hell didn't he own up to it when he got caught? That to me tells me he cared. If he didn't care, he wouldn't have lied. That's my opinion. And he wouldn't have continued to play the sport for so long when he could have just walked away. I have problems believing he truly hated tennis. You can't win Grand Slams and hate what you do for a living. It just doesn't add up to me.
Richie,
ReplyDeleteI, too, relate to him on so many levels, especially after reading "Open".
"Not a bunch of random, isloated incidents but an evolution from one place to another and one situation influencing the next and so on?"
You know what, though? So many people go through life not realizing that. That's why mistakes often get repeated. I'm glad Andre continues to learn and evolve.
If I can have Sara as my daughter, then Andre is my new little bro. Welcome to my family, Andre! ;)
Jo,
I'm not going to debate you, but I wanted to recognize what you said. One of the things I learned long ago (from an old beau, can you believe it?) is that people think differently. My opinion doesn't make me correct. Yours doesn't make you correct, either. Debating every single word won't make any difference. But we are all entitled to our own opinions.
natch: I was never debating you personally, so I'm a little confused by your post to me. And, to be quite honest, a little offended that you're talking to me like I'm 5 years old...LOL what was that? I fully understand that people are different and that we're all entitled to our own opinions. And I was expressing mine above by commenting on the issues Andre has brought up with the release of his book & his appearance on 60 Minutes. I never presented my opinion as fact and I was not debating you.
ReplyDeleteJo,
ReplyDeleteI did not think you were debating me. I just said I was not going to debate you. Then I followed that up by saying, in other words, you deserved to be heard. It was my way of being fair. I addressed Riche and Tim (granted, Tim was in a roundabout way) and I didn't want you to feel excluded. You clearly had a different opinion than I did. I also did not express that you presented your opinion as a fact.
"And, to be quite honest, a little offended that you're talking to me like I'm 5 years old...LOL what was that?" I don't have any idea what part of my words you are referring to. I don't even think I know how old you are. If you have told me and I've forgotten, I apologize.
natch: I understand now what you're saying...sometimes the way things are written & the way they are interpreted are 2 entirely different things. I interpreted your post to me as some sort of life lesson (hence the 5 yr old reference) that you wanted me to learn bc you thought I wasn't understanding that people have different opinions & that my opinion doesn't make me right. I read it as though you were being condescending, but clearly that's NOT what you intended. Sorry for the confusion!
ReplyDeleteOh and I didn't feel excluded, it's OK. :)
I'll admit that I was disappointed in Agassi when I first heard the meth story, but now I'm over it. He screwed up, he admitted it; if people want to be pissed, they should be pissed at the ATP for glossing over it and accepting Agassi's BS letter. He should have been suspended and it's the ATP's fault for not standing up to the star system, not Agassi's fault. Don't know why he is getting all the hatred in this.
ReplyDeleteAnd LOL at that asshat Martina Navratilova backtracking like crazy. If she said the comments about Agassi and Clemens she needs to stick by them. I appreciate assholes who stick by their assholeishnes than those who backtrack and deny it.
I know Agassi is going to have sell a lot of books for the publisher to recoup their money, but AA's book is currently #1 in preorders at Barnes & noble and #4 at Amazon. So someone is buying what he is selling.
Anon, she explained her comparison with Clemens, she didn't backtrack. Listen to the interview again.
ReplyDeleteI don't like this anti-doping system and I think the use of recreational drugs shouldn't be punished, but it pisses me off that the ATP let this pass at the time.
Anyway, I don't like it when people make confessions like this only to sell their books. It makes me not want to read it, no matter how interesting it may be.
Anon at 11:12:
ReplyDeleteAgassi admitted doing meth, Clemens still hasn't admitted doing steroids. Meth is not a performance enhancer while steroids is.
I said above that Agassi should have been suspended the three months and that the ATP was chickenshit for not doing it, but there is virtually no comparison between Clemens and Agassi. And, yes, Martina is an asshat for making that comparison.
Considering she has yet another lawsuit being put forth against her by another girlfriend she used and discarded (this is, what, the fourth of fifth such lawsuit against her), she probably wants to say anything to get the spotlight off her foibles.
She criticized Agassi yet in the interview above she says "recreational drugs" (which meth is) should not be tested for. Then what the hell is her beef? She is contradicting herself (which is nothing new for Martina of Starwood, as Pete Bodo calls her).
She said she made the comparison because they both lied, not because of the kind of drugs they used.
ReplyDeletePete Bodo is a friggin idiot. I can't help but laugh whenever his drivel is used in some sort of an attempt to further prove a point. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteWhoah, what the hell happened with this comment section?
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymous posters out there - please put a name to your ramblings so others don't have to keep referring to "Anonymous at 10:30" or "Anonymous at 11:12."
Agree with Anonymous at 12:53 though - anyone who references Peter Bodo automatically loses the argument. Sorry Anonymous at 11:42.