McEnroe & Sampras: Why no respect for Rafter?

[thrust]

Had about a 5 minute chat with Rafter in New Haven, just before his game really took off mid 90's, maybe 96?

Seriously good dude.....and this was right after a tough loss....

My kid still cherishes the ball he pulled out of his bag and signed for him with his sharpie, we weren't hunting autographs.

My favorite player ever and his level for those 2 years in the late 90's IMHO was as high a level of tennis that has ever been played....sick good.

I always liked Rafter's tennis game and found him to be a very nice and friendly person with fans at the now Miami Open, years ago.

 

[pc1]

I always liked Rafter's tennis game and found him to be a very nice and friendly person with fans at the now Miami Open, years ago.

I like Rafter's game also but his career record didn't stand up compared to McEnroe and Connors. John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors and Pete Sampras actually had just one year that can be argued to be better than Patrick Rafter's entire career! McEnroe in 1984 won 13 of 15 tournaments including two majors and the year end championship. Jimmy Connors in 1974 won 15 tournaments including three majors. Sampras in 1994 won 10 tournaments including two majors in the Australian and Wimbledon. He won the Italian on clay and the Year End Championship that year.

Rafter won 11 tournaments in his CAREER and 2 majors.

 

[Waspsting]

What did Connors reply?

"Never"

 

[thrust]

I like Rafter's game also but his career record didn't stand up compared to McEnroe and Connors. John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors actually had just one year that can be argued to be better than Patrick Rafter's entire career! McEnroe in 1984 won 13 of 15 tournaments including two majors and the year end championship. Jimmy Connors in 1974 won 15 tournaments including three majors. Rafter won 11 tournaments in his CAREER and 2 majors.

True, I think Rafter's main problem was he came to the net too often. He had the talent to win more, but his game was probably too one dimensional. Still, his net game was great to watch.

 

[pc1]

True, I think Rafter's main problem was he came to the net too often. He had the talent to win more, but his game was probably too one dimensional. Still, his net game was great to watch.

Yes I enjoyed his game also. I thought his groundstrokes were underrated and good in his prime. It had to be in order to stand up to Agassi in some of those great Wimbledon matches they had.

 

[70後]

Sometimes, it is a case of having the assets, but incorrectly deploying them. Or not strategically balancing.

In other cases, it might be having too much of one asset at the expense of another. The excess though is not worth the return.

 

[chrisb]

After unexpectedly winning the US Open in 1997, John McEnroe attempted to belittle Pat Rafter's achievement and dismissed him as a 'one Slam wonder'.

Similarly, Pete Sampras made snarky comments after Rafter beat him at 1998 Cincinnati. Asked what the difference was between them, Sampras sarcastically replied, "About 10 Slams!" and went on to assert that a player had to come back and win a Grand Slam again in order to be considered great.

When Rafter successfully defended his US Open title the following year, beating Sampras in the semi-final, he still didn't get any respect or acknowledgement. He said, "That is what really upsets me about him and the reason why I try to **** him off as much as I can."

Why this refusal from McEnroe and Sampras to respect Rafter's achievement? It doesn't reflect well on either guy, but especially Sampras!

 

[chrisb]

I feel that they thought Pat had a really incomplete game and was supremely lucky to get through to his slams. Weak backhand and suspect forehand were part of the problem