McEnroe is largely responsible for the widespread view that Agassi had a better return of serve than Connors. McEnroe says Connors returned his serve better than anyone until Agassi who Mac claims returned even better than Connors. I have to say I'm puzzled. Mac only played Agassi a paltry 4 times, and in 1 of those matches Agassi was a 16 year old kid who lost easily, on another occasion Agassi retired early in the second set, and on the last occasion Mac was well past 30. This hardly gives Mac that much experience of Agassi's return to make the claim that Connors' return was lesser. Agassi never faced Mac's serve in Mac's prime. Mac himself admits that around 86 he lost a step of speed and was never the same player again. So when Mac faced Agassi he was slow into the net, and unlike the vast majority of his matches with Connors, faced a player wielding a modern racket. An old Mac in Wimbledon 92 being constantly passed on the return by a young Agassi using a modern racket would have left him feeling helpless, but I don't think it's fair to compare the Wimbledon 92 Agassi to a Connors with an ancient T2000 against a peak Mac who was much faster onto the return. I have little doubt a peak Connors with a modern graphite would have had as big a field day with a 33 year old Mac serve as Agassi did. I can't help but think Mac's judgement on Agassi and Connors is a little affected by his like for Agassi and dislike for Connors (subconciously, I don't think mac would lie about it), and by a player who'd forgotten what it was like to be quick into the net onto the return and had forgotten what it was like to return serve with wood or steel. Personally I think Connors had the better return, because he was just as able to attack serves as Agassi but more consistent: he got more serves back, even as an older player in the graphite era. having said this about Mac, I do think Mac is a good analyst generally.