Originally Posted by CyBorg
Connors could drive through the ball on har-tru, take it early, force it to the corners, overpower the opponent. But on red everything stayed up and grinding out long rallies was more to Borg's strengths.
As for comparing clay across eras, we can only really use red clay results if we want to be fair. Nadal has not played a single atp match on har-tru, so we don't know how he'd do. So ultimately it's red clay results of one versus red clay results of another. IMO.
In the matches I've seen, Connors does seem to be getting a lot of pace from his opponents on har-tru, and of course that's something he liked.
As for the comparison with Nadal, I agree about restricting it to red clay, though if I had to speculate I think Nadal would adapt to har-tru just as well as Borg did. Neither one of them grew up on har-tru but both excel for obvious reasons on slow dirt.
Now Federer, I wonder, he didn't grow up on har-tru, but if har-tru gave Connors an advantage I think it may have given a similar advantage to Federer. Now that would have been really interesting, to see the Fed-Nadal rivalry on clay split up between red clay and some har-tru matches.