Originally Posted by pc1
Well Agassi's return stats aren't as impressive as some by the way. And I'm writing about a player like a Hoad who had the big serve, forehand and volley plus the big return when he was on his game.
Tanner had the big serve and forehand and was blown off the court by Connors. Sometimes we can also consider that maybe a receiver may have a day where he or she is on his game.
Mandlikova was that type of player on the female side. Big serve, volley, forehand and backhand plus when she was on she hit on the rise winning returns. I saw her do this to Navratilova at her almost invincible best in the finals of the 1985 US Open in the first five games. Navratilova was helpless under that type of firepower. Hana's level dropped and Martina won the next five games before Mandlikova won the first set in a tiebreak.
Well i dont think that even Hoad at his best would handle 130 mph serves. The main point here is that, in my view, no player is capable of winning a match unless the other player gives him a little to work with. You can say anything that you want about Hoad`s abilities but would you bet your life that he would turn out victorius (even playing his absolute best) in match with an inspired Krajicek on a fast court? The difference between a great player like Hoad and a good player like Krajicek is that the great player is able to bring the heat much more often than the good player can. The issue in sports is about consistency of high level of play and not about peak level of play. It is impossible to know who has the greatest peak of level, because i could well argue that Rosol was virtually unplayable during that famous fifth set