View Single Post
Old 11-03-2012, 05:25 AM   #22
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,531

Originally Posted by Gizo View Post
I think that Connors should have won 1977 Wimbledon against Borg as others have argued here, but Borg should have won the 1978 US Open.
Possible about '77, though I tend to doubt it. Sports Illustrated actually said the thumb was no excuse, since the errors that cost Connors the match came off his forehand; and the injured thumb was on his non-dominant hand. They also said that with all the talk about his thumb, he took everyone by surprise in the final, right from the start, hitting 21 clean winners in the first set.

When I see that match I don't see him affected by his thumb. I'm no expert, but I don't recall any expert observing Connors' play affected.

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
LOL at the "your game" comments. I was just giving my opinion in what the spirit of this thread is for. You are likewise entitled your own opinion. As it is I disagree with some of those. There was nothing more he could have done to win the 2005 Australian Open, he played his best and still lost. Novak was flat out too good at the 2008 Australian Open, he would have beaten Federer no matter what.
I think that everything in your post about Nadal, and everything in my post about Federer, is questionable; that's my actual opinion. I'm surprised you missed my mimicry of your post.
krosero is offline   Reply With Quote