Originally Posted by krosero
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.
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.
What you say makes sense, but Newk made a big deal of it on the TV broadcast.