View Single Post
Old 12-02-2012, 12:21 AM   #29
kiki
G.O.A.T.
 
kiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,082
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krosero View Post
Checking the rest of the '84 record, Connors has a 5-3 lead over Lendl in overall titles. But none of Connors' wins were a Slam or even, arguably, a big title: Tokyo Indoor, Los Angeles, Boca West, La Quinta, Memphis.

In runner-up appearances Lendl has a large lead: 7 to 2.

Honestly I think Connors could be ranked as low as #4 this year. Wilander, like Lendl, won only 3 titles, but one of them was the AO. And though the field there was not a full one, it was not like weak fields of the 70s, either; Lendl attended, and Wilander had decent wins over Edberg, Kriek and Curren.

Wilander also led Sweden to a Davis Cup victory, losing only one rubber during the season (a dead rubber against McEnroe). His live victories included one over Connors. And like so many of Connors' losses in '84, it was not close (6-1, 6-3, 6-3).

Whether Connors had Lendl's number in big matches in '84 is very debatable, I think. But if being better than Lendl in big matches is the basis for putting Connors ahead, then Wilander should go ahead of Connors. There's no question that Wilander had Connors' number in '84, in big and small matches, and on Connors' best and worst surfaces.



In '81 Lendl leads Connors 10-4 in overall titles. One of Lendl's titles was the Masters, and he made a GS final, which Connors did not. That year imo Jimmy is definitely #4.
I would agree if only Lendl had beaten Connors once.But he lost a lot of consecutive matches to Connors , from 1979 to 1981 and only beat him in 1982, for the first time.Connors reached the semis at Wimbledon, the USO while Lendl took the Masters and lost the FO final, but was beaten by Fancutt at Wimbledon and Gerulaitis at New York...
__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet
kiki is offline   Reply With Quote