Originally Posted by BTURNER
folks who have seen more of Borg, will freely shred this post, but here's my comparison.
I think wiilander had many of the attributes of Borg, that frustrated Connors. I think Wilander's serve and his big point mental game were perhaps weaker than Borgs, and Borg was the fastest man in the sport. Wilander had more variety and a better tactical sense on when to approach and where to put the volley. Wilander's instincts on when to be opportunistic were sooo good. His on court acumen was very like Jimmy Connors but with more margin off the ground.
?? no one had better opportunistic instincts than Connors....Wilander definitely had some similarities to Connors and had some Borg-like attributes as well. Connors was definitely older, and perhaps less patient, when he played Wilander in those events. Still, there were some good matches. That one in Key Biscayne was a dandy. The exos, were modified tournaments...Connors played like his life (or his wallet?) depended on it. Maybe Wilander not so much? having seen a couple of those (Beaver Creek and Suntory) it was clear Connors was playing well...I do recall Suntory being a fast indoor surface, which definitely favored Connors over Wilander; the 2nd set was a blitz. But Connors could do that when he was on, particularly on faster surfaces.