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.
I agree with this and would add that Connors just didn't like hitting the kind of ball that Wilander gave him. I watched Wilander courtside several times late in his career. He hit many high-looping topspin shots with little pace, and was good at annoying and frustrating opponents by mixing the pace, and not letting them get a good rhythm. I think this is the sort of opponent that Connors did not like playing, especially from the forehand side.