underrated shots

[sandy mayer]

Connors forehand: a short slice on grass would lead to mistakes, but this wasn't a problem on hard courts (and I don't think it was a big problem on clay) This was only 1 aspect of Connors' forehand but apart from that it was a great shot. It was strong off the return of serve. And he could generate great power and accuracy off it on most kinds of shots. I would go as far as to say his forehand was aweapon, even if it wasn't as big as his backhand.

Connors volley: very strong, Nastase in his autobiography calls him a 'great volleyer'.

Mac return of serve: he had great reactions and could even take the serve on the rise. Borg was very complimentary of Mac's return.

Lendl backhand: it was very strong. He could slice and let it rip, and could pass well.

Cash groundstrokes: he could hit off the ground: good passing shots, lobs and approach shots. He couldn't rally for too long but on fast surfaces his groundstrokes were good.

Kraijcek groundstrokes: much much better than people realise.

Ivanisevic: same as above though I think Kraijcek was more consistent.

Sampras backhand: it was often a big attacking weapon, especially early in his career. If you watch the 2002 US Open final Sampras blasts lots of bachands past Agassi. It was only a weakness on clay, especially with high bouncing balls. Late in his career it could be inconsistent and break down, but not before then.

Agassi serve: not in his great rival's class but a weapon. He had a great wide serve in the Ad court, unusuallly good for a righty. It came to his rescue on many big points.

[Frank Silbermann]

Originally Posted by sandy mayer

Connors forehand: a short slice on grass would lead to mistakes, but this wasn't a problem on hard courts (and I don't think it was a big problem on clay) This was only 1 aspect of Connors' forehand but apart from that it was a great shot. It was strong off the return of serve. And he could generate great power and accuracy off it on most kinds of shots. I would go as far as to say his forehand was a weapon, even if it wasn't as big as his backhand.

The problem with his forehand was his grip. It allowed him neither to open the racquet face in the continental/eastern manner nor to drop the racquet head as with a western grip. To lift a very low skidding ball you have to do one or the other. In a U.S. open match against Guillermo Vilas, Connors kept the ball to Vilas' forehand. Vilas' forehand was probably more powerful and had a bigger strike zone, but he never sliced it and Connors could handle the power. He didn't mind Vilas' celebrated topspin backhand, either, but Vilas' slice backhand drove him nuts.

In terms of pure power, both sides were equal, but he could get under the ball on the backhand and therefore made fewer errors.

Early in his career, Connors was considered a blaster. A fellow pro remarked that he had never before played anyone who could hit the ball so hard so consistently. By the end of his career he was hitting the ball equally hard, but competitors had moved on to larger, more powerful racquets and more topspin, and he was no longer considered to be a power player. What kept him near the top was his ability to stand inside the court, take the ball on the rise and slide it with disguise to any place on court he desired. Because he had mastered side-spin on his ground-strokes, changing the direction of the ball from cross-court to down-the-line was no problem for him.

An opponent could blast a heavy topspin shot sharply cross-court to him, and Connors could rush in, hit the ball before it had risen two feet from the court, and slide it down-the-line (or even reverse cross-court) while moving forward, and then knock off the easy volley.

[WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis]

Connors was so often able to get his opponents out of position or out of range on the court, that he could close effectively and knock off a volley even with his unusual grip. His superior groundstrokes made this possible. The forehand was quite accurate and could spin away from you when he cut under it. Just amazing to watch, though he was one of my least favorite players of his day.

I loved the Lendl backhand, and since he was my favorite player of his day, came to pattern my stroke after it. I remember watching and rewatching his matches, then going to out and playing 5or 6 hours a day attempting the same motion. Even now, when I can, it's my favorite shot to practice.

More so than Ivanisevic, Kraijcek was definitely solid off both sides. His reach was so great, but to me his footwork at times could be ungainly. The same with Goran whose matches at Wimbledon when he was young were almost comical how would struggle to keep his footing and get into position to hit the ball.

[N23]

Graf slice BH.