Is there anything wrong with these strokes?

[BounceHitBounceHit]

Originally Posted by BU-Tennis

We are talking about the strokes not the player. If it were only strokes that determined who is/isn't a champion then we would see a huge variance in who wins majors. And if you notice, i said if YOU could hit the ball like OLD Jimmy, YOU could compete at the 3.5-4.0 level, not Jimmy Connors. I was talking about his strokes currently not what they once were.

At what college in WV do you play? BHBH

[imalil2gangsta4u]

Yeah for his age and condition, he is playing at a very high level still.

[VaBeachTennis]

Originally Posted by BounceHitBounceHit

Correct. He's actually had BOTH hips done. Look, I am a legit 5.0-5.5 and play with former pros around his age all the time. They are TOUGH as nails. 3.5-4.0 players would have trouble winning games. BHBH

I agree, no argument from me. That why I was hoping that the poster was joking.

[NamRanger]

Originally Posted by BU-Tennis

We are talking about the strokes not the player. If it were only strokes that determined who is/isn't a champion then we would see a huge variance in who wins majors. And if you notice, i said if YOU could hit the ball like OLD Jimmy, YOU could compete at the 3.5-4.0 level, not Jimmy Connors. I was talking about his strokes currently not what they once were.

If I could hit like Jimmy Connors now I'd be a 5.0/5.5 easily. And that's with my poor conditioning.

[rfprse]

Originally Posted by raiden031

because his strokes are not pretty and look awkward, but were obviously effective at the highest levels of the game.

There doesn't seem to me anything awkward, imho, though I am not a teaching pro. I just wish I could hit like him, though I have completely different strokes.
Of course, his strokes are definitely different from those regarded as good strokes these days, but he used to hit flat (even with slight underspin) clearing just above the net.

[Mansewerz]

I think his backhand is semi-flat semi-slice

[DNShade]

Originally Posted by oneguy20

Funny how people are saying he can only compete at the 3.5 - 4.0 level and yet John McEnroe who is from the same era can compete on the senior tour (w/ Courier & Sampras although Mac retired from that tour too.)

You mean the tour he just won another event on in March? Yeah, he said he would retire - but not so much....

[DNShade]

Originally Posted by BU-Tennis

Not a joke at all. There is no way he could handle the high topspin game of today, especially since the courts have been slowed down so much that his flat shots are not nearly as penetrating as they once were.

Wrong. Sorry pal - but just not right. The high topspin of today? I hit flat and love to eat up that high topspin (and I'm not talking about some club players here) and I'm sure JC would chew it up as well - no problem. Actually the flat strokes of JC would cause modern pros more problems than the other way around. His shots would seem to be even more penetrating today since players aren't used to returning that kind of ball. JC seemed to adapt very well to all kinds of players and eras.

I love when people post idiotic things like JC or Borg or whoever wouldn't be able to compete with todays "supermen"...Please. Santoro seems to have done just fine with his interesting - non modern - style of play - and he is far from a talent of a Borg, JC, McEnroe, etc. Get real people.

Originally Posted by BounceHitBounceHit

Sanity. Finally. BHBH

Thanks!

To add to your post below, I think 3.5-4.0 would not win points, let alone games. Jimmy would have to be distracted by, I dont know, a beautiful woman parachuting out of the sky during a serve or something to lose a point.

Originally Posted by DNShade

Wrong. Sorry pal - but just not right. The high topspin of today? I hit flat and love to eat up that high topspin (and I'm not talking about some club players here) and I'm sure JC would chew it up as well - no problem. Actually the flat strokes of JC would cause modern pros more problems than the other way around. His shots would seem to be even more penetrating today since players aren't used to returning that kind of ball. JC seemed to adapt very well to all kinds of players and eras.

I love when people post idiotic things like JC or Borg or whoever wouldn't be able to compete with todays "supermen"...Please. Santoro seems to have done just fine with his interesting - non modern - style of play - and he is far from a talent of a Borg, JC, McEnroe, etc. Get real people.

great post.

[NLBwell]

As far as JC's strokes, they are simple and clean and are the perfect model for most players (anyone below 5.0 and probably most 5.0s). The best part of his game though was his foot and body movement and the ability to hit the same stroke no matter if the ball was high, low, away from him, or into the body. There is little margin for error in his stroke, but he was so consistent because he hit the exact same stroke every time. At the 5.0/5.5 level, you would start to need to have some of Connors' ability to move to be effective and most people don't have that.

[Thud and blunder]

Originally Posted by VaBeachTennis

Nevermind the fact that he's 50+ and I think he had hip surgery as well. He seemed to handle Roddicks spin quite well. Here's another video of them practicing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPm8a...eature=related

That other bloke will never make it with a backhand like that...

[LeeD]

IF we had JC's strokes right now, we'd easily play 5.5 to 6 levels.
He could handle because he shorthopped plenty of balls close to the baseline, used sidespin to control depth like a MrMcEnroe, and had eagle eyes for returning serves and hard hit deep balls.
He did OK against Borg and Vilas, who hit like the "modern" players of today.
Now view some vid of MrMc. His strokes where ridiculously short and stunted, and you know, he did OK too.....

[RoddickAce]

http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/site...doc_17_262.pdf

Jimmy would be a 5.0 now according to that chart, and let's not forget that he was the top player for "quite some time" and made it to the semi-finals of the US Open at age 39.

[NamRanger]

Originally Posted by RoddickAce

http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/site...doc_17_262.pdf

Jimmy would be a 5.0 now according to that chart, and let's not forget that he was the top player for "quite some time" and made it to the semi-finals of the US Open at age 39.

Yeah, and that's with two hip surgeries and at a very advanced age.

[BounceHitBounceHit]

Originally Posted by RoddickAce

http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/site...doc_17_262.pdf

Jimmy would be a 5.0 now according to that chart, and let's not forget that he was the top player for "quite some time" and made it to the semi-finals of the US Open at age 39.

Uh-hum. Well, he would probably be the 5.0 WORLD Champion, so far as I can tell. BHBH

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by DNShade

Wrong. Sorry pal - but just not right. The high topspin of today? I hit flat and love to eat up that high topspin (and I'm not talking about some club players here) and I'm sure JC would chew it up as well - no problem. Actually the flat strokes of JC would cause modern pros more problems than the other way around. His shots would seem to be even more penetrating today since players aren't used to returning that kind of ball. JC seemed to adapt very well to all kinds of players and eras.

I love when people post idiotic things like JC or Borg or whoever wouldn't be able to compete with todays "supermen"...Please. Santoro seems to have done just fine with his interesting - non modern - style of play - and he is far from a talent of a Borg, JC, McEnroe, etc. Get real people.

If it is true that JC's shots are more effective than modern pro shots, then why don't people still play with that style? You would think the top pros would be the ones who most effectively adapt to the current conditions of the game such as available equipment and strategies. It seems like the game wouldn't evolve into a topspin game if it was less effective.

[EtePras]

Originally Posted by ramseszerg

You do realize he was rallying with Roddick in that video.

edit: apparently it was Roddick's brother, not sure why he would be hitting with him, but in this video it's Roddick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPm8aQEvxkE

And do you remember what happened to Roddick at that tournament? Rallying with Roddick isn't guarantee that you'd take a game off of Nadal without his serve as well.

[ttbrowne]

These old pros are sneaky. I drilled with one today and his placement was awesome. Some of the 4.0's and 4.5's keep coming at him and he just shut 'em down. There was nothing in their bag that he hadn't seen a million times before.

[NLBwell]

Originally Posted by raiden031

If it is true that JC's shots are more effective than modern pro shots, then why don't people still play with that style? You would think the top pros would be the ones who most effectively adapt to the current conditions of the game such as available equipment and strategies. It seems like the game wouldn't evolve into a topspin game if it was less effective.

Because there is no margin for error in the shot. You have to be in perfect position and hit the ball perfectly just over the net. If you could do it as consistently as Connors you could be number 1. The problem is there might never be another person able to do that the way he did.