Who was Greater, McEnroe or Connors?

lordmanji · 09-11-2009, 01:04 PM

8 Grand slams for Connors versus 7 for McEnroe; Jimmy had more titles but McEnroe had a more varied resume with grand slam doubles wins.

BTURNER · 09-11-2009, 01:56 PM

A peanut butter sandwich is dry. A jelly sandwich lacks substance. Something special happens when you put jelly on one side of sandwich and Peanut butter on the other. Nothing is greater than a McEnroe/ Conners match except a Connors /McEnroe match. I know that is not the answer you meant but still. Sadly I can't for the life of me find PB&J on a tennis court anymore.

DCM · 09-11-2009, 01:58 PM

Hard one this. I'll go for Connors, just for more titles, matches won and GS...

McEnroe close behind him though.

timnz · 09-11-2009, 02:10 PM

McEnroe at his peak was a better player in 1984. However, Connors had a much longer career at the top of the game. Hence Peak vs Longevity. Its up to your opinion as to what is more important. I go with Connors.

jrepac · 09-11-2009, 02:22 PM

Raw talent, hands down, it is McEnroe. Really, he did not accomplish as much as he could've/should've with his skill set...and having said that, he accomplished an awful lot. Particularly when he was faced w/Borg/Lendl/Connors/Wilander during his heyday. I don't think we have seen quite that level of competition simultaneously in some time. (maybe sampras/agassi/courier/chang/edberg period comes close, but not quite IMHO)

Mac also had a fantastic doubles record, plus Davis Cup behind him. So that also makes me want to pick him.

But, if you look at just singles, plus all matches over all surfaces, over entire career, it is hard not to go for Jimmy. Yes, there are some matches that he too should have won....his GS record should be a bit fatter....but overall, great diversity across surfaces, big wins in big places (W & USO), huge # of match wins and titles. In his mid to late 30's he was still a very tough player, even if he was no longer winning the GS events, he was still beating most of those beneath him and held a top level ranking (from #4 to low teens, I seem to recall, before he busted his wrist in '90).

Mac v. Connors matches were usually such ragged affairs...you never knew what was going to happen, who was going to be "on" their game or "off" ...and who might blow up first....

I actually found some of their seniors matches quite entertaining....

wyutani · 09-11-2009, 02:29 PM

mcenroe won more grandies. obviously.

Arafel · 09-11-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyutani

mcenroe won more grandies. obviously.

Only if you factor in doubles (and Connors does have the 75 US Open doubles title). Connors won 8 singles Slams, winning on three surfaces. McEnroe won 7 singles Slams, on two surfaces.

wyutani · 09-11-2009, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arafel

Only if you factor in doubles (and Connors does have the 75 US Open doubles title). Connors won 8 singles Slams, winning on three surfaces. McEnroe won 7 singles Slams, on two surfaces.

yes i was testing you. and you passed!

urban · 09-12-2009, 12:55 AM

Close call. As said, Mac had more potential with his pingpong-like half volley-style, while Connors was a great pure striker of the ball. On matchup: Mac was always more vulnerable against hard hitters like Lendl or Connors, than against topspinners like Borg. On grass, Mac was potentially way ahead, but still Connors held him quite even at Wim and Queens. On clay, it was close between them, with Connors maybe a nod ahead overall. On hard courts, over the hill Connors was still able to give prime Mac fits in 1984.

Mac should have won more majors, especially on grass. Many of his final losses in majors were very close five set affairs, while Connors, when he lost, he lost quite decisively. So Connors got the most out of his career, while Mac didn't fullfil his potential.

thalivest · 09-12-2009, 04:39 PM

Connors was unlucky in many respects I feel. To not play the French Open during his best years from 1974-1978 due to the fallout of that 74 ban, and miss out on a possible/probable Calander Slam in 74 due to the ban. To play at a time the Australian Open wasnt that valued as a slam. For it to be the only years in history the U.S Open would be played on clay right in the heart of his prime from 75-77, and end up losing 2 U.S Open titles to two clay courters who would have no shot against him on either grass or decoturf. If all these things had been different he even could have had 14 or 15 slams, certainly alot more than 8.

grafselesfan · 09-12-2009, 04:58 PM

Connors. Results are what matter, not potential. Not that McEnroe didnt have an outstanding career in his own right, he certainly did, but overall Connors clearly had the better career.

TheFifthSet · 09-12-2009, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grafselesfan

Connors. Results are what matter, not potential. Not that McEnroe didnt have an outstanding career in his own right, he certainly did, but overall Connors clearly had the better career.

Doubles matter too. The fact that McEnroe was one of the greatest doubles AND singles players of all time has to be taken into consideration, IMO.

grafselesfan · 09-12-2009, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFifthSet

Doubles matter too. The fact that McEnroe was one of the greatest doubles AND singles players of all time has to be taken into consideration, IMO.

I dont feel doubles means that much in the big picture when comparing singles greats. Doubles mostly has its own category for me. Those who want to mix the two I respect their viewpoint, but that is not how I evaluate singles greats vs each other.

If doubles were that valued than Navratilova, Court, and King would be the undisputed 3 female GOATs of the Open Era and yet most have Court behind Graf and even possibly Evert, while King isnt rated up there at the very top.

joe sch · 09-12-2009, 06:20 PM

I would pick Mac over Jimbo because of doubles and Davis Cup. McEnroe was ranked the World No. 1 in doubles for a record 257 weeks and won four at Wimbledon and three at the US Open. The U.S. Davis Cup teams that Mac supported for 15 years and was part of U.S. winning teams in 1979, 1981, 1982, and 1992. Mac set numerous U.S. Davis Cup records, including years played (12), ties (30), singles wins (41), and total wins in singles and doubles (59). He played both singles and doubles in 13 series, and he and Peter Fleming won 14 of 15 Davis Cup doubles matches together.

Mafia13 · 09-13-2009, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe sch

I would pick Mac over Jimbo because of doubles and Davis Cup. McEnroe was ranked the World No. 1 in doubles for a record 257 weeks and won four at Wimbledon and three at the US Open. The U.S. Davis Cup teams that Mac supported for 15 years and was part of U.S. winning teams in 1979, 1981, 1982, and 1992. Mac set numerous U.S. Davis Cup records, including years played (12), ties (30), singles wins (41), and total wins in singles and doubles (59). He played both singles and doubles in 13 series, and he and Peter Fleming won 14 of 15 Davis Cup doubles matches together.

I think he also had a 12-0 record in Davis cup ties one of the years when USA won(I can't seem to remember the exact year), a feat Ljubicic nearly matched when Croatia won the Davis cup title(but he lost in the final to Hrbaty so it was 11-1)

urban · 09-13-2009, 01:59 AM

Yes, Joe Sch, the DC gives Mac a big bonus. Besides: i remember an extraordinary team event, the WTC final in 1985 or 86, when Mac and Connors (and Flach/Seguso) were pitted against the strong Czech team of Lendl and Mecir. Mac lost to Lendl, and Connors saved the day, when he beat Mecir, who had a big lead and got tight and began to serve underhand.

quest01 · 09-13-2009, 08:15 AM

McEnroe and Connors were two great Americans. When it comes to Head to Head, McEnroe was the better player, he actually beat Connors 11 straight times and he has a 20-14 lifetime record against him. However Connors has more titles compared to McEnroe, 108-77 and an 8-7 grand slam edge. Also Connors had more longevity on your, he made it to the semi's at the 1991 US Open at the age of 39, that was amazing.

So when it comes to head to head, McEnroe was the better player, but overall Connors has the better numbers.

Arafel · 09-13-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quest01

McEnroe and Connors were two great Americans. When it comes to Head to Head, McEnroe was the better player, he actually beat Connors 11 straight times and he has a 20-14 lifetime record against him. However Connors has more titles compared to McEnroe, 108-77 and an 8-7 grand slam edge. Also Connors had more longevity on your, he made it to the semi's at the 1991 US Open at the age of 39, that was amazing.

So when it comes to head to head, McEnroe was the better player, but overall Connors has the better numbers.

McEnroe's head to head against Connors, just like Lendl's, is heavily inflated by the fact that Connors kept playing into his late 30s. Neither got the upper hand on him until he was 33.

martin · 09-13-2009, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arafel

McEnroe's head to head against Connors, just like Lendl's, is heavily inflated by the fact that Connors kept playing into his late 30s. Neither got the upper hand on him until he was 33.

Excellent point!!

It's not realistic or fair to compare an old and not prime connors against a prime mcenroe or Lendl who are seven and eight years younger.
Connors is being punished for still competing at an old age.

jrepac · 09-13-2009, 05:47 PM

yes, connors lost more matches after he passed 35yrs of age....tho', ironically one of his last titles came in '89 when he beat Mac in straight sets in the Tolouse (FR) final...he was 37yrs old, (Mac was what then? 31 or 32?)....I recall Mac saying that Connors played some fantastic tennis...

The Mecir match referenced above was World Team Cup...I think it may have been '86 ; Mecir had a lead in the 5th, got tight and Connors climbed right back to win. And, it was on RED clay...shocking, huh?

anyways, I could flip a coin between these 2...they both are worthy, each for slightly different reasons.....

View Poll Results: Who is Greater, McEnroe or Connors?
McEnroe	38	42.70%
Connors	40	44.94%
undecided	11	12.36%
Voters: 89. You may not vote on this poll

09-11-2009, 01:04 PM	#1
lordmanji Professional Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 960	Who was Greater, McEnroe or Connors? 8 Grand slams for Connors versus 7 for McEnroe; Jimmy had more titles but McEnroe had a more varied resume with grand slam doubles wins.

09-11-2009, 02:22 PM	#5
jrepac Professional Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 1,097	Mac or Jimbo? Raw talent, hands down, it is McEnroe. Really, he did not accomplish as much as he could've/should've with his skill set...and having said that, he accomplished an awful lot. Particularly when he was faced w/Borg/Lendl/Connors/Wilander during his heyday. I don't think we have seen quite that level of competition simultaneously in some time. (maybe sampras/agassi/courier/chang/edberg period comes close, but not quite IMHO) Mac also had a fantastic doubles record, plus Davis Cup behind him. So that also makes me want to pick him. But, if you look at just singles, plus all matches over all surfaces, over entire career, it is hard not to go for Jimmy. Yes, there are some matches that he too should have won....his GS record should be a bit fatter....but overall, great diversity across surfaces, big wins in big places (W & USO), huge # of match wins and titles. In his mid to late 30's he was still a very tough player, even if he was no longer winning the GS events, he was still beating most of those beneath him and held a top level ranking (from #4 to low teens, I seem to recall, before he busted his wrist in '90). Mac v. Connors matches were usually such ragged affairs...you never knew what was going to happen, who was going to be "on" their game or "off" ...and who might blow up first.... I actually found some of their seniors matches quite entertaining....

09-11-2009, 02:29 PM	#6
wyutani Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: hong kong Posts: 4,746	mcenroe won more grandies. obviously. __________________ Western Grip, Counter-puncher Lefty... Dunlop Maxply Mcenroe (Serve), Dunlop Aerogel 4D 300 Tour (Return)...

09-12-2009, 06:20 PM	#14
joe sch Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hotel CA Posts: 4,180	I would pick Mac over Jimbo because of doubles and Davis Cup. McEnroe was ranked the World No. 1 in doubles for a record 257 weeks and won four at Wimbledon and three at the US Open. The U.S. Davis Cup teams that Mac supported for 15 years and was part of U.S. winning teams in 1979, 1981, 1982, and 1992. Mac set numerous U.S. Davis Cup records, including years played (12), ties (30), singles wins (41), and total wins in singles and doubles (59). He played both singles and doubles in 13 series, and he and Peter Fleming won 14 of 15 Davis Cup doubles matches together. Last edited by joe sch : 09-12-2009 at 06:26 PM.