Search results

Connors at times struggled when he was fed junk by his opponents (edit: to his forehand in particular). But this happened when he was younger (e.g., Ashe, Orantes) and when he was older (famously Lendl in many of their matchups). You're mixing things up here. Junkballing always existed, but it...

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. That Connors liked pace and that the power game didn't provide pace? This doesn't make sense. Jimmy's biggest problem was his serving, which was never great but in an evolving tour that increasingly emphasized power it was becoming a glaring...

He's number two all right

Voted Mac and it's super close, but this bears mentioning: Lendl isn't better than Mac because Lendl won a couple of Australians -- an event Mac mostly didn't attend. Some good points were also made here about #1 rankings. Different system then, irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

The meldonium ban was politically motivated.

Connors or Rosewall

1) As others said, difficult style to emulate; low margin for error. 2) I would add that the style was more suitable to the days of tennis before wholesale changes in racquet tech. Hitting that flat, that low to the net, with such great angles was uncanny in pre-graphite days, but new raquet...

+ cocaine and hookers

Have you considered not writing gibberish

Play a role in what? Causing Wilander's dementia?

Maybe the most famous point of the 1988 US Open final is Wilander hitting a passing shot forehand winner against an outstretched Lendl.

Hmmm.... Maybe? Dutch - Lendl Dillon - Agassi Blain - Connors Mac - McEnroe Poncho - Borg Billy - Chang Hawkins - Baghdatis

Maybe Cruz Hewitt will beat him

All these discussions of clay courts inspire me to say, once more -- please, please bring back har-tru on the tour!

I put Fritz down sometimes, but he's not a terrible finalist. The guy has won titles in his career. We've seen players make GS finals in the past who barely won anything, some real flukes.

The French was stronger for men than women in the 70s.

This is a screwy ways of thinking about it. If Borg was the only one skipping the Aussies, then yes. But those events were not well attended in general. It took years for the Australian Open to re-secure its status as an important event after many investments that included a new venue, better...

This is an old post, but an annoying one and thus worth responding to. Borg never played four majors per year. So he never really had the opportunity to take 3 of 4. If he had won the US Open in 1980, he would have probably gone on to play the Australian. But that was not an important event at...

I think he's no less a doper than Sharapova.

He played Fritz.

Seriously?

I was hoping that sentence would end with "killed in a fire"

No doubt about it. Jannik Sinner? Snore.

I think he has goofy guy with big nose aura

Medvedev got his. He's not in this losers club.

Well, he didn't

He's just not built for the big stage. It is what it is.

I think the only grand slam champ I wouldn't put in the hall is Raducanu. Well, on second thought, you have to excude some of those Aussie winners from the 70s/80s. But generally a grand slam champ gets in.

I love how his name suits him perfectly.