Doubt number 3 : Connors participating in 4 majors on existing surfaces . How many ha

[KG1965]

Connors then how many majors could win if he had been obliged as now to participate in all the majors and majors they had played in superifci now.

RG participates 1974, 1975 , 1976 1977, 1978 .

US Open
1973 in Flushing Meadows , not grass
1974 in Flushing Meadows , not grass
1975 in Flushing Meadows , not clay
1976 in Flushing Meadows , not clay
1977 in Flushing Meadows , not clay

Australian Open
1974,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84 on hardcourt

Wimbledon apply his two titles .

16 majors ? ( 7 US + 7 Aus + 2 W )
17 majors ? ( 8 US + 7 Aus + 2 W )
18 majors ? ( 8 US + 7 Aus + 2 W + 1 RG )

Hmmmm ...

I was perplexed .

 

[BTURNER]

it is an interesting question. certainly the hard courts aid his numbers, but they might also lead to more injury withdrawls and shorten his career . He'd have taken a LOT of low percentage shots to his body with all that cement pounding, and one problem is presumably Lendl is getting the same access. Ivan played on sure firm surfaces with much the same relish and might have gone down to Australia a lot earlier. I think Borg might have sauntered Down-under earlier as well to compete.

 

[KG1965]

it is an interesting question. certainly the hard courts aid his numbers, but they might also lead to more injury withdrawls and shorten his career . He'd have taken a LOT of low percentage shots to his body with all that cement pounding, and one problem is presumably Lendl is getting the same access. Ivan played on sure firm surfaces with much the same relish and might have gone down to Australia a lot earlier. I think Borg might have sauntered Down-under earlier as well to compete.

Good point, thanks.

 

[BGod]

I don't really think more hard court Slams would have done much to Connors' career considering how many hard court events he played and how well Federer is still doing despite his high usage.

Obviously I find it difficult seeing him lose the 75 & 77 U.S. Open titles had they been on hard. Which means 5 consecutive. Don't know about 1973. I don't think anything changes from 79-81. So give him 7 there.

Judging by who won the Aussie Open from 76-82:
Edmondson
Tanner
Gerulaitus (77)
Vilas (77)
Vilas
Teacher
Kriek
Kriek

I think it's safe to say Connnors takes a minimum of 3 titles there. However the smart money says more like 5. I'm not considering his 83 season because Wilander/Lendl fought that year and for all intensive purposes I'll say Connors tires out by the end of his great season against either of those guys. I am still considering AO is in December though, it's hard not to.

For the French I'll go conservative and say 2 titles.

So that's an additional 9 titles I'm giving to Connors:

6-2-2-7 spread for 17 total Slams.


Not surprising at all since he had the same consistency as Federer, including at the French, where he missed 5 years in his prime and still made 4 semifinals.

 

[urban]

Ist difficult to speculate about what ifs. OK, in 1975, he would have probably beaten Orantes on hard Courts. But 1977 against Vilas, ist not so easy. Vilas was in great form late 1977, and beat him at the MSG Masters on carpet. After 1978 Mac had his number on hard court. If AO on hard court had a full field like today, guys like Mac and Borg would take their share. What is correct, is that one cannot compare directly players from different eras by the pure Majors count. In Connors and Borgs case one has to say, that they skipped most Majors on purpose, in contrast to the pros of the 50s and 60s.

 

[PDJ]

I think he, like Evert, would have benefitted from the slower grass at Wimbledon.Evert probably more, as Connors would still have to contend with Borg. Navratilova wasnt really a major force until 83/84

 

[Winners or Errors]

On today's courts Connors would have won FEWER, not more, majors.

Connors won all of his majors on fast surfaces. I don't think the slower, higher bounce of today's courts at any of the venues would help him win more. He hit the ball really flat. He needed it to move through the court low.

He only won 11 of his 109 official titles on clay. The rest were all on quick surfaces, the most being indoor carpet. He never made an RG final, and don't give me that crap about his best years not being played there, because he was plenty competitive from 1979-1984.

I don't see how anyone could compare Connors' slow court resume to Evert's, by the way, as she is the women's GOAT of clay.

 

[hoodjem]

On today's courts Connors would have won FEWER, not more, majors.

Connors won all of his majors on fast surfaces. I don't think the slower, higher bounce of today's courts at any of the venues would help him win more. He hit the ball really flat. He needed it to move through the court low.

He only won 11 of his 109 official titles on clay.

Please remember that Connors won the USO in 1976 (beating Borg) on Har-Tru, aka known as green clay.

It is certainly NOT a fast surface.

 

[Winners or Errors]

Still, the percentages aren't with him winning with any consistency on slower courts.