Tennis: Players Records Vs. Top 10 at Slams ...

I'd say Borg had more chance though, especially him winning 5 in a row when his style was not made for grass at all. The courts at Wimbledon would suit him a lot more today.

 

Personally i think Borg and his wooden racquet would be blown away by these two on grass. Even tho the courts have slowed he doesn't realistically have the power and penetration of a Hewitt, and Hewitt is out of his depth now against Fed. Bjorn would get too few free points on his serve and the very aggressive baseline game of Federer and Sampras would give him trouble getting his teeth into the match as well as imposing his style. Macs serve improved a level after he went to the Max 200G and it was already starting to trouble Borg a lot on grass. The serves of these two are up a notch again, especially Sampras. I'd actually back Borg to beat Sampras on clay regardless, and he'd give Federer a damn good workout too. Nadal is a modern clay court Borg (improved penetration) but hasn't shown the same effectiveness across all surfaces, well not even close.

Borg is a great one tho, i have an old match or two on tape somewhere. The ultimate ice cool competitor. Would you believe he was a bad tempered brat in the juniors?

 

Eh? So Borg has to use a wooden racquet but McEnroe doesn't. :huh

 

John was the last ever Wimbledon finalist to use to use a wooden racquet, in 1982. He came back with the injection moulded Max 200G in 1983 and the rest is history. His record in 84 was an incredible 82-3 including 13 tournament wins and a perfect anniliation of Connors at Wimby. He said himself how much the 200G changed his game. If Borg hung around little doubt he too would have made the switch when suited. Evert and Connors also made well timed transitions.

 

If it means anything i'd back Borg and McEnroe to likely beat the other two with wooden racquets. Sampras and Fed would have obviously played a different game if under the same circumstances but the cream would have risen to the top still.

 

When did Connors ditch his wooden racket ?

 

Yes, but my point was that it's a bit unfair to have an all-time match-up where one uses modern day equipment and the other used an old wooden 'effort'. I'm sure when experts and the like compare whether Schumacher could beat Fangio, they'd surely consider that such a race takes place in a similar car.

 

I think he might have been first. I used to have a Jimmy Connors replica when I was little.

 

Yeah, fair do's. But again if we're judging all-time we'd at least afford these competitors the same equipment.

 

I'm thinking it was 84. He went to the Wilson Pro Staff, same racquet as Evert did. Connors however had some teething problems and went back to that mad Wilson T-2000 steel thing or whatever it was for a bit. Both had to adjust to the extra power, they hit very flat and the Staff was sending the ball over the baseline a bit. They say Connors was the only guy in the world who could hit the T-2000

Would you believe Sampras used the same model Evert and Connors converted to for his entire established career? It used to amuse me when people talked about the advantage the likes of Sampras had with the modern racquets yet Pete was actually using a very old model easily comparable to what they were all using in 1984. A fascinating tidbit is that this racquet was being made in 3 different factories and Sampras could actually tell the difference between them and had to have what become deemed the St Vincent model.

 

Borg would not be able to immediately handle a graphite mid size. He'd play WAY worse. I deem the graphite cut off to be about 1983-84.

 

Actually you make me realise i didn't answer Sonny's question properly. Connors had to have ditched his wood before Mac and Borg as he played that woeful steel thing for years prior.

 

How can you be so sure?

 

Yeah, the thing is we can't judge it. Mac transitioned and we know exactly what he could do, but even then it might not quite be the same as growing up with the modern racquets like the Hewitt's and Fed's have done. Head to head with all things being equal i believe the guys pre 83 are going to be on unfair terms. I wouldn't diss them for it tho, but we simply can't make a fair judgement either way. I'll say that if the same athletes grew up with the modern sticks they would of course have been proportionately better. The cream always rises to the top.