Re: Very fitting
- From: "Isaza" <correodemauricioisaza@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Sep 2006 20:44:53 -0700
<zepfloyes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
that Jimmy was in Roddick's camp and Tiger was in Roger's.
The one being the little-engine-that-could, bust your butt, look to the
crowd to boost you up, squeeze every last drop out of limited natural
gifts side and the other being the ethereal,
once-in-a-generation/lifetime, awe-inspiring, game transcending side.
You are wrong... Connors was very gifted.
Quite true. Superficial observers see his unspectacular, simple strokes.
However, his hand eye coordination, reflexes, intricate footwork, and feel
for the racquet should not be underrated. He did not use his feel to hit
feathery drop volleys but he did use it to hit great defensive lobs and more
importantly to respond to all kinds of groundstrokes with neutralizing
replies, working the court until he could open up the point.
Great player, no doubt. Maybe even a cut above Lleyton Hewitt
talent-wise. But hard-to-fathom, awe-inspiring genius? Nah, that's
taking it too far.
- Prev by Date: Re: Who is better: Federer 2006 or Federer 2004?
- Next by Date: Re: It's sad for tennis...
- Previous by thread: Re: Very fitting
- Next by thread: Federer Hit Short Ball At Roddick for Payback