Lendl beats McEnroe

Lendl beats McEnroe

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• Lendl
• McEnroe

[kw19193]

Well said ricappon. Lendl is perhaps the single most under-appreciated, overlooked champion of the modern era in tennis. McEnroe and Connors have spent an enormous amount of time and effort denigrating Lendl in hopes of elevating themselves. The simple fact of the matter is Lendl's better than either of them . . .

[ricappon]

Lendl is and will be forever the father of modern tennis . like it or not .

[nocode61]

Lendl was amazing. I began to appreciate his effort and talent as I got older. I mean look at his competitions Bog, Connors, Mac, Becker, Edberg, Willanders and tails of his career overlap with likes of Agassi and Pete. Imagine how many GS he would have compiled if he was not caught in the middle of the most competitive era of tennis.

[krakenwave]

@ripperduck

Yeah, I heard that Ivan and Samantha actually started up a Montessori school in Florida when they moved there a few years ago.

[tallshort79]

@ripperduck No, i ratified my own point, which wasn't that Mc was greater than Lendl; my point was always he was better than Lendl as long as he stayed focused and motivated. I don't need to make excuses for anyone because i'm not a "fan" of either player, of course i liked McEnroe's game better, but who doesn't.

[ripperduck]

@ripperduck everything. The early book on Lendl: amazing FH, dodgy BH, hates grass, can't volley, weak mind. At his peak, that book read amazing FH, great BH, very good grass, solid volley, mentally as strong as anyone. Mc's book never changed, bad FH, okay bh, amazing s&V, out of shape. Lendl was a work in progress when he hit the pros, Mc pretty much was done. Lendl kept working to become the best, Mc too lazy to do more than what he had. And your weak rationalizations underscore your nonsense

[ripperduck]

@tallshort79 SFW if MC had "immense natural talent" at an early age. He failed to develop his game further than what he had initially whereas Lendl used the talent he had and increased it to the point he became a far better player much longer than did Mc. And what kind of weak ass excuse are you pushing here, that he had other things on this mind. That's what makes someone great at anything, their focus/drive. Basically you just ratified my point, Lendl became the greater player by using

[ripperduck]

@tallshort79 U r still an idiot. Not name calling, just describing. I noticed that you didn't bother addressing the fact that Ivan became an adept S&V to the point that he reached Wibly finals and won grass court tourneys. Mc NEVER developed a baseline game, the stamina/strength to be able to play on clay. Proof was that Lendl went on to win Paris Mc never challenged again. Furthermore u forgot to mention that the final three sets Lendl kicked Mc's ass, which only goes to show how silly u r.

[tallshort79]

@ripperduck yes people saw serve and volley game before. you are so perceptive. get lost

[ripperduck]

@tallshort79 U R still an idiot. Lendl has a better record than Mc, so its more than training, the dude was better. They were contemporaries they were a year apart in age, Mc never made the attempt to stretch his game, simply too lazy to do it. And what the hell are you talking about re:Mc? He S&V'd oh yeah we never saw that before. Quantitatively, qualitatively Lendl was greater than Mc. He trained hard to change his game and with that he changed the game for good. Mc never came close to that.

[tallshort79]

@ripperduck Still calling names, and not realizing that improving your game doesn't necessarily make you greater than someone whose game is already superb.

Oh, and McEnroe played a style that was always there? What the hell are you talking about? He did things on the court that noone ever saw before. Lendl was maybe the first guy to train really hard. That was his contribution. Makes me yawn a little bit but yeah. But pure talented players thrived before as well as after him.

[tallshort79]

@ripperduck Mc and Lendl were only one year apart in age, but that's not the problem, Mc was an early, natural, immense talent, Ivan a much lesser one that needed time to work on his game. You have a point when you say that Mc didn't want to keep the pace of the new generation, although it was not laziness, just his mind wasn't all about tennis anymore, which is exactly what i was saying when i stated his game decline. It takes a lot to get something good out of what you say but what the heck.