Mate, talent doesn't purely mean consistently attaining good results. Talent can also mean having a flashy game, but can't do nothing with it. Just look at Dimitrov or Gasquet. Great looking game, but they're trash when it comes to winning matches, particularly against top players. So I suppose I'll rephrase that then. What I mean't was that Lacko had a 'better looking game' than Tipsarevic - his offence is more enjoyable to watch than Tipsy's offense. Obviously Tipsarevic is by far a better player than Lacko, but talent wise, it's questionable.
And for the record, I like Tipsy and I despise Hewitt. And the fact that he creamed Spewitt, not to mention in straight sets even when that bogan had chances in the first two sets, made it even more enjoyable. In fact, that win solidifies why I like Tipsarevic.
I disagree with your thoughts on Lacko being more talented than Janko....If that is what you think, then you are entitled to feel that way....By looking at the match stats, they were practically dead even, with Lacko hitting a few more winners and a dozen or so more errors...I don't think Lacko is a bad player, but he doesn't seem to really produce any consistent results....Last year in Zagreb, he made the final and that was all that he really did all year...I don't think Lacko's game is "better looking" in any way...I guess the reason I think you hate on Janko is because you have made rude comments about him before on a regular basis....So whatever dude, glad you like him