The only thing Mugenroe is "naturally" more talented at is losing hair

 

Probably so, yes. Certainly more talented at the net. Backcourt game is hard to compare because of the different racquets

 

Probably so, yes. Certainly more talented at the net. Backcourt game is hard to compare because of the different racquets

Hard to compare hahaha

it's easy actually, McEnroe's forehand was complete shit, Federer's probably the best in history.

Anyways: Mac's touch at the net was incredible, probably the best ever. In almost all other aspects of the game, Federer is his superior.

 

Roger is as superior to John McEnroe as the living are to the dead.


next.

 

Didn't Federer hit a similar shot IIRC?

 

McEnroe was a genius and definitely under-rated by the younger generation.

 

If McEnroe was nearly as dedicated to his game as Roger is, he would have won much more for a longer period of time. His miserable on court personality made it hard for me to watch his matches, despite his great game. He was though a great natural talent as is Roger.

 

you cannot be serious.

 

Of course not. Roger uses a lot more different spins for different shots. I know, modern equipment, but Arthur Ashe was known for using spin effectively as well and he used even older racquets.

 

I've pretty much watched McEnroe throughout his entire career, and would not attempt for one moment to dismiss his phenomenal talent. But Federer's pantheon of shots is simply unequalled and through his career and my over 50 years of following tennis, often breathtaking.

As McEnroe himself has said many times while commentating on Fed's play and shots :"Guys,, don't try that at home"

 

Too bad there aren't too many Mactards around to make this interesting

 

Well, sort of a Mactard here! Mac was extremely talented, so much so that he dominated the game at his peak while virtually never training! That is one of the reasons that he played so much doubles...to practice! The game has changed so much, as well as the equipment...when Mac started on the scene, ballbashing from the baseline wasn't the way the game was played. He also had a very underrated serve...

However, I will have to give Fed the nod as he is the most talented player to have ever played...

 

McEnroe is the 2nd most talented player behind Federer.

 

This! Mac second to Fed when it comes to talent, ahead of Rafa for sure. Just imagine if he worked on his fitness like Rafa and Nole. This is not about 'what ifs' in the career achievement category, but strictly talent...

 

Mac was extremely talented but he quit working, married an actress, went Hollywood and started using cocaine. When the cocaine came aboard reflexes at the net went AWOL.

The clean McEnroe was able to stand his ground and hit volley winners off of Lendl's best drives. At the net, the druggie McEnroe flinched every time Lendl drove the ball at him.

McEnroe was insanely talented but doesn't compare favorably to Federer. No human has ever surpassed Federer in tennis talent.

 

Mac was extremely talented but he quit working, married an actress, went Hollywood and started using cocaine.

Totally worth it

 

Possibly. In terms of sheer natural talent Lew Hoad, Laver, Nastase, McEnroe, & Federer stand out. Don't know enough about pre-1950s but I understand Lacoste, Budge, & Vines were all considered immensely talented as well. Federer & Laver stand out in that they both fulfilled their talent whereas McEnroe & the others were under-achievers - but it's telling that people consider Mac an under-achiever despite his Hall-of-Fame career: it shows how talented they feel he was.

 

No.

 

Pretty simple: if you are a Fed fan - answer is 'Not even close', if you are a Fed hater - answer is 'Clearly'.

Hope that helps.

 

Well I am a Fed fan and 'Not even close' is not my answer :wink2:

I do have to say that there has never been another player with the talent Fed has; however, I think Johnny Mac is in the discussion more than some are giving him credit for, especially those who maybe did not see him play, or do not understand how profoundly the game has changed... just something to think about.

 

Nope! Easy question.

 

There was a time when at 15-40, I thought that McEnroe had an even chance of winning the game (on non-clay) so lethal was his serve and volley. Alas, that time was all too short. Didn't work hard (that's why he played so much doubles), just seemed to lose interest when Borg retired (like there was nobody left to chase). Look at Lendl - so much less sheer talent but worked so hard and ends up with a comparable career. McEnroe had magic hands at the net but nothing compared to Federer overall. IMO, if the surfaces had not slowed down, Fed would be almost as good a volleyer but for sheer shotmaking from anywhere on the court, nobody I've seen beats Federer (the more instinctive the shot, the more jaw-dropping) - a natural. It is as Agassi said, there's nowhere to hide against Fed. For me, Fed is GOAT - the highest/longest peak and sustained longevity.

 

No
but McEnroe is and was very talented. Watching him play at like 60 is astounding because he regularly beats like 40 year olds on the 'legends' tour. Guy is aging gracefullly as far as the tennis court is concerned

 

At the net probably. I obviously didn't grow up watching McEnroe but ESPN Classic had a marathon of McEnroe matches a while ago and he made it look effortless. Even with that crap racquet, which made it even more impressive.

 

Noted.

The players who can make it look effortless are the most talented.

 

I first saw McEnroe play (on TV) when I first started watching tennis in 1989. Obviously he was past his peak, and being that I knew nothing about tennis at all at that time his ability as well as that of the other players passed me by. As the years passed and YouTube came around, I was finally able to fill in some of the gaps of the older players at their best.

I still don't know what to make of McEnroe to be honest. To my eyes he has what I would call a somewhat 'shaky' ground game - he was like Edberg in that he always wanted to come in to the net at the first opportunity, but I never felt he could last long enough with the bigger hitters to get there enough (at least after 1984). Before, sure. Now, whether this was due to his long break, lifestyle choices, improvements in rackets and players like Lendl and Becker - who knows. Probably all of the above?

Sadly, he really is remembered more for his outbursts than anything, and for that he only has himself to blame. In terms of talent - super talented, but basically built for another time/era. It still really haunts me to see footage of him, say at the 1989 Masters (WTF in those days) against Lendl, and witness the absolute hammering he takes both at the baseline and the net. But in his prime, he was of course magnificent.

So - in my opinion not as talented as Federer, but a completely different way of playing that makes it extremely hard to compare. And yes, he didn't use many different types of spin on his groundstrokes, from what I can tell.

 

McEnroe is on record saying that he wishes he could play like Federer. And this quote goes way back in the day, maybe 2005 or 2006.

 

Well right. But it doesn't mean one was more talented than the other. You have different eras totally. I definitely thing Fed is more talented than Rafa but let's not be fooled, Rafa has some mad touch too when he wants to.

Also I think in their primes Mac definitely had more off the ground than Edberg.

 

Talent doesn't matter, it's just a very vague and highly subjective "thing" in someones game. Discussing "talent" will always favour the own player for mentioned reasons.

If you are talented, you should be able to develope a good/working technique though (at least with proper coaching), which is way more comparable.

 

McEnroe was an artist on the court - a pleasure to watch and full of surprises. Feder is great but not to be compared.

 

fH-A3AeyukI

Brilliant Mac! One of my fav. HOTSHOT. He made it look like he had ages to get to ball after judging the lob and made an unreal winner.

On topic, it is extremely difficult to come to conclusion on such topics due to so many factors. Both are genius and talented, and in their own right.

 

yes he was but he was also lazy, ate some junk food ans used to take drugs with Tatum, his career is not what it should have been because of all those factors, a pity to see such a waste of sheer talent
the arogant Swiss wimp's not talented, he's boring, politically correct ane right thinking all things Big Mc wasn't for sure

 

The only place McEnroe will ever be more naturally talented than Fed is in his wildest, craziest dreams.