This is a pure case of hype. Now that Cricket & Hockey are back in people's interests & interest in Tennis has gone down, these people are again trying to bag the mega sponsorship deals.
Let me do a break up of shots with all players: 1.Vijays serve better than ivanisevics serve 2.Vijays backhand better than federer backhand 3.Vijay volley better than Sampras volley 4.Vijay Forehand better than nadal forehand 5.Vijay scream better than sharapoca
So vijay is best..Chak de vijay..Kar do mutti mein
RE:Not just Borg,Connors
by bharat on Sep 25, 2007 03:09 PM
Still, Vijay has never made big in grand slam matches...
Vijay lacked the killer instinct to convert opportunities into wins
Vijay lacked the stamina to endure in long matches
That is what differentiates between a normal player and a champion. Vijay was a good player, but comparing him with champions of the likes of Borg or Connors is ridiculous.
R U Ready To Go ? YES....I FOUND ALL GRE8 NEW FULL HINDI MOVIES, NICE VIDEOS, FUN AND MORE HOT STUDFF ON http://www.mh12.com/movies ....... HAVE A NICE DAY.
Viajy had defeated Borg, Connors & Mcenroe in small tournaments where great players play with little interest due to low stakes. In those matches he won. I don't think he won aginst such players in any grand slam events
Look at the records, maan! It is an insult to Borg for someone to say that Vijay Amritraj is better than him! To be good, you have to be good in all departments. He cannot excuse Vijay for being "unable to be able to put it together over a period of one week". What a rubbish excuse! After all, these are the aspects which differentiate champions from ordinary players. What's the use simply having a great game if you cannot convert it into wins?
In the same way, can we say that Sania is better than Sharapova?
RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by Diamond Cutter on Sep 25, 2007 03:21 PM
He never been in top 10 or even top 15. No doubt Amritraj brothers were very good players but comparision is ridiculous.
RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by Vijay on Sep 25, 2007 02:44 PM
What a cement head you are? Unlike Sania as idiots like you and the media overhype with fat contract deals Vijay was comparable with the best players during that period and even the better American and Europeans were willing to acknowldege his potential. Not only his compatriots but also predesscors like Sedgmen Laver etc
Comparing Sania Mirza with any top ten player is plainly rubbish. Only you can dish out that stupid analogies as you now nothing and neither you can comprehend anything.
Tennis players in India from be it Ramanathan Krishnan, Premjit Lal to Ramesh all struggled to put together the basic amenities.
Vijay during his peak was comparable with Borg and McEnroe and Connors. He has beaten the best players of his era many times yet for a tennis player to come out of the substandard Indian facilities and fund their travel was extremely difficult those days.
Vijay was a multi talented persona, either climate, schedule or some bad luck played spoilsport for him during the grand slams. Few years back in Chennai we had a chat with his father and he said how difficult it was those arrange a travelling coach and the money involved in that. Their family were middle class and they fought against all odds.
Rediff moderators can do a favour by removing this forum as it would prevent idiots and school children from spoiling the reputation of great Indian achiveers with their clueless and incessant ramblings.
RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by ram kumar on Sep 25, 2007 03:00 PM
Vijay. Clap Clap Clap. Rightly said. These guys on the forum like Bharat, Shaikh, and the others know nothing about tennis. All that they want is to criticize players though they know they are not worth anything.
RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by bharat on Sep 25, 2007 03:01 PM
Champions win matches and losers make excuses! My dear sir, we are only talking about tennis here and not about the other facets of life which Vijay Amritraj may be having.
Vijay may have had a good game, but he lacked the stamina and the killer instinct to be a champion. But champions like Borg, McEnroe or Federer have all these qualities, not just a good game. I repeat that this differentiates between a normal player and champions. It is beyond doubt that altough Vijay had a great game, HE WAS NO CHAMPION. There are many players who have the ability to make those odd upsets against big players. But had Vijay ever beaten those greats in any grand slam event. It is stupid to ignore your limitations and still claim to have reached the sky.
I can use the same animated language (cement head) directed personally at you, but I have no grudge against you. My argument is solid and I do not need such language or seek rediff moderator's intervention to prove my point.
RE:RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by Rana Kamdev on Sep 25, 2007 03:09 PM
Vijay Amritraj had confessed that he lost the 5 setters just because difference in stamina.
RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by Surya Kiran on Sep 25, 2007 02:57 PM
Certainly a Joke. Borg, Conner and Mcanroe are class apart. You can't compare Amritraj brothers to even Boris Backer or Mats Wilander/Edberg but every comparision is possible if we take it through Nationalism.
RE:Sania better than Sharapova?
by Rana Kamdev on Sep 25, 2007 03:07 PM
Sharukh Khan is better than Brad Pitt, Yuvraj is better than Bradman, P.T Usha was better than Veronica Campbell andLauryn Williams than why A brothers can't be better than Borg and Conners-?
Vijay might have been technically better than borg or connors, but while these two have great results to show, amritraj does not match them in grand slam tennis. he does not have that many wins against his name, which he needed to justify his talent and the above statement. so fact is borg and connors were better.
RE:record speaks otherwise
by sharp critic on Sep 25, 2007 03:05 PM
It is unfortunate that people use this forum to show off their commenting skills. In these days of instant stardom, media hype, people do not just comprehend the talent and hard work of Vijay and the respect he commanded from his competitors. He was a lone star not just from India, but from this Asian region as well, when the sport was dominated by Americans, Australians and few Europeans. This forum has become a treat for nasty people to post dirty comments without realising what they are writing. Please check history before participating in these columns.
RE:record speaks otherwise
by on Sep 25, 2007 03:20 PM
Borg - 11 Grand Slam Wins, World Number 1 for 109 combined weeks Connors - 8 Grand Slam Wins, World Number 1 for 160 consecutive weeks, 270 combined weeks!! McEnroe - 7 Grand Slam Wins, World Number 1 for 170 combined weeks Vijay - 0 GS Wins. Finals - 0. Semi-Finals - 0. Highest Ranking achieved - 16.
