Connors powers by Newcombe

It was always going to be a tough match to gauge, with Connors just starting his career when Newcombe's was coming to the end, but most believed the American would have had the edge on all surfaces if both were at their peak.

Simon Reed called it 2-1 for Connors after backing Newcombe to win the grass set, but such was Connors's dominance in our voting that we have to give him a straight sets victory - 6-4 6-2 6-2.

Next up in the competition for Connors will be a quarter-final meeting with Rod Laver in a few weeks time, but we still have more first-round matches to go.

Log on to Eurosport-Yahoo! on Friday for Simon Reed's rundown on our next match - Bjorn Borg v Ken Rosewell - and then the following week it is the tie of the round - Andre Agassi v Rafael Nadal.

Jimmy Connors - 85 per cent (2,952 votes)

John Newcombe - 15 per cent (515 votes)

Geoff.mccarro: Based on their peak, Connors every time, more bloody minded, more competitive, and way more athletic and fit. In a long game Connors would wear Newcombe down with his stamina and hard hitting.

Katy.hume: Without a shadow of doubt Newcombe. Great in singles but also in the doubles along with Tony Roche. Newcombe and Roche took a lot of beating.

Nbabel: I'm going to go with Reed on this one; Newcombe a serve-and-volleyer born, but with no other special weapons, would carry the grass but fall to one of the most dogged players ever on other surfaces; Connors in three.

Kucg123: If Connors were to lose on any of the surfaces it would have to be grass, and even then I am not so sure. With his great return of serve, I think Connors would neutralise Newcombe's serve and volley game.

Wynotmeme: This is a tougher one to call. Connors's career spoke for itself. His longevity in the game is legendary, but remembering his defeat to Arthur Ash I'd go with Newcombe. I don't see Newcombe as the most talented player around, or ever, but the wins he had without being serious about his tennis, means he had plenty to defeat the best. Newcombe to win all sets 7-5 7-5 7-6

Enze88er: I saw the 1973 and '74 Australian Opens at Kooyong. I would give Newcombe a chance against Conners in Melbourne but nowhere else. He was unfit by the standards that reigned from Connors and Lendl onwards, and lacked real power on all his strokes. His technique of strong, well placed serve was followed invariable by a volley: there was, simply, no other weapon. But since just about everything was played on grass it didn't matter. Had there been as many hard events when he was young as there are today he would surely have developed a different brand of tennis, for which he had the ability.

1-Roger Federer

---------------------> Roger Federer 6-0 6-2 6-0

---------------------> Boris Becker 6-2 4-6 7-5

9-Boris Becker

-

---------------------> Rod Laver 6-2 5-7 7-6

12-Rod Laver

-

13-John Newcombe

--------------------> Jimmy Connors 6-4 6-2 6-2

4-Jimmy Connors

+++

3-Bjorn Borg

14-Ken Rosewall

-

6-Andre Agassi

11-Rafael Nadal

-

7-John McEnroe

10-Stefan Edberg

-

15-Guillermo Vilas

2-Pete Sampras