Pat Cash meets tennis legend Björn Borg in his home country for a rare interview about his classic moments and the current state of tennis. Part 1 of 2.
If he played to his 30s no doubt hes gonna win 20 GS by then at least. But the think with Borg and Laver is that at their prime there was no one near their level.. ironically that's why Bjorg got burn out and retired, there was no challenge really. Just imagine how many GS Sampras wouldve won without Agassi there.. imagine how many Fed wouldve won without Nadal or how many Nadal wouldve won without Djokovic there
Him and Andre Agassi... I am reading his autobiography at moment... Iranian father (big bully) & American mother (gentle soul)... He always was a thorough gentleman on and off court... married another tennis gem - Steffi Graf... all great peeps...
No he cant. He coudnt adapt to the game. Everyone of the view that Borg era is over by the time he was defeated by Mc Enroe. People are unncecessarily imagining that Borg could have 20 or more slams by looking at todays Big 3 success. Borg won Wimbledon at 17. And he payed till 32 and h could only win 7. He had great serve. Over all his game is no less than any great player. Still he coudnt even reach 10. The era was toughest. And the times were changing. From wooden raquet to metal raquet. Apart from that he was only winning French Open and Wimbledon till then. He appeared in 4 US Open finals and lost everytime. Anyone from big 3 today would have won atleast one of those 4 finals if they were there in Borg place. Its like he has to play another 5 years continuously at Wimbledon and French Open. That is highly unlikely. Even greatest grass player like Federer could only win 3 Wimbledons after turning 26-2009, 2012 and 2017. Just see the gap. Those days 5 years was too long. Borg won his last FO final against Lendl. That was a 5 set matcg. But next year after Borg retirement the champion is 17/18 year old Wilander. Next year Lendl. Those days competition was tough than toady. Today Big 3 has so much variation. Those days there was no much variation from players. May be Borg could have won one or more FOs. Not more than that
@Blood Taker Your comments are so bizarre that I guess you're very unhappy with your penis. No sense of respect, a jumping envy from a hidebound nonperson. Just one more hater behind a screen.
There's not much that compares with Borg v Macenroe at Wimbledon. Maybe Federer v Djok or Federer v Nadal. They're on a par, but not higher. Good times in tennis the early eighties.
Doctor Garbonzo I was a very big Bjorg fan as a youngster. Bjorg is still class. Yes, he never played Australia as well. The players have him up there with lever. I have him higher. Bjorg put tennis on the map in the 1970s. Roger is doing the same today.
@ Blood Taker maybe he was a bit of a hippie, and I think that you’re right about him not handling the pressure. I *think* that he talked about that at the time. But a myth? No, not at all.
Bjorn is the king but he could still be wrong. What defies GOAT or Best ever ? I keep asking this question on YT to Djokovic fans who have been carrying and raving on like he's the best ever but I can't see any skill in his game whatsover. He is a essentially reactive and defensive player and has mental toughness so OK in that sense alone, he's the best competitor with the number one attitude. But to me it is tennis players who play with more initiative and can take and hit their groundtrokes earlier that are the best ones to watch. Sadly this WEAK era in tennis lacks attacking players and as such variety in this sport because of the slowing down of tennis courts and the balls they use these days. It is also unfortunate that for the past 10-12 years, a lot of promising players have not for one reason or another, been able to reach their potential - Grigor Dimitrov , Richard Gasquet,, maybe Milos Raonic.
tenniscollector oh my lol,the reason i said feds the best ever is because its true,he has won more than any other player ever,plus he makes it look so easy..
and because you are one-eyed Roger fan (nothing wrong with that honey) LOL. But in my earlier post, I am generalizing. 10 seasons ago - the Roger Federer era, there was signs even then that a group of players with potential to be a champion and winning big time, were not reaching it. I think that's very bad for the sport. Today's tennis has lost the chain factor - the chain were a champion is followed by another champion. That's why I call this Djokovic domination era, a truly WEAK one.
He won more than any other player? Win what? Trophies? Ivan Lendl has 94 and Connors has 109. Money? Djokovic has more. ATP 1000 titles? Djokovic is the leader there. The only thing he has won more than the rest is the grand slam count. Be more specific when you make those statements. PS: I am a huge Federer fan.
Maybe not be 3-9 vs Nadal in slams and 5-9 vs Djokovic in slams? I still think he's the greatest, but if those records were a little better, there would be no question. Plus, Nadal and Djokovic have time to catch him... If he were 5-8 vs nadal in slams, that would be respectable, given 5 of those matches were on clay. If he were 7-7 vs. Djokovic, that would be very respectable, given many of those matches took place in his 30's and when Djokovic was in his prime (which he still is). Given Djokovic's excellent fitness, he still has a chance to meet, pass, or at least come close to Roger's record.
Head to head records don't mean very much in tennis. I can tell you from personal experience, you can be better than someone and lose to them consistently because your game matches up poorly against them. I'm obviously referring to Nadal here, and most of Novak's wins against Roger occurred when he was playing at his peak and Fed was on his way down. Also, neither Novak, nor Rafa will sniff 18 GS. Fed is an anomaly, seriously, I want to know if he is some kind of alien/human hybrid...ATP needs to test DNA while doing drug tests lol.
I agree with Joy, and Federer can compete with these guys even though he's in his mid 30's. His body seems to lost track of time and just goes about continuing to compete at top levels
11 majors before 26 - it was an era of very unorthodox players, Borg being one of the most unorthodox, along with Macenroe, Connors, Nastase, and later Mercier, and plenty of others. Before racquet technology took over and they all played with wooden racquets, it was artistry that didn't return until Federer.
@ Fuz Capp I think that you’re right. And I don’t believe that technology is necessarily good for the game, either. It doesn’t show the talents of the player; it shows the technology, and to my mind, that isn’t what sport is, or should be, about.
4 years Wimbledon and French opens back to back on really slow clay and fast grass. Incredible feat that has only been achieved twice by Nadal and once by Federer. What is overlooked is how good his first serve was and how tough he was. 4 Us open finals. One of the greatest ever, period.
If my grandfather had 3 balls, he was a pinball machine... Borg retired at the age of 26, this is a factor that plays against him, it can not be an excuse in the evaluation of his career.
Lorenzo Pasquini Ah, but to win 11 slams and not play Australia and actually retire at 25, not 26, as he never played a tour match after walking out of the US open in 1981. That says alot about him, about how much better he was compared to the rest. He could have played another 10 years and moved easily to the newer racquets. He would still kick Sampras's ass (on clay). They should hold a wooden racquet Wimbledon contest. That would be fun.
Indeed. Federer's ability to play consistently at 60-70%, and still win against the majority of the tour, is what allows him to keep his energy reserves high for those clutch moments in the finals. When Fed hits 100% peaks during a match, there's no player in history that can/could cope with that.
Remember that Borg said that in 2016. Since then, Federer has won 3 more Slams, beaten Nadal 5 times in a row and counting, won one, if not the best Grand Slam final 5th set ever played (OA 2017), became the oldest ever to reach #1, gathered his 100th title...
Of course Federer is the greatest, it should go without saying. Borg himself was magnificent, a pity he retired young but he had his reasons, had lost some enthusiasm and intensity. His dominance at the French Open and 5 consecutive wins on fast grass at Wimbledon was a tremendous feat no-ne has come close to. He also had a great record in the Davis Cup.
Phil Coates yes and no. Nadal had this amount of injuries due to his style of playing and the surface of his choice to do that. Federer never wanted to adjust to that grueling style of playing, that's why he had fewer injuries, but also why he lost a lot during the period when all players started to play like Nadal or Djokovic and they slowed down grass to make it more spectacular.
@@mizofan ofc its not. Federer wasnt the best in era of the best ones. So how can he be called the best ever. 2004-2006 teenager Rafa won 6 out of seven matches. He is not the Goat.
@ Yves M. Just because Borg thinks that Federer is the GOAT male tennis player doesn't make it so! It is just Borg's opinion--nothing more, nothing less. Borg sadly fails to understand that there is no greatest of all-time player in any sport because of changes over time in technology, knowledge of food and nutrition , changes in training methods, etc. You can't make any valid comparison between the wood era in tennis history to the graphite era. The advances in racket technology and string technology have irrefutably cheapened the game of tennis making the graphite era players only appear to be greater than their wood era counterparts. Real tennis is wood racket tennis not the tennis played with graphite equipment!
I don't know how to compare Bjorn Borg with the tenis. But he was the Muhammad Ali or Elvis Presley, maybe The Beatles, or they all together, when he was playing the tenis. BB is a living legend
Lets face it Federer Djokovic and Falafel Nadal will still be spoken about in 100 years time. what an Honour !That is worth so much more than any pecuniary benefits they have accrued.
No, he was great but he retired too young for top spot, his overall achievement falling short. A pity because he was magnificent, winning on fast grass of Wimbledon as well as clay of Paris
I watched Borg play and I watched Federer play. Federer is the Viceroy for sure, the Gentleman of tennis, the Thor, if you wish... but there's only one Odin and that's Borg.
he came back approx 8 yrs later at ar 34 yrs old to try again on singles circuit....still with wooden racket in hand...unfortunately it was short lived as the game had moved on alot.
Borg wanted to come back to the tour in 1982 or 1983 after taking a break but didn’t want to then play qualifiers to get back into tournaments. How stupid were the tour then not to grant him a protected ranking?
Lot of ifs and if nots in Tennis discussion. Some people believe that Borg would have won 20 GS if he played till 30. But then whose Grandslams these guys are reducing? MC Enroe defeated Bjon in 1981 Wimbledon. Mc Enroe was defeated by Connes in 82. Again Mc won in 83, 84. In 85 it was Becker. By 85 MC Was just 26 year old. And he was winning no more grandslams. Mc said so many times that todays 33 is yesteryears 27. No one expected a longer career for a sportsperson then. The tennis technology was changing. Wooden raquets were became part of history even before Mc retired. In 1982 FO Mats became champion. In 83 it was Noah. 84 Lendl. 85 Wilander again. 86 Lendl. 87 Lendl. 88 Wilander. 89 it was chang. Tell me from whom you want to take the slams away from to give them to Borg. Honestly speaking, I dont see Borg even winning a single Grand Slam more. He loved Tennis. He plyed. He won matches, Slams, and hearts. He set his own records. He is a champion and one of the greatest. Talking about if he had played up to 30 and the grandslams could have or couldnt have won is disrepcting his achievements. People see Federer, Nadal and Djocovic playing well above 30 at high level and imagine that Borg would have won 20 or more slams. But they dont recognise that Becker, the greatest server, couldnt win more than 7 slams though he played till 32. He won first Wimbledon at 17. Wilander won FO at 17 even he couldnt win more than 7. People dont understand that those were the most difficult times for any champion. Just see during 81-85. So many champions and everyone of them is considered the greatest of all time. Mc Enroe, Conners, Wilander, Lendl, Stefan Edberg, Guilermo Vilas, Becker, Johan Kriek. So many champions. And there is one more guy Noah who actually defeated Mats Wilander in FO finalnin straight sets. Borg retired and must have been happy for not playing these tough guys.
Unless these young guys start making some noise Joko will pass Federer. If he wins the US Open he’s just 3 away from tying Roger. It’s getting harder for Roger. Novak has won 4 of the last 5 majors. No one is stringing them together like that. And I don’t see Roger winning 1 a year for the next 3 years
Michael David - did you travel to Time machine in Future to see that Djokovic and Nadal will break record of Federer?? or just Living in Fantasy . 😂 🤣 DJOKERTARDS FAN 💩. 👎. I am sure he will do but he is an absolute Dickhead lol.
@abhay bhardwaj If you’re sure they will do it. I fail to see the reason for your comment. Unless your nose 👃 is so far up Roger’s 🐴 you can see the writing on the wall. You Federer fans act like Nadal and Djokovic have five major titles. Until this past U S Open Djokovic had won 4 out 5 majors. Federer couldn’t even win Wimbledon while serving with 2 match points. Time travel happens in movies. I’m talking about reality. MRGA ! Not....
abhay bhardwaj the guy isn’t incorrect man. As much as I love Roger, I know with current slow paced courts with games of Nadal and Novak if they maintain their fitness both will pass the records. Both age and game of Roger aren’t aligned with pace of courts so current conditions are in favour of Novak and Nadal definitely.
in his time, there was NO ONE like him...all these years later, I have two very specific memories about him , that speak to how great he was. 1) He was the ONLY player, on clay, that made Guillermo "The Hulk" Vilas, look like a junior player..and Im thinking about that French Open final, where he just took Vilas apart. "Willy" was a monster on clay, during his day..and even guys that competed well against him, HATED playing him. and 2) Borg's speed, was the most vital aspect to how awesome he was. People always talk about the two hander and the big topspin forehand..but those shots were executed by a guy who was so fast, it looked like he was levitating on air. He was an incredible tennis player...a god, really.
@@kimdye4609 Djokovic won his 16 grand slam titles during the Federer and Nadal eras - in that same time Murray and Wawrinka only won 3 each. He also is 28-26 lifetime vs Nadal and 26-22 vs Federer - no one else can claim a winning record against both of them so it looks like you are WRONG
Bjorn's statement about not taking up coaching roles reveals how mentally exhausting a Physical game can be.a lot of legends have their mental burden exceptionally higher than the Physical work load because of the amount of thought process that goes into every match.if it can happen to an ice cool player like Bjorn it can happen with any one .kudos to these athletes for how they manage mental stress of such magnitude.
If you check the "goat list" at tennis-strangeforest, that balances all the big tournaments, weeks at N°1, finals, semifinals and QF played, and other achievements, Roger is N°1, Nole is N°2, and Rafa is N°3. So, basically, we have the top-3 best players in the history of the sport playing one against the other. I feel really lucky to be able to witness something like this.
Haha I don't want to say it out loud. But let be honest a few years ago. Monfils, Dimitrov ect. was beating Federer. If he had to play a third set, it was over. So tired was he. And look at him yesterday, no signs of being tired. Running like a 20 year old. I don't know what's cooking under neath. Don't get me wrong, it's just an opinion.
I love how the comments can generate some great debates. But at the end of it all we all know the truth - it shines through very clearly: Roger Federer is the greatest of all time.
Doesn't matter if he won the G.S.! Nr.1 Frderer, nr.2 Nadal. nr.3 Sampras. etc Novak . Novak is the nr 1 at this period of time but despite his efforts it is very far to has handling ability that Federer Nadal Sampras get.
Bluestin100 Hey, as a kid you believed in Santa Claus, so you merely replaced him with RF. This is the day and age of freedom to choose whatever dumb religion one wants.
Agree 100% the best calm gentleman player ever, then we have Pat cash saying Federer should retire , Pat cash could only dream of ever being as good as federer
Absolutely. I am 59 years old and have followed tennis since the late 1960's ! Bjorn was the coolest of all. A master in grass and clay - not just one, like Fed or Rafa. And mathematical models taking the quality of the competition etc into account have shown Borg to be the best in the Open era. And in 1982 after he retired from the slams, he had a great year beating Mac and the rest of them. Something people tend to forget. There were some murky $ factors afoot in 1982.
Folks,the greatest ever so far is Federer if u like or not.But like Borg said Djokovic has the potential to surpass him,he didnt say Nadal he said Djokovic cause Djoko really has the potential not Nadal. When it comes to prime between Federer-Nadal-Djoko,i believe Djoko in the best in the prime(peak) cause as u know nobody is even close to him when Djoko plays his best tennis and his peak time when Nadal/Federer were still at the top of their game.When it comes to Federer,during his peak time Nadal/Djoko was not at their best,plus Federer is behind to both Nadal/Djoko in head to head matches.When it comes to Nadal peak time it was 2013,u can see by statistics even at his peak Nadal still lost to Federe/Djoko constantly that year but he won French and Us Open finals in a very competitive matches.Lets break Djokovics peak time now which was 2011and 2015 in which he had 43 and 38 (if im not mistaken) unbeaten runs and he just completely dominated Nadal/Federer !!!
Borg did say that Federer could win another Wimbledon and he has just surpassed Sampras 7th to record a Historic 8th Title. So Who Knows ? ..... Seems Borg Knows.
Muhd Khaleef Izzaldeen Borg ain't dumb. Besides being a champion player he said he keeps up with tennis and watches the current great players play. He knows who is best.
Hard for Djokovic or Nadal to pass Federer style of play counts as well. Fed is probably the most talented bar the Championships he's won and is continuing to do at that. Thus in itself gives credence to that fact his consistency and game is probably the best of all time so far.
Funny that so many people rate Federer as the best player ever when Nadal holds a very strong- and positive- record against Federer despite being out of the circuit for several long spells. I would rate McEnroe as the very best, followed by Nadal and perhaps Federer third. However, we will never know what would have happened if these players had also competed against Borg, Sampras, Agassi, Lendl, Connors and the like.
Yeah Federer is great, Rafa, Borg, Laver, but none can hold a candle to Joko. Djokovic at his best, 4 continuous slams, was from out of this world. His athletic ability technique and prowess were immaculate. Plus his nature, here's my number call me maybe. Puts him in a category never to be seen again! Love ya joko, please research Yahweh!
And the biggest player is lendl who is the person who has won as much title as federer in 5 years less ... And jimmy connors is number one for the titles. (for me best player is Edberg & Willander technic)
I don't know that Federer is the best player or not but for sure I know that he is my favourite player... the other things which I like about Federer is his resilience and ability to bounce back every time he goes down. if he loses the point, match or a championship, he always stays calm and composed, which I think not many other tennis players have been able to do so far... Not even Nadal though he is quite a good player as well so is Djocovic... Well, what Federer has achieved is just like what Sachin Tendulkar has in Cricket. Obviously the records are there to be broken and perhaps Federer's record will also be broken but I am sure its not happening in next ten years.....
For me it's between Federer and Djokovic for the GOAT title. Not sure how much Novak can still achieve. Nadal isn't even in my top 10, and that's assuming that he's clean, which I doubt he ever has been.
Greatest ever. No-one commanded our attention to the nail-biting, often long, drawn out games as he did. Only comparison in my mind is: Bobby Fisher did for chess what Bjorn did for Wimbledon and tennis. No-one returned a serve like him. He never gave up, no matter how dire the game situation was.
Phil, Phil I will try to be objective and yes Nadal who I greatly admire has a far superior record head to head. Rafa plays like an unleashed animal with great effort, grunts and sweat flying all over the place. Roger floats over the court and makes movement look easy even last year with his knee injury. If you are looking at someone who "floats" over the court and makes it look easy then Roger is numero uno. He is the GOAT!! The world would be very boring if we all agreed with each other.
Best looking style of all time and the forehand model of the future. Also if Borg would have met Federer with the high tech rackets of now he would have beat him I believe
It was good...Special in fact. Not better though. Look at the number the 3 greatest today have won. Over double what McEnroe won. ....and he was special.
I have to beg to differ bjorn you were the best ever my friend you destroyed the spoilt brat Mcenroe at wimbledon your tennis was remarkable i was never in to watching tennis until one sunny day i visited my dad at his house and he was watching you play Mcenroe at wimbledon and i sat and watched you beat him i became a tennis fan from that day👍❤❤❤
![[Live] ศึกมหึมันส์มวยไทยสังเวียนเดือด เวทีมวยชั่วคราวสวนสยาม | จันทร์ 30 กันยายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pM1k6f7JXUc/mqdefault.jpg)
11 slams and retired at 26 years old, one of the greatest, no doubt
He regularly missed the Australian Open.
If he played to his 30s no doubt hes gonna win 20 GS by then at least. But the think with Borg and Laver is that at their prime there was no one near their level.. ironically that's why Bjorg got burn out and retired, there was no challenge really. Just imagine how many GS Sampras wouldve won without Agassi there.. imagine how many Fed wouldve won without Nadal or how many Nadal wouldve won without Djokovic there
italo azurro he could have won several more.
and remember that was when in reality there were only three slams. The Australian was ignored by the elite players.
Good list. I would rate Laver higher, perhaps third and Sampras ahead of Djokovic in fourth but overall a good list
One and only. The best and classiest tennis player ever!.. He never complained, never argued, just played great tennis.
Him and Andre Agassi...
I am reading his autobiography at moment...
Iranian father (big bully) & American mother (gentle soul)... He always was a thorough gentleman on and off court... married another tennis gem - Steffi Graf... all great peeps...
If Borg played till 35 he would've probably won 20GS
No he cant. He coudnt adapt to the game. Everyone of the view that Borg era is over by the time he was defeated by Mc Enroe.
People are unncecessarily imagining that Borg could have 20 or more slams by looking at todays Big 3 success.
Borg won Wimbledon at 17. And he payed till 32 and h could only win 7. He had great serve. Over all his game is no less than any great player. Still he coudnt even reach 10.
The era was toughest. And the times were changing. From wooden raquet to metal raquet.
Apart from that he was only winning French Open and Wimbledon till then. He appeared in 4 US Open finals and lost everytime. Anyone from big 3 today would have won atleast one of those 4 finals if they were there in Borg place.
Its like he has to play another 5 years continuously at Wimbledon and French Open. That is highly unlikely. Even greatest grass player like Federer could only win 3 Wimbledons after turning 26-2009, 2012 and 2017. Just see the gap.
Those days 5 years was too long. Borg won his last FO final against Lendl. That was a 5 set matcg. But next year after Borg retirement the champion is 17/18 year old Wilander. Next year Lendl.
Those days competition was tough than toady. Today Big 3 has so much variation. Those days there was no much variation from players. May be Borg could have won one or more FOs. Not more than that
Maybe, but you have to remember new better players emerged in late 80s and early 90s
MUFC Nobody gives a shit. This is a Tennis vid.
@MUFC dumbass there aren’t even 200 countries in the world🧐🧐🧐🤓
He said he was too tired & too many injuries!
wow 11 major titles .... retired at the age of 26!!!
and also humble
@Blood Taker Your comments are so bizarre that I guess you're very unhappy with your penis. No sense of respect, a jumping envy from a hidebound nonperson. Just one more hater behind a screen.
Blood Taker my friend Björn Borg is ranked as one of the best tennis players ever.
@snag66 - too bad nobody knows who you're talking to ...
RedPilled - But never won the US Open. Never a grand slam.
Bjorn has perfect hair even at hes 60 lol!
I don't have the hair, nor the money! so unfair :P
Borg, such a legend!!! I was 12 at the time, but I remember him playing so well, so focused, good memories I have, unforgetable!!! Borg forever!!!
There's not much that compares with Borg v Macenroe at Wimbledon. Maybe Federer v Djok or Federer v Nadal. They're on a par, but not higher. Good times in tennis the early eighties.
I think Borg is the GOAT. A guy who dominated both grass and clay in his time.
Borg easily could have won 3-4 more slams if he wouldn't have retired at 26, Seems like the popularity of game left with him back in 81'
Doctor Garbonzo I was a very big Bjorg fan as a youngster. Bjorg is still class. Yes, he never played Australia as well. The players have him up there with lever. I have him higher. Bjorg put tennis on the map in the 1970s. Roger is doing the same today.
@ Blood Taker maybe he was a bit of a hippie, and I think that you’re right about him not handling the pressure. I *think* that he talked about that at the time. But a myth? No, not at all.
LOL, Borg BEL18VED
together with Rod Laver
And now it's reality!
Hope my hair looks this good when I am his age.
maybe you will be bald
I'm 46 and don't have that much hair 😀
I became a tennis player in 81 because of Bjorn.
Me too.
In my opinion and proportionately for the years he played tennis B,Borg was the best ever!!!
Federer may be the best technical player but Borg is the most exiting champ of all times. All without being verbal or anything. He's just a classic.
borg is right,federer best player ever..
Bjorn is the king but he could still be wrong. What defies GOAT or Best ever ? I keep asking this question on YT to Djokovic fans who have been carrying and raving on like he's the best ever but I can't see any skill in his game whatsover.
He is a essentially reactive and defensive player and has mental toughness so OK in that sense alone, he's the best competitor with the number one attitude. But to me it is tennis players who play with more initiative and can take and hit their groundtrokes earlier that are the best ones to watch. Sadly this WEAK era in tennis lacks attacking players and as such variety in this sport because of the slowing down of tennis courts and the balls they use these days. It is also unfortunate that for the past 10-12 years, a lot of promising players have not for one reason or another, been able to reach their potential - Grigor Dimitrov , Richard Gasquet,, maybe Milos Raonic.
tenniscollector oh my lol,the reason i said feds the best ever is because its true,he has won more than any other player ever,plus he makes it look so easy..
and because you are one-eyed Roger fan (nothing wrong with that honey) LOL. But in my earlier post, I am generalizing.
10 seasons ago - the Roger Federer era, there was signs even then that a group of players with potential to be a champion and winning big time, were not reaching it. I think that's very bad for the sport.
Today's tennis has lost the chain factor - the chain were a champion is followed by another champion. That's why I call this Djokovic domination era, a truly WEAK one.
He won more than any other player? Win what? Trophies? Ivan Lendl has 94 and Connors has 109. Money? Djokovic has more. ATP 1000 titles? Djokovic is the leader there. The only thing he has won more than the rest is the grand slam count. Be more specific when you make those statements. PS: I am a huge Federer fan.
samy29987 hes best ever (federer)
The man is still handsome at 60, that's for sure. I wish more players today had his manners. Edberg was the same way.
The Bjorn Borg era was a magic parenthesis for Tennis. For me Bjorn is the King. The Viking.
What the fuck is up with Pat Cash? There is no opinion about it, Fed is the greatest of all time. What more does the guy have to do?
Criticising Federer has been a long-time obsession of his.
Pat Cash is a fucking moron that needs to stop talking.
Maybe not be 3-9 vs Nadal in slams and 5-9 vs Djokovic in slams? I still think he's the greatest, but if those records were a little better, there would be no question. Plus, Nadal and Djokovic have time to catch him...
If he were 5-8 vs nadal in slams, that would be respectable, given 5 of those matches were on clay. If he were 7-7 vs. Djokovic, that would be very respectable, given many of those matches took place in his 30's and when Djokovic was in his prime (which he still is).
Given Djokovic's excellent fitness, he still has a chance to meet, pass, or at least come close to Roger's record.
Head to head records don't mean very much in tennis. I can tell you from personal experience, you can be better than someone and lose to them consistently because your game matches up poorly against them. I'm obviously referring to Nadal here, and most of Novak's wins against Roger occurred when he was playing at his peak and Fed was on his way down. Also, neither Novak, nor Rafa will sniff 18 GS. Fed is an anomaly, seriously, I want to know if he is some kind of alien/human hybrid...ATP needs to test DNA while doing drug tests lol.
I agree with Joy, and Federer can compete with these guys even though he's in his mid 30's. His body seems to lost track of time and just goes about continuing to compete at top levels
Borg is smart.
Koullex, He certainly seems so. So.Smart, to retire young with a great record, and reputation.
His clothing line is super successful
11 majors before 26 - it was an era of very unorthodox players, Borg being one of the most unorthodox, along with Macenroe, Connors, Nastase, and later Mercier, and plenty of others. Before racquet technology took over and they all played with wooden racquets, it was artistry that didn't return until Federer.
@ Fuz Capp I think that you’re right. And I don’t believe that technology is necessarily good for the game, either. It doesn’t show the talents of the player; it shows the technology, and to my mind, that isn’t what sport is, or should be, about.
4 years Wimbledon and French opens back to back on really slow clay and fast grass. Incredible feat that has only been achieved twice by Nadal and once by Federer.
What is overlooked is how good his first serve was and how tough he was. 4 Us open finals.
One of the greatest ever, period.
If Borg played until like 34 he would have like 20 grand slam
If my grandfather had 3 balls, he was a pinball machine...
Borg retired at the age of 26, this is a factor that plays against him, it can not be an excuse in the evaluation of his career.
I was a Borg fan but he didn't though, did he? He had grown tired of tennis and would have increasingly struggled.
Depends on aging. Federer's fitness is in another level. Also considering how 35 year olds play like 30 year old today than 20 years ago.
Leo Reimer Racket technology changed. When Borg tried to make a comeback in his thirties he still used an old school wooden racket.
Lorenzo Pasquini Ah, but to win 11 slams and not play Australia and actually retire at 25, not 26, as he never played a tour match after walking out of the US open in 1981. That says alot about him, about how much better he was compared to the rest. He could have played another 10 years and moved easily to the newer racquets. He would still kick Sampras's ass (on clay).
They should hold a wooden racquet Wimbledon contest. That would be fun.
Roger won :) time for grandslam no.19
Parth Kaul Done. LETS DO 20.
Borg.....the best tennis player in history, followed closely by Federer. 👏👏👏
Hard to argue. Federer's consistency in my opinion is what separates him from the rest.
and his creativity and graceful play style.
yeah and his forehand too.
Indeed. Federer's ability to play consistently at 60-70%, and still win against the majority of the tour, is what allows him to keep his energy reserves high for those clutch moments in the finals. When Fed hits 100% peaks during a match, there's no player in history that can/could cope with that.
@@georgemavrides3434 Nadal says hi
2017. 8th Wimbledon. 19th Grand Slam.
5:17.. He doesn't wanna equal Sampras Bjørn. He wants to overtake him ;)
Remember that Borg said that in 2016. Since then, Federer has won 3 more Slams, beaten Nadal 5 times in a row and counting, won one, if not the best Grand Slam final 5th set ever played (OA 2017), became the oldest ever to reach #1, gathered his 100th title...
One of the best tennis players of all time calling Federer the GOAT. There you have it!
Of course Federer is the greatest, it should go without saying. Borg himself was magnificent, a pity he retired young but he had his reasons, had lost some enthusiasm and intensity. His dominance at the French Open and 5 consecutive wins on fast grass at Wimbledon was a tremendous feat no-ne has come close to. He also had a great record in the Davis Cup.
But didn't win as many trphies! He was lucky Federer caught glandular fever in 2008!
Phil Coates yes and no. Nadal had this amount of injuries due to his style of playing and the surface of his choice to do that. Federer never wanted to adjust to that grueling style of playing, that's why he had fewer injuries, but also why he lost a lot during the period when all players started to play like Nadal or Djokovic and they slowed down grass to make it more spectacular.
@@mizofan ofc its not. Federer wasnt the best in era of the best ones. So how can he be called the best ever.
2004-2006 teenager Rafa won 6 out of seven matches. He is not the Goat.
@ Yves M. Just because Borg thinks that Federer is the GOAT male tennis player doesn't make it so! It is just Borg's opinion--nothing more, nothing less. Borg sadly fails to understand that there is no greatest of all-time player in any sport because of changes over time in technology, knowledge of food and nutrition , changes in training methods, etc. You can't make any valid comparison between the wood era in tennis history to the graphite era. The advances in racket technology and string technology have irrefutably cheapened the game of tennis making the graphite era players only appear to be greater than their wood era counterparts. Real tennis is wood racket tennis not the tennis played with graphite equipment!
I don't know how to compare Bjorn Borg with the tenis. But he was the Muhammad Ali or Elvis Presley, maybe The Beatles, or they all together, when he was playing the tenis. BB is a living legend
Lets face it Federer Djokovic and Falafel Nadal will still be spoken about in 100 years time. what an Honour !That is worth so much more than any pecuniary benefits they have accrued.
Borg was always my favorite as a kid back in the day
Such a wonderful player and human
King Bjorn knows Very well who is the greatest tennis player of all time : himself !!
No, he was great but he retired too young for top spot, his overall achievement falling short. A pity because he was magnificent, winning on fast grass of Wimbledon as well as clay of Paris
I watched Borg play and I watched Federer play. Federer is the Viceroy for sure, the Gentleman of tennis, the Thor, if you wish... but there's only one Odin and that's Borg.
@@TheSpookyDuke I have watched both Borg and Federer and I much prefer Federer's style .
True enough, Djokovic has already passed Roger.
Borg, as thoughtful and humble as ever.
Still quite hunky too!!
Roger Federer is the best tennis player of all time. Roger Federer has been at the top for over 15 years , which I think is pretty amazing. :)
Federer truly is the GOAT and one of the best overall sportsmen of all time in my eyes
he came back approx 8 yrs later at ar 34 yrs old to try again on singles circuit....still with wooden racket in hand...unfortunately it was short lived as the game had moved on alot.
Borg...hands down the most genuinely good looking guy in tennis.
I was in the UK as a student in the 70s and I was quite crazy about Björn Bjorg. Summer and Wimbledon, those were magical days.❤️
"Magical days"....They were indeed.
Borg wanted to come back to the tour in 1982 or 1983 after taking a break but didn’t want to then play qualifiers to get back into tournaments. How stupid were the tour then not to grant him a protected ranking?
Im more jealous of his hair than his tennis accomplishments.. he is really cool,, no stress..
Loved Borg in the ‘70s and still do.
Both Bjorn Borg & Roger Federer are the real gems of lawn Tennis....both are phenomenal character's in their own way....I love them both.......!!!
Lot of ifs and if nots in Tennis discussion.
Some people believe that Borg would have won 20 GS if he played till 30. But then whose Grandslams these guys are reducing? MC Enroe defeated Bjon in 1981 Wimbledon. Mc Enroe was defeated by Connes in 82. Again Mc won in 83, 84. In 85 it was Becker. By 85 MC Was just 26 year old. And he was winning no more grandslams. Mc said so many times that todays 33 is yesteryears 27.
No one expected a longer career for a sportsperson then. The tennis technology was changing. Wooden raquets were became part of history even before Mc retired.
In 1982 FO Mats became champion. In 83 it was Noah. 84 Lendl. 85 Wilander again. 86 Lendl. 87 Lendl. 88 Wilander. 89 it was chang.
Tell me from whom you want to take the slams away from to give them to Borg.
Honestly speaking, I dont see Borg even winning a single Grand Slam more. He loved Tennis. He plyed. He won matches, Slams, and hearts.
He set his own records. He is a champion and one of the greatest. Talking about if he had played up to 30 and the grandslams could have or couldnt have won is disrepcting his achievements.
People see Federer, Nadal and Djocovic playing well above 30 at high level and imagine that Borg would have won 20 or more slams.
But they dont recognise that Becker, the greatest server, couldnt win more than 7 slams though he played till 32. He won first Wimbledon at 17. Wilander won FO at 17 even he couldnt win more than 7. People dont understand that those were the most difficult times for any champion.
Just see during 81-85. So many champions and everyone of them is considered the greatest of all time. Mc Enroe, Conners, Wilander, Lendl, Stefan Edberg, Guilermo Vilas, Becker, Johan Kriek. So many champions. And there is one more guy Noah who actually defeated Mats Wilander in FO finalnin straight sets.
Borg retired and must have been happy for not playing these tough guys.
Roger is still playing and this year isn't gonna be his last i think
Novak will be someday. Rafa could possibly. Their careers are not over.
Unless these young guys start making some noise Joko will pass Federer. If he wins the US Open he’s just 3 away from tying Roger. It’s getting harder for Roger. Novak has won 4 of the last 5 majors. No one is stringing them together like that. And I don’t see Roger winning 1 a year for the next 3 years
James Sohn - hahahahaa 🤣 🤣 IN YOUR DREAMS . 💤 😴 😂 it won’t Happen. Just go to sleep you dumbass .🛏. 💤 💤
Michael David - did you travel to Time machine in Future to see that Djokovic and Nadal will break record of Federer?? or just Living in Fantasy . 😂 🤣 DJOKERTARDS FAN 💩. 👎. I am sure he will do but he is an absolute Dickhead lol.
@abhay bhardwaj
If you’re sure they will do it. I fail to see the reason for your comment. Unless your nose 👃 is so far up Roger’s 🐴 you can see the writing on the wall. You Federer fans act like Nadal and Djokovic have five major titles. Until this past U S Open Djokovic had won 4 out 5 majors. Federer couldn’t even win Wimbledon while serving with 2 match points. Time travel happens in movies. I’m talking about reality. MRGA ! Not....
abhay bhardwaj the guy isn’t incorrect man. As much as I love Roger, I know with current slow paced courts with games of Nadal and Novak if they maintain their fitness both will pass the records. Both age and game of Roger aren’t aligned with pace of courts so current conditions are in favour of Novak and Nadal definitely.
in his time, there was NO ONE like him...all these years later, I have two very specific memories about him , that speak to how great he was. 1) He was the ONLY player, on clay, that made Guillermo "The Hulk" Vilas, look like a junior player..and Im thinking about that French Open final, where he just took Vilas apart. "Willy" was a monster on clay, during his day..and even guys that competed well against him, HATED playing him. and 2) Borg's speed, was the most vital aspect to how awesome he was. People always talk about the two hander and the big topspin forehand..but those shots were executed by a guy who was so fast, it looked like he was levitating on air. He was an incredible tennis player...a god, really.
This is February 2017. I think Federer is coming into his prime. 18 and counting!
Denis Daly 19 and counting..... Probably will be 20 at the end os the year
Abdullah Amin or at the end of the week 😁 OA 18
Or today~!!!
20!
This is February 2018, and yes, we are seeing a prime Federer now. 20 slams, world number one. And hopefully more to come.
Djokovic is the greatest, Borg 2nd, Federer 3rd, Sampras 4th, Laver 5th, Nadal 6th
Wrong!
I agree Nole is the greatest🎾🎾👑👑
@@kimdye4609 Djokovic won his 16 grand slam titles during the Federer and Nadal eras - in that same time Murray and Wawrinka only won 3 each. He also is 28-26 lifetime vs Nadal and 26-22 vs Federer - no one else can claim a winning record against both of them so it looks like you are WRONG
Wrong!!!
Bjorn's statement about not taking up coaching roles reveals how mentally exhausting a Physical game can be.a lot of legends have their mental burden exceptionally higher than the Physical work load because of the amount of thought process that goes into every match.if it can happen to an ice cool player like Bjorn it can happen with any one .kudos to these athletes for how they manage mental stress of such magnitude.
and now Federer is number 1 again and won his 20th GS, demigod!!!
If you check the "goat list" at tennis-strangeforest, that balances all the big tournaments, weeks at N°1, finals, semifinals and QF played, and other achievements, Roger is N°1, Nole is N°2, and Rafa is N°3. So, basically, we have the top-3 best players in the history of the sport playing one against the other. I feel really lucky to be able to witness something like this.
Did they changed order of players brotha
I think every swedish man has atleast one pair of Björn Borg underwear 😀
I think at one time most women in the world wanted to get into Bjorns underwear too lol
SWISS make The best medicine (DOPING) for one 38 years old tennist ...(hohohoho)
Haha
I don't want to say it out loud.
But let be honest a few years ago.
Monfils, Dimitrov ect. was beating Federer. If he had to play a third set, it was over. So tired was he.
And look at him yesterday, no signs of being tired. Running like a 20 year old.
I don't know what's cooking under neath.
Don't get me wrong, it's just an opinion.
I love how the comments can generate some great debates. But at the end of it all we all know the truth - it shines through very clearly: Roger Federer is the greatest of all time.
I had the pleasure of meeting him. Couldn’t be a nicer guy.
Bjorn, Novak DID win THE grand slam - a few weeks ago. Calendar or not calendar is utterly irrelevant.
Doesn't matter if he won the G.S.! Nr.1 Frderer, nr.2 Nadal. nr.3 Sampras. etc Novak . Novak is the nr 1 at this period of time but despite his efforts it is very far to has handling ability that Federer Nadal Sampras get.
Bipe Beppe
Is this dumb conclusion based on your personal bias and sexual attraction toward RF or on actual provable facts?
Ignore him he is to buthurt and cant accept a quality tennis player. For me Roger is still the GOAT but Nole has a real chance of catching him.
Bluestin100
Hey, as a kid you believed in Santa Claus, so you merely replaced him with RF. This is the day and age of freedom to choose whatever dumb religion one wants.
Joker is the most boring tennis player ever.
Agree 100% the best calm gentleman player ever, then we have Pat cash saying Federer should retire , Pat cash could only dream of ever being as good as federer
4:15
Bjorn is simply polite,as always, give RF+Co. wooden racquets + condition as in 70's and than we can talk who is the best ever...
You make a very good point...
Absolutely. I am 59 years old and have followed tennis since the late 1960's ! Bjorn was the coolest of all. A master in grass and clay - not just one, like Fed or Rafa. And mathematical models taking the quality of the competition etc into account have shown Borg to be the best in the Open era.
And in 1982 after he retired from the slams, he had a great year beating Mac and the rest of them. Something people tend to forget. There were some murky $ factors afoot in 1982.
This aged well...
Folks,the greatest ever so far is Federer if u like or not.But like Borg said Djokovic has the potential to surpass him,he didnt say Nadal he said Djokovic cause Djoko really has the potential not Nadal. When it comes to prime between Federer-Nadal-Djoko,i believe Djoko in the best in the prime(peak) cause as u know nobody is even close to him when Djoko plays his best tennis and his peak time when Nadal/Federer were still at the top of their game.When it comes to Federer,during his peak time Nadal/Djoko was not at their best,plus Federer is behind to both Nadal/Djoko in head to head matches.When it comes to Nadal peak time it was 2013,u can see by statistics even at his peak Nadal still lost to Federe/Djoko constantly that year but he won French and Us Open finals in a very competitive matches.Lets break Djokovics peak time now which was 2011and 2015 in which he had 43 and 38 (if im not mistaken) unbeaten runs and he just completely dominated Nadal/Federer !!!
Dude you need to check your 2013 Nadal stats, not even close to what you said. He was pretty much unstoppable in 2013
Pistol best ever
Borg is GOAT.
A star and a champion in every way. Borg might not have a many grand slams as Federer but, IMO he's the best player ever.
Borg did say that Federer could win another Wimbledon and he has just surpassed Sampras 7th to record a Historic 8th Title. So Who Knows ? ..... Seems Borg Knows.
Muhd Khaleef Izzaldeen Borg ain't dumb. Besides being a champion player he said he keeps up with tennis and watches the current great players play. He knows who is best.
Hard for Djokovic or Nadal to pass Federer style of play counts as well. Fed is probably the most talented bar the Championships he's won and is continuing to do at that. Thus in itself gives credence to that fact his consistency and game is probably the best of all time so far.
what a time for tennis in the 80's. Borg McEnroe,Lendl Becker and Conners
Funny that so many people rate Federer as the best player ever when Nadal holds a very strong- and positive- record against Federer despite being out of the circuit for several long spells. I would rate McEnroe as the very best, followed by Nadal and perhaps Federer third. However, we will never know what would have happened if these players had also competed against Borg, Sampras, Agassi, Lendl, Connors and the like.
5:50 still playing 5 years later
Dans 20 temps,un autre mieux entraîné,plus de titre,sera considéré comme le plus grand de la génération
Comme par le passé
Borg could have been GOAT but he burned out at 26
ed then he is not GOAT, you can say that for Monica Seles she was stopped by knife she was GOAT for both man and women side.
Yeah Federer is great, Rafa, Borg, Laver, but none can hold a candle to Joko. Djokovic at his best, 4 continuous slams, was from out of this world. His athletic ability technique and prowess were immaculate. Plus his nature, here's my number call me maybe. Puts him in a category never to be seen again!
Love ya joko, please research Yahweh!
Greatness recognises greatness.
And the biggest player is lendl who is the person who has won as much title as federer in 5 years less ...
And jimmy connors is number one for the titles. (for me best player is Edberg & Willander technic)
Michael Prevost, Lendl was my favorite, even though he never won Wimbledon, glad you mentioned him
4:16 Watch Federer’s back hand in slow motion .. see his follow through .. simply amazing
Ultimate Winner .
He said federer would retire next year (2017)
But federer actually retires this year (September-2022)
And everyone is crying...
😎in 2016 maybe his last year of tennis he said nd 2017 federer wins 1st grand slam of the year. champions have a way of making statements don't they
I don't know that Federer is the best player or not but for sure I know that he is my favourite player... the other things which I like about Federer is his resilience and ability to bounce back every time he goes down.
if he loses the point, match or a championship, he always stays calm and composed, which I think not many other tennis players have been able to do so far... Not even Nadal though he is quite a good player as well so is Djocovic...
Well, what Federer has achieved is just like what Sachin Tendulkar has in Cricket. Obviously the records are there to be broken and perhaps Federer's record will also be broken but I am sure its not happening in next ten years.....
man borg looks great!
Still remember buying the "Borg Pro" Tennis racquet when it came out.
A true icon and ambassador for Sweden
I would say chance for Federer's another grand slam are equal to Novak's 10...
For me it's between Federer and Djokovic for the GOAT title. Not sure how much Novak can still achieve. Nadal isn't even in my top 10, and that's assuming that he's clean, which I doubt he ever has been.
Greatest ever. No-one commanded our attention to the nail-biting, often long, drawn out games as he did. Only comparison in my mind is: Bobby Fisher did for chess what Bjorn did for Wimbledon and tennis. No-one returned a serve like him. He never gave up, no matter how dire the game situation was.
Phil, Phil I will try to be objective and yes Nadal who I greatly admire has a far superior record head to head. Rafa plays like an unleashed animal with great effort, grunts and sweat flying all over the place. Roger floats over the court and makes movement look easy even last year with his knee injury. If you are looking at someone who "floats" over the court and makes it look easy then Roger is numero uno. He is the GOAT!! The world would be very boring if we all agreed with each other.
I love him very much. He is one of my sport idols. He is very handsome. He looks great today!!!!!!
Borg won the French/Wimbledon double three years in succession in 78, 79 and 80. Not even Federer or Nadal have achieved that. Great player.
I think Novak is the best ever and will win Wimbledon this year and the US Open
Before we go to the pastures, I would like to see the player retire first, and then take their achievements into perspective of greatness.
I am a Rafa fan, however, Roger Federer has the body for tennis, he is a natural. And when nature makes something perfect who should doubt it?
Novak Djokovic
KH I agree Roger is a natural talent and it is remarkable how he loves the game .
can Alcaraz beats this guy's record at the age of 26?
Read somewhere that his eyesight was incredible and this, coupled with his intense concentration ability, gave him the edge
0:16 - maybe those 2 girls 'climbed aborg' if they needed to be censored. )))
must have been a great menage-a-trois .
Best looking style of all time and the forehand model of the future. Also if Borg would have met Federer with the high tech rackets of now he would have beat him I believe
Borg is absolutely Right! Federer best ever
The rivalry between Borg and McEnroe or Connors or Ivan Lendl were every bit as good if not better than the ones now
with Roger, Rafa and Novak.
It was good...Special in fact.
Not better though. Look at the number the 3 greatest today have won. Over double what McEnroe won. ....and he was special.
I have to beg to differ bjorn you were the best ever my friend you destroyed the spoilt brat Mcenroe at wimbledon your tennis was remarkable i was never in to watching tennis until one sunny day i visited my dad at his house and he was watching you play Mcenroe at wimbledon and i sat and watched you beat him i became a tennis fan from that day👍❤❤❤
No Mr Borg . YOU ARE THE BEST EVER!