Everybody forgets that Wilander won the French Open at 17, coming out of nowhere as an absolute unkown, beating top guns Gerulaitis, Lendl, Clerc and former champion & clay master Vilas in the final. A memorable achievement.
And everybody seem to forget that he didnt have a single weapon in his arsenal. I'm shocked of how weak his shots were when I look at old videos, and I was a Wilander fan growing up in Sweden. Would have won exactly 0 tournaments in todays game.
@@martinohlsson4617 you are absolutely manipulated by the "velocity" of todays game, thanks to the tecnology of the strings and raquets. Nothing else. Give current players the Rossignol F-200 Carbon of Mats and their shots would look also "weak" to you. Actually those were better players, had to put a lot more effort to produce power and spin. Wilander won 7 Grand Slams in the toughest era of tennis ever. McEnroe won after ´82 slams, Connors also, Lendl, Becker arrived, Edberg, Cash who was a nightmare for Mats, Noah who beat him in the ´83 FO final, and then seeing the arrival of Agassi and Sampras.
@@WONGLER Look at the matches. Pityful to watch. As I said, not a single weapon except boring the opponent to death. I'm ashamed of being a Wilander fan when I watch the matches again :)
@@rebecalinares5393 Well that's not true. Becker played in the same era and was powerful of both wings and had a super powerful serve. And loads of bad players today have weak shots. Just like Wilander. But in todays game you can't bore your opponent to death with balloon shot after baloon shot. And no, they were not better players. Ffs. Not even close. They smoked, took cocaine, drank alcohol like crazy etc etc. Because back then you could win anyways. Stop being nostalgic. All sports evolve. It's like saying that George Best was better than Ronaldo/Messi.
Strange to think that Mats Wilander was only just 24 here, he already had 7 grand slams under his belt, but this was pretty much his topflight career over with. Stefan Edberg also won his last grand slam at just 26. Players had much shorter shelf lives then!
True. That a player could win at age 30 or older was strange. When Andrés Gómez won at Roland Garros at the age of 30, it was a surprise that he could do it at that age. I suppose that nowadays physical preparation has extended the life of athletes. Also food, psychology, etc ... Tnanks for your comment
@@BogdanNeymetiI suspect it was about in the game back then too. I remember in the early 90s, Steffi Graf staying in Tennis magazine that there was at least one occasion where she strongly believed one of her opponents had been using banned substances because she could "see it in her eyes". Often wondered who Steffi was talking about.
fun fact: there’s only two years in the Open Era where the winner of every men’s singles grand slam title was from the same country…1988 was one of those two years (Edberg won Wimbledon, Wilander won the rest). The only other year was whatever the first Open year was (‘68 or ‘69) because Laver won them all.
Man, these two players were evenly matched. It's still hard looking back now to say who was the greater player in the scheme and history of the game. Even their tournament wins, majors, and accomplishments are very close and similar in numbers. I personally would have to give a close nod and preference to Edberg because of his bigger serve and volley game, overall aggressiveness, and mostly for his Wimbledon championships. Cool post.
Hi, Very good your reflection. They were two different styles of play although both effective. Wilander, could be noted that he won on all three Grand Slam surfaces. Grass, clay and hard. From Edberg his victories at Wimbledon and his elegance in the game. For me the best volley serve ever. Best regards
@@Retsler54 Yeah, Wilander in his prime in the 1980s was a tough out and tough to beat (especially at The French Open on clay). But he could and did win (majors) on all surfaces----clay, hard, and grass----which alone makes him one of the all-time greats. And he achieved that rare and coveted accomplishment all tennis players wish to attain, number one ranking in the world. Fascinating also to see two number one players in the world with completely different looks and styles of game, yet both from Sweden.
Lovely channel, just subscribed. Thank you for sharing. All court tennis is my favourite. And when you add the different surfaces, different types of players and natural gut strings, it does not get better than this!
I remember how Wilander almost won everything that year, he was only defeated in quarters or semis in Wimbledon, i think. But he won the other three majors, something that very few playera have been able to do in the same year. And then....nothing, he entered a bad streak and that was it, never recovered. One of the most curious cases in this sport
True. He was beaten in the quarters of Wimbledon by Mecir and won the other three Grand Slams. It was emptied in such a way that one more was the same. He finished the year with a bad result in the masters and in the final of the Davis Cup. A pity.
Both were my absolute favourite players , the death of Mats's father hit him hard , also the development of tennis improved from 1990/91 which was poison for Mats's game , anyway, he won everything, also Wimbledon in doubles 86
Raquet and string technology advances in the later half of Wilander's career just made it harder and harder for him to win matches, and would had been mentally exhausting for him as he was forced to rely on guile to win every match. Add powerful, over 6 footers, coming into the game, and then a personal tragedy or two, and he was like "I can't be bothered with this sh#t anymore". BUT he was a very skillful player, had all the shots except the big knockout blow, and was an incredibly intelligent tactician and so so mentally tough.
Mentally he was very hard but we must admit that he was not the one who had a more decisive game. However, he did not have any outstanding shots but all at a great level and he knew how to get the most out of his game.
@javiermolacobos he was called a counterpunching baseliner in the 80's but by today's standard ge would be considered an all-rounder. However we don't see this type of player because, as I said, the evolution of raquet and string technology has evolved to push them out the market, in the same way Ken Rosewall was. I am not sure what you mean 'decisive', as he won 7 or 8 grand slams, I think you may be referring to power. Power in this era did not equate to 'decisive'.
I did not like what happened to tennis. Watching it in the 90s was still ok though, especially the early 90s up to the mid 90s. My favourite in the 90s was Jim Courier.
@@javiermolacobos Muchas gracias Javier ! Could you possibly upload the matches of Edberg vs Cash , Wilander vs Cash and Edberg vs Becker from that 1988 Masters tournament ? Also Edberg vs Leconte which Leconte won as to my surprise , never seen anywhere
@@WONGLER Hi, Edberg vs cahs and Wilander vs cash, perhaps later. I still have them in vhs. Unfortunately Edeberg vs Leconte I don't have it. The next video I think will be to your liking.
What an anomaly Edberg appeared among the Swedes of that generation, playing serve n volley and with a single handed backhand and a continental grip forehand.
The declined disinterest had already started by now. Sad to see mats so disconnected so fast. Weird to see him in his 1988 outfits and playing so chaotically.
@@javiermolacobos I remember receiving my first subscription to Tennis magazine with Wilander reaching #1 and struggling to find motivation to continue on. The GOATs today just had more drive surpassing even Sampras’s achievements. Amazing, and it will be interesting to see if the next generation can top that.
@@MervManalo Hi!! It is difficult to see a rivalry as strong as the one that has been in recent years by the three greatest in history: Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Thanks to their talent and their confrontations they have achieved almost unattainable milestones.
@@javiermolacobos .Federer, Djokovic and Nadal are ONLY the 3 greatest male tennis players of THEIR generation! I have examined in great detail in other posted comments on other tennis videos on TH-cam the exact underlying factors/reasons why their accomplishments are so grossly disproportionate/inflated compared to those of their counterparts from the previous and earlier eras in tennis history. As the late, great tennis broadcaster, writer and historian Bud Collins accurately and very astutely pointed out on numerous occasions, you can only say with certainty which players are the greatest of their eras, but it can never be definitively determined which male and female tennis players are the GOAT because you cannot bring together into the modern era all of the greatest male and female players in history all at the very peak of their respective primes and give them all the opportunity to take advantage of changes/advances in equipment and advances in the knowledge of fitness training, weight training, food and nutrition and vitamin supplementation!
@@michaelbarlow6610 Very true everything you expose, but if we stick to titles there is no doubt that these three players have achieved an excellence that in other times, for different reasons, had not been achieved. There was always a mentally and physically advantaged tennis player as Borg and later Sampras could be in his day, but these three have reached limits difficult to reach for later generations.
Probably. In any case, the surface has always been the same and was not the most suitable for his athletic and stylish game. Players with more power when hitting the ball benefited from the surface.
@@javiermolacobos you are so wrong. edberg did well there because of the surface. he won and dominated all players there in 89,. and he even beat the eventual champion becker there in round robin in 88, and should have beaten lendl in the semifinals.the surface was very suitable for edbergs game, also the court at madison square garden was a faster carpet court than the one in germany where they moved the masters to in 1990. so thats another reason why edberg did better here at madison square garden than he did in germany
There is no doubt that the surfaces of MSG and Germany were not 100% the same, but they were very similar. In addition, Edberg reached the final in Frankfurt in 1990. I think that the tournament was simply not his favorite either because he did not arrive at the best moment of the season or because his motivation was waning. Still, he managed to win it once and make one more final, all at the zenith of his career. But before 1989 he played a few semi-finals and always found someone in better form@@archangelmusic13
Mats was really good.....Added much variety to his game as he aged...I do think he chipped BH too much latter stages of his career.....He def burned out too
According to what you say, but of all the stars of the 80s, Wilander was the one who had the most boring game although it was effective. The results justify it.
@@javiermolacobos Not sure I'd agree with 'boring"....Especially later in his career he came to net...but as a young player he basically kept ball in play
@@peachman5698 Maybe boring is too much. All my respect to Wilander, one of the greats in history. He was not one of my favorites among the players of that time. Neither was Lendl. I identified more with McEnroe, Noah, Edberg, Becker or Cash, with a more aggressive and spectacular play.
Après avoir remporté trois tournois du Grand Chelem en 1988, la pression de continuer à ce niveau a dû être trop forte. En tout cas, il a accompli quelque chose que peu ont accompli.
It is really a joy to watch these old matches, thanks for this!
The pleasure I feel I wanted to share and that's why the channel
Everybody forgets that Wilander won the French Open at 17, coming out of nowhere as an absolute unkown, beating top guns Gerulaitis, Lendl, Clerc and former champion & clay master Vilas in the final. A memorable achievement.
And everybody seem to forget that he didnt have a single weapon in his arsenal. I'm shocked of how weak his shots were when I look at old videos, and I was a Wilander fan growing up in Sweden. Would have won exactly 0 tournaments in todays game.
@@martinohlsson4617 What are you talking, Mats was a genius, mental very strong, especially in 1988
@@martinohlsson4617 you are absolutely manipulated by the "velocity" of todays game, thanks to the tecnology of the strings and raquets. Nothing else. Give current players the Rossignol F-200 Carbon of Mats and their shots would look also "weak" to you.
Actually those were better players, had to put a lot more effort to produce power and spin.
Wilander won 7 Grand Slams in the toughest era of tennis ever. McEnroe won after ´82 slams, Connors also, Lendl, Becker arrived, Edberg, Cash who was a nightmare for Mats, Noah who beat him in the ´83 FO final, and then seeing the arrival of Agassi and Sampras.
@@WONGLER Look at the matches. Pityful to watch. As I said, not a single weapon except boring the opponent to death. I'm ashamed of being a Wilander fan when I watch the matches again :)
@@rebecalinares5393 Well that's not true. Becker played in the same era and was powerful of both wings and had a super powerful serve. And loads of bad players today have weak shots. Just like Wilander. But in todays game you can't bore your opponent to death with balloon shot after baloon shot. And no, they were not better players. Ffs. Not even close. They smoked, took cocaine, drank alcohol like crazy etc etc. Because back then you could win anyways. Stop being nostalgic. All sports evolve. It's like saying that George Best was better than Ronaldo/Messi.
Those single lined courts was sooo cool
They would mess me up so bad. I would not be able to get used to them I think, hahaha
Strange to think that Mats Wilander was only just 24 here, he already had 7 grand slams under his belt, but this was pretty much his topflight career over with. Stefan Edberg also won his last grand slam at just 26. Players had much shorter shelf lives then!
True. That a player could win at age 30 or older was strange. When Andrés Gómez won at Roland Garros at the age of 30, it was a surprise that he could do it at that age. I suppose that nowadays physical preparation has extended the life of athletes. Also food, psychology, etc ...
Tnanks for your comment
@@javiermolacobos
….and dope
@@BogdanNeymeti It is possible that there are substances of dubious legality that help performance. There's a lot of money at stake....
@@BogdanNeymetiI suspect it was about in the game back then too. I remember in the early 90s, Steffi Graf staying in Tennis magazine that there was at least one occasion where she strongly believed one of her opponents had been using banned substances because she could "see it in her eyes". Often wondered who Steffi was talking about.
fun fact: there’s only two years in the Open Era where the winner of every men’s singles grand slam title was from the same country…1988 was one of those two years (Edberg won Wimbledon, Wilander won the rest). The only other year was whatever the first Open year was (‘68 or ‘69) because Laver won them all.
Man, these two players were evenly matched. It's still hard looking back now to say who was the greater player in the scheme and history of the game. Even their tournament wins, majors, and accomplishments are very close and similar in numbers. I personally would have to give a close nod and preference to Edberg because of his bigger serve and volley game, overall aggressiveness, and mostly for his Wimbledon championships. Cool post.
Hi, Very good your reflection. They were two different styles of play although both effective. Wilander, could be noted that he won on all three Grand Slam surfaces. Grass, clay and hard. From Edberg his victories at Wimbledon and his elegance in the game. For me the best volley serve ever. Best regards
Wilander on the other hand had his incredible 1988 where he won at Key Biscane ALSO.
@@Retsler54 Yeah, Wilander in his prime in the 1980s was a tough out and tough to beat (especially at The French Open on clay). But he could and did win (majors) on all surfaces----clay, hard, and grass----which alone makes him one of the all-time greats. And he achieved that rare and coveted accomplishment all tennis players wish to attain, number one ranking in the world. Fascinating also to see two number one players in the world with completely different looks and styles of game, yet both from Sweden.
Lovely channel, just subscribed. Thank you for sharing. All court tennis is my favourite. And when you add the different surfaces, different types of players and natural gut strings, it does not get better than this!
Thank you for your comment. This era of tennis has something special
My pleasure. It indeed it has. Looking forward to watching more of the videos you share. :)
As soon as I can, I will share new videos.
This is one excellent tennis channel! Congratulations and thank you for doing this.
Thanks !!!
I remember how Wilander almost won everything that year, he was only defeated in quarters or semis in Wimbledon, i think. But he won the other three majors, something that very few playera have been able to do in the same year. And then....nothing, he entered a bad streak and that was it, never recovered. One of the most curious cases in this sport
True. He was beaten in the quarters of Wimbledon by Mecir and won the other three Grand Slams. It was emptied in such a way that one more was the same. He finished the year with a bad result in the masters and in the final of the Davis Cup. A pity.
He won Key Biscayne as well.
Both were my absolute favourite players , the death of Mats's father hit him hard , also the development of tennis improved from 1990/91 which was poison for Mats's game , anyway, he won everything, also Wimbledon in doubles 86
@@johanf9279 Also Cincinnati and Palermo
@@WONGLER Yes. I just mentioned Biscayne because it is the only tournt outside GS that is a two week tourny. Mats won 4 of 5 big tournies.
Raquet and string technology advances in the later half of Wilander's career just made it harder and harder for him to win matches, and would had been mentally exhausting for him as he was forced to rely on guile to win every match. Add powerful, over 6 footers, coming into the game, and then a personal tragedy or two, and he was like "I can't be bothered with this sh#t anymore". BUT he was a very skillful player, had all the shots except the big knockout blow, and was an incredibly intelligent tactician and so so mentally tough.
Mentally he was very hard but we must admit that he was not the one who had a more decisive game. However, he did not have any outstanding shots but all at a great level and he knew how to get the most out of his game.
@javiermolacobos he was called a counterpunching baseliner in the 80's but by today's standard ge would be considered an all-rounder. However we don't see this type of player because, as I said, the evolution of raquet and string technology has evolved to push them out the market, in the same way Ken Rosewall was. I am not sure what you mean 'decisive', as he won 7 or 8 grand slams, I think you may be referring to power. Power in this era did not equate to 'decisive'.
I did not like what happened to tennis. Watching it in the 90s was still ok though, especially the early 90s up to the mid 90s. My favourite in the 90s was Jim Courier.
In my opinion, Courier was already an example of how power and physique were imposed on talent and intuition
4:43 I think it's the first time I've seen Wilander execute a winning forehand that isn't a passing shot with the opponent at the net
True, fair observation, I have seen many wilander matches ,then and lately on TH-cam,It's a rare shot.
@@albertostanghellini8684just like I've never seen him do any drop shots
Obviously, we can see Mats' lack of motivation.
The begining of his decline, it was very sad.
Very great job man 😎😉👍
He won 3 Grand Slams that year. '89 was when it started to go downhill.
@@MarcoSpeaksNadsat + Lipton Key Biscane. This year Mats won 3/4 grand slams AND Lipton which was of the same size. Incredible it was.
Excellent job 👏 👍
Thanks!!
WOW! Thank you sooo much. I've never seen anything of this match. Is there a chance of a complete version or was this all they showed?
This was all
@@javiermolacobos Muchas gracias Javier ! Could you possibly upload the matches of Edberg vs Cash , Wilander vs Cash and Edberg vs Becker from that 1988 Masters tournament ? Also Edberg vs Leconte which Leconte won as to my surprise , never seen anywhere
@@WONGLER Hi, Edberg vs cahs and Wilander vs cash, perhaps later. I still have them in vhs. Unfortunately Edeberg vs Leconte I don't have it. The next video I think will be to your liking.
@@javiermolacobos Muchas gracias ! It is not urgent so take your time and Have a nice happy New Year 👍🥳
L'époque du vrai Masters au Madison Square Garden.
Ça change de Turin!
15:08 might be the best serve I've seen.
Does anybody out there in this world have the 1988 Cincinnati final of Mats vs Edberg on DVD or VHS ? Never seen anywhere not even parts of it
Edberg c'était l'élégance à l 'attaque........
Continental forehand grip players reached world number 1 beside Johnny Mac.
Tanks ! Have you the match RR between Lendl and Hlasek, please ?
Unfortunately not.
La época mágica del tenis sueco ❤
What an anomaly Edberg appeared among the Swedes of that generation, playing serve n volley and with a single handed backhand and a continental grip forehand.
Indeed, a unique tennis player appeared with his own and different style that offered great moments in the history of tennis.
The declined disinterest had already started by now. Sad to see mats so disconnected so fast. Weird to see him in his 1988 outfits and playing so chaotically.
Hi!! It was NOT a big tournament for him this Master but he was number 1 at the time.
@@javiermolacobos I remember receiving my first subscription to Tennis magazine with Wilander reaching #1 and struggling to find motivation to continue on. The GOATs today just had more drive surpassing even Sampras’s achievements. Amazing, and it will be interesting to see if the next generation can top that.
@@MervManalo Hi!! It is difficult to see a rivalry as strong as the one that has been in recent years by the three greatest in history: Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Thanks to their talent and their confrontations they have achieved almost unattainable milestones.
@@javiermolacobos .Federer, Djokovic and Nadal are ONLY the 3 greatest male tennis players of THEIR generation! I have examined in great detail in other posted comments on other tennis videos on TH-cam the exact underlying factors/reasons why their accomplishments are so grossly disproportionate/inflated compared to those of their counterparts from the previous and earlier eras in tennis history. As the late, great tennis broadcaster, writer and historian Bud Collins accurately and very astutely pointed out on numerous occasions, you can only say with certainty which players are the greatest of their eras, but it can never be definitively determined which male and female tennis players are the GOAT because you cannot bring together into the modern era all of the greatest male and female players in history all at the very peak of their respective primes and give them all the opportunity to take advantage of changes/advances in equipment and advances in the knowledge of fitness training, weight training, food and nutrition and vitamin supplementation!
@@michaelbarlow6610 Very true everything you expose, but if we stick to titles there is no doubt that these three players have achieved an excellence that in other times, for different reasons, had not been achieved. There was always a mentally and physically advantaged tennis player as Borg and later Sampras could be in his day, but these three have reached limits difficult to reach for later generations.
it's a real shame the masters left madison square garden.i think edberg played well there and would have won more masters if it had stayed in msg
Probably. In any case, the surface has always been the same and was not the most suitable for his athletic and stylish game. Players with more power when hitting the ball benefited from the surface.
@@javiermolacobos you are so wrong. edberg did well there because of the surface. he won and dominated all players there in 89,. and he even beat the eventual champion becker there in round robin in 88, and should have beaten lendl in the semifinals.the surface was very suitable for edbergs game, also the court at madison square garden was a faster carpet court than the one in germany where they moved the masters to in 1990. so thats another reason why edberg did better here at madison square garden than he did in germany
There is no doubt that the surfaces of MSG and Germany were not 100% the same, but they were very similar. In addition, Edberg reached the final in Frankfurt in 1990. I think that the tournament was simply not his favorite either because he did not arrive at the best moment of the season or because his motivation was waning. Still, he managed to win it once and make one more final, all at the zenith of his career. But before 1989 he played a few semi-finals and always found someone in better form@@archangelmusic13
What language is the comments?
It's Catalan
1989 et la fin d'une certaine époque suédoise.
Sundström,Nyström et Kent Carlsson à la retraite pour blessures.
Català?
Mats was really good.....Added much variety to his game as he aged...I do think he chipped BH too much latter stages of his career.....He def burned out too
According to what you say, but of all the stars of the 80s, Wilander was the one who had the most boring game although it was effective. The results justify it.
@@javiermolacobos Not sure I'd agree with 'boring"....Especially later in his career he came to net...but as a young player he basically kept ball in play
@@peachman5698 Maybe boring is too much. All my respect to Wilander, one of the greats in history. He was not one of my favorites among the players of that time. Neither was Lendl. I identified more with McEnroe, Noah, Edberg, Becker or Cash, with a more aggressive and spectacular play.
Apogée et déclin de Mats Wilander.
Après avoir remporté trois tournois du Grand Chelem en 1988, la pression de continuer à ce niveau a dû être trop forte. En tout cas, il a accompli quelque chose que peu ont accompli.
ビランデルはセンス無い。
それは彼の今年の最高のゲームではありませんでした。
Incorrect
Very boring.
Obviously you don’t appreciate good tactical tennis