FULL VERSION 1981 - Borg vs Lendl - French Open Roland Garros
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2018
- *****************************************************
Copyrights - INA - Institut National de l'Audiovisuel
*****************************************************
Thank you for your gracious use of this classic match!
-------------------------------------------
PertSnergleman's Review:
-------------------------------------------
The 1981 edition of Roland Garros produced nothing new in terms of the last man standing, with Bjorn Borg winning his record-breaking sixth crown in Paris to become the most successful player in the history of this Major.
The great Swede had overcome the challenge from a young Ivan Lendl, junior champion here a few years ago, and he needed three hours and 13 minutes to score a 6-1 4-6 6-2 3-6 6-1 victory in what turned out to be his last match in Paris, never returning to play the French Open despite the fact he just turned 25.
Lendl made his professional debut at this event three years earlier and he was already one of the finest clay courters in the world, scoring two wins in six previous matches against Bjorn and hoping to win his first Grand Slam crown.
He failed to emerge as a winner in this one, though, unable to follow Bjorn's pace in the deciding set, and he would have to wait for another three years before he finally broke the spell and became a Grand Slam champion here in 1984.
It was a gruelling baseline battle but Borg found the way to impose his shots in a more efficient way, preserving more energy for a decider and proving his spirit of a champion for the one last time, as he never won another Major title again, losing in the final to John McEnroe at Wimbledon and the US Open.
It was a great battle right from the start, but it was Bjorn who drew first blood with a forehand down the line winner two games later, opening a 3-1 advantage and gaining the momentum in set one.
The Czech needed a much better start in set number two and he broke Bjorn for the first time in game two to forge a lead, making another quick hold in game three with a service winner for a solid 3-0 advantage.
Nonetheless, Borg bounced back and he erased the deficit when Ivan double faulted in the fifth game and the result was levelled at 3-3 after a forehand error from the Czech in game six. A smash winner ended Lendl's poor run to move him 4-3 ahead and he earned a break in a marathon game 10 when Borg's volley found the net to grab the set 6-4 and level the overall score to one set apiece.
After four good holds, the Swede was the dominant figure on court wrapping up the third.
Ivan had to raise his level and he did that in set number four, jumping into a 3-1 lead when Borg double faulted in game four and they were off towards the deciding set, the first in Roland Garros final since 1974 when Bjorn lifted his first trophy in Paris
Lendl managed to pull one break back in game five after an unforced error from Borg but the mountain he had to climb in order to get back on the positive side of the scoreboard was just too big for him at that moment. He sprayed a forehand long in game six to suffer another break and Bjorn held in game seven following another error from his opponent to cross the finish line and lift what turned out to be his 11th and last Major title. - กีฬา
To any young tennis players in the comments section who are complaining about the pace of the game, the lack of athletic talent, the lack of power; you’ve never hit with an old racket. You could swing as hard as possible and the ball went no where. The best play was to play for accuracy and placement or else you had zero control over the ball. If you didn’t hit the sweet spot, which was about the size of the tennis ball itself, the racket would twist in your hand and the ball went out. And playing the ball on the rise wasn’t even a thing until racket technology improved. So just understand what you’re watching, 2 of the greatest ever.
Great comment.
Dude, don't go from video to video posting same stuff.
@@hardcoreplayafromthehimala4888 lol. he posting the truth not lies so he can do that
@@ahnguyen1 These kids don't understand how much harder the game was back then. Lendl and Borg are playing with 2 lb racquets while moving on flat canvas type shoes. Nadal had it easy playing in an era with equipment that automatically do half the work. The babalot rpm silicone-coated poly string on Nadal's racquet was designed to generate topspin automatically. Nadal's babalot racquet is much lighter and shaped aerodynamically to effortlessly swing upward. Legends like Borg and Lendl had to generate their own topspin with racquets that were literally logs.
Exactly!
It's so amazing to be able to see these players back in their heyday.
The sound of Borg's racquet gives an indication of how tight his strings were!
the specs for his raquet (commercially) was in the range of 55 to 60 lbs. He had his strung either side of 80. Occasionally one would literally cave in while just sitting in his bag.
Playing Borg on a slow clay court in the summertime must have been fucking exhausting. More mentally exhausting than physically. Only an idiot would say these guys couldn’t compete in today’s game.
Yep. I think it was Becker in his prime who got to play an off-record training match against Borg (who had retired but still kept in shape) and he admitted he was astonished by Borg's speed and ability to keep getting the ball back. The result was one set all - Becker had not booked enough time for them to finish as he (a little understandably) thought he'd wrap up two sets in less than an hour.
@@eddieingalls534 the training with/against Becker was some days before Borgs comeback 1991.
@@CarmoniusFinsnickeri Ah ok, thanks.
Two of the greatest backhands ever seen in tennis! Borg's beautiful two-hander and Lendl's beautiful one-hander!
Bjorn Borg, an incredible athlete.
Borg was a machine. Even Lendl gave up in that third set. Borg just never missed.
this was by far Borg's toughest French final and probably his most satisfying victory.
It is amazing to see how good these guys and their techniques were with the heavy (13+ ounce) tiny, thin, and unstable 65-70 square inch standard wooden (and early composite) tennis rackets strung at 60-80 lbs (Borg strung at 80+ lbs, Lendl reputedly at 72.5 lbs). Modern players do not appreciate how much more difficult it was to play back then. It required incredible timing, stability, and power to thrust that ball deep into the court. You were unable to simply stick your racket out if out of position. If you were out of position or miss hit you were left with a short ball that was attacked. The best players with few exception were incredibly fit and consistent like these two masters who arguably had the best groundstrokes of the era. You had to have the mass of your body behind it which is why the players also bend down in perfect form to transfer power. Modern players use open stance (or any footwork) and simply block the ball in order to get the ball back deep and with authority. Volleying or hitting overheads with a standard wood strung at 60 lbs was also a challenging blister-inducing experience. Today's players (and even seniors) simply block the ball back for a crisp volley. Watching juniors (and women) today crack the ball effortlessly is the wonder of modern technology. The rackets are now 100 square inches typically, wide bodied, strung with poly, and strung loose for even more sweet spot, power, and stability. You were unable to really string loose in the past because there was no such thing as resilient poly to bounce back in shape. The strings would simply move around too much to control the ball (think how hard it is to control a tennis ball after your string breaks). As an aside I think few of the top players today would have been great players in the wood era with some exceptions including Sampras and Federer who both had traditional strokes and both used somewhat smaller (85-90 sq inch) rackets in their heydays (but 85-90 is a lot easier to play with than 65-70 sq inch). Federer's game would have been impacted. He would not have been able to make the magical touch flicks and hit forehand winners when out of position (something I noticed he couldn't do early in his career when he strung tight and used the 85 sq inch). Nadal's game would have been different. He would not have been able to generate super spin and stability using a 4-1/8 racket grip (he also would have miss hit a lot!). Nadal would have been a contender as was Vilas but would have been a very different approach. You could not overpower people so you had to think strategically strokes in advance how to wrong foot or generate error. Attacking the net came more in to vogue in the final years of the woods thanks to McEnroe and Laver. Today's players however have to be very quick, fit, and athletic as the ball travels so much faster.
Thanks ClearMindedOne for your ultra insightful comment! It's so true all you see with regards to the "old skool" players like Borg and Lendl... even more so when you see them try and move into the "next generation" as Lendl had trouble with his small head, heavy racquet against the likes of Cash, Wilander, Edberg etc... Thanks for your input, much appreciated!! :)
Tremendous analysis. Bud Collins smiles down from Centre Court heaven appreciatively.
@@indanekwaffles7074 Great comment.
ClearMindedOne One of the best tennis posts I've ever read.
You do not chat a lot.
No towel between every single point, no grunting, no hawkeye. Just grinding. Quite lovely to watch actually
always reminded me of boxing. baseliners slugging it out. Especially Lendl and Borg - machine men.
Takes some energy just to get the ball over net with a wooden racket
In the comments, people keep referring to Lendl’s racquet as aluminum. It’s not. It’s graphite. The paint on the frame makes it look metallic, but the material is graphite.
graphite fiberglass from Kneissl
I tip my hat for you mr borg the real King off tennis
It's useless to compare different generations.There is one king so far on Clay-he is only Rafa.No player perhaps can come close to what he has done at RG- let alone repeating /breaking it.It is an acknowledged fact said by all expperts/players of today and yesteryears.
@@jioalternatephone3247 No competition.
I wish they would have never gone away from wood. Once they did it became impossible to compare tennis eras. I loved the variety of tennis that wood rackets allowed to be played. It has been nothing but the same old robotic baseline play for the past 20 years. I'd give anything to see some serve and volley grand slam champion of the modern era. I believe Sampras was the last serve volley player to win a slam.
It is very dangerous to play for children with such heavy rackets.
some players have the same opinion
IMO Borg invented the modern game. He is still my favorite player of all time, although Nadal and Federer aren't far behind.
Borg was the first step in the modern game by making his main shots topspin . Second one came with Lendl's power game (which required heavy reliance on topspins with more powerful racquets and by absence of polyester strings). Third and final step with the modern game was Agassi, who can attack from both wings (Although I like Lendl's backhand more than Federer's, being 1HBHer myself, Lendl's one was not an attacking weapon)
Fabulous nostalgia for two awesome players, legends of tennis !
Wooden racquet vs aluminium racquet, Borg was not human
Borg had extreme patience. He could easily be in a 70 hit rally and not think twice. He would grind down his opponents until they capitulated. Tennis is not all about how many mph you hit your serve. Borg would win by outlasting his opponents. He was in extreme shape and never tired.
Someone mentioned how quiet both players were during rallies. Also notice they don't look at the friends box after every point. And no demand for towels after every point and less choosiness for the perfect ball from available balls.
It is possible, it is possible. Everybody should know it.
that was back in the day before it became entertainment. a few players grunted , not many. i found out if i grunt i get more of a surge of adrenaline when i am lifting something heavy. for some reason it helps.
You can't compare the intensity in the 80s to the one today. Of course there's more grunting and sweat too.
thank you so much for this video...Borg , will forever be my ultimate idol
Avec ce commentaire de ce journaliste sportif célèbre,pertinent et plein de vie ,un très agréable match ...à montrer dans les écoles de tennis
Suuur...
Thanks for uploading these old matches. A loved tennis back then.
Sadly today it is only about speed, especialy in men tennis. And the beauty of the game is gone :(.
True. Tennis is kind of a peculiar case as a spectator sport. When it´s played with variety and imagination, it´s definitely one of the most spectacular and exciting sports to watch. But when it´s just about bashing the ball as hard as possible from the baseline, and wearing the opponent down, I couldn´t think of a more boring viewing experience.
Incredible that the 1981 French Open was Borg's last major singles title win! He should have won the 1981 Wimbledon title because he had no less than 4 set points in the 3rd set (including a double set point) against McEnroe in the finals!
@andreasmissiroli . No one is disputing that McEnroe was a better grass court player than Borg and that Lendl was a better clay court player than McEnroe. However, there is also no disputing that McEnroe botched the 1984 French Open final against Lendl. He irrefutably let Lendl "off the hook" in that match! And had Borg possessed a great topspin lob (especially on the two-handed backhand side) instead of the crummy topspin lob that he possessed, the 1981 Wimbledon men's singles final may very well have turned out differently!
@andreasmissiroli . The fact remains that McEnroe lost to Lendl in the 1984 French Open final NOT because Lendl was a better clay court player than McEnroe (which he obviously was) but because (1) McEnroe failed to "tend to business" as the old expression goes and foolishly let Lendl back into the match, and (2) his lack of off-court fitness training cost him that match as well as other matches (e.g., the 1987 Davis Cup match versus Becker in Hartford, Connecticut). Second, Borg's lack of a great topspin lob cost him the 1981 Wimbledon and 1980 and 1981 U.S. Open finals! Fact: Nadal only has two Wimbledon singles titles because the AELT&CC foolishly changed the composition of the grass courts at Wimbledon in 2001 from the faster, skidding, low-rebounding traditional composition courts of 70% rye grass and 30% Red Creeping Fescue to the slower, higher-rebounding, more impact-resistant and more durable 100% rye grass courts! If the Center Court grass surface had remained unaltered, then Federer would have defeated Nadal in the 2008 Wimbledon final and Nadal to this day would have 0 Wimbledon singles titles!
@andreasmissiroli . Fact: When a commenter on TH-cam constantly uses large-case lettering of words he knows he is losing a debate and his puerile frustration at losing a debate becomes readily apparent by his resorting to large case lettering of entire words in posted comments, which despite his erroneous belief to the contrary notwithstanding, does not legitimize or validate in any way, shape or form his argument! You fail to even recognize the blatant contradiction in your previous comment when you foolishly brought up the defeat of Wilander to a serve-and-volley player Yannick Noah in the 1983 French Open final! Wilander was obviously a much better clay court player than Noah and yet Noah defeated Wilander by staying focused, keeping the pressure on Wilander throughout that match and "tending to business'' which McEnroe failed to do in the 1984 French Open final against Lendl! You contradicted yourself and failed to recognize that fact! You don't even recognize the difference between fact and opinion! Face reality-- you lost this debate! So go weep in your soup! And contrary to your erroneous belief, Djokovic is not mentally tougher than Federer! Both of those players have lost matches in the 4 major tournaments to players that they had no business losing to! I could cite numerous examples of that, but why waste my time arguing with someone as obviously lacking in tennis knowledge as you?!
@andreasmissiroli . McEnroe was a better player than Borg yes, however, the reality is that McEnroe botched that 1984 French Open final against Lendl when he was up two sets-to-love and let Lendl "off the hook" in that match! McEnroe has admitted that he flat-out choked in that match! And the reality is that Borg, and Borg has admitted this, should have won that 1981 Wimbledon final against McEnroe when he had no less than 4 break/set points late in the third set against McEnroe's serve , including a double set point, and failed to convert any of those four break/set points!
@andreasmissiroli . McEnroe did not verbally spar with a journalist during the 1984 French Open Men's final. He picked up the headset of a TV cameraman , yelled into it, and then threw it down! I have repeatedly stated that McEnroe's outburst which occurred in the third set of that match, had absolutely no impact on the outcome of that match! The reality is that McEnroe flat-out choked that 1984 final away against Lendl!
Borgs utilization of topspin was so advanced! It is perhaps the greatest tragedy in tennis that he stopped playing in his mid 20s😲
Look at Kent Carlsson ex No 6 ATP. The role model for real heavy toppspinn. Borg was not even close to that toppspinn Carlsson had. Yes, Borg retired at 25. He should have won around 20-23 Slams.
@@kentornholm8558
Borg is the GOAT.
he walked away in his prime.
Today's players wouldn't stand a chance against Borg if they had to use the same heavy tiny head racquets used back then.
Same thing with steffi graf. Serena wouldn't stand a chance against steffi if she had to use the old racquet technology.
I've studied this subject longer than you've been alive.
This is an incredible match with two of the best standard sized racket players ever to play. Some have posited that current players such as Nadal would demolish these players. That would be correct that if Borg was playing with 1970's wooden racket technology (65 square inches, flexible, thin, unstable, quarter size sweet spot, leather grip, 80 lbs string tension!, and 14 ounces!!) against the modern Nadal with 2020 racket technology (100 square inch, stiff, wide body, synthetic soft grip, huge sweetspot, low tension polyester strings, and 11 ounces of weight). Nadal's game would NOT have been possible with a wood racket. His strokes would have mishit a lot and he would not have been able to crack a ball with such heavy topspin or direct big winners from far back in the court (I would even argue that Djokovic could not have played his game either in that era). You could not effectively string loose in those days as the strings would slide immediately on impact (I was there and played nationally). This is why most rackets were strung around 60 lbs which gave them the needed stability and control to grab the ball. Borg was along with Rod Laver arguably the best wood racket players (though there are other contenders). Nadal would have played similar to Borg if he had been in the wood racket era with longer loopier strokes that propelled the ball far above the net. A good example is Guillermo Vilas who was arguably the Nadal of the 1970's and 1980's. Heavy topspin, muscular body, great on clay. I saw him play up closely in the day and he hit an incredibly heavy ball at high looping angles. Borg beat him consistently. Many might not realize just how difficult it was to strike a ball with that old technology and to play that consistently with incredible control for 5 sets. The rallies as you can see were much longer than today. You could NOT just crack a winner, though Lendl was the player to start doing that with his incredible forehand (BTW: Lendl was the last great tennis player of the original standard size tennis racket era, winning with a 70 sq inch racket: US open in 85, 86, 87; French open 84, 86, 87; Australian open 89, 90; Wimbledon finalist 86, 87 on fast grass against players using 95+ square inch rackets). There were serve and volleyers in those days (e.g. McEnroe) and persons with huge serves (e.g. Roscoe Tanner). Borg handled them even on the super fast grass of that era! So no way you could say that Borg, arguably the best wood racket player in the world who dominated tennis in the 70's and 80's, would have been demolished by Nadal or any other modern player if they were all playing with the old technology. Any other conclusion would be non sequitur. The more modern players who would have been great in the wood racket era in my opinion would have been Sampras and Federer as they use traditional tennis strokes (Sampras because he grew up using the small rackets, i.e. the 70 sq inch Kneissl White Star Pro---yes he was using that--and later the heavy lead juiced 85 square inch Wilson Pro Staff; Federer because he modeled his strokes after Sampras and used the same 85 square inch Wilson Pro Staff). What other players today might have been tops in the wood racket era?
You can't possibly compare the two. The differences in equipment are too great to make the comparison. But if you put either Borg or Nadal in their prime, in either era, it would have been fun to watch. On clay there has never been anyone the equal of Borg. He would have more than held his own against Nadal. I really have a problem when people diminish players of 40 years ago, simply because their games look different because of equipment differences. They played the top players in their era with what was available.
@Kent Eriksson a realization - watching McEnroe playing a 1980's match and having a wooden racket where the sweet spot is much smaller. McEnroe strings his racquet in the 40s! he just holds the racquet firmly in front of him to block the shot and let it's momentum drop the shot over and very close to the net . he plays with nuance using that flat racquet.
Nadal has a ritual of touching parts of his body. he always fiddles with his hind end, then touches his face in different places. grosses me out -its every point.. i can't unsee it.
@Kent Eriksson like a surgeon, he is a joy to watch.
David Ferrer.
two of the greatest
Thank you for Uploading this . You can see it very good
Thanks for a soo fantastic match! Unbelivable that there was soo few unforched errors!
Borg's 2 hander was the most beautiful 2 hander ever
I prefer Jimmy Connors's two-hander..
@@elmagnifico2851yes... Connors had one heck of a backhand!
Borg set up with two hands, but he released through the ball(after contact) with one, very unusually form, but very effective and yes, beautiful to watch.
I remember that game, I was 12 back in the days. It didn't feel so boring at the time, tennis has really evolved since then.
INCREDIBLE.
Do you Remember? Borg's last Slam! Who would have ever thought 4 mos later he would retire at 25! Then there is Lendl! He's the roll model & Father of Modern Tennis! If he played today he would figure out a way to compete & beat the top 3
Lendl played his whole career with that small adidas frame.
@@vanlendl1 After he won '86 US Open. The following week! Sports Illustrated released the issue of Ivan on the cover with the caption! The Champion that nobody cares about, Lendl refused all interviews w/ them ever since,
Many thanks for the wonderful upload.
Match symbolique entre le meilleur joueur des années 70 et celui qui gagnera le plus sur la décennie 80 ,Borg et Lendl ,pourtant à peine 4 ans de différence entre eux....
Four best ones in that era....Borg, Connors, Lendl and McEnroe...
For two players known for their fitness and endurance battling it out on a slow clay court over 5 sets the match time time is surprisingly short.
I would to know how many winners Borg hit in this match. 99% of the points he won were from Lendl errors. On clay Borg was invisible. He got bored in 81 only played 1 warm up tournament on clay before Roland Garros. He knew on that court he was never going to lose. It’s a shame the ATP didn’t allow him to continue playing in 82. He was still a top 4 player
Borg is one of my all time favourite players ... (and so was Lendl) ... congratulations, Borg!!!
menuda joya, muchas gracias....maravilloso.
Thank you for uploading a great video.
I have seen Borg live, but I was surprised that the hitting sound was metallic.
A lot of negative comments here but isn't it just easier to enjoy great tennis regardless of the era or what rackets they were using?? Nobody on here, these know it all types, not one of them have achieved in their entire working life what these two have in their relatively short professional careers.
Surtout ce qui est très impressionnant de sa part c'est une série de 8 finales consécutives à l'US Open entre 1982 et 1989 pour 3 victoires (1985-1986-1987). La série de finale s'interrompt en 1990 en quart par une défaite en 5 sets contre Sampras.
A reminder that there have only been four men in history who have reached at least four finals at the French Open, WImbledon, and US Open. Borg, Nadal, Djokovic, and Federer, who has done it 5 times.
@@patricksweeney5308 It's the French Open that's now regarded as inferior to the Australian Open.The Australian, with its great facilities and often dramatic and compelling floodlit nightime matches, went past the French Open years ago. The French has looked stale for years.
@@patricksweeney5308 The Australian open simply lost favor because in those days it was held at the very end of the season, leading into Christmas, and a lot of players were simply burned out and wanted to relax at home rather than traipse all the way down under to play in it. That's why the organizers were prevailed upon to shift it to January, and because it's now the first of the majors each year it guarantees that all the top players looking for grand slams come down to participate. The bad old days of the 70's are long gone.
@Gregory Mathews. You need to bear in mind that the two major reasons that Federer, Djokovic and Nadal have each gotten to all 4 major singles finals at least 4 times in their respective careers are (1) they have only the other two players to challenge them-- that is, they don't have the large number of all-time great players to challenge them like the all-time great players of the 1970's- mid-1990's had and (2) the changes in the game that favor baseline play over net play, such as the slowing down of courts , the adoption of the larger Type3 tennis ball for utilization in some tournaments , the development and utilization of lubricated, copolyestor-lubricated strings which add 20% more spin to the ball, and the near total lack of serve-and-volleyers (especially great serve-and-volleyers) have enabled those three players to win major singles titles into their 30's and thereby achieve grossly inflated statistical accomplishments totally disproportionate to the accomplishments of the all-time great players of the previous and earlier eras! From the late 1970's through the mid-1990's there were no less than 10 all-time great players competing at or near the top of men's tennis for the 4 major singles titles including Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Wilander, Lendl, Vilas, Edberg, Becker, Agassi and Sampras. And at any given time during that period, there were anywhere from 5-7 HOFers competing at or near the top of men's tennis for the four major singles titles. Federer, Djokovic and Nadal have only had each other to challenge them at the 4 major singles tournaments! Serve-and-volleyers ( especially great serve-and-volleyers) can much more readily expose the loss of foot speed of an opposing player who is in his or her 30's than a baseline player can because the geometry of the court with its' wider angles at the net favors net play over baseline play. There currently is a paucity of serve-and-volleyers and no great serve-and-volleyers at all to expose the loss of foot speed on the tennis court of Federer Nadal and Djokovic!
How precise they had to hit the balls with 65 sq in. wood or aluminum racquets on long handles. Now imagine if they had today's racquets, strings, and sports nutrition tech back then..
This is another time, can't really compare to now....
Yea they would have to change their entire technique
He is the Highlander of the tennis all time.
Bjorn will be forever the no 1
and that's the truth
please forget about any goat.
nor for today not for the past. it does not mean anything.
If you watch Borg’s movement and especially his anticipation it’s other worldly. His speed and quickness is not from this planet.
Nadal would beat him in straight sets.
@@mr.majestic2667 LOL would have been Nadal able to just carry these kinds of rackets , idiot.
It´s quite amazing how Lendl evolved later on. The game got way faster and more powerful in the late 80´s.
No. The game was already pretty fast paced at this point. Just watch the Wimbledon and US Open finals in 80 and 81 with Borg and McEnroe. The clay game continued to be slow as evidenced by Wilander’s victories at the French.
@@senorgato70 Yes, the clay court was always and still is the slowest of all courts. I might be wrong on this but it seems the clay courts in the past had a little more clay than it does today.. making the courts even that much slower.
The last great victory of king👑 Borg🏆❤️
The fathers of modern tennis
Recuerdo estos partidos, cuando tenia 15 años, los veia junto con un amigo , y cuando terminaban cogiamos las bicicletas con el macuto a cuestas y nos haciamos 7 u 8 km. hasta las pistas mas cercanas, y entrenar 4 o 5 horas hasta que habia luz, y volviamos a casa ya oscureciendo, que tiempos, viendo ahora estas imagenes de 2 de mis tenistas favoritos, creo que Ivan Lendl ha sido uno de los tenistas mas infravalorados, siendo de los mas completos quizas porque era menos dado a protestar y montar espectaculo.que otros.
Y que decir de borg, mi favorito de siempre, quizas porque las imagenes a los 15 años permanecen imborrables,el jugador que no protestaba una sola bola y eso que a veces le toco jugar finales con el publico en contra, como la ultima en wimbledon ,contra MCenroe porque la gente estaba arta de ver ganar al mismo y queria un nuevo campeon, aquel partido fue un calvario para borg, donde se jaleaban los aciertos de Mcenroe, y los fallos de borg, pero aguanto estoicamente sin una mala palabra ni un mal gesto, esa es una de las cosas que define a un campeon
I would really loved to have seen Rafa play Borg at Roland Garros USING A WOODEN RACKET. The technology today obviously gives today's players a huge advantage but make them play with technology from the 70's and 80's and the playing field is totally levelled.
Wouldve rather seen them use modern tech honestly but Rafa using a wooden racquet is very intriguing!
@@eze6285 There is no way in hell that Rafa would be as successful using a heavy wooden racquet and natural gut string. The aerodynamic babalot racquet and silicone-coated polyester rpm strings he uses automatically generates topspin Then there's the stark difference in sneakers from 1981 to 2021, the electrolytes fluids I assume they're gulping down every sit downs these days all gives the modern day tennis player an advantage. Take nothing away from Rafa though, he would still be the king of clay no matter which era he plays in. Uncle Toni trained Rafa on the worst courts specifically to condition him for the tough matches at Roland Garros.
@@josecalderon9487
Natural gut would give him power though and wooden racket pretty easy to control. Literally seen casual players use wooden tennis racket. Rafael Nadal racket swing weight is over 375. He is the strongest guy on tour it would be easy.
@@alkathorat2859 More power but less spin to control it. Rafa uses a reverse forehand 95% of the time. That's hard on the arm, shoulder, and torso as is, but to do that all the time with a 3 lb. wooden racquet with a smaller head. Not happening. Borg only used the reverse forehand when it was absolutely necessary but otherwise, he hits the ball the proper way 95% of the time. Borg's topspin rpm was about 1,200 or something, the most for his time, but certainly not even average by today's standard. Gut string also requires maintenance after every play so Rafa would have to fiddle with the strings after each play, that would just add more time on top of all the time he takes already to wipe off and stuff. Gut strings break easily too.
@PertSnergleman Great upload. Why does it switch from ESPN to a worse picture for the first 20 minutes?
J'ai vu jouer Bjorn. Un athlète exceptionnel. D'une vélocité d'une vitesse de course incroyable. Bjorn a montré son dos a Guy Drut lors des SuperStars en 1976 sur 400 m après les JOs. On n'imagine pas encore aujourd'hui quel poumon sur pattes était Bjorn. Contrairement a ce qu'on croit il était normal 1,8 m 75 kgs seulement il avait une condition physique très au dessus des autres capable de jouer 3 4 5 heures sans forcer. Et avec un mental de Suédois. Il n'y avait pas un Bjorn sur le court mais plusieurs. Bjorn était capable d'abréger l'échange sur une attaque mais il préférait jouer sur le physique surtout sur clay. Je n'ai jamais vu un mec aussi rapide. Il y a un match des 70's ou Bjorn ecoeure Rod Laver sur plusieurs lobs...
Pour aller chercher son trophée il monte 4 à 4 les escaliers après 3 heures de jeu.
Pour moi il restera le plus grand joueur du tennis mondial
@@MrJeumf Le tennis a beaucoup changé, les athlètes sont plus forts plus grands plus musclés, le matériel a beaucoup évolué, la lourdeur des frappes est plus intense. Ce qu'on oublie souvent c'est que Bjorn jouait avec un petit tamis à 35 kgs et un cadre hyper rigide et hyper lourd = 450 grammes juste pour avoir un rendement équivalent aux plus mauvaises raquettes et cordages d'aujourd'hui. Bjorn a révolutionné le jeu pas seulement par son style mais aussi parce qu'à partir de lui la condition physique est devenue de plus en plus importante. Lui était un joueur normal super affûté hyper endurant et résistant à l'effort, mais il est devenu le Viking du Tennis il y a plus de 40 ans bien avant les champions d'aujourd'hui qui héritent directement de lui et des suivants (dont Lendl) Regardez Nadal un monstre de muscles !!! On a tendance à oublier Bjorn dans les commentaires des journalistes sportifs. Sans ce demi Dieu du Tennis - qui a eu la 1ère escorte policière à Wimbledon - sans ce 5ième Abba qui a rendu le Tennis si célèbre, on n'aurait pas tous ces supers joueurs quasiment robotiques. Bjorn a gagné 5 fois a Wimbledon il était bien plus qu'un joueur de fond de court...
@@jean-lucbereda1155 entièrement d’accord avec votre analyse 👍
@@MrJeumf Tout est relatif..Pas les mêmes époques donc toujours difficile de comparer..Sur quel plan ? Le plus grand avec tournois GC gagnés a 26 ans oui mais aprés il est dépassé par 4 joueurs. Beauté du tennis ? tennis d'usure pas enthousiasmant sauf face à une opposition de style..en tous cas pour moi Loin derrière Federer, Mc enroe, Edberg, Sampras
@@jean-lucbereda1155 Borg a surtout été immortalisé grace a son opposition face a Mcenroe, rajouté a la rivalité avec Connors, dans les deux dernières années..La plus Parfaite opposition de style et de tempérament.
two legends ❤
Just finished watching this. Thanks for posting. Why did the broadcast change languages so many different times?
I also wish they would have flashed the score more often. Not only did they not do it in between points, but sometimes they didn't even do it in between games. It made it much harder to follow the match.
How boring is, to read all those comments comparing what can't be compared...
Every age has its way of playing and its stars.
Who really cares if Borg could defeat Nadal nowadays or viceversa in the past?
With out the past there would probably not even be a Nadal. So I agree.
The same goes for boxing and sports teams.
The greatest era in tennis history, before technology destroyed the game.
Exactly. The classic racquet head size should never have been tampered with, period. That’s not evolution, it’s perversion.
@@LeadershipAlliance i fully agree with that :)
they won more players ... but lost the nature of this game.
even in 1984 once Mcenroe got used to playing a more modern-day racquet for that time, he had one of the greatest years in the history of Tennis! If Bord didn't retire and geared up to a modern-day racquet he would have won at least 3 more French Opens. Wilander and Noah won French Open's during that span, no way they would have beaten Borg on Red Clay!
Two machines. Greats! 🙂
People talk about lendl’s fitness, when they should be really talking about Borg. Borg wore Lendl Down, then took his heart. Borg could have played another match.
Very true, Borg was exceptional even at today standard, but this was Borg at his top vs a still young and quite inexperienced Lendl (very far from his best form starting from the middle of '80s)
Borg today before Corona Borg would thrive with the Modern racket and conditioning,he would play longer,i his career he retired before peaking,very rare
Back then clay play was completely different from grass or hard. Now they all seem pretty much the same.
If you have never used a wooden racket, you should definitely use it according to the rules of the time.
A racket that is heavy, has no repulsion, and has a small sweet spot, and can be played for hours.
At that time, the shoes you should wear are Stan Smiths.
Commentator:who can beat this record? 6 time winner RG
Nadal:hold my beer
Rafa has beaten Borg's record, two times over.
Well youngsters, some of us oldsters aren't impressed with your "13". The 70s and 80s were highly competitive with much more diverse styles and actual personalities. Never mind the technology.
How Borg brought on the table tennis in the XX century top spin inside out forehand mental physic with a wood racket
i couldn't watch the whole thing...were there ANY drop shots from the back court in the match? I didn't see any, and there sure looked like there were good places to try them.......
Dream Match for most tennis fans: Prime Rafa vs Prime Borg in FO Final
Rafa in straight sets
@@guacaquio give Nadal a wooden racquet and see what happens. Against Bjorn Borg Nadal would have had the same end of the poor Vilas
Borg would have reach final to play Rafa.
Nadal struggled with 145 injuries throughout his career.He wouldn't make it in the 80's,that's a fact.
The scoreline seems to suggest Borg was indeed losing interest. It is like everytime he pulls well ahead his mind goes elsewhere and back comes Lendl. Borg then wakes up and takes the next set, until finally it is the last set.
interesting observation/theory
Borgs racquet strung amazingly tight I believe at 70lbs it’s the reason for the racquet sound. His team was very stiff as well. That racquet I played with had several very unforgiving. Showed his mastery of he game to be able to play with it.
More than 80 lbs
Trying to compare today's tennis with tennis in the past is mission impossible. The reason is that the nature of the (in principle) same sport has changed so dramatically that it is absolutely impossible to come with any kind of comparing technique. Is good to remember that in this case Borg played with Donnay Borg Pro that has 70 sq.inch headsize - it has roughly 390g and it is made of several layers of wood and graphite plus two layers of fibreglass. The string tension he used was about 37-38 kg(!!!). Lendl played with a bit more modern racquet (former Kneissl White Star after Adidas purchased the form it was Adidas GTX Pro T Ivan Lendl. Headsize about 80 sq. inch but made from graphite. Today's players wouldn't be able to play with it and believe me - I saw Pete Sampras playng with the old JK Pro Staff and he'd been struggling extremely. You simply can't play tennis like Nadal od Fed with that type of stick. That's why tennis is in fact a different sport today. There are many other differences (tennis shoes, overgrips, strings etc.) you just name it. Another story are the surfaces. All today's surfaces are much slower (grass, hard) with the exception of clay. Clay is faster. Super fast carpet is completely banned by the ITF .
Stanislav Dermek very good ponits made! Clay court tennis in the era of Borg was a tad dull, I have to say.
@@ragnarjonsson1122 well first of all - the clay was different. It was constructed in the traditional fashion with rocks mixed with sand as a bottom layer and crushed brick on top. Today it is made of the similar material but the real clay is only a thin layer on top what makes the surface faster. That is making a big difference in between of the top of the line professional courts and the club courts. However might today's tennis seem fast and powerful - in fact - it is a factor that makes it less popular among club and recreational players. Popularity of the game decreased dramatically (especially in the countries that used to be dominant - USA, UK, Australia, Sweden). ITF tries to reincarnate the game with an extremely stupid proposals (shortening the game, unification of the surfaces, new equipment etc.). In summary - the game is going to be less sport and more show. That might ruin the club game as it did in most of the countries. I'm afraid that there's no real answer for that (that might be working).
@ stanislav dermek. Although you make some excellent points in your comment, I need to point out a few errors. First, to the best of my knowledge the Donnay Borg Pro wood racket was 100% wood and had no graphite or fiberglass in it. I have never read anywhere any official detailed description of the composition of the Donnay Borg Pro wood racket which states that that racket had those 2 non-wood materials in it. The Donnay Borg Pro racket was essentially a Donnay Allwood with redesigned cosmetics. Of course Borg's rackets were specially designed with extra layers of wood in the entire head and throat area of the racket which was necessary in order to support the exceedingly tight approximately 80 pound string tension that Borg had his rackets strung at. Second, the racket that Lendl played with in the 1981 French Open Final was an Adidas Lendl GTX Pro racket not the GTX Pro-T racket (which didn't come out until 1986 or 1987). You are correct that the Adidas Lendl GTX Pro racket was made from the same molds that Kneissl used to make Lendl's rackets when Lendl had a contract with Kneissl. Third, Lendl's GTX Pro and GTX Pro-T rackets had 73 square inch head sizes not 80 square inches. Fourth, regarding your comment about Sampras playing with a Jack Kramer Pro Staff racket, if by that you are referring to the racket that Sampras played with on the men's pro tennis tour, that racket was not a Wilson Kramer racket . It was a braided graphite/kevlar racket called the Pro Staff which was designed specifically by Wilson Sporting Goods for Jimmy Connnors in 1984. Although Jack Kramer was a member of Wilson's advisory board, the racket that Sampras and Edberg and Chris Evert played with (and Connors briefly) did not have Kramer's name on it like the series of wood rackets that Jack Kramer endorsed for Wilson during the 1970's ( including the famous Jack Kramer Autograph wood racket). There was a graphite/fiberglass midsize and oversize racket that Wison manufactured during the mid 1980's that was called the Jack Kramer Staff racket. Sampras during a practice session (it may have been at Madison Square Garden) briefly tried to hit some serves with a wood racket and although the first few serves he hit were clocked at 120+ mph, his shoulder started to hurt and he had to stop serving with the wood racket in order to avoid the risk of injuring his shoulder.
@@michaelbarlow6610 many thanks for the feedback. Talking about Donnay Borg Pro - I have just now in my hands Donnay Borg Allwood that is predecessor of the later Donnay Borg Pro. It says that it is made of 1 layer of maple wood than 1 beech 4 ash and 2 ''vulcanised fiber''. What is vulcanised fiber - I have no idea but it is definitely not wood. In the later edition of the racquet (Donnay Borg Pro) the composition was the same with the difference that vulcanised fiber was replaced with graphite fiber (that's the information on the actual racquet). I'd been always convinced that the reinforcement was about adding some glassfibre layer in between of the maple layers - for example Slazenger Manuel Orantes (it is written there) as other Slazenger stick (Challenge No.1 1976 edition) says that it is reinforced with graphite. I don't want to cut it and check what is really inside :-)
With Lendl's racquet you're 100% right - the one in video is GTX Pro. In fact it is the same product as GTX Pro T (as Lendl himself said) just the handle was customised. It stayed till the end of production the same Kneissl mold.
I didn't say that Sampras played with the Jack Kramer racket - I remember him playing with the Wilson Pro Staff 85 and later with K-Factor 88 (I have both of those rackets). I don't believe that I said that it is Jack Kramer Pro Staff since I own all of those sticks (JK Autograph, JK Pro Staff, W Pro staff 85, W K-Factor 88) and I know how they look like (with Wilson PS 85 I play every day). I remember that it was designed for Connors (he played just a few months with it) while Chris Evert, Stefan Edberg, Jim Courier and Pete Sampras most of their career. Also Federer used to play with it for a while.
@ Stanislav Dermek. Thanks for the information. I was wrong in assuming that the Donnay Borg Pro racket was simply the Donnay Allwood racket with redesigned cosmetics. I have never had the opportunity to hold a Donnay Borg Pro racket in my hands so I never knew that they substituted graphite for the vulcanized fiber that was in the Donnay Allwood. I have heard of the term "vulcanized rubber" which I guess is a stronger, more durable form of rubber than standard rubber. I do know that the early version of the Donnay Allwood Jr. tennis racket (which was the racket that I played tennis with for many years) had no top layer of white wood around the racket head and had no thin red layer of vulcanized fiber in between the wood layers. As a result, the early version of that racket warped. But Donnay eventually added both a white wood layer on the outer part of the racket head and a thin red layer of vulcanized fiber in between the wood layers to the Donnay Allwood Jr. racket which solved the problem of the racket warping. I guess that Sampras switched to the K Factor 88 racket after he retired from the pro tour because I don't recall seeing Sampras playing with any other racket on the pro tour other than the Wilson Pro Staff 85 square inch braided graphite/kevlar racket. I also didn't know that the only difference between the Adidas Lendl GTX Pro racket and the GTX Pro -T racket was a modification to the racket handle. I do remember that Lendl would send his rackets to Warren Bosworth ( or Adidas would send them directly to Bosworth) for modification of the grip and weight of the racket to meet Lendl's specifications. One of the most astonishing things is that why in the world did Bosworth foolishly add silicon to the racket handle below the velour grip? He must have known that silicone is toxic. Lendl developed 2 small benign tumors on the heel of his right hand (which was noticeable during his Wimbledon match against David Wheaton) probably as a result of the silicone that Bosworth sprayed on the racket handle below the velour grip.
For those saying boring and slow, you must be young. The racquets available nowadays allow the likes of Rafa, Roger and Novak to play a faster game. Give the same technology to Borg, Lendl, McEnroe and they will show how exciting tennis could be. Those racquets were heavy.
Yes you are correct. Federer would have had backproblems too to play at this age of 38.
Nadal-Borg 6-0/6-0/6-0
@@miperrosellamaleo 6-4, 6-2, 6-2 to Borg.
@@gerwulfthered154 hahaha
@@miperrosellamaleo
Come back when Nadal has won Wimbledon fives times in a row.
How many more French Opens would Borg have won had he not retired? McEnroe was top dog on grass and hard courts but I think Borg would have gotten the better of McEnroe on clay.
Two machines!!
A transmissão foi transmitida pela rede Globo
Com narração de Luciano do valle
Comentários de Henrique Coutinho
Une régularité incroyable de Lendl ,entre 82 et 90 il est dans les 3 premiers ,et plusieurs années numéros 1 et champion du monde
Lendl aurait dû s'inscrire à Roland Garros en 1990,car il avait une bonne carte à jouer cette année là...il a préféré se consacrer à sa préparation sur gazon...dommage car ce n'est ni Agassi et Gomez qui auraient pu faire peur à un bon Lendl...
@@leliondescavernes1747 pourquoi dommage ??
si Wimbledon était sa priorité ... il a bien fait.
Aca Ivan Lendl llevaba una gran ventaja tecnologica, pues usaba a esta altura una raqueta de materiales compuestos (grafito y kevlar), mientras Borg raqueta de madera
So happy to see the late Jacques Dorfmann, RIP....
I wonder if Borg realized in that moment that it was his last time on court at the French. A bit sad to watch it really.
Actually he sort of did. Later he would say that he had lost motivation the previous fall. That he just came to Paris out of routine really. The same at Wimbledon, and was almost reviewed when it looked like Connors was going to beat him in the semi there.
yes he knew . he got bored with tennis because he won so much . I think
More like super boring.
In 1996 - when he was ranked no 1 - Sampras played against the retired McEnroe, both using a Wilson Jack Kramer Pro Staff. McEnroe easily won that match.
With those racquets, Federer would have had no chances against Bjorn Borg, who would have had destroyed Federer like he did with Lendl in Master 1980 final
Plus, Bjorn was yperfit, a miracolo pf mother nature
Super boring
très grand match de Borg.
C'est la finale où il produit le jeu le plus complet (volée, amorties).
Il aurait pu plier l'affaire en 3 sets.
C'st la période de Lendl que je préfère (il n'était pas trop connu).
Oui Borg aurait dû plier le match en 3 sets...si Bjorn avait retrouvé en 1982 toute sa détermination des grandes années (78 à 80),en étoffant à nouveau son programme de tournois (une quinzaine d'épreuves), alors je pense sincèrement qu'il aurait très facilement remporté un 7 ème Roland Garros... l'éclosion de Wilander aurait été considérablement retardée..
Serve and volley Tennis is my Cup of tea, but this match was brilliant.
The pace of shots was so much slower in the old days of wooden rackets and early aluminium rackets, and a lot less topspin too. Some great skill in placement and volleys, though. Lendl was still to reach his peak at this time, his power-shots came in the mid 80s through to the early 90s.
Those rackets required much greater technical ability than today's rackets.
Great to watch :)
The commentator says Czech Republic in the first min of the video when introducing Ivan Lendl...interesting. I mean at the time it was Czechoslovakia
Today, whenever I say Czechoslovakia to either a Czech or a Slovak, they both hate hearing this because each think that they are better than the other. Such childish reactions even in 2022.
Serbia vs. Croatia, same childish stupidity even in 2022.
In the fifth set Borg was on his toes like a robot ful of energy
53:48 what a sequence of points from Borg: so dominant.
Coach: If Borg loses his cool, you've got him.
Lendl: But he never loses hi-
Coach: Good luck
DOES Borg EVER lose his cool?
@@kayskidf1 Yes 1980 versus John at Masters...
@@jean-lucbereda1155 can't see anyone but mcenroe or connors to irk borg to that level. he was just so chill on the court.
@@kayskidf1 No Bjorn lost control in 1980 Masters on the referee not on Mac. Mac and Bjorn are friends since the 70's when John was newbiee.
@@jean-lucbereda1155 i'll have to look up the "Bad CyBorg Bjorn.". my imagination is having a field day with the idea of a "bad" Borg..
The current ice man and no.1 at the time Borg vs the future ice man and no.1 Lendl.
En finale de l open de Suisse Lendl l avait emporté contre Borg l année précédente (sur dur ) donc un match serré était à prévoir pour cette finale de Roland Garros et ce fût le cas un combat terrible
Oui Ivan fut à deux doigts de disparaitre en quatre sets en demi finale face José Luis Clerc...Clerc en 81 était chaud bouillant,et venait de remporter Rome juste avant Roland Garros... aurait-il fait aussi bien que Lendl ,face à Borg?
Two endurance athletes who have similar styles of play.
Although it seems they are just lobbing the ball back and forth, not really doing endurance training
Borg has such a weird backhand it s a mix of the one handed backhand and the two handed he hits the ball by holding the raquet with his two hands and then after he had hit the ball he lets his one hand from the raquet
Great groundstrokes from both players...
Lendl qui bat Mac enroe en quart de finale avec beaucoup de calme et fait un match historique en demi contre Clerc ,proche de l élimination au 4 iem set ....il fera un autre match historique contre Vitas à l us open mais s inclinera là....avant de battre ce joueur en finale des Masters ....un match de légende
En 2019 parece un entreno, ha evolucionado mucho el Tennis
training with a smaller racket could still be today a very fine training ^^^^
2:37:40 Nadal of course
this was the end of an era, by the end of the season Borg had lost to Mc Enroe several times and to Lendl in Basel final. He had a had a great run since 1974
1st set: 00:01:50
2nd set: 00:29:12
3rd set: 01:12:17
4th set: 01:36:48
5th set: 02:04:39
Last point: 02:36:23
Lendl 8 grand chelems ,5 ans numéro 1 ,74 tournois gagnés...près de dix en de suite dans le dernier carré de l us open....a une époque où il devait affronter Mac enroe,Wilander,Connors,Becker...Edberg ....bravo ...et plusieurs victoires au Masters....
Au même âge c est deux champions offrent la coupe Davis à leur pays,en 75 pour Borg et 80 pour Lendl (a moins de 20 ans )j espère qu il y a une rue Borg et une rue Lendl en Suéde et en Tchéquie....
The film has been slowed am assuming. Looks like it. If true, is it to make sure the viewer can see the ball which often is hardly detectable in other videos. ???
the film has not been slowed down, believe it or not.
Borg has his strings so high tension that it sounds like he is hitting a tin can.
They used to have a net chord judge! You can see him in action at 1:50:39. He'd better get out of the way when I hit my around the net post winner!
I don't think you can hit winners from the back court with these rackets.
McEnroe and borg played with wooden racquets with tiny TINY sweet spots and if you listen to mac's it is strung more loose compared to borgs.
i think that loose string gave mac his feel. he almost made it "twang"... he played the net so well because ball was on the racquet longer and had time to spin, slice, boppy, etc more effectively over the net. also a little bit harder hit ball would stay in the court.
---a completely arbitrary bio of McEnroe's tennis racquet.😶