He was a great player. His 1989 Wimbledon Final performance comes to mind. And his 2 indoor matches against Sampras were unreal tennis from those 2 Titans.
What I love about these old-school masters of serve and volley is their skill of playing brilliant volleys out of the most difficult positions. Most players these days would not even touch the ball. Becker shows this repeatedly in the video, waiting till the very last fraction of a second, seemingly being successfully passed by Chang, and then suddenly pulling off a sharp volley that wins him the rally. You just don't see this today.
This was Becker's penultimate matched at the AO. He lost his opener to Moya the following year and retired from majors after Wimbledon '97 (until his' 99 Wimbledon run)
Becker is beautiful tennis. It strikes me how much class he showed. I remember to have seen him play in Brussels indoor. I had a great frontrow seat and I remember to this day the impression he gave to float and hardly touch the ground. Big man but extremely elegant player. Very very gifted. Favorite with Lendl and Federer.
Boris encore aujourd'hui c'est mon idole .Quel tennis plein d'intelligence , de force , de touché et de tactique.Avec un mental en acier , rare à ce niveau de jeu
i think this was the first grandslam that i watch, i remember couple rounds before that becker was 0-2 i think against a swedish guy and i made by the way my school homework and watch the match and then where becker won that match in 5 sets i was so impressed that i was falling in love in the tennis sport. I remember how happy i was that chang beat agassi in the semis so that becker has it easier against chang.
@@al2498 At this tournament Agassi tanked the match to avoid playing Becker. Agassi's h2h against Becker does not give a clear picture of their rivalry. 88-90 Wimbledon, 91 Australian open, 92 and 95 ATP Masters tournament where most of the time Becker was winner and if not winner he was finalist Agassi had avoided all these tournaments and then of course this tanked match to Chang. Becker fans give excuse that after 1990 Beckers game had declined but this excuse is not really needed. Most of these avoided tournaments and tanked match are in 90's
Becker's last hurrah. He was my favourite player in the 90s. The video reminds me how much I loved his baseline game. His serve and volley were excellent, but the "Boom Boom" nickname didn't do him justice. He was a complex player, his groundstrokes were so classy, beautiful, with the perfect balance of skill and power, and they don't even look too dated. His backhand is very underrated. He could often outplay his opponents from the back of the court.
Becker was a big and strong guy who moved gracefully with speed on the court along with the skills you mentioned. His game was a joy to watch, and I have never seen anybody else dive for balls like he did. He was a true icon of the game. Too bad he was too volatile on/off court otherwise he could have won 10 plus grand slams easily.
@@TheGatornation93 Yeah, I remember he was really the best player in the world in the early 90s, but he could only keep his No. 1 ranking for 12 weeks. He had potential for much more. Some of his losses (like those Wimbledon finals he lost) were heartbreaking. Plus in retrospect, when we know his history in retirement, it's much easier to feel fond of uncontroversial characters of the period like Edberg.
U took the words out of my mouth. He really didnt have a weekness except his mental game was spotty. He lost a lot of wimbleton finals. 2 of them he should have won, maybe 3. That one in 91, was a major choke. Too bad, still one of the greatest to ever hold a racquet. And too me he was the most enjoyable to watch.
Agreed. Strange didn't win any clay court tournaments. His baseline strokes are a thing of beauty. Also, he was a RG semi-finalist early in his career -- 1987 I think.
Watching this I'm surprised that Backer didn't win more US and Australian Opens. I really only ever watched him play at Wimbledon, but he clearly does have a very good all court game. At times it almost looks like he's toying with Chang.
The consistency wasn't there. In the 90s you already had a new wave of heavy hitters whom Becker couldn't overpower and who could expose him in longer rallies. Plus, Becker never had the discipline to fully maximize his potential.
Becker was an underachiever. He had all the talent you could wish for but had also a very hard time focusing on tennis for longer periods of time. He won 4 of his 6 GS before age 23. The final 10 years of his career were very spotty and he usually just showed up at the beginning or the end of a season, and at Wimbledon. In that time span he only won 4 or 5 tournaments which were played between March and September.
@@katerinadicamella To that tongue tick formula Wimbledon 95 says hi and Australian open 96 aks Why. He had tanked the match at this tournament to avoid playing Becker.
Becker always steamrolled Chang. Becker was the only top player that Chang had no answer to. It's surprising given that Chang could play well against Sampras.
No, M. Chang beat B. Becker 1 time - in the semifinals of Tokyo 1994. M. Chang has never beaten Y. Kafelnikov and M. Norman. The score is 0:4 in both cases.
Chang played well against Sampras early in their pro careers winning their first 5 matches, but Sampras was 12-3 against Chang after 1990 when he started to peak. Chang always had problems with guys who could over-power him like Sampras/Becker.
two very talented players and unlike most tennis played today where players run back and forth on the baseline repeatedly serve and volley mixed in makes for a well rounded and exciting show of skills
agreed. chang had great hands, great speed, and great reflexes. He, unfortunately, didn't have the firepower or precision on his ground strokes though. so just as you said, he couldn't make his way to net on his own terms very often.
It's always a joy to watch Becker playing tennis at this level. He played gentleman way. Never reacts to losing points in his career! Also very friendly with players he faced. Love becker and his tennis.
Becker was known from this early professional days for that. When reporters would ask him why he lost? What part of his game needed improvement? He would flat out say, the other guy was better. True sportsman.
Changs ball placement and trajectory tells the story here ; he seemed not capable of flattening out or hitting deep and down the lines; just looping it back mid court - Never a hope against a player of Bekers all round abilities
Becker's Puma raquet was 88 square inches I think. Sampras and Edberg used the original Wilson pro staff, which was 85 square inches. It requires great skill to use those small frames.
@@blake7871 The Becker racquet used was in fact a 92 sq inch racquet. I have an Estusa Power Beam Braided. Due to the head shape and open string pattern, it plays more like a 95 sq inch racquet. I've played with 95s and 98s.
To be fair it wasn't that small. Please Google the Puma Becker. The head shape is not dissimilar to a 95 sq inch racquet and plays like one. You can use an open string pattern and has good weight and not stiff. I have an Estusa Power Beam Braided. Becker used a customised Estusa at this stage which was a Puma midsize in essence. Beautiful racquet by the way. It was referred to as Midplus, like the original 95 sq inch racquets. Now 95s are called midsize and 98s are called midplus.
@@BurnsTennis I used that racket 30 years ago and could've sworn it was an 88, but I could be wrong. It might be 92. I've still got it somewhere, so I'll find out for sure.
And the winner shakes hands first with the umpire. When someone does this today, they get slammed by a clueless newbie in the comments, as many people think these relatively very new post-match habits (like losers shaking hands first with the umpire, winners wawing to the crowd with their racquet etc.) are hard-and-fast written rules that have been around forever and a player who breaks them deserves a lifelong ban.
Becker’s read on Chang’s serve was great. He could chip it, slice it, hit through it and pretty much do whatever he wanted at will. Chang could have done much better with a better serve. He gave it his all. Becker was superior by a country mile. Felt like Nadal was taking on Ferrer. We always knew the result.
It was exciting to watch Becker play this all-court game. At that time he was more than a S&V player, he had great baseline game to back it up. Sampras was a better athlete than Becker and hence a better player overall, but heck Becker's game was exciting to watch.
Becker won the Australian Open twice but his best tennis was usually reserved for 3 other events: Wimbledon, The year-ending Masters/ATP Finals and The Davis Cup. His Wimbledon record...3 time champion, 4 times runner up His Year-End Masters/ ATP Finals record...3 times champion, 5 times runner up His Davis Cup Singles record is possibly the greatest in history...38 wins and only 3 losses. not sure if there's a player in history that can better that record
Landing on the right foot wasn't unorthodox at the time, it's just an old school technique (which I still use). What makes his serve look most different is that he releases the ball toss at the hip and arches up into it. Again another older school technique which not many used, even back in the day.
Everybody did that at the time. Even Chang landed on his right foot if you watch his 1989 French Open victory. I remember copying Boris Becker's serve after his 1985 Wimbledon win. Tennis magazine did a detailed analysis on his serve at the time. His serve back then is as good as any today.
Landing on the right foot is a classic old school technique that also helped him launch into the court on the way to the net. Becker was a serve and volley player who was also capable of staying at the baseline and hitting beautiful power groundstrokes.
Chang had a 1-5 record against Becker. Other players he had a poor record against included Moya (0-5), Kafelnikov (0-4), Mayotte (0-3), Enqvist (1-5), Muster (3-6)
That’s a shockingly valid point. Becker never did win the French either. This would have been his huge chance to end his career with all 4 slams in his pocket. Sadly Edberg suffered the same fate. He had a good battle with Chang one year in the us open too.
I would say he was definitely one of the best if not the best mover of his era, although he slowed down quite a bit after 1996/1997 due to injuries from overtraining resulting in him dropping out of the top 10.
but by the same token, these players look like amateur baseliners compared to the modern ones. That's something I love about tennis. There's so much to be good at. even the professionals, who devote their whole lives to mastery of the sport, are not good at everything. they have to pick and choose what to be good at.
2 legends from the 80s and 90s. Becker won the slam but Chang won in life.....Chang: worth $50 million, clear conscience and respect, Becker: Bankrupt, weird choice in women and went to jail!
Thank God the game evolved with the very next generation and erased the archaic, serve-reliant guys into obscurity. Drove these net-rushers right into extinction.
@@niceguy1774 It has nothing to do with anything involving "evolved." Racket tech, string tech, slower balls, and slower surfaces killed serve and volley.
to win a slam 11 years after ur 1st just shows beckers longevity and quality
He was a great player. His 1989 Wimbledon Final performance comes to mind. And his 2 indoor matches against Sampras were unreal tennis from those 2 Titans.
Becker. Beautiful timeless tennis.
Always a pleasure to watch a good serve and volley. Amazing skills
What I love about these old-school masters of serve and volley is their skill of playing brilliant volleys out of the most difficult positions. Most players these days would not even touch the ball. Becker shows this repeatedly in the video, waiting till the very last fraction of a second, seemingly being successfully passed by Chang, and then suddenly pulling off a sharp volley that wins him the rally. You just don't see this today.
Absolutely.. even if we do consider the change in courts/ball/racquet/string, the net play skill is just not the same
Yes - sadly many of those skills are not in today's game of simply thrashing the ball from the back court
This was Becker's penultimate matched at the AO. He lost his opener to Moya the following year and retired from majors after Wimbledon '97 (until his' 99 Wimbledon run)
I had forgotten how talented and aesthetic was Becker.
Becker is beautiful tennis. It strikes me how much class he showed. I remember to have seen him play in Brussels indoor. I had a great frontrow seat and I remember to this day the impression he gave to float and hardly touch the ground. Big man but extremely elegant player. Very very gifted. Favorite with Lendl and Federer.
Boris encore aujourd'hui c'est mon idole .Quel tennis plein d'intelligence , de force , de touché et de tactique.Avec un mental en acier , rare à ce niveau de jeu
i think this was the first grandslam that i watch, i remember couple rounds before that becker was
0-2 i think against a swedish guy and i made by the way my school homework and watch the match and then where becker won that match in 5 sets i was so impressed that i was falling in love in the tennis sport. I remember how happy i was that chang beat agassi in the semis so that becker has it easier against chang.
Good take. I think as well against Agassi Becker would have lost. He could not handle Agassis baseline power tennis.
@@al2498 At this tournament Agassi tanked the match to avoid playing Becker. Agassi's h2h against Becker does not give a clear picture of their rivalry. 88-90 Wimbledon, 91 Australian open, 92 and 95 ATP Masters tournament where most of the time Becker was winner and if not winner he was finalist Agassi had avoided all these tournaments and then of course this tanked match to Chang. Becker fans give excuse that after 1990 Beckers game had declined but this excuse is not really needed. Most of these avoided tournaments and tanked match are in 90's
Becker's last hurrah. He was my favourite player in the 90s. The video reminds me how much I loved his baseline game. His serve and volley were excellent, but the "Boom Boom" nickname didn't do him justice. He was a complex player, his groundstrokes were so classy, beautiful, with the perfect balance of skill and power, and they don't even look too dated. His backhand is very underrated. He could often outplay his opponents from the back of the court.
Excellent comment.
Becker was a big and strong guy who moved gracefully with speed on the court along with the skills you mentioned. His game was a joy to watch, and I have never seen anybody else dive for balls like he did. He was a true icon of the game. Too bad he was too volatile on/off court otherwise he could have won 10 plus grand slams easily.
@@TheGatornation93 Yeah, I remember he was really the best player in the world in the early 90s, but he could only keep his No. 1 ranking for 12 weeks. He had potential for much more. Some of his losses (like those Wimbledon finals he lost) were heartbreaking. Plus in retrospect, when we know his history in retirement, it's much easier to feel fond of uncontroversial characters of the period like Edberg.
U took the words out of my mouth. He really didnt have a weekness except his mental game was spotty. He lost a lot of wimbleton finals. 2 of them he should have won, maybe 3. That one in 91, was a major choke. Too bad, still one of the greatest to ever hold a racquet. And too me he was the most enjoyable to watch.
Agreed. Strange didn't win any clay court tournaments. His baseline strokes are a thing of beauty. Also, he was a RG semi-finalist early in his career -- 1987 I think.
So selfcontrolled, so focused and so concentrated. Becker knew in advance that he will win it!
Beckers Rückhand ist an Ästhetik nicht zu überbieten
Federer?
Watching this I'm surprised that Backer didn't win more US and Australian Opens. I really only ever watched him play at Wimbledon, but he clearly does have a very good all court game. At times it almost looks like he's toying with Chang.
Becker read Chang's shots like a book in this match, and Agassi read Becker's tongue direction during serve like a hawk 😂
The consistency wasn't there. In the 90s you already had a new wave of heavy hitters whom Becker couldn't overpower and who could expose him in longer rallies. Plus, Becker never had the discipline to fully maximize his potential.
Becker was an underachiever. He had all the talent you could wish for but had also a very hard time focusing on tennis for longer periods of time. He won 4 of his 6 GS before age 23. The final 10 years of his career were very spotty and he usually just showed up at the beginning or the end of a season, and at Wimbledon. In that time span he only won 4 or 5 tournaments which were played between March and September.
@@katerinadicamella To that tongue tick formula Wimbledon 95 says hi and Australian open 96 aks Why. He had tanked the match at this tournament to avoid playing Becker.
These two can beat 99% of the players out there. Boom Boom and Michael are two awesome players.
Becker in QF beat Kafelnikov in 3 sets and in that match he played so beautifully from the baseline and was serving almost to perfection..
Becker always steamrolled Chang. Becker was the only top player that Chang had no answer to. It's surprising given that Chang could play well against Sampras.
Sampras and Chang go back a long way in juniors circuit too.. maybe that familiarity helped even the grounds a bit for Chang
No, M. Chang beat B. Becker 1 time - in the semifinals of Tokyo 1994. M. Chang has never beaten Y. Kafelnikov and M. Norman. The score is 0:4 in both cases.
Chang played well against Sampras early in their pro careers winning their first 5 matches, but Sampras was 12-3 against Chang after 1990 when he started to peak. Chang always had problems with guys who could over-power him like Sampras/Becker.
Chang did beat sampras in the semis I believe.
Which tournament? Not this one, Chang beat Agassi to reach the finals, while Sampras lost in the 3rd round.
two very talented players and unlike most tennis played today where players run back and forth on the baseline repeatedly serve and volley mixed in makes for a well rounded and exciting show of skills
If that style worked, it wouldn't have gone extinct.
Chang was a surprisingly skilled volleyer. Just didn't have the killer approach shot or long enough reach to warrant going to net regularly I guess.
agreed. chang had great hands, great speed, and great reflexes. He, unfortunately, didn't have the firepower or precision on his ground strokes though. so just as you said, he couldn't make his way to net on his own terms very often.
His volley form was aggressive early 90s stuff. Hard court baller stuff.
If Chang were six feet tall, he would've won a couple more majors. Just look at him when he stands next to that big mf'er Becker. Looks like a kid.
Boris was the Federer of his era but did not quite live up to his tremendous potential. Maybe it was the early success that tarnished his later years
But don't tell that Fed didn't achieve anything. He has many more slams than Becker.
Chang was so legit. Nobody wanted to see him in their half. Legend.
LOL
It's always a joy to watch Becker playing tennis at this level. He played gentleman way. Never reacts to losing points in his career! Also very friendly with players he faced. Love becker and his tennis.
Becker was known from this early professional days for that. When reporters would ask him why he lost? What part of his game needed improvement? He would flat out say, the other guy was better. True sportsman.
Changs ball placement and trajectory tells the story here ; he seemed not capable of flattening out or hitting deep and down the lines; just looping it back mid court -
Never a hope against a player of Bekers all round abilities
Becker could have won more slams if he only had more focus.
He looked like game 6 Jordan here
I love the outfit of both men❤. It's so classy .
Becker was extremely skilled the racket head he had was tiny and hardly hit a miss hit
Reminds me of a guy
Becker's Puma raquet was 88 square inches I think. Sampras and Edberg used the original Wilson pro staff, which was 85 square inches. It requires great skill to use those small frames.
@@blake7871 The Becker racquet used was in fact a 92 sq inch racquet. I have an Estusa Power Beam Braided. Due to the head shape and open string pattern, it plays more like a 95 sq inch racquet. I've played with 95s and 98s.
To be fair it wasn't that small. Please Google the Puma Becker. The head shape is not dissimilar to a 95 sq inch racquet and plays like one. You can use an open string pattern and has good weight and not stiff. I have an Estusa Power Beam Braided. Becker used a customised Estusa at this stage which was a Puma midsize in essence.
Beautiful racquet by the way.
It was referred to as Midplus, like the original 95 sq inch racquets. Now 95s are called midsize and 98s are called midplus.
@@BurnsTennis I used that racket 30 years ago and could've sworn it was an 88, but I could be wrong. It might be 92. I've still got it somewhere, so I'll find out for sure.
Wie stark Becker im Aufschlag und am Netz war echt wow!
Kinda funny to see the tension of their encounter at the net after the match. We could feel the hostility between them.
You see something I dont. Looked very respectful and classy to me
Becker's service action was beautiful..Poetry in motion..
i think Federer was closest to if. But u are right
Boris Becker ini menurutku Pemain Putra dimasanya yang Servis n Volynya sangat matang n super mematikan...
That's how you beat a Pusher. Get to the NET
I think the modern forehand started with Becker. He rotated his torso all the way thru the shot. Lots of power and spin.
Becker and Stich: 2 german GOATS
Stitch was solid but Becker was legendary. Tough to lump those two together. Considering how much Becker did win.
Notice how there was no changeover or toilet break after the set was over if the score was par.
And the volleying in this match was great quality. They are making great volleys look very routine.
Why does Boris just go Godmode on Chang? Poor guy
10:08 after the match point i like more this kind from men handshake instead the teenhandshake that the their PLAYERS give today
stop being so gay
And the winner shakes hands first with the umpire. When someone does this today, they get slammed by a clueless newbie in the comments, as many people think these relatively very new post-match habits (like losers shaking hands first with the umpire, winners wawing to the crowd with their racquet etc.) are hard-and-fast written rules that have been around forever and a player who breaks them deserves a lifelong ban.
Excellent take.
Love the sound of natural gut
Great upload and solid play by both players
Not long ago they were playing real tennis 😂😂
this is probably the most boring tennis style
Becker’s read on Chang’s serve was great. He could chip it, slice it, hit through it and pretty much do whatever he wanted at will. Chang could have done much better with a better serve. He gave it his all. Becker was superior by a country mile. Felt like Nadal was taking on Ferrer. We always knew the result.
It was exciting to watch Becker play this all-court game. At that time he was more than a S&V player, he had great baseline game to back it up. Sampras was a better athlete than Becker and hence a better player overall, but heck Becker's game was exciting to watch.
Becker won the Australian Open twice but his best tennis was usually reserved for 3 other events:
Wimbledon, The year-ending Masters/ATP Finals and The Davis Cup.
His Wimbledon record...3 time champion, 4 times runner up
His Year-End Masters/ ATP Finals record...3 times champion, 5 times runner up
His Davis Cup Singles record is possibly the greatest in history...38 wins and only 3 losses.
not sure if there's a player in history that can better that record
Becker's serve is so weird, he lands on his right foot instead of left. Impressive it could be so good with unorthodox technique.
Landing on the right foot wasn't unorthodox at the time, it's just an old school technique (which I still use). What makes his serve look most different is that he releases the ball toss at the hip and arches up into it. Again another older school technique which not many used, even back in the day.
Everybody did that at the time. Even Chang landed on his right foot if you watch his 1989 French Open victory. I remember copying Boris Becker's serve after his 1985 Wimbledon win. Tennis magazine did a detailed analysis on his serve at the time. His serve back then is as good as any today.
You're making a "weird thing" out of something that was fairly commonplace back then - even thought of as classic a decade or two earlier.
Landing on the right foot is a classic old school technique that also helped him launch into the court on the way to the net. Becker was a serve and volley player who was also capable of staying at the baseline and hitting beautiful power groundstrokes.
Sabatini , Novotna and I belive Navratilova also landed on her right foot after serve..
Chang never learned to flatten his backhand.
Chang the youngest French Open Winner.
Becker the youngest Wimbledon Winner.
Chang had a 1-5 record against Becker. Other players he had a poor record against included Moya (0-5), Kafelnikov (0-4), Mayotte (0-3), Enqvist (1-5), Muster (3-6)
Becker best
I Remember The Tournament. Becker Was Just Too Strong For Everyone.
If only Becker had made it past Edberg in the FO 1989 semis. I don’t think Chang would hold that grand slam title
That’s a shockingly valid point. Becker never did win the French either. This would have been his huge chance to end his career with all 4 slams in his pocket. Sadly Edberg suffered the same fate. He had a good battle with Chang one year in the us open too.
hmmm becker never won a title a clay . dont think he was any final against chang on clay
@@olaraay he beat Chang easily at the FO 91
A great match
Bons tempos...
Glad Becker didn't get distracted by Chang's horrendous necklace.
so much more interesting than todays baseline tennis
Tennis today is a joke long baseline groundstrokes and double handed backhand. 😂
‘We volleyed a lot back in those days because … well… no one had yet figured out how to hit a backhand’.
Becker control the match
Was Chang the best on court mover of his era before Nadal and Alcaraz?
I would say he was definitely one of the best if not the best mover of his era, although he slowed down quite a bit after 1996/1997 due to injuries from overtraining resulting in him dropping out of the top 10.
Muster and Chang @@TheGatornation93
Becker was about the age of Daniil Medvedev at that time, may be younger
Prachtig
Best serve and volleyer.. Boom Boom Becker
imagine chang would have a forehand like nadal= minimum 10 grandslams he would have now
Maybe like Djokovic?
Edberg was more elegant than Becker.
At the net I agree but overall completely no
I think the actual players looks like amateurs playing at the net in compare with the old ones
but by the same token, these players look like amateur baseliners compared to the modern ones. That's something I love about tennis. There's so much to be good at. even the professionals, who devote their whole lives to mastery of the sport, are not good at everything. they have to pick and choose what to be good at.
@@bonzwah1 Lendl, Agassi, Courier, Muster & Wilander were all great baseliners, have you actually watched them play???
This is carpet?
昔はサーブのネットイン判定手で触ってるんかな？
2 legends from the 80s and 90s. Becker won the slam but Chang won in life.....Chang: worth $50 million, clear conscience and respect, Becker: Bankrupt, weird choice in women and went to jail!
张德培真了不起！
Bum Bum Becker
Mr.chang...
has no skills to be top..
Physical(height), serve, stroke..etc..
If on court this Era,
wouldn't be in top 100.
Better than Hewitt
Thank God the game evolved with the very next generation and erased the archaic, serve-reliant guys into obscurity.
Drove these net-rushers right into extinction.
😴
Ignrant
Evolved? Devolved more like it.
@blake7871 if they were the more evolved ones, they would still be winning.
Instead, they vanished and we're left with "BuT the surfaces Tho!".
@@niceguy1774 It has nothing to do with anything involving "evolved." Racket tech, string tech, slower balls, and slower surfaces killed serve and volley.
Que bueno que era chang