John McEnroe versus Bjorn Borg...1980 U. S. Open Finals

[GeoffWilliams]

I saw the match yesterday. That's when my fighting weight was 172lbs, not 233lbs! Ha, ha.

[don_budge]

Yesterday...

34 years? No it was yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONXp-vpE9eU

Yesterday...The Beatles (1965)

Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away
Now it looks as though they're here to stay
oh, I believe in yesterday

Suddenly I'm not half the man I used to be
There's a shadow hanging over me
Oh, yesterday came suddenly.

Why she had to go?
I don't know, she wouldn't say
I said something wrong
Now I long for yesterday.

Yesterday love was such an easy game to play
Now I need a place to hide away
Oh, I believe in yesterday.

Why she had to go?
I don't know, she wouldn't say
I said something wrong
Now I long for yesterday.

Yesterday love was such an easy game to play
Now I need a place to hide away
Oh, I believe in yesterday...

Art vs. Technology...

[don_budge]

Stay tuned...34 years later

I have just finished watching this five set epic. I found it bazaar. I seldom reach for stats but there is certainly a good case here. I don’t have figures other than my own guesswork.

But before I start: Who was the linesman at 3-3 on the first point in that game? One imagines the whole of Sweden were screaming for his execution. What a stinker! Had that ball been called out Borg would have won the game to thirty. That’s fate...small margins can determine epic matches.

I thought McEnroe served really well. The variation he used was tremendously effective. I have never seen Borg miss so many forehand returns. He misfired on both wings for the entire five sets. It was an important factor because overall Borg won most of the longer rallies once he got serves back.

Conversely, other than the first set, Borg served terribly. He first serve percentage must have barely gotten above 30% in sets two and three. It improved slightly in sets four and five but not by much. His overall first serve percentage must have been around the low to mid forties. He really couldn’t get his usually very reliable serve together at all. This is very significant because, historically in their contests, Borg’s first serve pinned McEnroe firmly back and allowed Borg to dictate the rallies. It is very hard to beat Borg when his first serve percentage is high because he cannot be consistently out rallied.

I find it remarkable that despite serving and returning like a drain, Borg won two sets and only lost narrowly in the fifth. That is the most amazing stat of the lot. I really must teach my kids to hang in and work with they've got. It's amazing what can be achieved by adopting that approach.

The best feature of the match was the duel: McEnroe, being perhaps the best volleyer ever in some ways, playing against the perhaps the best passer of all time. This made the contest a great spectacle for me. It made the match so exciting to watch. The passing shots and the volleying were exceptional...quite brilliant.

I still miss those two players even today, nearly 34 years later.

Thanks for the wonderful conversation. Any tennis coach worth his salt had best be a genuine student of the game and that requires him by definition to be somewhat of a historian as well.

You found it bizarre and I found it exquisite. As you know...playing with the standard sized wood racquet is not a perfect proposition. Consequently on any given day your serve or some other part of your game might not be up to par...as it appears that Borg’s serve has somewhat deserted him...then you must compensate with other aspects of the game and one of them is just rolling up your sleeves and playing the hand dealt to you. You must cover up a deficiency with some other strong suit...in this case a willingness to get down and fight.

Did you notice the odd configuration of linesman? One linesman for the sideline on both sides of the court. The middle service linesman running into position to cover the sideline after the serve was in play. The complete absence of Hawkeye...only the umpire to overrule on an obvious mistake. Except that prehistoric device to call the serve in or out.

On the baseline call in question...at 3-3 in the fifth...that linesman may have been blocked by Borg who instead of playing a ball that was very close, made the poor decision to not play it. Since he did not move back into position to play that ball deep behind the baseline he suffered the consequences for blocking the linesman’s view. To his credit he played on...as tough as it must have been to accept at the time. He cast a furtive glance at his friends box. This is part of what made Borg such an incredible and iconic sport’s legend. The Swede. The Nordic Ice Man.

John McEnroe’s service tactics were sheer genius that day. Not only the tactics...but the execution. He was constantly working over the forehand of Borg...his opponents strength. But not only was he dismantling the forehand he was also dissecting the backhand. McEnroe had Borg tied up in a pretzel all day long. Remember the old Tilden axiom about defeating your opponents strength. It can be demoralizing...plus it really opens up their weakness. McEnroe was/is no dummy and he had Borg guessing all day long about the location of the serve. Trabert mentioned numerable times about his tactics. It was quite a lesson accompanied by some astute comments from the booth.

If a modern day tennis coach cannot appreciate what John McEnroe was doing with a standard sized tennis racquet then they really are not true tennis aficionado's. They are lacking in credentials. Sadly this is what we are faced with in the “world of tennis” these days. The division of yesterday and the present...defined by the equipment change right around the time of this match.

Clearly Borg was not at his best. Yet this was a hallmark of yesterdays tennis. It was so difficult to find “the zone” day in and day out...one had to make do and roll up your sleeves and fight with your back to the wall...with only a tiny little wooden racquet strung with gut. Perhaps McEnroe was not at his best either...he admits to being tired in the post match interview. That comes as no surprise seeing as he too had a strenuous five set semifinal against one of the greatest tennis players and competitors of all time in Jimmy Connors. Connors made him win his match and took him to the fifth set tie-break. Connors fought him tooth and nail right down to the end of the night. That match was a compelling match as well. Timeless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcDF08fg21A

Whereas Johan Kriek may have sort of packed it in after winning the first two sets against Borg in the semis. Borg won the last three sets in succession 6-1, 6-1 and 6-1. So who was at their “best” is a mute point in the context of classic tennis...thirty four years later there is only the name on the trophy. McEnroe may well have had "more excuses" in his bag but to his credit he played without making any explanations or excuses whatsoever. He had every reason to pack it in himself deep in the fifth but he found the will to hang on. McEnroe definitely had the tougher road to hoe.

But most of all I love your recognition of “the duel”. It isn’t only that McEnroe was a great volleyer or that Borg was a great baseliner. You see the reversal of roles all of the time in this match where Borg is attacking or when McEnroe is dueling from the baseline. Even Tony Trabert makes the observation at one point in the match about Borg’s reputation of being a baseliner yet he was also an incredible all court player...as was John. He dueled the Swede tit for tat all day long from the baseline.

But I bet that you are right about that baseline call. Borg didn’t even play the ball. He obviously thought it was out. He wasn’t the type to cheat or try to obfuscate the reality of any given situation. He had that kind of courage. He had that kind of integrity. He had that kind of love for the game. He demonstrated all of it on that given Sunday when for some reason that we are not privy too...he was not at his best. But he showed why he was a great, great champion. He fought with all of his Nordic heart...to the last inch. In the end...there was no real loser in this match. As any tennis player knows. The challenge is to do your best in any given situation. Win or lose...triumph or disaster. Treat both those impostors just the same...you will be a man, my son.

[stotty]

Thanks for this series, don_budge. It's been an epic. One of the last great wooden racket duels. Great players using diddy rackets. One had his racket strung like a fishing net while the other had his as tight as a drum. Everything about those two was as opposite as it could get.

[klacr]

Any tennis coach worth his salt had best be a genuine student of the game and that requires him by definition to be somewhat of a historian as well.

So true. I cannot tell you how many times I say this to young professionals that are getting certified. They need to be a historian as well as a visionary.

Thank you for this statement.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Thank you...Stotty

Thanks for this series, don_budge. It's been an epic. One of the last great wooden racket duels. Great players using diddy rackets. One had his racket strung like a fishing net while the other had his as tight as a drum. Everything about those two was as opposite as it could get.

So true. I cannot tell you how many times I say this to young professionals that are getting certified. They need to be a historian as well as a visionary.

Thank you for this statement.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Thanks for listening and following my train of thought. I know that in the beginning you were a bit leery of my message regarding the classic game versus the modern game. But I sense an open mind now.

I never say that I am right in anything that I present on the forum...I only write my case and let the chips fall where they may. There are some on this forum that think this is a debate or certain opinions can be shouted down...and by that I mean all topics need to be agreed or disagreed upon. I never feel that way...and after saying that I will say this.

For once I will say this...I AM RIGHT. And I mean it and I am not shy saying it. I don't need a second opinion. This question about the relative merits regarding the game of classic tennis versus the modern game is not one of personal feelings...it is only about the facts.

The facts are of course obfuscated to the maximum. Number one...it has been a long time and number two any historians of the game from here on out are only going to go back to this point in time for their source of tennis history. They lack the experience and first hand knowledge. Once again the powers that be win. He who wins writes the history.

When watching this match you get a real sensation about how the game had EVOLVED up to 1980. The oversized equipment had already been introduced but the very top echelon wasn't having anything to do with it. They looked at it with disdain and viewed anybody playing with it as a cheater. The game that McEnroe and Borg played on this glorious afternoon at Flushing Meadows was a brilliant display of tennis by two tough and gritty combatants with traditional wooden racquets. The likes of their rivalry and the polar aspects of the whole scenario will never again be matched...that is my opinion.

It's funny how the modern junior development coaches and the certified lot are so dead certain that the current game is the best there ever was and this is what I mean about the victor writing the history book. The current game is dead in the water compared to the classic. It will have to be retooled or reengineered for more "evolution" to take place. The classic game was a living thing and all of the champions were connected as if by some thread of Chromosomal DNA from the life of the game. The game transcended everyone...no one person was bigger that it.

But now...sadly there is a disconnect and a refusal to acknowledge something so fundamental as right and wrong. But tennis always serves as a metaphor for life as the news media and the government and the corporations lead us astray by the careful manipulation of information...much as the tennis world has done. Leading us to slaughter...as 10splayer suggested I was leading my students. Even though he has never personally witnessed on of my tennis lessons. Just blah, blah, blah. We will see what the carnage will look like in the end...I have seen it. It isn't pretty.

I know everyone would like to see this era dead and buried. There are some really strange ideas why it should be so. But basically it comes down to one over riding principle and that is one of greed. It is the greed in everyone's heart that leads them to believe that they are a superior being to those of our past. It is some old guy playing with a Babolat tennis racquet the size of a snow shoe that clings to an illusion that he is playing good tennis. It is the greed of the machine that cares not a twit for words like integrity. The only word that the machine understands is profit. Just as our government is only concerned with our "national interests" and not the "will of the American people"...an expression they trot out when they are about to do something in our national interests that is contrary to the will of the American people.

Tennis interest was at an all time high in 1980. The McEnroe and Borg rivalry was only swelling to a crest. It had not yet peaked...but Borg wasn't having anything to do with it. Perhaps Johan Kriek was using some kind of oversized racquet in his semi and he had a close brush with someone that he knew he should dispatch routinely. There were more peaks to come. Trust me the game would have continued to evolve. If you can imagine all of the best tennis players since this glorious afternoon striving to out do these two. Can you imagine them all with wooden racquets and what glorious tennis that they would have produced. Can you imagine for example Pete Sampras versus Andre Agassi with wooden racquets? Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg with wooden racquets? The current crop of pretenders with wooden racquets? I don't know...I am only trying to connect the dots. It isn't the player's fault by the way.

I am only a student of the game. Part of my job as a tennis coach is to connect the dots. You know of my paradigm and it's deep and connected roots to traditional and classic tennis. You know how there is this modern element on this forum that from time to time makes some rather rude and otherwise unintelligent or illogical comment without backing any of the discourse with facts. It is only the sound of those that the machine views as useful idiots. Most everyone qualifies for this status...it takes an almost nonexistent quality to think outside of the box these days. The brainwashing has been insidious and unrelenting. Like society as a whole...tennis has been dumbed down. It's only a sign of the times.

Every point in this epic was a masterpiece. That is not to say there weren't mistakes and mishits. But taken as a whole the match must nearly be described point by point. I had to watch the match several times to come up with the words to describe the action. The points were like single brushstrokes that make up a great masterpiece. It reminded me of the moment only a couple of months ago when I stood at the very top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris looking down at that classic and old traditional city in Europe. Each building from that height looked like a single brush stroke and put them all together you had the wonderful visual whole that makes up the city of Paris. Like a beautiful painting every single brush stroke adds up to make up the whole.

The individual buildings on the ground were masterpieces of architecture as well. You walk along the streets admiring the craftsmanship and beauty from the ground level in the micro view as opposed to the macro view from the top of the Eiffel tower.

The same as this match. Such an intricate tapestry of tennis and all of its nuances. The variety of strokes...the variety of tactics. The infinite number of possibilities...permutations and combinations. Then there is the complexity of the players and their emotions and their tactical acumen and their individual interpretation of THE GAME. THE GAME OF TENNIS as it was meant to be played.

In tennis, in art and in life there is a balance. Even the universe is somehow balanced although theoretically. Equal parts positive and negative. Perhaps the human race has an equal balance as well...the summation of all of our actions and intents equal parts good and evil. But one thing is very clear to me and there is absolutely no way around it because in this very case for once and for all I am right...the game of tennis has been compromised by the actions of the very human hands that invented it. That precious balance that the game had and endured for so many years was compromised by an overabundance of speed in the game. It's simple. What was lost was tennis that was played like on this September afternoon between the last of the great rivalries in tennis...John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg.

[don_budge]

From the Horse's mouth...John McEnroe

Every point in this epic was a masterpiece. That is not to say there weren't mistakes and mishits. But taken as a whole the match must nearly be described point by point. I had to watch the match several times to come up with the words to describe the action. The points were like single brushstrokes that make up a great masterpiece. It reminded me of the moment only a couple of months ago when I stood at the very top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris looking down at that classic and old traditional city in Europe. Each building from that height looked like a single brush stroke and put them all together you had the wonderful visual whole that makes up the city of Paris. Like a beautiful painting every single brush stroke adds up to make up the whole.

The individual buildings on the ground were masterpieces of architecture as well. You walk along the streets admiring the craftsmanship and beauty from the ground level in the micro view as opposed to the macro view from the top of the Eiffel tower.

The same as this match. Such an intricate tapestry of tennis and all of its nuances. The variety of strokes...the variety of tactics. The infinite number of possibilities...permutations and combinations. Then there is the complexity of the players and their emotions and their tactical acumen and their individual interpretation of THE GAME. THE GAME OF TENNIS as it was meant to be played.

In tennis, in art and in life there is a balance. Even the universe is somehow balanced although theoretically. Equal parts positive and negative. Perhaps the human race has an equal balance as well...the summation of all of our actions and intents equal parts good and evil. But one thing is very clear to me and there is absolutely no way around it because in this very case for once and for all I am right...the game of tennis has been compromised by the actions of the very human hands that invented it. That precious balance that the game had and endured for so many years was compromised by an overabundance of speed in the game. It's simple. What was lost was tennis that was played like on this September afternoon between the last of the great rivalries in tennis...John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg.

The great John McEnroe discusses the 1980 U. S. Open Championships in his superb autobiography..."Serious". This is what he had to say about it.

"I had won the U. S. Open the year before but I had won it without having to play Connors or Borg. In 1980 I would have to play them both...not to mention Ivan Lendl.

I still consider the '80 Open the best physical achievement in my career. In the quarterfinals, on Thursday night I beat Lendl 7-5 in the fourth set; the next morning Peter (Fleming) and I played the doubles final against Stan Smith and Bob Lutz, which we lost in a tough five setter. I really felt we should have won that match but I couldn't feel too broken up about losing it, since it felt like kind of a last hurrah for the great doubles team of Smith and Lutz (whom we'd beaten in the final the previous year). I had particular respect for Stan, because of his dedication to Davis Cup.

On Saturday I played Connors in a wild semifinal. After I'd won the first set 6-4 and gone up 5-3 in the second, I got a little tight and Jimmy went on an unbelievable tear, working up the crowd in his intimitable style...our seesaw battle sawed once more and we ended up in a fifth set tie-breaker.

I should mention that I have always liked the tie-break rule...the rule of thumb is that the stronger server has the edge...and I knew that was me. I knew if I could just get a couple of good serves in I would win.

Then on Sunday, still depleted, I got into another one of my classic battles against Borg (who hadn't had to play doubles or Connors). The fast court favored me but after I'd gone up 7-6, 6-1 Bjorn once again capitalizing on my fatigue and his superior conditioning, started inching his way back into the match. I'm postitve he had our Wimbledon match in mind...I know I did. He must have been thinking that I would wilt again, and the king of five-setters would once more prevail. Bjorn did much better in five-setters overall than he did in three-setters simply because he was so much fitter than almost anyone else.

Not so fast.

I'm sure that after I lost the third and fourth sets, the crowd thought Borg would ride his momentum to take the fifth set and his first U. S. Open title. Strangely enough...though that very expectation (the crowd is always a critical component in a big match) helped me relax and pump myself up. I had lost a match I should have won at Wimbledon. I didn't want to do that again.

I had come this far, I thought, I could stick with it and win this match. I had a surprise in store for my hometown crowd. Getting off to a good start in the fifth set helped me to grab a second wind, a lost shot of adrenaline. In the end, one break of Bjorn's serve was all I needed.

When we shook hands, I could see that he was devastated. He had started out the year by winning the Masters, his first-ever major title in New York this was supposed to have been the other bookend. I sensed he felt I had finally gotten the upper hand on him."

....from the horse's mouth of the great John McEnroe.