The modern baseline topspin power game owes everything to Borg. What came after was an evolution, both physically and technologically, of what he started.
@Cliff589 he only went to the australian when he was very young. It wasn't that important back then. And yes, sadly enough no US. But then again McEnroe, Connors never won the French. Lendl never won Wimbledon.
The only title that Borg truly deserves is the most overrated player in tennis history. Was he great for his time? Of course. Was he deserving of all the ridiculous accolades of his fans who claim some sort of athletic divinity for him? Give me a break. Putting aside the obvious differences in racquets and string technology, Borg or any other player from the 70s and 80s would be miles behind today's top players in terms of athleticism, fitness and the overall well-roundedness of their game. Look at how flat-footed and slow they were, especially Lendl. And whatever racquets Borg used, that silly little BH would not get it done in today's game. Finally, the thing that Borg's fans and admirers never want to admit is his mental weakness and lack of fight. As soon as McEnroe started beating him, Borg ran off with his tail between his legs. Compare that with the Big Three, all of whom experienced significant up and downs in their career and constantly reinvented themselves and improved various aspects of their games. Cue the old geezers ranting about S&V and wooden racquets lol
Some of those details of this vintage footage are just awesome. The loopy play, the two handed backhand of Borg ending as a one hander, Lendl hitting his forehand very close to the body, the way how Lendl loses the matchpoint, the tiny medal he gets for being second, the way how Borg looks when he holds up the trophy.
@Cliff589 put these raquets in the hands of todays players and they'd all look totally lost. for once in their lives they'd have to create power and control all by themselves and not rely on their strings.
Borg playing with wood going against the composite racket of Ivan Lendl and simply out working his opponent in every possible way. Nobody will ever duplicate three Channel slams. 1978 1979 and 1980. Borg was the best player in the history of the sport going from the slowest surface to the fastest surface when grass was real and only a 2-week time span❤😊
Borg was my favourite player. I was only 9 when he retired. I was a tennis fanatic then my hero was gone I was devastated. I wish the ATP would have allowed him to continue. He was losing motivation though. Before Roland Garros he only played match on clay as a warm up lost in 1r Monte Carlo. Then won his 6th French open in 8 appearances. I think he could have added to his 11 grand slams but we’ll never know.
1981 Borg played only 9 events. In 1982 their was a new rule where players had to commit to 10 events. Borg refused to sign it in September 81. He told McEnroe he was quitting. He played numerous exhibitions in 82 but only 2 ranking events .
@@willnill7946 No, ATP want him to play a certain number of tournaments and Borg refused it, he simply wanted calm down, but they didn't come to an agreement, so in 1983, Borg simply quit to play tennis. That exhibitions where only an "patch" for his sponsors, because nobody even thought, he wouldn't play tennis in 1982, so he has to fulfil, somehow his business commitments.
Yes, but look then when today's players test Ivan and Borg's rackets. They are completely worthless and would not be able to do any of what they are doing today.
For all those saying the game has changed-- it has changed because the racquets have brought about major changes in strokes and strategies. Borg couldn't go out and blast every ball with a wooden donnay. He's at a disadvantage here and didn't realize it.
Lendl then became the fittest on tour by the mid 80s. Anything he considered weak he went away and worked on. Borg had incredible stamina due to his hill running and intervals, Lendl was the first to combine stamina with strength and cross-training. By this point, Borg had sadly retired.
And to think that Borg was already thinking about retirement, that his mind was half way gone from tennis. And he beat Lendl and then made W finals for 6th year in a row and also the US Open final. 11 GS in total with just 25 yo…
Yep I saw a documentary made in 1983 where he said that he had to be talked into playing the whole 1981 season. He was done after 1980. Amazing he still won French and made finals of Wimbledon and u.S.
@@chuckdeless9891 Yeah, but not Lendl's racket. He played the Adidas GTX Pro until 1990. And the Adidas was basically a paintjob of the Kneissel White Star Pro, a 1977 racket. From 1990 on Lendl played a Mizuno Racket, that was basically slightly bigger version of the Adidas. And on grass he played a Bosworth frame.
He was here....but it would not be long before a young hellion would beat him down, and worst of all expose him as a quitter who ran away when he knew he was longer #1. Bjorn to John in private "if you're not #1 you're nothing...."
Borg was tired & he had some kind of burnout! He was also divorcing with his wife Marianna & he had problems with his coach..... just he wanted to have some break!
Borg looks thin and out of shape and Lendl looks flustered by the heat. the points shown are championship quality. Borg in his career was an absolute legend as his stamina was incredible. His resting heart rate was once claimed to be under 40 beats per minute.
@@jasonbrooks6562 Well, Lendl was entrenched in the top 4 by 1982, I think. He started winning lots of tournaments. You could even see from 1981 that he was going to be a force. He impressed me a lot in this 1981 French Open.
It's futile to try to compare players of different eras. I prefer the game as it was played in the 70s and 80s. More contrasting styles, more finesse and creativity to win. Power has taken over, even on clay. This was intentional and the game isn't as popular. Everything was changed to emphasize power, touch means nothing. The balls, the racquets, the strings and even the clay. The French on clay today looks almost like the US Open on hard courts in 1981. Most of the men are clones of each other. That is one reason why Nadal and Federer were so popular; in addition to being great champions and sportsmen, they had contrasting styles and not just power. I find it difficult to sit through an entire pro match now. It's just two robots slamming the ball as hard as they can and grunting for no reason.
To me I watched these old matches specially the 1984 one with John McEnroe and I just don’t see how Lendl is number one in the world. It’s just the old brackets in the old thing they don’t have that much pace. His shots are just loopy and pace you know so it’s just weird.
U will find nonsense stupid people when it comes on tennis videos, the players in the 70s to 90 s had different styles n racquet technology, now the technology has changed but we can't deny what the old generations did n what the big 3 have achieved, just one stat is enough to say how good n consistent the big 3 were, from roger Federer becoming number one n then rafa Djokovic n murray for a brief period it is close to 20 years while in 1980s some 5 players which were all legends got their hands to number one but no one was as superior as we witnessed in the last 2 decades
The biggest difference is there seems to be no effort to craft a point and try to make the opponent go into defense. It seems just hitting the ball back and waiting for the opponent to make a mistake. They are just standing in their positions and exchanging rallies, no hustle, no pushing the other into a corner. That's where I think the Big 3 will be always the greatest ever.
This isn't the players fault, its simple racquet technology. Same reason serve and volley as a play style is virtually extinct these days. The clay looks boring though back in those days. Too slow for serve and volley like at wimbledon but the racquet technology means baseline shots aren't as powerful either
Have any of the big three changed the way tennis has been playing since Borg appeared? They are a copyright of Borg technique, the forehand of Federer is exactly the same to Borg forehand, the style of Rafa in RG is a copy of Borg.
simply racquet technology, are you aware of the surface changes since 2001? ATP only interest is money, the change on surfaces killed the serve and volley players, the sponsors request a 3 hours TV show wiht artificial gladiators, they need to sell shirts and Tennis shoes and they want icons to wear their products, it's happening in all sports and you can blame Borg for that @@HobbenTroutski
Slow it may be in comparison to 21 century tennis but back then, Borg was king. We can scoff today and talk about how slow it was but it doesn't demean the accomplishments of these guys. People who know tennis will appreciate the place in history that these guys hold.
@@capricornmagic63 Of course, I totally agree, just seems strange by today standards, but it is like comparing, i don't know, Formula 1 racing of 50 years ago to today. Of course in both cases guys today profit from technological evolution (some more, some less) but also the technique and strategies change. It is interesting, in my opinion.
@Jim Magnet Man And managing to put so much topspin with that small wooden racquet, whereas players today have larger head synthetics and string designed to grab the ball to do it.
@Jim Magnet Man And regarding the racquet, he used the Donnay one painted black when he played in Europe, but the one he played with in the US had different cosmetics.
I think it would be worth mentioning that what we're seeing here is recorded using old tech, so lots of things look and seem slower, etc. I would guess it was a bit slower though, but how much...? I'm sure there may be some measurables that were recorded at the time. Here Borg strung his racquet at 80lbs., Lendl 72.5lbs. Lendl came on the scene known to have a big forehand, and that's what you see here on old tech. And I'm sure Roscoe Tanner would be a fairly big server today a he was probably the biggest server back then. Be careful what you see on old video...
Por Dios lo que comparas una época en la que el tenis no ok estaba tan desarrollado co no o ahora, en esa comparacion estúpida nadal en esa época no hubiera podido jugar como el juega ponele lógica men la velocidad de juego, las bolas, las raquetas, la técnica era otra época men🤦
This match was a year shy of 40 years ago. If fed , nadal and joka played with small wooden racquets theyd probably beat borg and lendl 6-2 . But borg and lendl would both absolutely destroy the 1970 french winner jan kodes 60 60 . The increase in performance over 11 years 70 to 81 is bigger than the increase in performance over 39 years 81 to 2020 , if you corrected for equipment, ie of fed joka and nadal had to use a small headed raquet
@@iang8169 Um, based on what would Borg and Lendl "destroy" Kodes? That's nonsense. Although Kodes is not among the greatest of French Open champions, that's largely due to the fact that some of the best players at the time skipped the event. For example, neither Rosewall nor Laver played there that year. But this doesn't take away from the fact that Kodes was an excellent player. Besides, are you suggesting that Rosewall and Laver weren't as good as Borg? Because that's absurd.
@@JD-jc8gp kodes beat nastase in the final who by then was the best clay courter in the world, better than laver 33 yrs old and rosewall 36yrs old on clay, so kodes was the legit winner . And let me clarify what i mean by using the sprinting analogy. Up until usain bolt , jessy owens was regarded as the best sprinter of all time . Justin gatlin wasnt even rated top 10 all time . But in a mythical head to head match up gatlin would have destroyed owens based on their best times , yet owens was the greatest of all time ( now regarded as second greatest after bolt ) . Now just my opinion , but the gap in absolute level of play beteen joko and nadal and 40 yrs back with borg and lendl is smaller than the gap in absolute level between borg and lendl in 81 and 10 yrs back with kodes, newc , stan smith etc ..
Borg era impressionante mentalmente. Podia estar a trocar bolas durante um terramoto e não se desconcentrava. Comparar eras é o pior que se pode fazer. Naquela altura Borg foi o melhor.
Legends of the game. Both of them.
Back when Ivan landed on his right foot when serving…what a great match, thanks for posting
yes, borg is the most important player of tennis history , so bigger than any other player since
Most people today don't know who Borg is. Happens to the best, that's life.
The modern baseline topspin power game owes everything to Borg. What came after was an evolution, both physically and technologically, of what he started.
He was like a god.
A status that no other player will ever achieve
Here, here.
he sure was
@Cliff589 he only went to the australian when he was very young. It wasn't that important back then. And yes, sadly enough no US. But then again McEnroe, Connors never won the French. Lendl never won Wimbledon.
The only title that Borg truly deserves is the most overrated player in tennis history. Was he great for his time? Of course. Was he deserving of all the ridiculous accolades of his fans who claim some sort of athletic divinity for him? Give me a break.
Putting aside the obvious differences in racquets and string technology, Borg or any other player from the 70s and 80s would be miles behind today's top players in terms of athleticism, fitness and the overall well-roundedness of their game. Look at how flat-footed and slow they were, especially Lendl. And whatever racquets Borg used, that silly little BH would not get it done in today's game.
Finally, the thing that Borg's fans and admirers never want to admit is his mental weakness and lack of fight. As soon as McEnroe started beating him, Borg ran off with his tail between his legs. Compare that with the Big Three, all of whom experienced significant up and downs in their career and constantly reinvented themselves and improved various aspects of their games.
Cue the old geezers ranting about S&V and wooden racquets lol
@@dl3988 you don't know much about tennis, do you?
Some of those details of this vintage footage are just awesome. The loopy play, the two handed backhand of Borg ending as a one hander, Lendl hitting his forehand very close to the body, the way how Lendl loses the matchpoint, the tiny medal he gets for being second, the way how Borg looks when he holds up the trophy.
0% histrionics. 100% tennis. No challenges to any line calls. They were two craftsmen going about their business. A lesson to us all.
Lendl challenged lines calls many times in his career.
Borg was incredible. The stamina, speed and determination and focus was inspiring.
two of the alltime greats
@Cliff589 put these raquets in the hands of todays players and they'd all look totally lost. for once in their lives they'd have to create power and control all by themselves and not rely on their strings.
Thanks for posting - great moment in tennis history.
Borg playing with wood going against the composite racket of Ivan Lendl and simply out working his opponent in every possible way. Nobody will ever duplicate three Channel slams. 1978 1979 and 1980.
Borg was the best player in the history of the sport going from the slowest surface to the fastest surface when grass was real and only a 2-week time span❤😊
Borg was my favourite player. I was only 9 when he retired. I was a tennis fanatic then my hero was gone I was devastated. I wish the ATP would have allowed him to continue. He was losing motivation though. Before Roland Garros he only played match on clay as a warm up lost in 1r Monte Carlo. Then won his 6th French open in 8 appearances. I think he could have added to his 11 grand slams but we’ll never know.
Why wouldn’t the atp let him continue?
1981 Borg played only 9 events. In 1982 their was a new rule where players had to commit to 10 events. Borg refused to sign it in September 81. He told McEnroe he was quitting. He played numerous exhibitions in 82 but only 2 ranking events .
@@markanderson8006 so they allowed him to play 2 ranking events but no more than that??
@@markanderson8006 no, he had to play something other than exhibitions or he would have to qualify for the majors. He thought he was above everyone
@@willnill7946 No, ATP want him to play a certain number of tournaments and Borg refused it, he simply wanted calm down, but they didn't come to an agreement, so in 1983, Borg simply quit to play tennis.
That exhibitions where only an "patch" for his sponsors, because nobody even thought, he wouldn't play tennis in 1982, so he has to fulfil, somehow his business commitments.
The game has really changed since then.
That happened because of the changes made to the rackets, I think.
Well rackets got better they clay has also gone way faster than back in the day
Yes, but look then when today's players test Ivan and Borg's rackets. They are completely worthless and would not be able to do any of what they are doing today.
@@magnusenamdThat is an untested and unverified assumption.😂
For all those saying the game has changed-- it has changed because the racquets have brought about major changes in strokes and strategies. Borg couldn't go out and blast every ball with a wooden donnay. He's at a disadvantage here and didn't realize it.
Borg had the fitness level that even Lendl couldn’t touch. Borg simply cracked him. Lendl thru in the towel. Match over .
Lendl then became the fittest on tour by the mid 80s. Anything he considered weak he went away and worked on. Borg had incredible stamina due to his hill running and intervals, Lendl was the first to combine stamina with strength and cross-training. By this point, Borg had sadly retired.
Nessuno ha vinto quanto Borg all'età di 25 anni...il mito corre lontano....
in proporzione a gli anni giocati circa 9 è il tennista che ha vinto di più nella storia
Borg has winning h2h against Lendl, Lendl has winning h2h against Agassi, Agassi has winning h2h against Kuerten, Kuerten is up against Federer.
No emotion, just winning. Swedish steel at its best.
Not making a big display of emotions does not mean you haven’t any … He was the definition of poker face
And to think that Borg was already thinking about retirement, that his mind was half way gone from tennis. And he beat Lendl and then made W finals for 6th year in a row and also the US Open final. 11 GS in total with just 25 yo…
I think that US Open final was what really killed him. He felt that he was playing well and had a good chance to win, but McEnroe played better.
Yep I saw a documentary made in 1983 where he said that he had to be talked into playing the whole 1981 season. He was done after 1980. Amazing he still won French and made finals of Wimbledon and u.S.
Very nice tennis
How much has tennis chanced since those days! Much stronger and faster today. Despite, it is a joy to watch these old games.
Ivan Lendl is my tennis hero
Lendl got so much better by the mid 80s. Hit it so much stronger
rackets got lighter and more powerful
@@chuckdeless9891 Yeah, but not Lendl's racket. He played the Adidas GTX Pro until 1990. And the Adidas was basically a paintjob of the Kneissel White Star Pro, a 1977 racket. From 1990 on Lendl played a Mizuno Racket, that was basically slightly bigger version of the Adidas. And on grass he played a Bosworth frame.
Borg was the GOAT.
Two tennis legends: one at his peak and the other one still maturing. When tennis was pure romanticism...
it was only 5 years between these players still Borg came from a different era
When men played without grunting 😊
Real tennis is played with a racquet no larger than a 85 square inch head. Beyond that size of racquet the game becomes a baseline competition.
Clash of eras
Borg had a terrific one hand backhand, got more speed on the ball with one hand.
Borg hits two hands on the backhand. Don't really understand what you are saying.
King Borg rules👑❤️
He was here....but it would not be long before a young hellion would beat him down, and worst of all expose him as a quitter who ran away when he knew he was longer #1. Bjorn to John in private "if you're not #1 you're nothing...."
@@datacipher Borg lost to mcenroe because he was tired & through with Tennis! He was tired of being a champion!
McEnroe was just the final straw. Borg was tiring of tennis long before that Wimbledon.
Borg was tired & he had some kind of burnout! He was also divorcing with his wife Marianna & he had problems with his coach..... just he wanted to have some break!
I like how they’re just not even jogging much less running at 12:37 onward
Great match.
Borg wore him down in the end.
Well, Lendl wasn't the only opponent the Borg wore down. Borg was a master of the five setter. Unstoppable force.
Borg looks thin and out of shape and Lendl looks flustered by the heat. the points shown are championship quality. Borg in his career was an absolute legend as his stamina was incredible. His resting heart rate was once claimed to be under 40 beats per minute.
Didn’t seem Lendl was hitting it very hard. Two legends👍
Matchpoint, then short shakehands, game over.
🥂❤🥂
Borg had superior net skills and can out rally Lendl. Only chance Lendl has to win is try to serve better and redline the returns.
Please Agassi Vs Moya 1999
Lendl veniva aveva giocato il giorno prima cinque set contro Clerk. Mentre Borg aveva vinto in tre set la semifinale e riposato un giorno in più...
In più, c'è da dire che il primo Lendl andava soggetto a crolli fisici al quinto set...
Lendl needed to change shirt. Borg didnt.
Borg did: same shirt style lol
@@iggypopisgod9 Interesting! Where do we see that? Borg was known to rarely have to do this.
You could see the beginning of the Lendl style that would dominate in the 80's.
Really? It was only '86 to '89. That he was definitely #1. Mac ran him close in 1985 and Wilander in grand slams owned 1988.
@@jasonbrooks6562 Well, Lendl was entrenched in the top 4 by 1982, I think. He started winning lots of tournaments. You could even see from 1981 that he was going to be a force. He impressed me a lot in this 1981 French Open.
After Laver the second greatest player of all time
Lendl is the first GOAT of the modern tennis!
Lendl my n1, borg my n2... 😢
Lendel,quand il était n1,il savait tous faire comme ceux qui sont venus après lui.Epoustouflant aussi
It's futile to try to compare players of different eras. I prefer the game as it was played in the 70s and 80s. More contrasting styles, more finesse and creativity to win. Power has taken over, even on clay. This was intentional and the game isn't as popular. Everything was changed to emphasize power, touch means nothing. The balls, the racquets, the strings and even the clay. The French on clay today looks almost like the US Open on hard courts in 1981. Most of the men are clones of each other. That is one reason why Nadal and Federer were so popular; in addition to being great champions and sportsmen, they had contrasting styles and not just power. I find it difficult to sit through an entire pro match now. It's just two robots slamming the ball as hard as they can and grunting for no reason.
The balls were hit so much softer back then. Shallow balls were not hit for winners so much either.
Borg had Lendl at that time !!!!!!!!!
To me I watched these old matches specially the 1984 one with John McEnroe and I just don’t see how Lendl is number one in the world. It’s just the old brackets in the old thing they don’t have that much pace. His shots are just loopy and pace you know so it’s just weird.
Imagine what opelka doing with both
Yeah. With a wooden racquet and sheep gut strings made in a glorified shed. He'd absolutely slaughtered - like Roscoe Tanner was on clay.
The same two players on carpet 5-6 months later. Borg crushes Lendl at his own game...ua-cam.com/video/yyuiEzBb7hk/v-deo.htmlsi=TeguT21Af64d_O9q
Thank you for this link we all forget Borg had a resting heart rate of 38
That was before Lynda was the Man of steel. His fitness was not up to the level in that time in his career
Andrew Castle really hasn't got a clue about tennis. Crap player. Even worst commentator.
U will find nonsense stupid people when it comes on tennis videos, the players in the 70s to 90 s had different styles n racquet technology, now the technology has changed but we can't deny what the old generations did n what the big 3 have achieved, just one stat is enough to say how good n consistent the big 3 were, from roger Federer becoming number one n then rafa Djokovic n murray for a brief period it is close to 20 years while in 1980s some 5 players which were all legends got their hands to number one but no one was as superior as we witnessed in the last 2 decades
The biggest difference is there seems to be no effort to craft a point and try to make the opponent go into defense. It seems just hitting the ball back and waiting for the opponent to make a mistake. They are just standing in their positions and exchanging rallies, no hustle, no pushing the other into a corner. That's where I think the Big 3 will be always the greatest ever.
Have you ever played with a wooden raquet?
This isn't the players fault, its simple racquet technology. Same reason serve and volley as a play style is virtually extinct these days. The clay looks boring though back in those days. Too slow for serve and volley like at wimbledon but the racquet technology means baseline shots aren't as powerful either
Have any of the big three changed the way tennis has been playing since Borg appeared? They are a copyright of Borg technique, the forehand of Federer is exactly the same to Borg forehand, the style of Rafa in RG is a copy of Borg.
simply racquet technology, are you aware of the surface changes since 2001? ATP only interest is money, the change on surfaces killed the serve and volley players, the sponsors request a 3 hours TV show wiht artificial gladiators, they need to sell shirts and Tennis shoes and they want icons to wear their products, it's happening in all sports and you can blame Borg for that @@HobbenTroutski
Different era plus the games shifted. Clay is faster today and pays off to make opponent run.
Wow Tennis was slow back in those days
Slow it may be in comparison to 21 century tennis but back then, Borg was king. We can scoff today and talk about how slow it was but it doesn't demean the accomplishments of these guys. People who know tennis will appreciate the place in history that these guys hold.
@@capricornmagic63
Of course, I totally agree, just seems strange by today standards, but it is like comparing, i don't know, Formula 1 racing of 50 years ago to today. Of course in both cases guys today profit from technological evolution (some more, some less) but also the technique and strategies change. It is interesting, in my opinion.
@Jim Magnet Man And managing to put so much topspin with that small wooden racquet, whereas players today have larger head synthetics and string designed to grab the ball to do it.
@Jim Magnet Man And regarding the racquet, he used the Donnay one painted black when he played in Europe, but the one he played with in the US had different cosmetics.
I think it would be worth mentioning that what we're seeing here is recorded using old tech, so lots of things look and seem slower, etc. I would guess it was a bit slower though, but how much...? I'm sure there may be some measurables that were recorded at the time. Here Borg strung his racquet at 80lbs., Lendl 72.5lbs. Lendl came on the scene known to have a big forehand, and that's what you see here on old tech. And I'm sure Roscoe Tanner would be a fairly big server today a he was probably the biggest server back then. Be careful what you see on old video...
Borg would have made Nadal look stupid on clay.
Daumen runter für die Werbung und für armselige 15 Minuten.
Sierasorteigpur
Quinamenadesorteigesfeiallavors
Perestasuposadamentaltoplo
Sifosaixivosaltresnopodieuarribaralafinal
Fome y demasiado lento los puntos, el tenis femenino de hoy es más divertido de ver
What a boring game😮. Wimbledon at the same time was twice as fast and entertaining 👌👍
yo veo jugar a esta gente y si Nadal hubiera coincidido con elos hubiera acabado siempre 6-0, 6-0, 6-0
Las raquetas eran mas pesadas y pequeñas y se nota
Por Dios lo que comparas una época en la que el tenis no ok estaba tan desarrollado co no o ahora, en esa comparacion estúpida nadal en esa época no hubiera podido jugar como el juega ponele lógica men la velocidad de juego, las bolas, las raquetas, la técnica era otra época men🤦
Paragone totalmente illogico ed infantile.
If Nadel had to play with a wood racquet, he wouldn’t even play college let alone pro tennis.
Se ve que nunca jugaste con una raqueta de madera.
Time has not been kind to these players.
This match was a year shy of 40 years ago. If fed , nadal and joka played with small wooden racquets theyd probably beat borg and lendl 6-2 . But borg and lendl would both absolutely destroy the 1970 french winner jan kodes 60 60 . The increase in performance over 11 years 70 to 81 is bigger than the increase in performance over 39 years 81 to 2020 , if you corrected for equipment, ie of fed joka and nadal had to use a small headed raquet
@@iang8169 Um, based on what would Borg and Lendl "destroy" Kodes? That's nonsense. Although Kodes is not among the greatest of French Open champions, that's largely due to the fact that some of the best players at the time skipped the event. For example, neither Rosewall nor Laver played there that year. But this doesn't take away from the fact that Kodes was an excellent player. Besides, are you suggesting that Rosewall and Laver weren't as good as Borg? Because that's absurd.
@@JD-jc8gp kodes beat nastase in the final who by then was the best clay courter in the world, better than laver 33 yrs old and rosewall 36yrs old on clay, so kodes was the legit winner .
And let me clarify what i mean by using the sprinting analogy. Up until usain bolt , jessy owens was regarded as the best sprinter of all time . Justin gatlin wasnt even rated top 10 all time . But in a mythical head to head match up gatlin would have destroyed owens based on their best times , yet owens was the greatest of all time ( now regarded as second greatest after bolt ) .
Now just my opinion , but the gap in absolute level of play beteen joko and nadal and 40 yrs back with borg and lendl is smaller than the gap in absolute level between borg and lendl in 81 and 10 yrs back with kodes, newc , stan smith etc ..
@@iang8169 No, no. This is completely wrong. Nastase is not even close to Laver's and Rosewall's level in 1970. The rest you write is also nonsense.
With wooden racquet neither Nadal or Djoko would beat Borg
LENDL GRAN TENISTA;,, PERO SE ENFRENTÓ CON UNA "PARED"....... PUNTOOOO!!!
Che lagna, tirano pianissimo
Borg era impressionante mentalmente. Podia estar a trocar bolas durante um terramoto e não se desconcentrava. Comparar eras é o pior que se pode fazer. Naquela altura Borg foi o melhor.
Con i giocatori di oggi non riuscirebbero a stare nei primi 100 posti