Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
just read this on another board, http://www.peterbodostennisworld.com/
thought it related to some of the threads here lately.
Posted by Chris Lewis 11/04/2006 @ 10:45 PM
Hi Guys,
First, I want to preface my following remarks with an apology. I haven't read all the posts in this thread, so I haven't got the *full* context.
However, I've noted the references to both Bjorn & Vitas, and thought you might find it of interest to hear my take on the two of them, given that I played & practised (in Vitas' case, we practised extensively) with both of them.
As an aside, Bjorn wrote the introduction for a book I released in the mid eighties.
BJORN: I first saw Bjorn play in early '74, when, as a teenager, he won the NZ Open (on fast grass!), beating Onny Parun in the final.
Many of you may not have heard of Onny, but let me assure you, he was an extremely difficult player to beat on grass (Australian Open Finalist & two time Wimbledon quarter-finalist).
Being approximately the same age as Bjorn, and an aspiring player myself, I took a *very* keen interest in his game. The things that impressed me most were his movement, his incredible passing shots, his consistency, and a will of steel. You just *knew* the guy was made of special stuff.
In those days, what really made him stand out was his unique style. *Nobody* was playing with such heavy topspin off both sides, particularly on fast grass courts where penetrating slice approaches (a la Ken Rosewall & Tony Roche) were the order of the day.
(Sidebar -- I never saw Bjorn play either Ken or Tony, and don't want to imply that he wouldn't have had trouble with them. I suspect he would have as I vaguely remember Bjorn finding Tony a real handful during World Team Tennis one year.)
The first (& only) tour match I played against Bjorn was on clay in the quarters of the Swedish Open in the late seventies. His reputation on clay was already one of invincibility. As I recall, he'd won his first two rounds losing only a couple of games (haven't got time to check). And combined with the fact that he
was on home ground on his favorite surface playing a player who was dating his ex-girlfriend, Swedish player Helena Anliot, I don't need to tell you that I was up for the match.
We played on center court in front of packed stands. Being a player who, like Bjorn, also kept in good shape, I wasn't at all daunted by the prospect of a gruelling physical encounter, something that many players were scared of, especially when they played Bjorn.
It needs to be said that playing a match on slow clay using heavy wooden racquets (Bjorn's were strung at 80lbs) was no fun if you weren't in shape. And given that consistently hitting winners from the baseline was not an option, if you were to beat Bjorn from the back of the court, the *only* way to do it was to turn the match into the equivalent of a 10,000 meter race.
And that's pretty much what happened. Without boring you with the details, here's what Bjorn said about the match:
"I played Chris in a tournament in Bastad, Sweden, in 1979 on a slow clay court, and until then I always thought of him as a grasscourt player. But when we played this game, I couldn't shake him off. I stayed back and hit some good groundstrokes and then they came back just as quickly. Finally, I won 7-6 6-3, but it was a tough match."
A tough match indeed!
It was noted above that Bjorn's resting PR was either in the 30's or 40's (it was the 30's), and that he beat an Olympic 110m hurdles Gold Medallist in a European Superstars 600m event (I think it was Guy Drut), which said a lot for his athleticism & stamina.
As someone who comes from a tradition of great middle distance running in NZ (Peter Snell, John Walker), I know a GREAT athlete when I see one, let alone play one. I can say with virtual certainty that Bjorn would have been able to run 100m in around the 11.0 second mark (that's 10 flat for 100 yards), and that he would have been somehere in the low 30 minute range for 10k (and better with specific training). He also was very strong, deceptively so.
Combine those physical attributes with a will of steel and a playing style that was very awkward to counter -- high bouncing, heavily topspun shots if you stayed back, and sharply dipping, vicious crosscourt angles if you came in (don't forget his topspin lob & the difficulty of smashing them with a racquet with the head-size of a pea, and a sweet-spot the size of an amoeba) -- and what you've got is someone who achieved what Borg achieved.
With the old wooden racquets, believe me, it was virtually impossible to penetrate his game. On clay, nobody could -- no-one came close -- and on grass, well, nodbody could either...until John came along, with his extraordinary talent.
Although I'm not going to get drawn into any debate as to whether a great player from a former era would beat a great player from a current era, I can't stress enough that it's very easy to drop context; namely, the playing conditions that characterize(d) each era.
For example, I started on the tour in the mid seventies with a wooden Kramer Pro-Staff, switching to a Prince Woodie in '81 (was THAT ever a process), & the Prince Graphite (the Original grommet-less Classic) in '82.
Believe me, today's generation of racquets are *so* effortless to play with, I can't overstate how much a part technology has played in the evolution of the game.
I'm digressing, but I had the privilege of hitting with Lew Hoad when he visited Harry Hopman at "Hop's" Academy in Florida many years ago. I also had the privilege of hitting with Rod Laver, and partnering him in a Senior's event in the 90's. What those guys could do with the old racquets was extraordinary.
Hoad was a bull of a man who could flick those 14oz tree trunks around as if they were matchsticks. And Rod had such incredible variety. He had a heavyweight game, with an artist's touch. His skill level was McEnroeish, in the sense he could do things that nobody else in his own era could do.
But can you compare THEM with Bjorn...or Roger?
Back on topic:
The question was posed as to whether Bjorn was better on clay or grass. If you polled the players of his era, me included, I think the consensus would be virtually unanimous -- clay, in spite of his winning five consecutive Wimbledons.
Noted claycourt specialists like Corrado Barrazutti, who was an extremely patient, fit player would view Bjorn as unbeatable, and play accordingly, whereas on grass, there were many players who actually *believed* they could win, even though few of them did.
If you've got this far, sorry for the anti-climactic ending. I intended to include my take on Vitas, but I've run out of time. :-(
However, I promise to post off Part Two as soon as I get a spare moment.
In Suspense,
Chris
thought it related to some of the threads here lately.
Posted by Chris Lewis 11/04/2006 @ 10:45 PM
Hi Guys,
First, I want to preface my following remarks with an apology. I haven't read all the posts in this thread, so I haven't got the *full* context.
However, I've noted the references to both Bjorn & Vitas, and thought you might find it of interest to hear my take on the two of them, given that I played & practised (in Vitas' case, we practised extensively) with both of them.
As an aside, Bjorn wrote the introduction for a book I released in the mid eighties.
BJORN: I first saw Bjorn play in early '74, when, as a teenager, he won the NZ Open (on fast grass!), beating Onny Parun in the final.
Many of you may not have heard of Onny, but let me assure you, he was an extremely difficult player to beat on grass (Australian Open Finalist & two time Wimbledon quarter-finalist).
Being approximately the same age as Bjorn, and an aspiring player myself, I took a *very* keen interest in his game. The things that impressed me most were his movement, his incredible passing shots, his consistency, and a will of steel. You just *knew* the guy was made of special stuff.
In those days, what really made him stand out was his unique style. *Nobody* was playing with such heavy topspin off both sides, particularly on fast grass courts where penetrating slice approaches (a la Ken Rosewall & Tony Roche) were the order of the day.
(Sidebar -- I never saw Bjorn play either Ken or Tony, and don't want to imply that he wouldn't have had trouble with them. I suspect he would have as I vaguely remember Bjorn finding Tony a real handful during World Team Tennis one year.)
The first (& only) tour match I played against Bjorn was on clay in the quarters of the Swedish Open in the late seventies. His reputation on clay was already one of invincibility. As I recall, he'd won his first two rounds losing only a couple of games (haven't got time to check). And combined with the fact that he
was on home ground on his favorite surface playing a player who was dating his ex-girlfriend, Swedish player Helena Anliot, I don't need to tell you that I was up for the match.
We played on center court in front of packed stands. Being a player who, like Bjorn, also kept in good shape, I wasn't at all daunted by the prospect of a gruelling physical encounter, something that many players were scared of, especially when they played Bjorn.
It needs to be said that playing a match on slow clay using heavy wooden racquets (Bjorn's were strung at 80lbs) was no fun if you weren't in shape. And given that consistently hitting winners from the baseline was not an option, if you were to beat Bjorn from the back of the court, the *only* way to do it was to turn the match into the equivalent of a 10,000 meter race.
And that's pretty much what happened. Without boring you with the details, here's what Bjorn said about the match:
"I played Chris in a tournament in Bastad, Sweden, in 1979 on a slow clay court, and until then I always thought of him as a grasscourt player. But when we played this game, I couldn't shake him off. I stayed back and hit some good groundstrokes and then they came back just as quickly. Finally, I won 7-6 6-3, but it was a tough match."
A tough match indeed!
It was noted above that Bjorn's resting PR was either in the 30's or 40's (it was the 30's), and that he beat an Olympic 110m hurdles Gold Medallist in a European Superstars 600m event (I think it was Guy Drut), which said a lot for his athleticism & stamina.
As someone who comes from a tradition of great middle distance running in NZ (Peter Snell, John Walker), I know a GREAT athlete when I see one, let alone play one. I can say with virtual certainty that Bjorn would have been able to run 100m in around the 11.0 second mark (that's 10 flat for 100 yards), and that he would have been somehere in the low 30 minute range for 10k (and better with specific training). He also was very strong, deceptively so.
Combine those physical attributes with a will of steel and a playing style that was very awkward to counter -- high bouncing, heavily topspun shots if you stayed back, and sharply dipping, vicious crosscourt angles if you came in (don't forget his topspin lob & the difficulty of smashing them with a racquet with the head-size of a pea, and a sweet-spot the size of an amoeba) -- and what you've got is someone who achieved what Borg achieved.
With the old wooden racquets, believe me, it was virtually impossible to penetrate his game. On clay, nobody could -- no-one came close -- and on grass, well, nodbody could either...until John came along, with his extraordinary talent.
Although I'm not going to get drawn into any debate as to whether a great player from a former era would beat a great player from a current era, I can't stress enough that it's very easy to drop context; namely, the playing conditions that characterize(d) each era.
For example, I started on the tour in the mid seventies with a wooden Kramer Pro-Staff, switching to a Prince Woodie in '81 (was THAT ever a process), & the Prince Graphite (the Original grommet-less Classic) in '82.
Believe me, today's generation of racquets are *so* effortless to play with, I can't overstate how much a part technology has played in the evolution of the game.
I'm digressing, but I had the privilege of hitting with Lew Hoad when he visited Harry Hopman at "Hop's" Academy in Florida many years ago. I also had the privilege of hitting with Rod Laver, and partnering him in a Senior's event in the 90's. What those guys could do with the old racquets was extraordinary.
Hoad was a bull of a man who could flick those 14oz tree trunks around as if they were matchsticks. And Rod had such incredible variety. He had a heavyweight game, with an artist's touch. His skill level was McEnroeish, in the sense he could do things that nobody else in his own era could do.
But can you compare THEM with Bjorn...or Roger?
Back on topic:
The question was posed as to whether Bjorn was better on clay or grass. If you polled the players of his era, me included, I think the consensus would be virtually unanimous -- clay, in spite of his winning five consecutive Wimbledons.
Noted claycourt specialists like Corrado Barrazutti, who was an extremely patient, fit player would view Bjorn as unbeatable, and play accordingly, whereas on grass, there were many players who actually *believed* they could win, even though few of them did.
If you've got this far, sorry for the anti-climactic ending. I intended to include my take on Vitas, but I've run out of time. :-(
However, I promise to post off Part Two as soon as I get a spare moment.
In Suspense,
Chris
