Hypothetical Match up: RFederer vs BBorg

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by 6-3 6-0, May 4, 2014.

?

Who would win lose often than not?

  1. RFederer

    17 vote(s)
    60.7%
  2. BBorg

    11 vote(s)
    39.3%
  1. 6-3 6-0

    6-3 6-0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages:
    1,575
    Location:
    Fedal era
    Since everyone is starting one, lemme add this this into the mix too:

    RG: 5-0 (or 4-1) BBorg
    Wimbledon: 3-2 RFederer
    USO: 5-0 (or 4-1) RFederer

    Overall : 8-7 RFederer

    Discuss
     
    #1
  2. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,334
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Looks good to me. I think 4-1 to Borg at the FO and 4-1 to Federer at the USO.
     
    #2
  3. Vcore89

    Vcore89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    The synapse
    Borg 5 RG, 6 W and 4 USO
    Federer 5 AO, 8 W and 7 USO

    assuming they are the big two. Federer can play very well with wooden racquet.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #3
  4. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,724
    Location:
    U.S
    RG : 4-1 borg
    wimbledon : 3-2 federer ( actually make it 7-3 federer out of 10 )
    USO : 4-1 federer
     
    #4
  5. 6-3 6-0

    6-3 6-0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages:
    1,575
    Location:
    Fedal era
    Damn! I messed up the poll :(
    The "win" word shouldn't be there and "more" should be there between lose and often...How do I edit it?
     
    #5
  6. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,202
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    wooden or graphite rackets?
     
    #6
  7. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    Borg on grass and clay, Fed on hardcourts. People are so overrated Fed's grass game. The guy lost to a dirtballer on grass in his PRIME at wimbledon for god sakes. And borg was 3 times the player on grass that Nadal is
     
    #7
  8. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,579
    RG-- 5-0 Borg
    Wim-3-2 Federer
    USO-5-0 Federer

    8-7 Federer
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #8
  9. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,724
    Location:
    U.S
    bitc* please. NAdal in 07/08 form would've taken down sampras of 96/98/99 ( before the final ) in 4 sets. He wouldn't have choked like Goran did in the 98 final either ....

    oh and just a reminder, pre-prime federer beat 4 time defending champion sampras on fast grass in 01 in a very good match ....go cry elsewhere ....
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #9
  10. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224



    Defensive Dirt Ballers don't beat Prime Sampras at Wimbledon Especially ones that stand 2 miles back on the return of serve. . But thanks for trying to make an absurd argument.

    Sampras isn't Federer. He isn't gonna let dirtballer roll all over him outside of clay like Fed allowed to happen
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #10
  11. urundai

    urundai Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    914
    Not so fast. In the slower wimbledon courts in 2000s, Nadal would've made Pete cry.

    Sorry, 2008 Nadal easily defeats the 1990s Pete in 2008 wimbledon courts.
     
    #11
  12. forehand fan

    forehand fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2013
    Messages:
    309
    just other day i was watching a highlights of borg vs mcenroe wimbledon final. borg wasn't exactly standing inside the court while returning serve
     
    #12
  13. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Never played fast grass, while Borg never played slow grass

    If fed could play wooden, Borg could played graphite ( he of all players was the one with very high rackets stringing in his heyday)

    But since Borg was so much better on slow turf, the edge leans towards the swede

    IMO, Borg wins 60% or 65% of their matches over 5 sets

    If Fed gets dismantled and tired against Nadal, figure out against Borg, a man who never got tired ever.
     
    #13
  14. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Well said dude

    Borg won 3 W on fast grass after winning 3 RG titles on slow clay.

    Not comparable with the all court are the same situation Nadal has beeen favoured to play in.

    On current Grass, Borg would play like he played at RG

    On old grass, Nadal does what Wilander did. A couple of QF and bye bye

    "Tanner is amazing on grass, he comes in after the serve.It is not fair, Issner and Roddick never played that way, uncle ,no?"

    "Mc Enroe slice makes the ball so that it doesn´t bounce on grass.No real tennis, no?"
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #14
  15. mike danny

    mike danny Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,992
    So a 7 time W champion is overrated?

    What more nonsense will you come up with?
     
    #15
  16. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,771
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    I agree. I think Federer could win 1 out of 5 at RG considering Borg was a righty as opposed to Nadal, and Borg could get 1 at the USO.
     
    #16
  17. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,334
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Nadal makes only a couple of Wimbledon QF's but players like Agassi and Courier and Lendl can make finals and multiple finals?

    Massive underrating of Nadal here. You guys talk like no baseliner has ever made it to a Wimbledon final before.
     
    #17
  18. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Federer played Sampras,Hewitt,Safin,Roddick,Kuerten,Agassi,Nadal,Murray,Djokovic,Del Potro and Wavrinka.That makes 11 slam champions

    Borg faced Laver,Rosewall,Vilas,Connors,Newk,Ashe,Nastase,Smith,Lendl,
    Tanner,Gerulaitis,Orantes,Panatta,Mc Enroe,Kodes.That makes 15 slam champions.

    Federer played only once on fast courts, when he beat Sampras at the All England.

    Borg, in addition to FO and USO on clay, played USO on fast hard, WCT/Masters on fast Supreme and Wimbledon on fast grass.

    No player really owned Borg, unless for a brief period Nastase,Connors and Mc Enroe.

    Nadal has owned Federer much of their career.

    Do they belong to the same league? I don´t think so.
     
    #18
  19. SpinToWin

    SpinToWin G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2014
    Messages:
    10,136
    Location:
    Germany
    You cannot call Agassi a grinder. He was an aggressive ballstriker and hit flat through the court. Nadal cannot play truly flat to save his life. On a fast, low bouncing grass, Nadal would be a quite manageable task for many players.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #19
  20. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,334
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    I didn't call Agassi a grinder, he's a baseliner though Nadal plays more aggressively on grass he certainly has the weapons to succeed.
     
    #20
  21. SpinToWin

    SpinToWin G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2014
    Messages:
    10,136
    Location:
    Germany
    no. Nadal does not have the game to succeed (on a high level) on a fast grass court.
     
    #21
  22. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,334
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    You don't think he could adapt if raised in those conditions?

    Agree to disagree. Bare in mind the post I responded too said he would make only a couple of QF's...the man is a 2 time Wimbledon champion the grass isn't that different.
     
    #22
  23. Chanwan

    Chanwan Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,353
    So Borg is - at least - one league above Fed? But perhaps two is more correct?
    Okay.

    As for the fast surfaces, Fed has played on fast surfaces after Wimbledon 2001 - iirc, the WTF is Shanghai was damn fast. And his game is naturally suited for fast tennis. Plus, while the courts were generally faster in Borg's days (clay not included), the groundstrokes, return of serve, passing shots, shots on the run etc. etc. are a lot faster in Fed's days.
     
    #23
  24. Chanwan

    Chanwan Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,353
    I agree with this. Would be very interested in their clay and grass matches in particular. Fed wouldn't face the same match-up problem he did against Nadal's lefty forehand and there were a number of years, where he pretty much only lost to Rafa on clay. 2 out of 5 would be a stretch, but 3 out of 10 could be possible at RG imo.
     
    #24
  25. Chanwan

    Chanwan Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,353
    I think Nadal's problem on faster grass would be
    a) the lower bounce
    b) no poly in those days
    c) less time to get to the ball and get everything back

    All in all, the problems he often face in the first week of Wimbledon would be multiplied and he wouldn't have poly to allow him to hit out on his forehand on the low slices.
    But saying he couldn't have adapted to some extent or made it past a quarter is overstating it imo. But I do think he would have a hard time actually winning Wimbledon prior to the 00's though.
     
    #25
  26. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,344
    Federer had to play in grass court conditions that were more similar to the the clay conditions Borg played on back in the early 80s.

    The comparison is irrelevant unless conditions are decided on. 80s grass/balls of 2000 grass balls. Ditto for grass and hard-courts.
     
    #26
  27. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,334
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    He forgot Moya, Ferrero, Gaudio and Johansson...that's 15 ;)
     
    #27
  28. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,215
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Borg at RG, Federer at AO, Wimbledon and US Open.

    Clay: 8-2 Brog
    Hard: 7-3 Fred
    Grass: 7-3 Fred
     
    #28
  29. Nadalgaenger

    Nadalgaenger Professional

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,101
    Location:
    Seattle
    RG (4-1 Borg)
    Wimbledon (4-1 Fed)
    US Open 5-0 Fed
     
    #29
  30. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,690
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and żeberka
    AO Federer 4-1
    FO Borg 4-1
    Wimbledon Federer 4-1
    US Open Federer 4-1
     
    #30
  31. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,672
    Imo, Borg is a better version of Nadal, so if Federer has trouble beating Nadal, he's gonna have even more trouble against Borg.
     
    #31
  32. Nadalgaenger

    Nadalgaenger Professional

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,101
    Location:
    Seattle
    Ugh, no? On what do you base that judgment?

    And Nadal's lopsided H2H against Federer is largely due to the lefty forehand and the heavy topspin into Fed's backhand. Borg presents no such threat. Borg is basically a better version of Ferrer.

    I love Borg but let's face it: the game has evolved, athletes have evolved, and Nadal, Djokovic, and Federer are on another level athletically than anything that came before. Agassi has said this himself.
     
    #32
  33. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    It's more about the legs days and that plays right into Borg's one of Bjorn Borg's core strengths, his leg strength and stamina. His physicality is what pushed allowed him to have such a stellar five set record (he and Nadal have two of the very best records in terms of matches that go five sets). Borg won 17 of them in a row at one stage. In Sweden, they used to regularly test their top athletes and Borg's leg strength was off the charts. Edberg also scored very high on that test by the way. In these hypos, you have to equalize for equipment of course and then consider surfaces/surface speeds as well. I think that Borg would end up winning more than Federer would, especially if they used slower hard courts and not the faster ones they used to play on. At Wimbledon, I'd give the slight edge to Borg as well as at the FO. The AO's slow hard courts would be great for Borg and don't overlook Borg's fitness when it comes to playing in the heat of Melbourne. When all time greats face off, basically I don't think you'd see either player "dominate" the other. Each would have wins/losses, yet say they played a Tour where they faced off dozens of times over a year, across all manner of surfaces and venues. I think Borg would hold a lead. If they played about 1/3 matches of clay, then it could get a bit more in Borg's favor. Especially for those that are too young to have seen players before 2001 or so:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPGh4p0dyIk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyuiEzBb7hk (to hit like this with a wood frame, no matter how long you play with one, is just hard to fathom frankly).

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhsNNplZ0Uo
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #33
  34. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #34
  35. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,215
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Good posts, do you have links for talk of Borg's and Edberg's results on tests for leg strength and/or other athletic attributes?
     
    #35
  36. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Thank you. Let me find that SI article Nathaniel. His leg strength suprassed Ingemar Stenmark's (Swedish downhill skier) to give you a sense of the results.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31IYa7VsZYg (interesting forehand comparison)

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #36
  37. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,215
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Federer has played a lot on quick courts.
     
    #37
  38. mightyrick

    mightyrick Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    4,661
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I see Federer and Borg splitting their head-to-head. On fast surfaces, Federer will win more often than not. On slower surfaces, Borg will win more often than not.
     
    #38
  39. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,215
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Impressive. I know Borg's leg strength was incredible just by watching his tennis but I'm curious as to how close Edberg was who I also always felt had incredibly strong legs.
     
    #39
  40. Nadalgaenger

    Nadalgaenger Professional

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,101
    Location:
    Seattle
    Lol, your admiration for the great Borg is praiseworthy. From the sound of it, you basically think Borg is the GOAT and would dominate Roger on all surfaces.

    Admittedly, I just got into tennis in the Fedal era and am largely biased, perhaps as you are, but when I compare video footage there seems a significant shift in the level of athleticism in modern tennis (owing, of course among other things, to string and racket technology but also to modern training). With that in mind, I can't personally envision a player like Borg beating Roger. Just consider the huge edge Federer would have on his serve, let alone the explosiveness of Federer's forehand.
     
    #40
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, Regarding peak playing level Borg is stronger. I agree here.
     
    #41
  42. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    I know, each of us is certainly biased, even if it by virtue of when you played and watched the most tennis. Anyone that does not have a favorite player/era, please raise your hand lol. Bjorn Borg got me really into tennis as junior. I thought it was so impressive how Borg played and then also his on court demeanor and modesty. Make no mistake though, he like other greats, thought that he was the best tennis player on the planet and that he could take out anyone when playing his best. Borg was definitely my tennis role model Nadalgaenger. I don't think he'd necessarily dominate Federer. It's hard to dominate any great player. Many people who have only watched tennis post 2001 or so overlook how very heavy racquets used to be, the lack of poly strings for someone like Borg/Vilas/Laver/Lendl (especially Borg), how fast courts used to be with so many indoor events (off clay), and how Borg thrived despite the dynamics being tilted more in favor of net rushers than today. Also consider just how hard Borg would serve and hit his groundstrokes with Federer's frame or Nadal's and full poly.

    If one were to go out and hit some with a wood frame, made extra heavy with an extra ply of wood support the tension, strung at 80 lbs with gut (to replicate modern poly strings somewhat) and THEN play with a modern frame, it starts to be apparent that modern frames in the hands of someone like Borg or Laver would be extremely effective. Borg had ultra skill, yet he also had very impressive physicality. Today's game is more about the legs than past eras and that's Borg's sweet spot so to speak. Borg trained like an absolute demon. He'd practice feverishly with Vitas Gerulaitis from morning till late in the day. They would go at each other full bore for hours on end. He was so into his tennis routine.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #42
  43. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,215
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Is the image with the article in really small writing the SI info, I mean I just can't make it out?
     
    #43
  44. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,672
    Give Borg modern training, knowledge, and technology and he'll do just fine against Federer. Borg was a unique physical specimen. You think Nadal is a physical beast? You should watch Borg in his prime.
     
    #44
  45. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    No, not the cover. It's a multi page article. It's in that "SI vault" of old articles and I may have saved a copy Nathaniel. Maybe it's from the 90's, I'm looking. If I find it I'll send it to you. It does mention Borg, Edberg, and Stenmark, but I don't recall it giving exact values. It may have been some sort of leg press machine that measures force/strength. Among Swedish athletes, I think Borg and Edberg were tops over the years with the testing, which included Swedish Olympic athletes (I'm sure not weightlifters though lol).
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2014
    #45
  46. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,215
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Ah OK, well don't try too hard. I'll take a look later...
     
    #46
  47. Tenez101

    Tenez101 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,639
    This makes no sense. Fed would destroy Borg with modern technology and technique. Conversely, Borg would probably have a big advantage if they played with wood. Which scenario are we considering? Or are we taking an "average" or both, i.e. assuming the equipment in each match is independently random?
     
    #47
  48. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    You have to equalize for equipment. Could Roger Federer beat the #200 player in the world today with a wood frame? I don't think so.
     
    #48
  49. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,672
    He'd get bageled by top 1000 player playing with 80s wood..
     
    #49
  50. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,724
    Location:
    U.S
    I wonder why people generalize it this way.

    when you say slow court, you mean slow HC or clay !?

    because djokovic for instance is nowhere near as good on clay as he is on slow HC

    same for murray

    same for federer

    same for sampras

    same for agassi

    reverse for rafa

    etc etc

    see borg having the clear edge on clay and federer on slow HC ( lesser than the edge borg has clay though )
     
    #50

Share This Page