Why Borg is the definitive Open Era GOAT

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by smoledman, Feb 22, 2013.

  1. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    oh jeez, you don't realize that is meant to be poking fun @ BobbyOne's comment !? really ?

    My previous signature was actually a subtle jab @ federer , but very few actually got it (zagor, krosero etc )
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2013
  2. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    reference ?

    Was it best of 5 ? the field size and no of rounds ?

    again, could laver have beaten rosewall at RG in 67/won RG on clay in 67 ... possible ... a lock to do so ? nope .......

    I mentioned the upset to drysdale in 68 USO as well ...

    all it takes is 1 match out of 28 ....... any player estimated to have 97% chance of winning the GS ? :lol:
     
  3. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    None of the amateur majors in 1962 nor open majors in 1969 were on indoor wood.
     
  4. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,658
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I, for one, would argue exactly that--that Laver's 1969 Grand Slam was a much more impressive achievement than his 1962 Grand Slam.

    But maybe I am not anybody.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2013
  5. OTMPut

    OTMPut Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,285
    Johnny Mac is the GOAT. He played with both wood and graphite racquets. He also won doubles and mixed doubles GS titles. He played best of 5 sets. He played on vastly different surfaces.

    He had coke, beer and burgers and lived a normal life. Unlike chumps today who lead unreal lives surrounded by a team of caretakers and play on similar surfaces and have no credentials in doubles/mixed doubles.
     
  6. OTMPut

    OTMPut Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,285
    Guess what, this deserves a thread of its own.
     
  7. dafinch

    dafinch Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,831
    I would argue it, too, lol. I worded it incorrectly: I don't think anybody would argue that the '69 was NOT a more impressive achievement than the '62 Slam, which was in keeping with the contention that pros are-shocking!-better than amateurs and the pros were allowed to play in '69. Sorry for the typo.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2013
  8. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Professor Hoojdem is a great linguistic, I have had the honour to be corrected by him often
     
  9. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Nadal/Agassi: Well written.
     
  10. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,094
    I think you are over reaching here. It is clear that Laver was the best player in the world by far in 1967, but he doesn't mean that he could have the four true slam. I had a look at the fields of the 1967 pro slams and it is not so impressive.

    To win the french pro, he defeated a certain Mackay in the QF (the tournaments begins here for him), then Stolle, then Gimeno, on wood.
    At Wembley pro he defeated Mackay again, Davidson, Rosewall on indoors (which surface I don't know).
    At the US Pro he had to play four matches: Olmedo, Ayala, Stolle, Gimeno.
    At Wimbledon pro, 3 matches were enough again: Stolle, then Gimeno, then Rosewall.

    None of these were played on clay, Rosewall's best surface. So, as we know how many times the ultra dominant player of a year failed to win the calendar slam, I think it is overreaching to consider that he had 97% chance to win it all. A deeper field in each tournament, a tournament to be played on his main rival best surface, it make it harder.
     
  11. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Right but then consider how mamy people here belittle his amateur slam
    And evem his open!!!
     
  12. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,094
    Yes, but I'm not responsible for them right? I don't consider the amateur slam as an achievement which can be used when we compare him with the other greats though, as the best players of that time didn't compete. It is still an incredible achievement to dominate once category though, even if it is not the highest category.
     
  13. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    You can´t have it both ways.Either belittle his am slam or his pro slam, never the two at once.
     
  14. dafinch

    dafinch Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,831
    Putting aside the fact that the one in '67 was not a Grand Slam, I don't quite get the logic of giving him the one in '67 because they were pros, and gushing over the one in '62 won amongst amateurs.
     
  15. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,355
    I think, the thread is about Borg... but simply put. Laver had the best seasons on all worlds, in all amateur tennis (for some 60 years), in all pro tennis and in all open tennis (for 44 years now.).
     
  16. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,658
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Oh, okay.

    Yes, I agree.
     
  17. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,658
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Can I admire and respect both?
     
  18. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    I guess you know that my answer is pretty obvious...
     
  19. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Santana, Fraser,Pietrangeli,Osuna,Mulligan and Emmo among Laver victims in 62
    That is pretty impressive
     
  20. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Borg is only the 3rd greatest of the Open Era after Federer (who he is a long way behind) and Sampras.

    Nadal is only just behind him as well.
     
  21. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I don't think Borg is "a long way behind" any player. His record is way too good for that.
     
  22. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    510
    Federer has surpassed Borg overall, Sampras in GS too, but Bjorn is still a monster champion: 5 straight Wimbledon (41 successive match wins), 6 French (4 in a row, 28 successive match wins.
    Borg competed better at the US Open than Sampras at the French.

    Nadal is not far behind and if he comes back from injury strongly, can surpass Borg and Sampras, Bjorn finishing top level tennis at Rafa's age now.
     
  23. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,506
    If Federer wins 20 majors, would you say Borg is not too far behind him?
     
  24. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,039
    The gap between Fed and Borg(along with Laver, sampras..)hasn't move ever since Roger won his 14th in 2009. Don't expect Fed to move ahead if he ever win another slam.
     
  25. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,616
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Borg will be considered one of the greatest players ever as long as tennis is played. That kind of greatness is never forgotten. The same holds true for other all time greats, but Borg had a very unique impact on the game in those years after the Open Era began, during a truly Golden Era of tennis. It's great that we are in another great period where you have 3-4 great tennis players at the top and squaring off. Tennis needs great players and great rivalries from era to era.
     
  26. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Agreed, he should be considered Tier 1 by everyone.
     
  27. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,301
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Agreed, Borg's domination of two polar opposites was incredible. Top tier for sure. Do you know of any good Borg matches to watch on youtube?
     
  28. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,616
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    The three channel slams when the grass was faster was impressive.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyuiEzBb7hk (versus Lendl who was playing with a graphite frame in the Jan. 81 final)

    This is a interesting indoor match versus Lendl. Borg went 5-0 in Jan. 80/Jan. 81 against McEnroe, Lendl, and Connors to take both the 1980 and 1981 YEC tourneys, played at NY's MSG. It was the fourth biggest tournament around in those days.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCAS3FjJvFI (versus McEnroe at the same tournament in the SF the year before. Jan. 1980)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTMx--E0OhY (watch his movement in particular versus Connors! Thanks Krosero.)
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2013
  29. jrs

    jrs Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,221
    The only negative against Borg is the lack of US Open title. Also, would he have been able to dominate his peers for longer period of time.
    As I posted in another thread - his French-Wimbledon victories will be tough to equal and beat. Federer might have had chance if not for Nadal.
     
  30. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Not even comparable
    And Borg did it thrice
     
  31. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    Bjorn' runs at 79 and 80 Masters still stun me and are among sport history greatest
    In 1979 he defeated on fast indoors world n5 Tanner, n2 Connors, n3 Mc Enroe and n4 Gerulaiitis on four successive days and lost a set to Connors and a set to Mc Enroe in two of the best ever indoor matches
    In 1980 he started beating n5 Clerc... and in succession he proceeded to beat n2 Mc Enroe n3 Connors and n4 Lendl.Again losing a set to Mc Enroe in thar epic match with Borg being the bad guy and Mc the perfect sportsman, and another set to Connors in a great match
    Many here have rated Connors, Lendl and Mc Enroe in open era top ten...well Bjorn beat them one after the other on a courts perfectly suited to them...
     

Share This Page