Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Former Pro Player Talk (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37)
-   -   Pat Cash's 1987 Wimbledon win (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=416921)

sandy mayer 03-14-2012 02:04 PM

Pat Cash's 1987 Wimbledon win
 
I remember the 1987 Wimbledon very clearly and I think Pat Cash's performances were out of this world.

I've heard people say he only won because Becker got knocked out early, but I'm of the view that this kind of talk is unfair.

Becker was obviously the greater player but Cash was a very worthy Wimbledon champion.

Mustard 03-14-2012 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandy mayer (Post 6391648)
I remember the 1987 Wimbledon very clearly and I think Pat Cash's performances were out of this world.

I've heard people say he only won because Becker got knocked out early, but I'm of the view that this kind of talk is unfair.

Becker was obviously the greater player but Cash was a very worthy Wimbledon champion.

It's Becker fault for losing to Doohan, so I don't see how that argument can be used really. Cash beat the 7 guys in front of him, and dropped just 1 set in total. Becker must be blamed for failing to get past the R64 (Becker's worst Wimbledon result ever), not Cash's achievement questioned because Becker got knocked out early.

jrepac 03-14-2012 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustard (Post 6391670)
It's Becker fault for losing to Doohan, so I don't see how that argument can be used really. Cash beat the 7 guys in front of him, and dropped just 1 set in total. Becker must be blamed for failing to get past the R64 (Becker's worst Wimbledon result ever), not Cash's achievement questioned because Becker got knocked out early.

Becker was not playing very well heading into Wimby; he barely got past Connors at Queens the week before. Cash really played some fine tennis; he beat Wilander, Connors and Lendl, in succession. Not exactly chopped meat there! And, he had lost to Connors just the week before at Queens, so that just tells you how much he stepped up his game. His S&V game was really spot on.

Update: according to Wiki, Cash beat both Curren and Edberg in straight sets prior to losing to Connors at Queens; clearly he was finding his range.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1987_St...hips_-_Singles

kiki 03-14-2012 03:44 PM

In 1986 Cash beat Wilander to reach the W QF...just 3 WEEKS AFTER HAVING SERIOUS SURGERYˇˇˇ

Moose Malloy 03-14-2012 03:53 PM

You can only beat who's in front of you, but I don't think Cash would've beaten Becker had they met in '87(it would have been in the semis) I thought the Doohan match was pretty high quality, Doohan pretty much played out of his mind.
Who knows what the result would've been if it was on Center Court instead of Court 1, many are a bit intimidated by that court. The old Court 1 had to be a bit annoying for players, crowd noise from Center often drowned out points played on it(and Lendl was playing an exciting 5 setter at the same time on Center, so the atmosphere on 1 was quite noisy at times)

I have the Becker-Cash QF from '88 W on dvd, Cash was a great grasscourter but when Becker was on, he was close to unbeatable. So much more power off every shot.

Quote:

Becker was not playing very well heading into Wimby; he barely got past Connors at Queens the week before.
'not playing very well?' I think that's stretch, he did win Queens, right? was he supposed to double bagel everyone there or something?
And I've heard many players say Queens played very differently from Wimbledon. I watched that Queens final recently & I don't think I've ever seen Becker stay back on 2nd serve in any match he played in his Wimbledon career as he much as he did in that Connors match.

Regardless, Becker was a HUGE favorite with the bookies to 3 peat at Wimbledon that year.

hoodjem 03-14-2012 05:01 PM

Cash did not stand up straight until the match was over. He was down in the knees-bent volleying position for the entire three sets.

And it worked!

Mustard 03-14-2012 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moose Malloy (Post 6392059)
Regardless, Becker was a HUGE favorite with the bookies to 3 peat at Wimbledon that year.

He certainly was, and the All England Club even made Becker the number 1 seed above Lendl.

sandy mayer 03-14-2012 05:11 PM

I did watch the Cash Becker 88 Wimbledon match but don't remember it much at all. What was it that Becker did that gave him superiority? When comparing the two players I think Cash moved significantly better and was definitely the better volleyer (Becker was good but Cash was better). Becker definitely had the better serve.

becker definitely had the better ground game but I always felt Cash had a good groundstroke game for grass then in that he passed and lobbed very well and knew how to hit approach shots.

hoodjem 03-14-2012 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustard (Post 6392296)
He certainly was, and the All England Club even made Becker the number 1 seed above Lendl.

And Lendl was the world no. 1 at that time, but seeded second (back when surface differences mattered).

Moose Malloy 03-14-2012 06:25 PM

Quote:

I did watch the Cash Becker 88 Wimbledon match. What was it that Becker did that gave him superiority? When comparing the two players I think Cash moved significantly better and was definitely the better volleyer (Becker was good but Cash was better). Becker definitely had the better serve.
whether any of that is true is irrelevant. Becker showed a new, brutally efficient way of playing on grass(one that Sampras perfected) - serve big & return big. Stuff like better volleys & better movement really didn't matter as much when you had to face that, this wasn't the 70s anymore(I think Cash would have been a better fit there, he was sort of a throwback, even in 1987)

krosero 03-14-2012 06:45 PM

Newcombe picked Lendl over Cash in the final.

Mustard 03-14-2012 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krosero (Post 6392623)
Newcombe picked Lendl over Cash in the final.

Newcombe and Cash don't get on at all.

From Cash's autobiography:

Quote:

"(John) Newcombe has never once had a good word to say about me. He relentlessly had a go at me in his weekly newspaper column in Sydney that was ghost written by a certain John Thirsk. Every time I lost a match, there was Newcombe laying into me. Every time I won, he would say it's about time. He was forever criticising my behaviour on court and insisting my actions - the odd disagreement with an official and bouncing of a racquet - was letting down the great heritage of Australian tennis... I am learning to come to terms with this sort of vilification now, but it used to be very hard for me.

"At the time, Mats Wilander and I were the two nations' No. 1 players. I was 18 years old. Mats just nine months older and the newly crowned Australian Open champion. Newcombe and Thirsk collaborated to write that comparing Mats' talent with mine was like comparing the Grand Canyon with a crack in the wall.

Isn't that just the sort of thing you want to hear before the biggest match of your life when you are representing your country? Looking back over my whole career, I can honestly say that no words have ever struck more painfully, and it was hurtful not only to myself, but my father, my whole family, and my coach Ian Barclay...

"The injuries certainly took their toll, not just on my body, but my mind as well. I tried hard to not plunge into the depths of self-pity yet there were occasions when I wondered why I had been singled out to suffer so much bad luck.

There is a depressive streak that runs through my family and sometimes I used to get so down. Even when I was fit, it was almost a case of waiting for the next injury to happen and so many times I used to wonder, why me?

"Perhaps I'm a dreamer but becoming Australia's Davis Cup captain remains an ambition... I can't really see it happening with the current leadership of Tennis Australia because the president Geoff Pollard has always been very much a John Newcombe man...

Backhanded Compliment 03-14-2012 07:10 PM

I watched that match... that year nobody was playing quite as well as Pat Cash during Wimbledon. He was simply better, he didnt succumb to nerves so therefore he won. I didnt want Lendl to win.

Doug_Hartley_2012 03-15-2012 12:17 AM

Cashie was brilliant in '87 but injuries really robbed him of greatness. Two classic 5s losses in the AO final to Wilander and Edberg were a bit cruel. He deserved at least one of them. And of course was an absolute legend in Davis Cup competition. He did brilliantly given those injuries and really was exceptional at Wimbledon coming back from injury. I was especially proud of him a few seasons where he fought his way through the qualifying tournament to earn a spot in the main draw. It really meant something to him, competing at Wimbledon.

Stuart S 03-15-2012 06:08 AM

I recall Cash at Wimbledon in 1987 very well (doesn't seem like 25 years ago - now that's scary!!).

What struck me most about him in that tournament was his semi v. Connors. Cash, from the net, was just amazing. Connors did NOT have a bad game - he just caught Cash on a very good one.

I recall too, only two weeks previously, Connors had beaten Cash at Queen's Club on grass (7-6, 6-4). Which is why I (a lifelong Connors fan) looked forward to the Wimbledon semi with optimism.

But on the day, Cash dominated from the net as I had never seen before. Time after time, Connors unleashed what looked for all the world like a winning passing shot. But not only would Cash get to the shot, he'd angle it away for a winner. A truly amazing performance for a 6-4, 6-4, 6-1 victory.

The final is what everyone seems to recall... a very long opening set (73 minutes), a tense Lendl throwing away 4 set points in the third, Cash's triumphant clamber into the crowd, etc etc. But as I said, it's that semi that sticks most in my mind.

pmerk34 03-15-2012 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Backhanded Compliment (Post 6392713)
I watched that match... that year nobody was playing quite as well as Pat Cash during Wimbledon. He was simply better, he didnt succumb to nerves so therefore he won. I didnt want Lendl to win.

I bet if you polled the top 100 players in the world at the time 90% of the m would have had the same sentiment.

pmerk34 03-15-2012 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart S (Post 6393429)
I recall Cash at Wimbledon in 1987 very well (doesn't seem like 25 years ago - now that's scary!!).

What struck me most about him in that tournament was his semi v. Connors. Cash, from the net, was just amazing. Connors did NOT have a bad game - he just caught Cash on a very good one.

I recall too, only two weeks previously, Connors had beaten Cash at Queen's Club on grass (7-6, 6-4). Which is why I (a lifelong Connors fan) looked forward to the Wimbledon semi with optimism.

But on the day, Cash dominated from the net as I had never seen before. Time after time, Connors unleashed what looked for all the world like a winning passing shot. But not only would Cash get to the shot, he'd angle it away for a winner. A truly amazing performance for a 6-4, 6-4, 6-1 victory.

The final is what everyone seems to recall... a very long opening set (73 minutes), a tense Lendl throwing away 4 set points in the third, Cash's triumphant clamber into the crowd, etc etc. But as I said, it's that semi that sticks most in my mind.

That was the first time anyone had ever done that. IT was cool. Too bad it wasn't the last

kiki 03-15-2012 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moose Malloy (Post 6392550)
whether any of that is true is irrelevant. Becker showed a new, brutally efficient way of playing on grass(one that Sampras perfected) - serve big & return big. Stuff like better volleys & better movement really didn't matter as much when you had to face that, this wasn't the 70s anymore(I think Cash would have been a better fit there, he was sort of a throwback, even in 1987)

I agree.But, on old low bouncing, ultra fast grass, I´ll tell you a secret I learned playing in the Royal Windmill Hill tennis courts, near Eastbourne, with pro coaches from Aus&NZ ( of the eraly 80´s): the first think you need to succed on grass, is a feeling with it, not getting upset for bad bounces and, most of all, a feeling of being comfortable on that turf.After you have it, then there is the S&V mechanics ( more important than a mere big serve, which only helped Ivanisevic but nobody else), the dinks and chips, the returns to the feet, so on...but, you need to feel comfortable.

Do you know, at the very end the difference between Becker and Lendl? as easy as this: Becker grew up playing football in the south of Germany, Lendl never put a foot on anything softer than a street.That is so simple as that.

Becker was a very ehavy , not fast on legs, erratic footwork guy, yet he succeded so much at Wimbledon .Yes, booming serve, booming returns and whatever but, do you know what really caught me when I first saw Becker on grass ( against Leconte at the 1985 SF) ? easy, how comfortable he felt and how much did he enjoy playing on it.

The first think that I ever thought of this kid, the first time I saw him was, not his serve, not his gorundies, not his champion´s mind and pride: I told to myself, this guy, even with that body, is born to play on that turf.The moment that idea sank in my mid, I had no doubt he was gonna reign at Wimbledon for so long ( as he did, till Sampras showed up)

Moose Malloy 03-15-2012 09:50 AM

Quote:

Newcombe and Cash don't get on at all.
I really doubt Newcombe would offer his picks as a commentator based on any bias towards a player. Lendl was the favorite with the bookies, Newcombe wasn't going out on a limb.

Quote:

John) Newcombe has never once had a good word to say about me
He certainly had a lot of good to say about Cash in the '84 USO SF. Newcombe seemed very excited by an Aussie doing well & expected great things from him. Cash always seemed like a strange dude, someone who got ticked off easily(his behavior after losing to Becker in '88 was really odd, Boris did nothing before, during or after the match to get him upset)
He takes shots at almost everyone in that book, talk about dishing dirt.

Quote:

That was the first time anyone had ever done that. IT was cool. Too bad it wasn't the last
They were pretty upset with Cash & told him never to do it again. My times have changed there, still can't get over the fact they now have on court interviews. This is a tournament that used to disdain the yellow tennis ball for years after it was the norm everywhere else.

Quote:

Regardless, Becker was a HUGE favorite with the bookies to 3 peat at Wimbledon that year
just checked, apparently Becker was 4-6 to win that year. I don't believe Sampras was ever that heavy a favorite at Wimbledon(think Fed was 4-6 in '05 or '06)

Cash was 14-1 prior to the tournament.

These were the odds as of the quarterfinals

Lendl 2-1
Edberg 3-1(was 12-1 before the tournament)
Cash 6-1
Wilander 8-1
Connors 8-1
Bobo 12-1
Leconte 12-1

Look like Cash was favored over Wilander in the QF based on these odds. And that the winner of Lendl-Edberg was expected to win it all.

jrepac 03-15-2012 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moose Malloy (Post 6392059)
You can only beat who's in front of you, but I don't think Cash would've beaten Becker had they met in '87(it would have been in the semis) I thought the Doohan match was pretty high quality, Doohan pretty much played out of his mind.
Who knows what the result would've been if it was on Center Court instead of Court 1, many are a bit intimidated by that court. The old Court 1 had to be a bit annoying for players, crowd noise from Center often drowned out points played on it(and Lendl was playing an exciting 5 setter at the same time on Center, so the atmosphere on 1 was quite noisy at times)

I have the Becker-Cash QF from '88 W on dvd, Cash was a great grasscourter but when Becker was on, he was close to unbeatable. So much more power off every shot.



'not playing very well?' I think that's stretch, he did win Queens, right? was he supposed to double bagel everyone there or something?
And I've heard many players say Queens played very differently from Wimbledon. I watched that Queens final recently & I don't think I've ever seen Becker stay back on 2nd serve in any match he played in his Wimbledon career as he much as he did in that Connors match.

Regardless, Becker was a HUGE favorite with the bookies to 3 peat at Wimbledon that year.

yes, he won, but not convincingly; as the defending Wimbledon champ and prohibitive favorite, he was on the verge of losing to a 35yr old Connors....not to take anything away from Jimmy, but this is a match Boris should've won in straight sets, if his game was really "on". Doohan did play incredibly well in the Wimbledon match, yes, but I don't think Boris was 100pct sharp. As opposed to Cash, who really looked like he was dominating his opponents.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse