Who was Lendl's biggest rival?

[dangalak]

I always wondered.

[Mustard]

John McEnroe.

[krosero]

Brad Gilbert.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/...=L018&oId=G016

[pc1]

Originally Posted by krosero

Brad Gilbert.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/...=L018&oId=G016

I know you're joking but years ago I heard a radio interview with Gilbert in which he said Lendl was the player he found toughest to play.

Gilbert thought Lendl had perhaps the best serve in tennis not necessarily because of the power but also because of the variety.

[gavna]

Originally Posted by Mustard

John McEnroe.

Yeah Johnny McEnroe for sure.......those WCT finals from Reunion Arena were classics and you could feel the hate from both of them in the stands.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Mustard

John McEnroe.

Mac in general terms.but terrific rivalries with Becker indoors and grass,Wilander on clay and Connors on hard

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Mustard

John McEnroe.

Mac in general terms.but terrific rivalries with Becker indoors and grass,Wilander on clay and Connors on hard as well as Cash on hard

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by dangalak

I always wondered.

Lew Hoad. Ask Dan Lobb!

[krosero]

Jan Kodes.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by krosero

Jan Kodes.

During his first years could be as well

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by krosero

Jan Kodes.

Hahaha! Of course.

[dangalak]

No seriously. It's probably between Becker, McEnroe, Connors and Wilander.

If McEnroe is Lendl's biggest rival, was McEnroe's biggest rival Lendl?

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by dangalak

If McEnroe is Lendl's biggest rival, was McEnroe's biggest rival Lendl?

Tough to say. Lendl, Connors and Borg all have good cases to be McEnroe's biggest rival. I was more certain that Lendl's biggest rival was McEnroe because McEnroe was the best player in that period where Lendl was looking to take over as the world's best.

When McEnroe was looking to become the world's best, Borg stood in his way, but McEnroe and Borg got along personally and the rivalry was shortlived due to Borg's early departure from the sport. McEnroe's rivalry with Connors was fiery and intense, while McEnroe's rivalry with Lendl was more of a disdain for one another. McEnroe and Lendl are from the same generation, so that's something else to take into account.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by dangalak

No seriously. It's probably between Becker, McEnroe, Connors and Wilander.

If McEnroe is Lendl's biggest rival, was McEnroe's biggest rival Lendl?

Connors was past his prime before Lendl came into his. Although Connors continued to compete for another 7-8 years after he was passed his prime, he was clearly not as great as he was in the 70's up to 82'.

You might make the same argument for McEnroe. Lendl's prime began in about 1984. After 1984, Mac's level of play dropped off just enough to make him something less than an all time great from there on out. IMO, it was caused by cocaine abuse. If not for that, both McEnroe's and Lendl's careers would not look like they do in retrospect.

Wilander's prime coincided with Lendl's and, IMO, Lendl was clearly the better player.

Becker's peak also coincided with Lendl's, although Becker was a bit younger. Becker may have had a slightly higher level of play at his absolute peak, but, Lendl was the more consistent champion between the two.

[SystemicAnomaly]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Connors was past his prime before Lendl came into his. Although Connors continued to compete for another 7-8 years after he was passed his prime, he was clearly not as great as he was in the 70's up to 82'.

You might make the same argument for McEnroe. Lendl's prime began in about 1984. After 1984, Mac's level of play dropped off just enough to make him something less than an all time great from there on out. IMO, it was caused by cocaine abuse. If not for that, both McEnroe's and Lendl's careers would not look like they do in retrospect.

Wilander's prime coincided with Lendl's and, IMO, Lendl was clearly the better player.

Becker's peak also coincided with Lendl's, although Becker was a bit younger. Becker may have had a slightly higher level of play at his absolute peak, but, Lendl was the more consistent champion between the two.

Originally Posted by Ramon

Those stats are very deceiving. Connors was past his prime in most of those encounters, but even in '82-'84 when Connors was losing most of the time and clearly past his prime, he found a way to beat Lendl when it mattered the most. Despite those stats, I think Connors had Lendl's number.

Borg retired before Lendl reached peak form. I think the numbers would have been closer.

Mac, Edberg, Wilander, and Becker were closer contemporaries to Lendl. Early on, Mac had a hard time figuring out how to beat Lendl who seemed to push him around a lot. Mac finally figured out that he had more success by staying aggressive and their matches were more even after that.

I don't think Lendl ever really established a big rivalry in the manner of Borg/McEnroe or Connors/McEnroe. The McEnroe rivalry was starting to build up steam, but then McEnroe suddenly retired. Lendl is a figure that bridged two different eras of tennis. He was competitive in the era of Borg/Connors/McEnroe and also in the era of Wilander/Edberg/Becker. By the time Sampras peaked and Agassi finally got it together, Lendl was through.

Yes, I'm well aware that Connors was probably past his prime with many of his meetings with Lendl. I have not yet looked closely at their h2h encounters to determine the trend/exact nature of their rivalry. In sheer numbers tho', with 35 encounters, I believe that it may be second only to Lendl's encounters with J Mac = 36 meetings.

J Mac won his first 2 encounters (1980) with Lendl but then lost the next 7 (81-82). However, with his wins over Lendl in 83-84, McEnroe took the h2h lead 12-9. J Mac dropped to #2 in 1985 but maintained his edge over Lendl, 14-12. J Mac took some time off in 86 (married Tatum) and never regained his dominance in singles. They met again starting in 87 but J Mac won only 1 of their last 10 encounters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lendl%E2%80%93McEnroe_rivalry

Lendl's contemporaries who primes roughly coincided with his own included Edberg, Becker (starting in the mid-80s) and Wilander. Lendl's rivalries with Edberg (13-14) and Becker (11-10) were fairly even overall. Altho' Lendl ruled Wilander in the long run, their early encounters were fairly even. In their first 10 meetings (1882-84) they were even at 5-5. From 85 thru 87, Lendl won 8 of their 9 encounters. Wilander had a stellar year in 1988. He prevailed over Lendl in the final at the 88 USO. After 88, Wilander's performance dropped off sharply.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lendl%E2%80%93Wilander_rivalry
.

[Ramon]

Originally Posted by SystemicAnomaly

Yes, I'm well aware that Connors was probably past his prime with many of his meetings with Lendl. I have not yet looked closely at their h2h encounters to determine the trend/exact nature of their rivalry. In sheer numbers tho', with 35 encounters, I believe that it may be second only to Lendl's encounters with J Mac = 36 meetings.

J Mac won his first 2 encounters (1980) with Lendl but then lost the next 7 (81-82). However, with his wins over Lendl in 83-84, McEnroe took the h2h lead 12-9. J Mac dropped to #2 in 1985 but maintained his edge over Lendl, 14-12. J Mac took some time off in 86 (married Tatum) and never regained his dominance in singles. They met again starting in 87 but J Mac won only 1 of their last 10 encounters.

On the Connors rivalry, I don't have all the numbers, so I'm basically just giving you my subjective impression and why I think Connors got the better of it. When Lendl first burst onto the scene with upset victories over Borg and Mac, tennis writers and analysts were wondering why Connors dominated him. Something about Connors' style just bothered Lendl. As Connors aged and Lendl improved, it's no surprise that Lendl began to win against Connors, but if you look at their H2H in grand slams, even when Connors was nearing the end of his career he knew how to beat Lendl when it really counted. If you ask Connors or Lendl if they would trade any 10 tournaments for 1 grand slam tournament, I think they would unhesitatingly say "yes".

Good analysis of the Mac rivalry, BTW. Mac was never the same when he came back from retirement (and neither was Borg for that matter).

[jrepac]

Originally Posted by SystemicAnomaly

J Mac won his first 2 encounters (1980) with Lendl but then lost the next 7 (81-82). However, with his wins over Lendl in 83-84, McEnroe took the h2h lead 12-9. J Mac dropped to #2 in 1985 but maintained his edge over Lendl, 14-12. J Mac took some time off in 86 (married Tatum) and never regained his dominance in singles. They met again starting in 87 but J Mac won only 1 of their last 10 encounters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lendl%E2%80%93McEnroe_rivalry
.

After Mac took the layoff, he was never the same; he started losing to Connors again in the late '80's as well.

[dominikk1985]

funny thing about lendl was that he was a late peaker.

look how his power increased
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIGHlkXfcnE (81)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6A2b...eature=related (91)

a totally different player

[Ramon]

Originally Posted by dominikk1985

funny thing about lendl was that he was a late peaker.

look how his power increased
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIGHlkXfcnE (81)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6A2b...eature=related (91)

a totally different player

If you look at old Federer videos against Sampras, you'd see a completely different Federer, too. You wouldn't have any idea that the guy had such a good ground game.

It's just how the style evolved. Lendl in 81 was still known as the young Czech with the huge forehand; biggest in the game. If he would have tried hitting harder more often, would it have worked against Borg and Connors or would he have just made errors sooner? We don't know.

[pmerk34]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Connors was past his prime before Lendl came into his. Although Connors continued to compete for another 7-8 years after he was passed his prime, he was clearly not as great as he was in the 70's up to 82'.

You might make the same argument for McEnroe. Lendl's prime began in about 1984. After 1984, Mac's level of play dropped off just enough to make him something less than an all time great from there on out. IMO, it was caused by cocaine abuse. If not for that, both McEnroe's and Lendl's careers would not look like they do in retrospect.

Wilander's prime coincided with Lendl's and, IMO, Lendl was clearly the better player.

Becker's peak also coincided with Lendl's, although Becker was a bit younger. Becker may have had a slightly higher level of play at his absolute peak, but, Lendl was the more consistent champion between the two.

You aren't giving Ivan enough credit. He beat Connors 17 times in a row. He had the smarts and the guts to change his tatics by junkballing Jimmy to beat him and frustrate him. Connors was not an ordinary over 30 "fading great player". If Ivan would have stuck to his old strategy of feeding Jimmy pace there is no way he could have run off 17 in a row on him.