Stats for 1970 Wimb final (Newcombe-Rosewall)

[krosero]

Newcombe d. Rosewall 5-7, 6-3, 6-2, 3-6, 6-1

Newcombe was 26, Rosewall 35.

Rosewall had lost two previous Wimbledon finals, to Drobny and Hoad. In the Open Era he had so far made two Slam finals, both at the French Open with Laver.

Rosewall was staying back generally on second serves. Kramer thought he should come in because Newcombe was taking it to come in himself.


The following are my own counts.

Newcombe won 158 points overall, Rosewall 143.

SERVICE

Newcombe won 100 of 158 points on his serve (or 63%).
Rosewall won 85 of 143 points on his serve (or 59%).

It’s just a coincidence that each man served as many points as he won in the match overall; that’s how the numbers worked out.


Newcombe served at 54%, making 85 of 158 first serves.

Rosewall served at 61%, making 87 of 143 first serves.

(Another instance of the winner serving more points than the loser).

Newcombe had 6 aces [one on a 2nd serve] and 7 double-faults.
Rosewall had 2 aces and 11 double-faults.

Newcombe served 28 other unreturned serves, of which I judged 3 as service winners.

Rosewall served 28 other unreturned serves, of which I judged none as a service winner.


Newcombe converted 6 of 14 break points, Rosewall 3 of 18.

Newcombe got his first serve into play on 11 of 18 break points he faced (or 61% of the time).

Rosewall got his first serve into play on 8 of 14 break points (or 57%).

Newcombe won 100 of 158 points on his serve (or 63%).
Rosewall won 85 of 143 points on his serve (or 59%).

Newcombe won 158 points overall, Rosewall 143.


WINNERS

Newcombe hit 56 clean winners apart from service: 9 FH, 6 BH, 16 FHV, 12 BHV, 13 overheads.

Rosewall hit 38 clean winners apart from service: 5 FH, 12 BH, 6 FHV, 9 BHV, 6 overheads.

Newcombe’s rate of winners over the course of the 45 games is not far below Laver’s in the 1969 final. He has a lot of volley/smash winners, in fact close to a rate of 1 per game, not far behind Gerulaitis and McEnroe against Borg in 1977 and 1981, respectively (at Wimbledon).

Rosewall, in terms of winners, had a similar performance in his five-set loss earlier in 1970 to Laver in Sydney.

Newcombe hit 7 service return winners (two when Rosewall misjudged them). Six were passes. In addition he hit 6 passing shots, three from each side.

Rosewall hit 9 service return winners, all passes. In addition he hit 8 passing shots – five from the backhand.

Neither man hit a lob winner.


ERRORS (forced and unforced)

Subtracting the aces and clean winners from the total points won:

Newcombe made 103 total errors. Of those I counted 28 return erros and 7 double-faults. That leaves him making 68 errors in points that had at least a successful return, that is, in rallies.

Rosewall made 96 total errors. Of those I counted 28 return errors and 11 double-faults. That leaves him making 57 errors in rallies.

[kiki]

A very good Wimbledon final, I think it was the last GS final to be played by 2 of the greatest Australian players of any time.Obviously, Rafter and Philipousis played the last one, but none of them can compete with Newcombe and Rosewall.

Two contrasting styles, but Newcombe in 1970 was clearly peaking and more confident in his weapons than Rosewall ( who would beat Roche in the same year´s US Open,tough).

At the end, a battle between Newk´s serve and Ken´s return of serve.In 71, Newcombe defeated easily Rosewall in the semifinals, in what might have been Ken´s last real chance to win that elusive title he never won.

[krosero]

I've gotten new stats, and made slight corrections to the opening post.

I did a couple of things I hadn’t done before. I counted how many times Rosewall stayed back on his serve; and I recorded where Newcombe was directing his serves.


Rosewall did not directly follow his serve to net on 35 points (6 of them first serves).

He lost 17 of these 35 points. But at one stretch late in the match he won 12 of 13.

By then he seemed, on these points, to be making an approach shot early in the rally and not letting John make the first approach.


In the third and fourth sets Rosewall made all of his FH returns. In fact after making a FH return error early in the second set, he didn’t make another until early in the fifth: a streak of 16 successful FH returns.

During that streak Rosewall took 63 serves on the BH, and out of those he was forced into 15 return errors.

Overall in the match Rosewall made more return errors on his stronger wing: 24 on the BH, 4 on the FH. That's almost entirely due to the fact that most serves were being directed to his BH.

Vines wrote in his book that you should always approach to your opponent’s backhand even if that is his stronger stroke. The theory there is that the BH is always more attackable than the FH, even in the case of a player whose backhand is regarded as his stronger side.

Rosewall even ran around his BH a few times during his stretch of successful FH returns.


ALL RETURN ERRORS

Breaking down the 28 return errors that Newcombe drew:

– 17 first serves, 11 second serves
– 4 FH, 24 BH
- all were forced errors


Breaking down the 28 return errors that Rosewall drew:

– 21 first serves, 7 second serves
– 10 FH, 18 BH
– 4 errors were unforced, all on second serves (Rosewall did not SV on these points)



SUCCESS ON SERVE

Newcombe won 58 of 85 points on 1st serve (68%) and 42 of 73 on 2nd (58%).

Rosewall won 61 of 87 points on 1st serve (70%) and 24 of 56 on 2nd (43%).


Success on serve just looking at points on which the serve was successfully returned:

Newcombe 57% on 1st serve (36/63) and 56% on 2nd (30/54).
Rosewall 59% on 1st serve (38/64) and 45% on 2nd (17/38 ).


So in this match, the server always had the advantage, except when Rosewall was down to his second serve.

[Xavier G]

Newcombe was approaching his prime in 1970, Ken was 35 already. It's harder to prevail at an older age against the very best and Newcombe had the big serve. Rosewall is one of the players I admire most in tennis history and he would surely have won a couple of Wimbledon titles in his prime if everyone had been allowed to compete. Boycott years didn't help either. If Open tennis had come about in 1960 for instance, that would have suited Ken.

[krosero]

Sports Illustrated's Walter Bingham
(all the stats are confirmed in my count)

Pity Ken Rosewall. Sixteen years ago he stood on Wimbledon's center court in the finals against Jaroslav Drobny, a 19-year-old boy against a Wimbledon favorite. Drobny won, a popular decision, and little sympathy was wasted on Rosewall. Surely he would have other opportunities. Two years later Rosewall reached the finals again and this time he lost to his doubles partner, Lew Hoad. When Rosewall turned pro, he became ineligible for Wimbledon and by the time open tennis arrived, Rod Laver had supplanted him as the best player in the world.

And yet last week, on a damp, humid afternoon, there was Ken Rosewall, now 35, back on center court and in the finals, back for perhaps his last try at the one major title he had never won. Across the net was John Newcombe, another Australian—this was the 10th All-Australian final in the last 15 years—a big, strong, good-looking 26-year-old with a crashing serve and volley and the stamina to run all day. It would be pleasant to report that little Ken, with his lightning backhand and delicate touch, cut the bigger man down, as almost everyone in London wanted him to do. In truth Newcombe won and it was not really close, that is if you can call a five-set match not close.

Rosewall won the first set by breaking Newcombe's big serve in the 11th game and then holding his own.

But for the next hour it was all Newcombe. Whenever Rosewall missed with his first serve, Newcombe would take the weak second one on his forehand, perhaps the strongest in tennis, and pin Rosewall back on his heels. Newcombe won the second and third sets 6-3, 6-2 and when he immediately broke Rosewall to start the fourth set, the rout appeared to be on. Rosewall looked exhausted, and he would seize the brief rest periods to sit at the base of the umpire chair, waiting until Newcombe took his position on the court before rising.

Losing 1-3, Rosewall fell behind love-30 on his serve and it seemed certain that Newcombe was about to apply the crusher. There then occurred one of the most remarkable reversals in Wimbledon history. Rosewall won four straight points to make it 2-3. He won four more on Newcombe's serve to even the set. Four more made it 12 straight points and 4-3 Rosewall. Again Rosewall broke Newcombe, held his own serve and won the set 6-3. From that black moment in the fifth game he had won 20 out of 23 points.

The applause around the stadium was, by Wimbledon's standards, enormous—but it was applause for a dying man. Newcombe may be young, but he does not shake up easily. Leading 2-1 in the fifth set, he broke Rosewall's serve and rattled off four more games in a row for the match. For Newcombe it was his second Wimbledon title—he won in 1967—while Rosewall had only the sad distinction of the most years between losses in the finals.

[FedericRoma83]

Rosewall was still able to beat Newcombe in 3 sets later in the year at the US Open.

Their other important meetings:
1-1 in 1971 (Newcombe won at Wimbledon, Rosewall at the WCT Finals)
no crucial matches in 1972
1-0 in 1973 (Newcombe won the US Open semifinal)
0-2 in 1974 (Rosewall won at both Wimbledon and US Open)

I think this clearly demonstrates Rosewall greatness, he leads 4-3 against a top player that he faced when he was 35-39 years old...

[kiki]

I don´t there there has been a crowd´s favourite ( specially at the All England) as the Sydney´s Master.

[krosero]

Newcombe served on 158 points and 34 serves did not come back: 21.5%
Rosewall served on 143 points and 30 serves did not come back: 21.0%