Question for the older dudes... about Borg

[pc1]

Originally Posted by jrepac

LOL! Well, you did not want to watch Borg play Vilas...on clay...that was deadly. On that note, didn't Vilas and Wilander play a 5hr FO final that bored people to tears?

You needed at least one player to be an aggressor for it to be interesting...i.e. Mac or even Jimmy, would go after Borg and make it interesting.

Chrissie vs. Martina was exciting. Chris against another baseliner was either 1) her crushing them or 2) her outlasting them. The one matchup that would cure insomnia was Chris vs. Manuela Maleeva. I simply could not stand it, I tell you....would want to slit my wrists watching that battle of attrition.

You're absolutely right. I like different styles of play and it seems so often today that we don't have enough variety in style of play.

[ttbrowne]

He also was the darling of network tennis announcers and commentators because he was bringing humility back to tennis. At the time Connors, Mac, Nastase had been going in a direction which was seen as classless. The networks loved Borg and tried to make a hero out of him.

I liked him but could never emulate his strokes so I quit trying and stuck with what I knew. I wish I hadn't quit!!!

[borg number one]

With thanks to TW Poster BorgForever, see this recent YouTube Upload. Borg in superb form at the 1981 US Open, beating Connors in straight sets. Note that Connors won both Wimbledon and the US Open in 1982 with Borg no longer playing. Also, note McEnroe lost all his matches to Connors in 1981 and was 0-4 against Lendl that year. So, as many have discussed when Borg left the Game, he had plenty of "Game" left and it was in fact a fight at the top, with McEnroe, Borg, Connors, and Lendl all worthy candidates. See him in the "zone", with no chance for Jimmy Connors on hard courts (his WORST surface), and using "old technology". See his serve in action, and many other facets of his Game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOUb8m6-lH0

[jswinf]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Always sort of felt that this must have also been why people spoke so glowingly about his calm demeanor (lucky he was good looking, otherwise calm demeanor can also mean "boring" or "no personality," in the same way a compliment from an ugly guy is sexual harassment but from a great looking guy...), he was interesting when held up against the hot heads and extroverts of the day, guys like Connors, Nastase, Mac, and Vitas. Was Vilas also a bit of a rascal? I don't think it was a coincidence that tennis was the most popular in the states when there were several obnoxious loud mouths at the top.

I recall that Borg did draw quite a bit of "boring" or "no personality" flak, not from everyone. Kind of like what some critics said/say about Sampras--tennis playing machines, that's all there is to them. Used to hear or read fairly often that Borg's resting heart rate was 40 or something like that, with someone implying "so there must not be much going on upstairs." Personally I think that's garbage--these guys are out to be the best tennis players they can, not to host the "Tonight" show.

I don't recall much criticism of Vilas' character--he's a poet, right, so was expected to be more emotional? I always liked watching him hit that backhand (see admission below.)

I was OK with watching Borg back in the day (as you youngsters are so fond of saying) and think he really was the father of the "new" approach to tennis, but I'd just rather watch a player with a 1-hand BH, just looks more "elegant" or whatever.

[jrepac]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Always sort of felt that this must have also been why people spoke so glowingly about his calm demeanor (lucky he was good looking, otherwise calm demeanor can also mean "boring" or "no personality," in the same way a compliment from an ugly guy is sexual harassment but from a great looking guy...), he was interesting when held up against the hot heads and extroverts of the day, guys like Connors, Nastase, Mac, and Vitas. Was Vilas also a bit of a rascal? I don't think it was a coincidence that tennis was the most popular in the states when there were several obnoxious loud mouths at the top.

Borg was cool as ice...meaning he didn't show a lot of emotions...much like Chrissie...that does not mean he didn't have personality. I think the "fun" of the 70's was that hot v. cold match up of a Connors or JMac vs. Bjorn. Vilas seemed like a fun guy, based on his interviews...not sure what he was like otherwise (i.e. was he a rascal?). Plus, everyone knows that off the court, Bjorn and Vitas were big party guys as the 70's club scene was raging. Ah, fun, fun, fun...

[jrepac]

Originally Posted by borg number one

With thanks to TW Poster BorgForever, see this recent YouTube Upload. Borg in superb form at the 1981 US Open, beating Connors in straight sets. Note that Connors won both Wimbledon and the US Open in 1982 with Borg no longer playing. Also, note McEnroe lost all his matches to Connors in 1981 and was 0-4 against Lendl that year. So, as many have discussed when Borg left the Game, he had plenty of "Game" left and it was in fact a fight at the top, with McEnroe, Borg, Connors, and Lendl all worthy candidates. See him in the "zone", with no chance for Jimmy Connors on hard courts (his WORST surface), and using "old technology". See his serve in action, and many other facets of his Game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOUb8m6-lH0

Great clip; Connors striking the ball quite well, but Bjorn simply hitting some AMAZING shots, no matter what Jimmy is throwing at him. Always loved watching these 2 go at it...the ground stroking is superb.

[borg number one]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Thanks for the responses. The New York Times article, I've been trying to find stuff like that, articles published when Borg was emerging. Keep em coming.

A bit before my time, but I remember reading that Borg had a "big" serve. Or at least that Wilander, unlike Borg, didn't have a big serve.

35ft6, have you seen this video of Borg and his Wimbledon run from the 1970's through his loss in the 1981 Wimbledon Final? (Legends of Wimbledon-Bjorn Borg, from the Wimbledon DVD Collection)

It really captures many aspects of this Tennis legend. If you've already seen me post these elsewhere, sorry, but I like to point as many people as possible to this excellent video. Check these out, along with that 1981 US Open clip above when you get a chance. It'll give you a real good picture of his impact on the Game at the time.

Bjorn Borg-Legends of Wimbledon (Wimbledon DVD Collection)

(Part 1)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1694076/5681964

(Part 2)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1694418/5686082

(Part 3)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1694791/5681794

(Part 4)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1695359/5682850

(Part 5)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1695735/5683378

(Part 6)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1702965/5702564

(Part 7)
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1695987/5684466

[35ft6]

^ Thanks! I'll check them out.

[BTURNER]

"Great posts folks. This really captures some of the complexities of Borg that tend to get "glossed over" through the years, and now many who never watched him play at all really, just pick up on certain "stereotypes", shall we say, such as he was a boring, baseliner, who didn't have a "varied Game". Complete nonsense. I think PC1's post above really captures how Borg was so good at constantly "adjusting", often changing his Game depending on the player and surface, and of course he also made a lot of adjustments during a match. He seemed thoroughly convinced always that as the match wore on, he'd always find a way to prevail (much like Federer in that way). He seemed always shocked when he would actually lose to someone, as beating him was a tall order, requiring such a massive effort typically and LOTS of winners.


Borg-one let me clarify my view. Its not that Borg or Evert did not have variety or could not adjust in tactics . Quite to the contrary. Its that they did not employ variety if their basic grinding ground game was working or likely to work or unless they were sooo confident and ahead they were using the match to practice volleying or slice or whatever for future rounds. For most players, variety is as much about relieving boredom and testing their mastery of spin as it is about winning a point. Not for Evert or Borg. So disciplined were they, that they never seemed to hit a shot for their pleasure in its production. It was usually when pushed by challenge tht they began to explore their options and show us just what they had in their bag of tricks. That meant a lot of matches especially in early rounds where the basics of keeping the ball deep, moving their opponent around and driving them into mental and physical exhaustion was pretty much what the audience got along with some forays into the net when the ball was short or the surface demanded. Made them damn consistent in avoiding trouble in the first week. Trust me this is no slam on them . Its incredible discipline they showed which I admire. I don't know that much about Borg evolution but for Evert, while she approached and volleyed in the 70's it was really in response to Martina, Hana and Austin that she REALLY learned to create and exploit with alternate spins from the ground and variety at net regularly especially in her early 30's. Borg did not hang that long. He used S/V which Evert refused to do outside of doubles to her last breath.

[pug]

To answer the question asked by the OP, most of us back then were in awe of Borg, and I heard very few critical comments. He was unbeatable at times, and I thoroughly enjoyed watching him.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by pug

To answer the question asked by the OP, most of us back then were in awe of Borg, and I heard very few critical comments. He was unbeatable at times, and I thoroughly enjoyed watching him.

Funny thing is about Borg, even when he was a teenager, he seem to have some aura about him that the crowd believed he would somehow win when the odds seemed against him. At least I got that impression from the vibes of the crowd when he was a teen.

He was losing a match at the US Open in 1976 in the third and final set (best of three in the early rounds) at 2-5 and yet many in the crowd were convinced he would win. Maybe it was just the part of the stadium I was in but a lot of people felt Borg's opponent was still going to lose even when he was ahead 5-2. And he did lose in a tiebreak. Incidentally it was against Jaime Fillol.

[borg number one]

Originally Posted by BTURNER

"Great posts folks. This really captures some of the complexities of Borg that tend to get "glossed over" through the years, and now many who never watched him play at all really, just pick up on certain "stereotypes", shall we say, such as he was a boring, baseliner, who didn't have a "varied Game". Complete nonsense. I think PC1's post above really captures how Borg was so good at constantly "adjusting", often changing his Game depending on the player and surface, and of course he also made a lot of adjustments during a match. He seemed thoroughly convinced always that as the match wore on, he'd always find a way to prevail (much like Federer in that way). He seemed always shocked when he would actually lose to someone, as beating him was a tall order, requiring such a massive effort typically and LOTS of winners.


Borg-one let me clarify my view. Its not that Borg or Evert did not have variety or could not adjust in tactics . Quite to the contrary. Its that they did not employ variety if their basic grinding ground game was working or likely to work or unless they were sooo confident and ahead they were using the match to practice volleying or slice or whatever for future rounds. For most players, variety is as much about relieving boredom and testing their mastery of spin as it is about winning a point. Not for Evert or Borg. So disciplined were they, that they never seemed to hit a shot for their pleasure in its production. It was usually when pushed by challenge tht they began to explore their options and show us just what they had in their bag of tricks. That meant a lot of matches especially in early rounds where the basics of keeping the ball deep, moving their opponent around and driving them into mental and physical exhaustion was pretty much what the audience got along with some forays into the net when the ball was short or the surface demanded. Made them damn consistent in avoiding trouble in the first week. Trust me this is no slam on them . Its incredible discipline they showed which I admire. I don't know that much about Borg evolution but for Evert, while she approached and volleyed in the 70's it was really in response to Martina, Hana and Austin that she REALLY learned to create and exploit with alternate spins from the ground and variety at net regularly especially in her early 30's. Borg did not hang that long. He used S/V which Evert refused to do outside of doubles to her last breath.

I'd agree with this BTURNER. Both Evert and Borg did think that their "bread and butter" Games, consistency with sudden power at the right spots, and fitness/movement/footwork (especially in the case of Borg) would win them 99% of the time, IF THEY WERE ON. Sometimes, with very offensive players, they would have to get out of this "comfort zone" and then start really mixing things up. Navratilova did that with Evert and McEnroe did this with Borg. As to Borg, I really wish he would have stuck around and capitalized on the new technology being ushered in. That would have been FASCINATING for tennis fans. More power and easier spin generation quite possibly in a less "taxing fashion" may have been "just what the Dr. ordered" for him as he approached years 26-30 on the Tour. Yet, I agree with your post almost completely, that's a good way to describe how Borg and Evert typically operated, especially on Clay, but often on Grass courts, and even Hard/Indoor courts too. Overall, this approach was grounded on tremendous discipline, talent, stellar work ethic, patience, and very high tennis IQ's, along with superb conditioning (stamina especially, but also quickness/speed). They each utilized all these elements to employ their baseline oriented Games.

[pug]

Originally Posted by borg number one

As to Borg, I really wish he would have stuck around and capitalized on the new technology being ushered in. That would have been FASCINATING for tennis fans. More power and easier spin generation quite possibly in a less "taxing fashion" may have been "just what the Dr. ordered for him as he approached years 26-30 on the Tour.

I have always entertained this thought also, what "could have been." I really think that Borg was capable of anything and the only thing that held him back was himself, IMO. If only, if only, ah well, fun to think about.

[BTURNER]

... this approach was grounded on tremendous discipline, talent, stellar work ethics, patience, and very high tennis IQ's, along with superb conditioning (stamina especially, but also quickness/speed). They each utilized all these elements to employ their baseline oriented Games.[/quote]

To take this comparison one step further. Borg was probably the fastest player/best athlete on the tour throughout most of his career. Evert was always in the top 4-6 fastest and a top tier athlete but never at the very top of these categories. Always a couple names ahead. She had that perfect footwork, flawless balance and stroke production but the trait that narrowed the gap virtually everywhere, was her uncanny almost psychic anticipation. Saves that half step in time to the pass which Borg made disappear with speed. Well that gets to to lots of Wimbledon finals just like Borg, but it does not win them, not when a King, Goolagong or Navratilova is hitting the volleys/ overheads! That + a less impressive first serve than Borg kept the pressure on her constantly on grass to produce too many winners from awkward situations.

[borg number one]

Yes exactly BTurner. Evert had great anticipation and footwork (much like Connors), but Borg had those things BUT also blazing speed/quickness. THAT is what allowed him to win 5 Wimbledons on VERY FAST grass, when there tons of great serve and volleyers. He was that great as an athlete, as well as a tennis player with great "pure tennis ability". Incidentally, I've read often that Wimbledon (especially on the old grass) really rewarded the best tennis "athletes" overall, the guys that were the quickest/fastest, and able to make those quick adjustments to bad bounces/skidding shots. Just look at Laver, Borg, and Sampras, and now Federer, they're all tremendous athletes, first and foremost.

[35ft6]

Originally Posted by pc1

Funny thing is about Borg, even when he was a teenager, he seem to have some aura about him that the crowd believed he would somehow win when the odds seemed against him. At least I got that impression from the vibes of the crowd when he was a teen.

Federer is like that, too. They both give off a sort of movie star hero vibe, and you always expect the star of the movie to come out on top no matter how daunting the odds.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Federer is like that, too. They both give off a sort of movie star hero vibe, and you always expect the star of the movie to come out on top no matter how daunting the odds.

People always tend to give people like that characteristics that are great. Sometimes it may be unfair to them because they expect so much.

[35ft6]

^ Yeah. And when they can handle it graciously, it's really a beautiful thing. I wonder if sportsman realize just how important they are to so many people. How even the poorest person in the crappiest neighborhood might live and die on the successes and failures of a pampered mega-millionaire who travels in private jets and is fawned over by kings and presidents. Maybe it's for the best that most athletes are notoriously tunnel-visioned and unworldly, knowing just how much people care might paralyze them.

Watching the documentary about Borg, it's kind of sad to know that he'll have drugs, marital, and business problems later on. But he's aged remarkably well, the dude's got miraculous genetics. And it's always nice to hear his thoughts on tennis, he seems so astute and humble, his opinion usually seems remarkably free of ego.

Some of the girls talking about him in part 1 or 2, can't remember, are total hotties. Weird to think they're about my mom's age now.

[borg number one]

^^Excellent 35ft6. He was a "global superstar", no doubt about it. Players today don't realize how much he helped "popularize the Sport", generating the first $1 million+ endorsement contracts with IMG. He along with Connors and McEnroe, Evert, and co. brought Tennis into unchartered territory. They were all VERY famous, here in the U.S. and internationally, yet none drew the attention that Borg did EVERYWHERE. It was crushing attention always, but he handled it well.

Yes, his post-retirement was sad. He REALLY struggled without tennis for a while. What CONSUMED his life and kept him so focused was not there anymore, and neither was all the exacting discipline, the diet, workouts, lots of sleep, practicing for hours everyday, the coaching, endless tournaments, travel, media, and the screaming fans everywhere. Lennart Bergelin, his coach, was a father figure for him, and that was gone too. He was suddenly left to his own devices.

He was a rock star, playing tennis at the highest levels, and without the "insulation" from the public that players have now. The tennis environments tend to be much more controlled now, with more security everywhere, even at hotels, etc. Borg was more "on his own" back then.

Anyway, I think he really missed the Game and also couldn't deal well with all the new freedom he had, along with all the money at 25! When he retired in the early 80's, he was reportedly worth between $100-$200 million (a huge sum back then), owned an island, and he lived in Monte Carlo. He also was out of that "bubble" all of a sudden with unlimited freedom. He supposedly got a lot of money stolen from him by his business partners, but he also turned to a "party lifestyle" and made some bad decisions. He was naive and had known only Tennis. He divorced and remarried a couple of times, but he has really settled down now from the looks of it.

Now, he has newfound happiness in his life. His "underwear" company is doing really well, and I believe that behind Calvin Klein, it's the second biggest clothing company in Sweden. He lives in a "castle" in Sweden, with a tennis court, and he plays very often (he's looks happily married, and is probably a multi-millionaire once again). He now plays on the Champions Tour, and he is very close to John McEnroe especially. His best friend, Vitas Gerulaitis died a strange death in his sleep (poisoning from a heating/AC Unit it was reported, but who knows?)

See these links below about the "current" Bjorn Borg and hear what McEnroe says about him. Borg is deep down a REALLY nice guy and remarkably humble given his success, which is a big reason for my fondness and admiration for him. Growing up, I would tell myself on and off the Tennis Court, if someone as famous/successful as Borg stayed so "humble" and "modest", shouldn't you?

J. McEnroe and Bjorn Borg are the best of friends now and really like brothers. Harry Hopman (legendary Australian Coach) called him a "complete Credit to the Game".



http://www.bjornborg.com/en/

see this video on him from his company website: http://www.bjornborg.com/en/Heritage/

Also see this short clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUa2ltLC0hw
(Hear McEnroe talk about how well Borg treated him when he first came on the Tour, and how he "took him under his Wing" and how "if Bjorn Borg was behind me..the Hell with everyone else.")

McEnroe actively tried to talk Borg into staying on the Tour when Borg decided to leave the Game during 1982 and Tennis and McEnroe especially really missed him. It's like how Federer and Nadal "understand each other" like no other people.

I'm so glad that Bjorn now watches a lot of the majors in person, especially Wimbledon and the French Open. The Game still needs him around.

[Changmaster]

Originally Posted by borg number one

^^Excellent 35ft6. He was a "global superstar", no doubt about it. Players today don't realize how much he helped "popularize the Sport", generating the first $1 million+ endorsement contracts with IMG. He along with Connors and McEnroe, Evert, and co. brought Tennis into unchartered territory. They were all VERY famous, here in the U.S. and internationally, yet none drew the attention that Borg did EVERYWHERE. It was crushing attention always, but he handled it well.

Yes, his post-retirement was sad. He REALLY struggled without tennis for a while. What CONSUMED his life and kept him so focused was not there anymore, and neither was all the exacting discipline, the diet, workouts, lots of sleep, practicing for hours everyday, the coaching, endless tournaments, travel, media, and the screaming fans everywhere. He was a rock star, playing tennis at the highest levels, and without the "insulation" from the public that players have now. The tennis environments tend to be much more controlled now, with more security everywhere, even at hotels, etc. Borg was more "on his own" back then.

Anyway, I think he really missed the Game and also couldn't deal well with all the new freedom he had, along with all the money at 25! When he retired in the early 80's, he was reportedly worth between $100-$200 million (a huge sum back then), owned an island, and he lived in Monte Carlo. He also was out of that "bubble" all of a sudden with unlimited freedom. He supposedly got a lot of money stolen from him by his business partners, but he also turned to a "party lifestyle" and made some bad decisions. He was naive and had known only Tennis. He divorced and remarried a couple of times, but he has really settled down now from the looks of it.

Now, he has newfound happiness in his life. His "underwear" company is doing really well, and I believe that behind Calvin Klein, it's the second biggest clothing company in Sweden. He lives in a "castle" in Sweden, with a tennis court, and he plays very often (he's looks happily married, and is probably a multi-millionaire once again). He now plays on the Champions Tour, and he is very close to John McEnroe especially. His best friend, Vitas Gerulaitis died a strange death in his sleep (poisoning from a heating/AC Unit it was reported, but who knows?)

See these links below about the "current" Bjorn Borg and hear what McEnroe says about him. Borg is deep down a REALLY nice guy and remarkably humble given his success, which is a big reason for my fondness and admiration for him. Growing up, I would tell myself on and off the Tennis Court, if someone as famous/successful as Borg stayed so "humble" and "modest", shouldn't you?

J. McEnroe and Bjorn Borg are the best of friends now and really like brothers. Harry Hopman (legendary Australian Coach) called him a "complete Credit to the Game".



http://www.bjornborg.com/en/

see this video on him from his company website: http://www.bjornborg.com/en/Heritage/

Also see this short clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUa2ltLC0hw
(Hear McEnroe talk about how well Borg treated him when he first came on the Tour, and how he "took him under his Wing" and how "if Bjorn Borg was behind me..the Hell with everyone else.")

McEnroe actively tried to talk Borg into staying on the Tour when Borg decided to leave the Game during 1982 and Tennis and McEnroe especially really missed him. It's like how Federer and Nadal "understand each other" like no other people.

I'm so glad that Bjorn now watches a lot of the majors in person, especially Wimbledon and the French Open. The Game still needs him around.

He died from carbon monoxide poisoning.