Stats for 1984 USO SF(McEnroe-Connors)

M

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
McEnroe d Connors 6-4 4-6 7-5 4-6 6-3

McEnroe 94/157 on 1st serve (60%)
Connors 124/160 (77.5%)

McEnroe 18 aces(2 on 2nd serves), 7 double faults
Connors 1 ace, 1 double

McEnroe had 33 unreturned serves, three I judged service winners
Connors had 24

McEnroe had 53 winners: 10 fh, 5 bh, 22 fh, 8 bhv, 8 ov
Connors had 53 winners: 12 fh, 30 bh, 6 fhv, 3 bhv, 2 ov

McEnroe had 6 passing shot winners, 3 fh, 3 bh
Connors had 38 (28 bh, 10 fh)

McEnroe was 8 of 17 on break points
Connors was 7 of 14

Stats from CBS

Through his 1st five matches, McEnroe was winning 77% of points on 1st serve, 71% of his points on 2nd serve

At 5-3 in the 4th, McEnroe was 54 of 112 at net, Connors 15 of 28

At 3-1 in the 5th, McEnroe had 29 unforced errors, Connors 16
 
K

krosero

Legend
Published stats

This was written by Arthur Ashe in the Washington Post:

This was Connors' first Open with his new mid-sized racket. His serve and groundstrokes now fly off the strings faster than before; with the ability to hit a two-fisted backhand at the last minute, he left McEnroe guessing at the net more than before. A radar gun has clocked Connors' backhand at more than 100 miles per hour.

By contrast, McEnroe relies more on pinpoint placement. His mid-sized racket is strung at a loose 48 pounds, thereby creating a tremendous trampoline effect. This gives McEnroe touch on his volleys and lobs. In the tense fifth set, it enabled him to swing fluidly. Connors tended to overhit.
Click to expand...


ESPN.com
(this was actually a recent article, Oct. 2008):

The two battled tooth and nail for nearly four hours, combining for 65 winners before McEnroe won a taut five-setter 6-4, 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 6-3.
Click to expand...


Sports Illustrated:

By the time he was finished, Connors would nail 45 winners and break Mac seven times. McEnroe would end up with only 20 winners. Still, a subpar McEnroe won 6-4, 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 6-3, because in the crunch he served 19 aces, and at the outset of Set Five he raised his game a notch, winning 12 of the first 13 points to take a 3-0 lead. After fighting off a breaker in game seven, McEnroe ran out what he called a "yoyo" of a match.

McEnroe's record in his last 16 matches against Lendl and Connors, the only players remotely close to being considered "challengers," is now 14-2. Remaining for McEnroe this year are probable Davis Cup matches against Cash and Wilander and a campaign for the Australian Open championship. Following that, McEnroe may well rue that warm Sunday afternoon in Paris when he blew up. Tear out that page, and Johnny Mac has had the entire sport for breakfast, lunch and dinner in 1984.
Click to expand...


The Globe and Mail:

Saturday, Connors, who played as if he had reinvented the pass, grunting as he blasted some 30 backhands down-the-line or cross court for winners, generated enough heat to warm fans who stayed, despite the dropping thermometer, for more than 12 hours of tennis.

But McEnroe, who served 19 aces yet sullied his own streaks of brilliance with lapses of concentration and intensity that produced 29 unforced errors, chipped away, using his deft touch, rushing the net some 138 times in all before prevailing 6-3, 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 6-3.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
K

krosero

Legend
Thanks for your stats, Moose, the published winner counts are just confusing. Especially SI giving McEnroe only 20 winners. I always figured maybe they just excluded service. But it was a long match and you can see both players hitting a lot of winners from everywhere. If he had only 20 winners, that's only 4 per set which makes no sense.

And now I look at my notes: CBS had Mac already at 50 winners, and Connors at 51, at love-3 in the fifth. Even if those stats included Mac's aces (which I doubt), they're higher than the winner counts in the print media.

But there is some sense to the stats in the newspapers, because the Globe and Mail had Connors at 30 BH winners, exactly the same as your count.
 
Last edited:
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
This match is one of my favorites. Fantastic rallies and contrasting styles of course. I could watch it forever.
 
R

Ripper014

Hall of Fame
This was one of my favorite matches ever too... unfortunately earlier this year my VHS player ate the tape while I was watching it... Another favorite is a Wimbledon match I had with Hana and Martina... where Hana played the best first 4 games I have ever seen by a woman, it was sad she lost the match in 2 sets.

I am going to have to do something about getting another copy of the Connnor/Mac USO 84 semi though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1
B

BTURNER

Legend
"Through his 1st five matches, McEnroe was winning 77% of points on 1st serve, 71% of his points on 2nd serve.

While you have the comparable stat for first serve points won in the match you do not percentage of second serve points won for context. Loved this match. Connors played some of his best stuff.
 
K

krosero

Legend
pc1 said:
This match is one of my favorites. Fantastic rallies and contrasting styles of course. I could watch it forever.
Click to expand...
I have such great memories around this match. It was months before I got into tennis, but I actually remember seeing this one. The tennis went on until 11 pm and it was a Saturday night (not a school night). I found it playing, and watched till the end.

And as good as McEnroe's volleys always were, whenever I think of this match I think of the baseline rallies.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
krosero said:
I have such great memories around this match. It was months before I got into tennis, but I actually remember seeing this one. The tennis went on until 11 pm and it was a Saturday night (not a school night). I found it playing, and watched till the end.

And as good as McEnroe's volleys always were, whenever I think of this match I think of the baseline rallies.
Click to expand...

That day was arguably the best day in tennis history and this match was the best match that day.

McEnroe was fantastic at the baseline that day and Connors was perhaps even better than he usually was, which is incredible.

What is amazing to me is that considering what a great volleyer that McEnroe was that at one point he was losing more points than he was winning at the net. Connors' passing shots were great that day.

A very high quality match and a match I think is superior to many matches ranked higher than it and more famous. I think people tend to forget about it because it was a semi and not a final.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
Mac Screams

Ripper014 said:
My most vivid memory of this match is of all the passes Connors made and finally having McEnroe stop and scream for him to stop.
Click to expand...

that was a great moment, wasn't it? :)

this is one of their very best matches, IMHO, simply based on the quality of play from both sides....and this was a peak Mac facing an "older" Jimmy (who seemed to make age meaningless time and time again)

Mac's serve was great that day and Jimmy's reflex's were incredibly sharp...this was just a lot of fun to watch.

Really wish Jimmy would've hung onto the Pro-Staff longer...I thought he played great with it....he also beat Lendl late in the year in an indoor match when he was playing w/it. He then went back to the t-2000 for quite some time...which was a bad move.
 
R

Ripper014

Hall of Fame
jrepac said:
that was a great moment, wasn't it? :)

this is one of their very best matches, IMHO, simply based on the quality of play from both sides....and this was a peak Mac facing an "older" Jimmy (who seemed to make age meaningless time and time again)

Mac's serve was great that day and Jimmy's reflex's were incredibly sharp...this was just a lot of fun to watch.

Really wish Jimmy would've hung onto the Pro-Staff longer...I thought he played great with it....he also beat Lendl late in the year in an indoor match when he was playing w/it. He then went back to the t-2000 for quite some time...which was a bad move.
Click to expand...



I agree... it was why I purchased the Prostaff when it finally arrived on the market and continued playing with it for 15 years... and still have 4 of them today. Well Jimmy and Chris... another of my favorites... at the time. But then when I got the actual racket in my hands... who knew it would feel so right.

The USO 84 was a great match... and because it was a night match it allowed Connors to compete deep into the match... but in the last set you could feel the chances of Jimmy winning slipping away. This match was still one of my favorite matches of all time and I wish CBS would provide a DvD of "The Original Super Saturday" but for me it seemed a little anti-climatic in the end. CBS might as well include the men's final in the dvd as well... in case anyone cares it was McEnroe over Lendl 6-3 6-4 6-1, now that really seems anti-climatic after the matches on saturday doesn't it?
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
Ripper014 said:
I agree... it was why I purchased the Prostaff when it finally arrived on the market and continued playing with it for 15 years... and still have 4 of them today. Well Jimmy and Chris... another of my favorites... at the time. But then when I got the actual racket in my hands... who knew it would feel so right.

The USO 84 was a great match... and because it was a night match it allowed Connors to compete deep into the match... but in the last set you could feel the chances of Jimmy winning slipping away. This match was still one of my favorite matches of all time and I wish CBS would provide a DvD of "The Original Super Saturday" but for me it seemed a little anti-climatic in the end. CBS might as well include the men's final in the dvd as well... in case anyone cares it was McEnroe over Lendl 6-3 6-4 6-1, now that really seems anti-climatic after the matches on saturday doesn't it?
Click to expand...

There have shown the entire Super Saturday on the old Classic Sports Network that was taken over by ESPN and is now called ESPN Classic Sports but I haven't seen it in total since. Take goodness I taped it.
 
Last edited:
R

Ripper014

Hall of Fame
pc1 said:
There have shown the entire Super Saturday on the old Classic Sports Network that was taken over by ESPN and is not Classic Sports but I haven't seen it in total since. Take goodness I taped it.
Click to expand...

How about tranferring it on to DvD for some of us deprived TW board members?
:)
 
K

krosero

Legend
pc1 said:
McEnroe was fantastic at the baseline that day and Connors was perhaps even better than he usually was, which is incredible.

What is amazing to me is that considering what a great volleyer that McEnroe was that at one point he was losing more points than he was winning at the net. Connors' passing shots were great that day.
Click to expand...
That's true, at one point CBS had McEnroe under 50%. And the final figure (72 of 138 net approaches) is just 52%.

Edit: just to note, we don't know exactly how those net approaches were counted; could be the method was a more strict way of counting.
 
Last edited:
K

krosero

Legend
Moose Malloy said:
McEnroe had 53 winners: 10 fh, 5 bh, 22 fh, 8 bhv, 8 ov
Click to expand...
That's an incredible figure for McEnroe's forehand volley: 22 winners, and from the backhand side only 8.

You had him at 23 FHV winners when he lost to Borg at MSG in January '81 -- and that was only a 3-set match.

I remember an article, probably in Tennis Magazine, that showed how McEnroe was stronger on the forehand side at the net up through '84, but afterwards his figures on that side went down below his BH figures. If I ever find it I'll make a post about it.

But as I recall it was about how he was standing so far over to serve in the deuce court that he was getting passed to his left when he came in behind his serve.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
I frankly didn't expect it to be a competitive match before it started. I thought McEnroe would beat him easily. Perhaps not quite as easily as Wimbledon earlier in the year but in my mind, probably in straight sets. I never dreamed the match would reach that high a level in quality.
 
R

Ripper014

Hall of Fame
pc1 said:
I frankly didn't expect it to be a competitive match before it started. I thought McEnroe would beat him easily. Perhaps not quite as easily as Wimbledon earlier in the year but in my mind, probably in straight sets. I never dreamed the match would reach that high a level in quality.
Click to expand...

I was expecting a good match... Connors always came up with something special at the USO... it was his home court more than any other player, and the finals always worked up to his birthday. He was always a great fighter... and this was his colosseum where he did his best work.
 
K

krosero

Legend
pc1 said:
I frankly didn't expect it to be a competitive match before it started. I thought McEnroe would beat him easily. Perhaps not quite as easily as Wimbledon earlier in the year but in my mind, probably in straight sets. I never dreamed the match would reach that high a level in quality.
Click to expand...
I wish that Mac and Connors had faced off in a USO final. Four semis, not once in the final.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
84 semi

pc1 said:
I frankly didn't expect it to be a competitive match before it started. I thought McEnroe would beat him easily. Perhaps not quite as easily as Wimbledon earlier in the year but in my mind, probably in straight sets. I never dreamed the match would reach that high a level in quality.
Click to expand...

Yes, given their encounters earlier in the year, that was a real possibility. He had creamed Jimbo on grass and on red clay...of all surfaces, earlier in the year. But this was the USO, and Connors had the mojo going for sure. Even more shocking than the semi was the fact that Mac creamed Lendl the very next day. I figured he'd be wiped out after the marathon w/Connors....but, that tells you just how good Mac was that year.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
Ripper014 said:
I was expecting a good match... Connors always came up with something special at the USO... it was his home court more than any other player, and the finals always worked up to his birthday. He was always a great fighter... and this was his colosseum where he did his best work.
Click to expand...

and, he was the 2-time defending champ, so there was certainly some pride on the line.....
 
K

krosero

Legend
They met in Canada just before the Open, and McEnroe won 2-6, 6-2, 6-3.

That was the first set Connors had taken from McEnroe since summer '83 (sixteen straight sets).

There was an article in the Los Angeles Times that mentioned Connors' new racquet:

Jimmy Connors sported a new look Saturday and, for one set, the equipment change gave John McEnroe fits.
Click to expand...

That's just the abstract; I didn't buy the full article.
 
K

krosero

Legend
And the next two meetings Mac won again in straight sets (Canada in '85, San Francisco in '86). The next one after that, Connors finally broke the losing streak (Canada in '87).

I don't know if he was using his old racquet during those losses, but I know he was using a new racquet again when he made the Wimbledon semis in '87, before beating McEnroe in Canada.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
krosero said:
And the next two meetings Mac won again in straight sets (Canada in '85, San Francisco in '86). The next one after that, Connors finally broke the losing streak (Canada in '87).

I don't know if he was using his old racquet during those losses, but I know he was using a new racquet again when he made the Wimbledon semis in '87, before beating McEnroe in Canada.
Click to expand...

If memory serves me, Connors went back to the T-2000 right after the January masters in '85...he lost a tight 3 setter to Lendl and I think he was questioning the Pro-Staff more and more. Which was nothing but a red herring in my mind; to most observers, he played quite well with it. He went back to the T-2000 for a long time...using it at all the GS events in '85....but he had a bad run in 1986, just not doing very well, period. He then was seen using various graphite demos/prototypes...in that San Fran match against Mac in late '86, he was using some unknown black frame...likely from Slazenger, as in '87 he was playing with that white Slazenger Panther Pro Ceramic, which seemed to suit him quite well. I think he played w/a Slazenger Phantom after that, then trotted out those brightly colored Estusa frames (yellow mainly, but I think there was a hot pink one too!)
 
K

krosero

Legend
Moose Malloy said:
McEnroe had 53 winners: 10 fh, 5 bh, 22 fh, 8 bhv, 8 ov
Click to expand...
And I just wanted to add one more thing. Your count tells us with certainty that CBS was not including service yet in its winner counts. They had McEnroe at 50 winners at love-3 in the fifth. If that included the 17 aces they'd counted by then, it would leave only 33 non-service winners. But by your count he was already approaching 50 clean non-service winners by then. So the aces can't be included.

Since the CBS count at love-3 was slightly higher than what you must have had at that point (I counted 7 remaining winners by McEnroe from that point forward), that also tells us CBS was occasionally crediting McEnroe with winners when Connors would barely deflect the ball.

And so now we know how to look at the CBS winner counts in the Lendl-Cash semi and the final.
 
Last edited:
K

krosero

Legend
Moose Malloy said:
Stats from CBS

Through his 1st five matches, McEnroe was winning 77% of points on 1st serve, 71% of his points on 2nd serve
Click to expand...

krosero said:
For Connors they gave this: 66% on first serve, 65% on second.
Click to expand...
Re-watching some USO matches that CBS covered in the early 80s, I noticed that they were using the phrase "second serves in". So this stat above for '84, I don't know what phrase they used exactly, but it may not have included double-faults (unlike the way that stat is done today).

And that's probably something to look for in Martina-Chris matches, because we were wondering about what kind of success they had on second serve.
 
B

BringBackWood

Professional
Moose Malloy said:
McEnroe d Connors 6-4 4-6 7-5 4-6 6-3

McEnroe 94/157 on 1st serve (60%)
Connors 124/160 (77.5%)

McEnroe 18 aces(2 on 2nd serves), 7 double faults
Connors 1 ace, 1 double

McEnroe had 33 unreturned serves, three I judged service winners
Connors had 24

McEnroe had 53 winners: 10 fh, 5 bh, 22 fh, 8 bhv, 8 ov
Connors had 53 winners: 12 fh, 30 bh, 6 fhv, 3 bhv, 2 ov

McEnroe had 6 passing shot winners, 3 fh, 3 bh
Connors had 38 (28 bh, 10 fh)

McEnroe was 8 of 17 on break points
Connors was 7 of 14

Stats from CBS

Through his 1st five matches, McEnroe was winning 77% of points on 1st serve, 71% of his points on 2nd serve

At 5-3 in the 4th, McEnroe was 54 of 112 at net, Connors 15 of 28

At 3-1 in the 5th, McEnroe had 29 unforced errors, Connors 16
Click to expand...

Have you got numbers of winners per set for each player?
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
Sometimes I think a rally may end in an unforced error but the stats may not take into account the quality of the rally. Perhaps a few potential winners were prevented by the great speed and anticipation of the opponent. Perhaps a probable winner was neutralized and the opponent hit a winner off the probable winner.

Perhaps the rally is so great with four or five potential winners prevented with variety of shots that one player may be so worn he makes an unforced error. It still may be a great rally but the stats still may have it ending with and error.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
The incredible stat to me was that McEnroe at least at one point was below 50% at the net! That says so much for Connors' counter punching game and passing shots.
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
metsman said:
seems mac was just not playing too well.
Click to expand...

disagree. Mac was playing very well. Just a touch below his very best, but still very well.
This match might actually make you appreciate Connors' peak level at the USO, tbh.

 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
abmk said:
disagree. Mac was playing very well. Just a touch below his very best, but still very well.
This match might actually make you appreciate Connors' peak level at the USO, tbh.

Click to expand...
Maybe, I'll give it a look but it was to be very rare for Mac to hit that few winners on a fast court right? It seems he must have been hitting a lot of volleys right back at Connors explaining the low winners and high number of groundstroke winners for Connors. Haven't watched it though, will do when I have some time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
metsman said:
Maybe, I'll give it a look but it was to be very rare for Mac to hit that few winners on a fast court right? It seems he must have been hitting a lot of volleys right back at Connors explaining the low winners and high number of groundstroke winners for Connors. Haven't watched it though, will do when I have some time.
Click to expand...

those winner counts in some of those articles are incorrect.

See post #1. Mac had 53 winners apart from serve and 18 aces.Assuming no service winners, that brings up his winner count to 71.
That's on the lines of what you'd expect.

Similarly Connors had 54 winners overall.

Mac played very well, trust me. Connors put on a clinic of returning and passing. As good as any in the open era, tbh.

This match is arguably the best match at the US Open in the Open era.
 
Last edited:
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
metsman said:
Maybe, I'll give it a look but it was to be very rare for Mac to hit that few winners on a fast court right? It seems he must have been hitting a lot of volleys right back at Connors explaining the low winners and high number of groundstroke winners for Connors. Haven't watched it though, will do when I have some time.
Click to expand...
It's a fantastic match. It's one of my favorite matches of all time. I think you will enjoy it.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
abmk said:
those winner counts in some of those articles are incorrect.

See post #1. Mac had 53 winners apart from serve and 18 aces.Assuming no service winners, that brings up his winner count to 71.
That's on the lines of what you'd expect.

Similarly Connors had 54 winners overall.

Mac played very well, trust me. Connors put on a clinic of returning and passing. As good as any in the open era, tbh.

This match is arguably the best match at the US Open in the Open era.
Click to expand...
I think your last line summed it up. Sometimes I put that match on a sort of background enjoyment when I'm doing paperwork or something boring.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
metsman said:
seems mac was just not playing too well.
Click to expand...
Not at all...Mac was playing very well. I think the difference was Connors...he brought his A game to this one....had not played at this level since '82. In looking at the stats, the BH winners and passing shots really stands out...he was killing it. His return game was "on" too, which against Mac, was not easy to do as he was hard to read.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
metsman said:
Maybe, I'll give it a look but it was to be very rare for Mac to hit that few winners on a fast court right? It seems he must have been hitting a lot of volleys right back at Connors explaining the low winners and high number of groundstroke winners for Connors. Haven't watched it though, will do when I have some time.
Click to expand...

While the USO court was a bit faster back then compared to nowadays, it's nowhere near as fast as grass. So, that helped Connors get a better shot at returning Mac's serve and balls sat up a little more, so he could connect more effectively. Connors WAS one of the best hard court players of that era...he was great on medium-fast surfaces.
 
J

jrepac

Hall of Fame
abmk said:
those winner counts in some of those articles are incorrect.

See post #1. Mac had 53 winners apart from serve and 18 aces.Assuming no service winners, that brings up his winner count to 71.
That's on the lines of what you'd expect.

Similarly Connors had 54 winners overall.

Mac played very well, trust me. Connors put on a clinic of returning and passing. As good as any in the open era, tbh.

This match is arguably the best match at the US Open in the Open era.
Click to expand...

IMHO, it was one of the best matches Connors ever played, but lost (along w/a couple to a guy named Borg)
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
pc1 said:
I think your last line summed it up. Sometimes I put that match on a sort of background enjoyment when I'm doing paperwork or something boring.
Click to expand...

I wish someone made a good 10-15 min highlight reel of the match. Wouldn't have time to watch full match again and again. But would like to watch the highlights once in a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
jrepac said:
Not at all...Mac was playing very well. I think the difference was Connors...he brought his A game to this one....had not played at this level since '82. In looking at the stats, the BH winners and passing shots really stands out...he was killing it. His return game was "on" too, which against Mac, was not easy to do as he was hard to read.
Click to expand...

jrepac said:
IMHO, it was one of the best matches Connors ever played, but lost (along w/a couple to a guy named Borg)
Click to expand...

abmk said:
I agree.
Click to expand...
In watching Connors in those days in person I did feel he lost a bit from even just two years before. Lendl made the comment Connors couldn't attack on balls he used to. When the semifinal started between Connors and McEnroe I didn't think Connors had any sort of chance. I was wrong. He was in the match every step of the way.

abmk, you pointed out in a previous post that it makes you appreciate Connors' peak at the US Open. That's understandable of course but I think it also gives an idea how strong peak Connors was around 1976 or 1978 when he was thought to be a juggernaut. That's why while perhaps McEnroe may have been thought to be more talented at his peak I do wonder if he was really more talented because of how powerfully and solidly Connors could hit the ball. I'm not sure how much lower 1978 Connors at the US Open was to 1984 McEnroe at the US Open if he was at all.

An average to a bit above average serve and volley during Connors' peak years stood very little chance against him.
 
deacsyoga

deacsyoga

Banned
This was a really impressive performance by Connors after getting utterly humiliated at Wimbledon. He was always someone who thrived off a challenge or when he felt he had something to prove. One of the gutsiest and most driven champions ever. Still glad McEnroe won to complete his historic great year though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
abmk said:
I wish someone made a good 10-15 min highlight reel of the match. Wouldn't have time to watch full match again and again. But would like to watch the highlights once in a while.
Click to expand...
Yes. That would be nice. But the highlights are so many that 15 minutes may be too little and I may feel I missed something.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
deacsyoga said:
This was a really impressive performance by Connors after getting utterly humiliated at Wimbledon. He was always someone who thrived off a challenge or when he felt he had something to prove. One of the gutsiest and most driven champions ever. Still glad McEnroe won to complete his historic great year though.
Click to expand...
I'm a big fan of tennis history so in retrospect it's better McEnroe won.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Stats for 1984 Wimbledon SF (Connors-Lendl)
Replies
14
Views
3K
kiki
kiki
M
Stats for 1984 USO Final (McEnroe-Lendl)
Replies
33
Views
3K
Moose Malloy
M
K
Stats for 1984 W final (McEnroe-Connors)
Replies
25
Views
5K
krosero
K
M
Stats for 1982 USO SF(Lendl-McEnroe)
Replies
25
Views
5K
Moose Malloy
M
M
Stats for 1974 W Final(Connors-Rosewall)
Replies
7
Views
2K
WCT
W
Top