A question all Connors fans have wondered but never asked....

[JAY1]

As a Jimmy Connors fan and a fan of 'The Golden Era' in general.... Borg, McEnroe, Vilas et al.
I've often wondered but never liked to mention in case it would somewhat diminish his achievements, but would Connors have won his 3 Slams in 1982 & 1983 if Borg had been still playing full time on the tour?

Like a lot of Connors fans I'm very quick to point out he was a huge under achiever when it came to winning Slams, and can easily list 6 Slam finals he should have won, not to mention his years of inactivity at Kooyong and Roland Garros.

We all know Jimmy stepped up a level in his game in 1982, a level not too far off 1974 but would it have been enough to win the three Slams he won in 82 & 83.
A question that is impossible to really answer but I'll try....

Positives....
He got himself fitter
He improved his 1st serve by 25%
He nearly got Borg in their 1981 Wimbledon semi-final
He beat Borg in all but 1 of their 12 exhibitions in 82 & 83 ( these were not played like exhibitions, it was like the unofficial title for 'World's number 1' and they really went at one another ).
He had Lendl's number in the big matches.

Negatives.....
He hadn't beaten Borg since 1978 on the main tour.
At his 3 Slam wins in 82 & 83 be never had to beat Mac & Lendl back to back ( hardest was Vilas and Lendl), if Borg had been playing the likelihood is he would have to beat 2 of the 3 back to back.
I can't think of anymore.

What do we all think.......

 

[treblings]

for starters, i think that the exhibitions Borg and Connors played in 82 and 83 where just that, exhibitions. certainly not some unofficial race for World´s no. 1

 

[eldanger25]

Good question - I actually think he still wins those majors. It's not like you're getting '79-'80 Borg in a hypothetical 1982 in which he stayed on tour - you're getting an emotionally exhausted veteran confronting the same career transitions all players - including greats - go through, usually during the second half of their twenties.

Connors was four years older than Borg, and dealt with these transitions himself from '79-'81 - new wife, started a family, adjusted his game to physical issues (namely, back problems) that come with more tread on the tires, etc. No coincidence that Borg gets married and winds down his career within a season or so - finding that on- and off-court balance as a veteran on tour is a tricky thing, and that was what he was gonna have to do if he stuck around. For instance, I think in Tignor's book he mentioned that Connors cited a 5 set win over Mac in late '81 at Wembley as a real turning point - getting that old feeling back that he could win the big ones, that he'd found the balance necessary to make the push he made the following year.

Another issue that any veteran star has to deal with is the arrival of a new kid in town: Mac. You flash back to the end of '78, you've got Borg and Connors together at the top of the game, each with their own kingdoms for the last few years at the game's two consistently great/strong events - the Open and SW19. Mac swiped New York from Jimmy in '79, sending him into the wilderness for awhile, and swiped London from Borg in '81, arguably hastening him out of the game. Not a surprising order of events, given that New York is Mac's backyard and Borg was ultimately the greater player than Jimmy and able to hold Mac off for longer.

Still, what I'm saying is that Jimmy had a bit of a mental head-start in terms of climbing back up the mountain he'd just been thrown from to re-engage with the new king as a challenger, and I think you'd have seen Borg having to manage that transition in '82/'83.

Anyway, I just don't see a burnt out Borg taking the Open in either '82 or '83 given his snake-bitten history there even in happier times, and totally could've seen him taking a loss at Wimbledon in '82 - to Connors or somebody else.

I do think he'd have defended RG in '82 - and certainly against a young Swede like Wilander (would've been a nice symmetry to see him deny first Lendl in '81, then Mats in '82 - the two guys who'd divvy up RG for most of the rest of the 80s). Still think Noah was on a mission in '83, but Borg may've semi-righted the ship elsewhere by '83 (i.e. Wimbledon) to make up for it.

I also think - assuming Borg stuck it out and came out the other side with renewed fire - that an older and wiser Borg would've been sorted out by '84 or so (including with an updated racket), and would've been a real contender for more majors everywhere in the '84-'87 range.

So maybe Borg swaps places with Connors at the '84 SW19 final, but I don't think he was in the kind of headspace in late '81 to assume he pockets the 3 slams Connors took in the '82/'83 range.

Just my .02.

 

[BobbyOne]

for starters, i think that the exhibitions Borg and Connors played in 82 and 83 where just that, exhibitions. certainly not some unofficial race for World´s no. 1

treblings,

I guess they were half-way serious matches and half-way exhibitions, rather the former.

 

[DMP]

As a Jimmy Connors fan and a fan of 'The Golden Era' in general.... Borg, McEnroe, Vilas et al. I've often wondered but never liked to mention in case it would somewhat diminish his achievements, but would Connors have won his 3 Slams in 1982 & 1983 if Borg had been still playing full time on the tour?

Do NOT ever ask a question like that. It isn't relevant to what Connors achieved. He achieved what he did in the times that he played. If you start asking about how many slams he might have won you are bending to the criteria of the know-nothings on the General Forum, who seem to think slam counts are the only things that matter.

Well we know that isn't true, and has been pointed out, the things that were important in those early years of the Open Era were different.

So, Connors achieved what he did, when he did.

I also think these speculations are highly suspect. Who would have predicted Lendl's or Murray's successes after their early failures, Laver's lack of success at slams after winning the Grand Slam, Sampras's final success at the USO after so many 'failures' as he got older, Nadal losing to Soderling? As I've said before, if tennis teaches one thing it is that players can, and do, change things.

As far as Borg v Connors goes, people seem to forget that Borg played on well after his USO defeat by McEnroe, and had a lot more trouble from Connors than McEnroe in his final matches.

I say all this as someone who didn't like Connors personally, but am a great admirer of what he achieved.

 

[treblings]

treblings,

I guess they were half-way serious matches and half-way exhibitions, rather the former.

if we consider Connors competitive nature, i´m sure you´re right that he took them serious
he wouldn´t have played any different against Borg, if they played on a private court without spectators or money at stake.
not sure about Borg at this stage of his career.
at the end of the day they were exhibition matches not a race for number one

 

[eldanger25]

Re: my earlier post, Mac elaborates on the mental balancing act that vets have to deal with at around the 10:55 minute mark of this video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1I9_EFsrps. Good conversation on the topic for a solid few minutes, also check out Connors on the topic at around the 14:10 mark.

Somewhat different situation to Borg '82, but a universal theme - the tug of stability and family life etc. versus the grind of the tour and expectations for your own game.

Connors made that turn and returned to the top, for whatever private reasons and innate motivations he had - can't say the same for Borg and Mac. No shame in either outcome - it is what it is, can't say Borg didn't give his all to the game the first 25 years of his life.

 

[JAY1]

if we consider Connors competitive nature, i´m sure you´re right that he took them serious
he wouldn´t have played any different against Borg, if they played on a private court without spectators or money at stake.
not sure about Borg at this stage of his career.
at the end of the day they were exhibition matches not a race for number one

Have either of you guys seen any of these Borg v Connors 'exhibitions' ?
I've watched about 7 of them.....

 

[JAY1]

Do NOT ever ask a question like that. It isn't relevant to what Connors achieved. He achieved what he did in the times that he played. If you start asking about how many slams he might have won you are bending to the criteria of the know-nothings on the General Forum, who seem to think slam counts are the only things that matter.

Well we know that isn't true, and has been pointed out, the things that were important in those early years of the Open Era were different.

So, Connors achieved what he did, when he did.

I also think these speculations are highly suspect. Who would have predicted Lendl's or Murray's successes after their early failures, Laver's lack of success at slams after winning the Grand Slam, Sampras's final success at the USO after so many 'failures' as he got older, Nadal losing to Soderling? As I've said before, if tennis teaches one thing it is that players can, and do, change things.

As far as Borg v Connors goes, people seem to forget that Borg played on well after his USO defeat by McEnroe, and had a lot more trouble from Connors than McEnroe in his final matches.

I say all this as someone who didn't like Connors personally, but am a great admirer of what he achieved.

You have no idea do you?! And since when did you make the rules on here?
Obviously you're unable to speculate and think outside of the box.
It's a completely feasible question.

Borg had Connors number for 79, 80 & 81 and I'm intrigued if Connors would have had the same impact in 82/83 if Borg had been around.....

 

[treblings]

Have either of you guys seen any of these Borg v Connors 'exhibitions' ?
I've watched about 7 of them.....

i´m only one guy
great matches, i´m sure. with Connors you always got your moneys worth
still, exhibitions and no unofficial race for no.1 Johnny Mc for one would have objected(´you cannot be serious´)
it´s a minor point of your op though, so let´s not make it into the focus of your original question, which i think is worth discussing

 

[JAY1]

i´m only one guy
great matches, i´m sure. with Connors you always got your moneys worth
still, exhibitions and no unofficial race for no.1 Johnny Mc for one would have objected(´you cannot be serious´)
it´s a minor point of your op though, so let´s not make it into the focus of your original question, which i think is worth discussing

Having watched 7 of the matches it was more of a case of Connors trying to prove he really was the best player in the world and Borg trying to measure how far he was off from making a return to the top of the game.
This is what gave it an edge and yes of course it was different to them playing a Grand Slam final etc.
What was interesting about the matches was that generally for the first set there was a bit of messing about, but after that they were deadly serious.
We so nearly had 6 world number ones all playing together at their peak for a few years.....

 

[treblings]

Having watched 7 of the matches it was more of a case of Connors trying to prove he really was the best player in the world and Borg trying to measure how far he was off from making a return to the top of the game.
This is what gave it an edge and yes of course it was different to them playing a Grand Slam final etc.
What was interesting about the matches was that generally for the first set there was a bit of messing about, but after that they were deadly serious.
We so nearly had 6 world number ones all playing together at their peak for a few years.....

interesting point about Borgs situation.
have you seen these 7 matches live or on tv?

 

[kiki]

Thata is a good question.

At the end, I think it all depends on Borg and brains would be the deciding factor.

One of the reasons Connors ( and to a lesser extent Vilas) played so well in 82 is not that they improved; they were 30 yrs old and it is almost impossible to improve at that age.

But, rather, they felt freed from their " tiran", the man that had them mentally beaten before they stepped on court during the last three years or so.

That is a big difference.Connors ( and Vilas) had scored wins against the likes of Mac and Lendl before, but the key factor to their success was exclusively on their minds: it is like they took a very heavy stone off their backs and that gave them energy and mental strength.

Plus, none of them had the pressure of Mac and Lendl, who were approaching their peak play and were expected to fight out who was the number one after Bjorn´s retirement.

You could see that burden when Mac lost to Connors the W F and all the indoor finals he lost to Lendl ( as well as the USO sf) and you could see it in Lendl, when he certainly was menthally blocked against fresh Matts Wilander at the RG fourth round and to Connors at the US Open final.Not to mention skipping Wimbledon.And losing to guys he was expected to beat like Vilas and Noah.

1982 is very interesting because of that: a practical treaty on the burdens and menthal pressures top players experience and how, what is good news for some, are bad news for others.

 

[kiki]

as opposed to bringing new frontiers and perspectives to coetaneous Connors and Vilas, Borg´s departure hurt both Lendl and Mac...Mc Enroe said he felt like he missed the swede...

but what he really missed was not Borg, but somebody who had the burden on his shoulders, not on their owns.As simple as that.

 

[treblings]

You could see that burden when Mac lost to Connors the W F and all the indoor finals he lost to Lendl ( as well as the USO sf) and you could see it in Lendl, when he certainly was menthally blocked against fresh Matts Wilander at the RG fourth round and to Connors at the US Open final.

it´s Mats not Matts

 

[Mustard]

for starters, i think that the exhibitions Borg and Connors played in 82 and 83 where just that, exhibitions. certainly not some unofficial race for World´s no. 1

Exhibition matches were much more serious back then, and considering that Borg wasn't playing on the main tour in 1982 thanks to disputes with the ITF, I'm sure he'd want to play very well against Connors before he would return to the tour. It was in January 1983, when we knew for the first time that Borg wasn't coming back to tennis full-time.

 

[JAY1]

interesting point about Borgs situation.
have you seen these 7 matches live or on tv?

DVD. ......

 

[kiki]

it´s Mats not Matts

what was your experience of 1982 season?

 

[JAY1]

what was your experience of 1982 season?

I was wondering exactly the same thing Kiki......

 

[DMP]

You have no idea do you?! And since when did you make the rules on here?
Obviously you're unable to speculate and think outside of the box.
It's a completely feasible question.

Borg had Connors number for 79, 80 & 81 and I'm intrigued if Connors would have had the same impact in 82/83 if Borg had been around.....

You are right and I apologise. It was a clumsily written post, and I realised as soon as I had written it. It is a perfectly valid topic for discussion.


You are one of the posters I like to read. I think I was reacting to a post in the Lendl v Connors thread where I think you were bemoaning the fact that Connors was not given enough recognition these days because he had not won more slams. I read your OP above as being along the same lines and trying to find reasons to give Connors hypothetical victories. I was trying to urge you to be strong and ignore the tyranny of modern slam-counting as a measure of greatness.

So my apologies again.

I don't really like hypothetical discussions because I think there are so many unknowns and intangibles, but maybe that is just a lack of imagination on my part. FWIW I wil just repeat that in his final playing year Borg had more problems with Connors, for whatever reason, than he did with Mc Enroe.

 

[JAY1]

You are right and I apologise. It was a clumsily written post, and I realised as soon as I had written it. It is a perfectly valid topic for discussion.


You are one of the posters I like to read. I think I was reacting to a post in the Lendl v Connors thread where I think you were bemoaning the fact that Connors was not given enough recognition these days because he had not won more slams. I read your OP above as being along the same lines and trying to find reasons to give Connors hypothetical victories. I was trying to urge you to be strong and ignore the tyranny of modern slam-counting as a measure of greatness.

So my apologies again.

I don't really like hypothetical discussions because I think there are so many unknowns and intangibles, but maybe that is just a lack of imagination on my part. FWIW I wil just repeat that in his final playing year Borg had more problems with Connors, for whatever reason, than he did with Mc Enroe.

Thank you I appreciate your apology.

I think my point of view regarding the Connors v Lendl debate was misunderstood.....
I don't judge Connors by today's modern day tennis perspective but I like to look at both sides of the argument, even if it's a side I don't agree with.
So I find this tough to do considering I'm a huge Connors fan.
I know there must be a part of Connors that looks back and thinks mmmmmm maybe I should have won a few more slams, but then brings himself back to the present and feels 'oh well that's how it was back then'

Like any of us who despair at the modern tennis fan who only goes on numbers, it would be nice for them to realise how amazing 'The Golden Era' players were/are! (A losing battle).
I was somehow trying to get them to realise this, but know that's not going to happen.

Laver on a par with Federer
Borg on a par with Nadal
Connors/Lendl a level above Djokovic
Vilas a level above Murray

 

[treblings]

what was your experience of 1982 season?

what do you mean by experience? my memories?

 

[kiki]

what do you mean by experience? my memories?

yeas, memories.

Since your are a fan of the mc namacs, you must remember they won their second Wimbledon title with a whitewash against Flambo and Mac.

 

[kiki]

Thank you I appreciate your apology.

I think my point of view regarding the Connors v Lendl debate was misunderstood.....
I don't judge Connors by today's modern day tennis perspective but I like to look at both sides of the argument, even if it's a side I don't agree with.
So I find this tough to do considering I'm a huge Connors fan.
I know there must be a part of Connors that looks back and thinks mmmmmm maybe I should have won a few more slams, but then brings himself back to the present and feels 'oh well that's how it was back then'

Like any of us who despair at the modern tennis fan who only goes on numbers, it would be nice for them to realise how amazing 'The Golden Era' players were/are! (A losing battle).
I was somehow trying to get them to realise this, but know that's not going to happen.

Laver on a par with Federer
Borg on a par with Nadal
Connors/Lendl a level above Djokovic
Vilas a level above Murray

What is your idea of the Golden Era, Jay1? when it began? when it finished?

Curious to see somebody else using the same phraseology

 

[JAY1]

What is your idea of the Golden Era, Jay1? when it began? when it finished?

Curious to see somebody else using the same phraseology

'The Golden Era' - 'When Tennis Ruled The World' - 'When Tennis Became Rock n Roll'.
Started the beginning of 1974 and ended at Wimbledon 1985 when Connors and McEnroe handed over the relay baton to a 17 year old German.
Almost a dozen golden years.

 

[kiki]

'The Golden Era' - 'When Tennis Ruled The World' - 'When Tennis Became Rock n Roll'.
Started the beginning of 1974 and ended at Wimbledon 1985 when Connors and McEnroe handed over the relay baton to a 17 year old German.
Almost a dozen golden years.

nobody can acuse you of lack of patriotism, certainly

 

[treblings]

I was wondering exactly the same thing Kiki......

Jay, in 82 i was busy chasing girls and playing tennisi was 18 at that time.
television coverage wasn´t what it is today, but i watched Wimbledon every day
i spent some time at our national trainíng center, watching a young boy named Tom hitting topspin of both wings and wondering what planet he came from
i watched Brian Gottfried play immaculate s&v and got destroyed by a guy who once beat Rosewall(that might have been 1983, but i put it in because it sounds good)
and i drove a read beatle in 82, my first car.
what about you?

 

[JAY1]

Jay, in 82 i was busy chasing girls and playing tennisi was 18 at that time.
television coverage wasn´t what it is today, but i watched Wimbledon every day
i spent some time at our national trainíng center, watching a young boy named Tom hitting topspin of both wings and wondering what planet he came from
i watched Brian Gottfried play immaculate s&v and got destroyed by a guy who once beat Rosewall(that might have been 1983, but i put it in because it sounds good)
and i drove a read beatle in 82, my first car.
what about you?

You do know Kiki is going to pick up on your 'read' Beetle ....

In 1982 I was 11/12 and just lived to play tennis over the local public courts. Mad Connors fan!
As you said not much coverage on TV, but I remember Wimbledon that year really well, especially final v Mac.
I was desperate for a Connors Cerutti 1881 tennis shirt, but they were like £100 plus. I had to make do with a photo in a catalogue.
Even though I was a Connors fan, Wimbledon felt a bit naked without Borg.
What really occurs to me about 1982 with tennis and with sport in general, is the amount we didn't really know and how we used our imagination most of the time, fuelled by the odd match on TV, a snippet on the radio or a clipping from a newspaper.....

 

[kiki]

In 1981 Borg and Connors played their last great match, a truly unbelievable five sets semifinal at Wimbledon

 

[JAY1]

In 1981 Borg and Connors played their last great match, a truly unbelievable five sets semifinal at Wimbledon

I watched it last night on DVD.
Incredible drama and excitement, it had everything except a long final set!
Spectators were being carried out by Ambulance staff on stretchers ( hot day and Centre court standing ).
The only two thing's that stopped Connors winning, was his inner belief he really could beat Borg and Borg's inner steel and desire.
Connors won the first set in 14 mins 6-0.
I have never ever seen such a highly charged match at Wimbledon!
Incredible!

 

[kiki]

That was an example of the quality of Borg/Connors when both played well

I don´t think I have ever had the feeling of such a dense rivalry that I had with Borg and Connors.

Even if one of them won a set 6-1, if you didn´t keep the score, you would believe the set ended 6-4.It was just LIKE that.

I just revisited the Boca Raton match of1979.All I have to say is that I haven´t seen anybody play better than Connors did and get beaten 6-3,6-2

With those two on court, it often came down to 4-5 points a match and very subtle detaills.

 

[jrepac]

Have either of you guys seen any of these Borg v Connors 'exhibitions' ?
I've watched about 7 of them.....

they were usually pretty intense, from what I remember. Shoot, they went at each other on the Seniors Tour like it was a Wimby final. Pride was the real motivation.

 

[JAY1]

That was an example of the quality of Borg/Connors when both played well

I don´t think I have ever had the feeling of such a dense rivalry that I had with Borg and Connors.

Even if one of them won a set 6-1, if you didn´t keep the score, you would believe the set ended 6-4.It was just LIKE that.

I just revisited the Boca Raton match of1979.All I have to say is that I haven´t seen anybody play better than Connors did and get beaten 6-3,6-2

With those two on court, it often came down to 4-5 points a match and very subtle detaills.

In everyone of their matches it was this close regardless of the score.
It was like the pendulum effect, if they both started at 9 out of 10 and Borg went up to 10, Connors would drop down to 8 ( but still an incredible level )!
This is what happened for the latter part of their Main Tour rivalry.....

 

[jrepac]

Exhibition matches were much more serious back then, and considering that Borg wasn't playing on the main tour in 1982 thanks to disputes with the ITF, I'm sure he'd want to play very well against Connors before he would return to the tour. It was in January 1983, when we knew for the first time that Borg wasn't coming back to tennis full-time.

This is true; many of us thought Borg was just taking a break and would be back in '83.

I think Connors would've won those 2 USOs....Wimby might have been trickier, but he was playing awfully well at the time. Let's face it, if you can beat Mac on grass--which he did at Queens a few weeks earlier, in straights, --you've got to be playing well.

 

[JAY1]

they were usually pretty intense, from what I remember. Shoot, they went at each other on the Seniors Tour like it was a Wimby final. Pride was the real motivation.

What virtually all of the modern day tennis fans don't realise is that tennis was like boxing back in The Golden Era, yes titles were important but it was more about who was the Heavyweight Champion of the World.
Take 1978, Borg hammered Connors in the Wimbledon final, let's call it a KO in 5th round. Connors then had his rematch in the U.S Open final and had a KO in the 6th round. The titles weren't the main thing, it was who had beaten who. Who was 'The Heavyweight Champion of the World'.

 

[treblings]

You do know Kiki is going to pick up on your 'read' Beetle ....

In 1982 I was 11/12 and just lived to play tennis over the local public courts. Mad Connors fan!
As you said not much coverage on TV, but I remember Wimbledon that year really well, especially final v Mac.
I was desperate for a Connors Cerutti 1881 tennis shirt, but they were like £100 plus. I had to make do with a photo in a catalogue.
Even though I was a Connors fan, Wimbledon felt a bit naked without Borg.
What really occurs to me about 1982 with tennis and with sport in general, is the amount we didn't really know and how we used our imagination most of the time, fuelled by the odd match on TV, a snippet on the radio or a clipping from a newspaper.....

´read beetle´ it was definitely time to stop posting yesterday
my favourite was Johnny Mc´s Tacchini shirt with the red stripe across the chest.
and racquets i couldn´t afford, like the ultra-expensive wilson ultra
different times for sure, i was collecting articles and pictures from newspapers about everything tennis back then.
nowadays you just google and it leads you to everything you could ever care to know

 

[treblings]

yeas, memories.

Since your are a fan of the mc namacs, you must remember they won their second Wimbledon title with a whitewash against Flambo and Mac.

was that in 82? i remember McNamara playing with the Prince Woodie and McNamee with the Prince Graphite. but here´s the big question.
which racquets did Mc and his partner play with in 82? Pierre Flambeau, was that his name

 

[kiki]

was that in 82? i remember McNamara playing with the Prince Woodie and McNamee with the Prince Graphite. but here´s the big question.
which racquets did Mc and his partner play with in 82? Pierre Flambeau, was that his name

yes, 1982

Mc Enroe used a maxply and peter Fleming, not sure, snauweert or fischer

 

[kiki]

What virtually all of the modern day tennis fans don't realise is that tennis was like boxing back in The Golden Era, yes titles were important but it was more about who was the Heavyweight Champion of the World.
Take 1978, Borg hammered Connors in the Wimbledon final, let's call it a KO in 5th round. Connors then had his rematch in the U.S Open final and had a KO in the 6th round. The titles weren't the main thing, it was who had beaten who. Who was 'The Heavyweight Champion of the World'.

That is a definition I used often to describe the Connors/Borg matches

a true heavyweight Battle when boxing was at its real peak¡¡¡

Borg himself said in his book that their 79 Masters clash had the atmosphere of a heavyweight World championship fight, like Ali-frazier 6 yrs before...at the very same MSG¡¡¡

 

[DMP]

Like any of us who despair at the modern tennis fan who only goes on numbers, it would be nice for them to realise how amazing 'The Golden Era' players were/are! (A losing battle).
I was somehow trying to get them to realise this, but know that's not going to happen.

I think that is just the way of the world. Forty years from now Federer, Nadal, Djokovic will be described as tennis dinosaurs, too slow, too small, too weak to compete with the champions of that era. And those who saw them play will be thinking 'hang on, they were just as good as good as the players we see now, it is just that things have changed. Don't judge them by current standards.'

And they might just think 'maybe if this is how I think about Federer et.al. those old-timers had a point about players like Borg, McEnroe, Connors'.

Just enjoy the fact that you were around to see tennis at a time when it really mattered, when it was on the front page of the sports, and when Borg's announcement of his retirement was headline news.

You/we know what we all saw.

 

[DMP]

What virtually all of the modern day tennis fans don't realise is that tennis was like boxing back in The Golden Era, yes titles were important but it was more about who was the Heavyweight Champion of the World.
Take 1978, Borg hammered Connors in the Wimbledon final, let's call it a KO in 5th round. Connors then had his rematch in the U.S Open final and had a KO in the 6th round. The titles weren't the main thing, it was who had beaten who. Who was 'The Heavyweight Champion of the World'.

You and jrepac have it right. It was all about who was the champion. It was a throwback to the old pro days, when that was also all about who was the #1, the Head Honcho.

 

[Gizo]

While those unsanctioned events and exhibitions that Connors and Borg faced each other in weren't exactly the US Open or Wimbledon or anything, they were still hard fought matches that they both tried hard in.

The lines between 'official' tour events, and unofficial ones was pretty blurred back then, and often the unofficial ones awarded considerably more money and were viewed as more important than a lot of the regular tour events. Mac for example would exceed the maximum fine limit on purpose so he would get suspended from playing in official tour events (he admitted this), but he could still play in big money exhos when suspended.

Ranking points wasn't exactly a differentiator either as many of the events which the ATP counts such as the Masters and WCT events didn't award them.

Borg did get a couple of wins over Connors in 1982-1983 at Ottawa and Chicago, although Connors won all the rest of them.

 

[JAY1]

While those unsanctioned events and exhibitions that Connors and Borg faced each other in weren't exactly the US Open or Wimbledon or anything, they were still hard fought matches that they both tried hard in.

The lines between 'official' tour events, and unofficial ones was pretty blurred back then, and often the unofficial ones awarded considerably more money and were viewed as more important than a lot of the regular tour events. Mac for example would exceed the maximum fine limit on purpose so he would get suspended from playing in official tour events (he admitted this), but he could still play in big money exhos when suspended.

Ranking points wasn't exactly a differentiator either as many of the events which the ATP counts such as the Masters and WCT events didn't award them.

Borg did get a couple of wins over Connors in 1982-1983 at Ottawa and Chicago, although Connors won all the rest of them.

Do you have a list Gizo of all the Borg v Connors matches and results from 1982 & 1983? It would be great to see, thanks.

 

[Gizo]

Do you have a list Gizo of all the Borg v Connors matches and results from 1982 & 1983? It would be great to see, thanks.

Here you go:

July 1982 - Industry Hills (Michelob Light Cup) F - Connors 5-7 6-2 6-2 6-7 6-2
July 1982 - Richmond - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-5 6-3
September 1982 - Ottawa - Borg 1-6 6-3 6-3 1-6 6-2
October 1982 - Montreal (Molson Challenge) F - Connors 6-4 6-3
November 1982 - Seattle - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-5
November 1982 - Los Angeles - Connors 6-3 2-6 6-2
November 1982 - Vancouver - Connors 6-2 5-7 6-4
November 1982 - San Francisco - Connors 7-5 7-6
January 1983 - Chicago (Challenge of Champions) RR - Borg 6-4 1-6 6-2

February 1983 - Baton Rouge - Connors 6-7 6-4 6-3
February 1983 - Providence - Connors 6-4 6-4
April 1983 - Seoul - Connors 5-7 6-1 4-6 6-4 7-6
April 1983 - Tokyo (Suntory Cup) F - Connors 6-3 6-4

The matches in bold took place in invitational tournaments, while the other matches were one night exhos.

So in 1982-1983 their record was 3-1 to Connors in tournament matches, and 11-2 to Connors overall.

My personal opinion is that all tournament matches, whether official or unofficial, should count towards h2h records, so overall I have the Borg-Connors h2h at 18-15 to Borg.

 

[JAY1]

Here you go:

July 1982 - Industry Hills (Michelob Light Cup) F - Connors 5-7 6-2 6-2 6-7 6-2
July 1982 - Richmond - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-5 6-3
September 1982 - Ottawa - Borg 1-6 6-3 6-3 1-6 6-2
October 1982 - Montreal (Molson Challenge) F - Connors 6-4 6-3
November 1982 - Seattle - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-5
November 1982 - Los Angeles - Connors 6-3 2-6 6-2
November 1982 - Vancouver - Connors 6-2 5-7 6-4
November 1982 - San Francisco - Connors 7-5 7-6
January 1983 - Chicago (Challenge of Champions) RR - Borg 6-4 1-6 6-2

February 1983 - Baton Rouge - Connors 6-7 6-4 6-3
February 1983 - Providence - Connors 6-4 6-4
April 1983 - Seoul - Connors 5-7 6-1 4-6 6-4 7-6
April 1983 - Tokyo (Suntory Cup) F - Connors 6-3 6-4

The matches in bold took place in invitational tournaments, while the other matches were one night exhos.

So in 1982-1983 their record was 3-1 to Connors in tournament matches, and 11-2 to Connors overall.

My personal opinion is that all tournament matches, whether official or unofficial, should count towards h2h records, so overall I have the Borg-Connors h2h at 18-15 to Borg.

You're a star Gizo! Thank you. J

I have a number of these matches on DVD, I will watch them again with relish.
Are you a Borg or Connors fan?
Whose your favourite player/s from the time?

 

[JCat]

It is interesting how in this time period in tennis they had so many of these kinds of 4-man or 8-man events. They would give them some impressive name like "The Challenge of Champions" and it would be aired on one of the major television networks. I don't see much of that today. Tennis events rarely air on the major networks these days; they are usually reserved for The Tennis Channel or ESPN.

 

[urban]

Gizo, have You or has someone the overall hth Borg-Connors, including and excluding all those exos and invitationals? There were some invitationals like Frankfurt 1979, which i have seen on tv, before Borg's retirement in 1981. I wonder, if the 18-15 balance You gave, is not too low.

 

[Gizo]

You're a star Gizo! Thank you. J

I have a number of these matches on DVD, I will watch them again with relish.
Are you a Borg or Connors fan?
Whose your favourite player/s from the time?

No problem!

Yes I have the 1982 Industry Hills 5 set thriller and their last ever match at the 1983 Suntory Cup and they didn't disappoint.

Actually I was more of a Mac fan (even though sometimes he annoyed me with his whining and tantrums) than a Connors or Borg one. I didn't dislike Connors or Borg at all though and I loved watching all 3 of them, together with Lendl as well.

My favourite player from that era was Gerulaitis (RIP). I loved both his entertaining, all court style of play and his rockstar personality. Watching him getting his *** kicked by Borg and Connors time after time was annoying though.

 

[Gizo]

Gizo, have You or has someone the overall hth Borg-Connors, including and excluding all those exos and invitationals? There were some invitationals like Frankfurt 1979, which i have seen on tv, before Borg's retirement in 1981. I wonder, if the 18-15 balance You gave, is not too low.

Urban, here are all the matches between Connors and Borg that I know of:

1 - November 1973 - Stockholm SF - Borg 6-4 3-6 7-6
2 - August 1974 - Indianapolis F - Connors 5-7 6-3 6-4
3 - September 1975 - US Open SF - Connors 7-5 7-5 7-5
4 - November 1975 - Stockholm SF - Connors 6-2 7-6
5 - February 1976 - Philadelphia F - Connors 7-6 6-4 6-0
6 - March 1976 - Palm Springs SF - Connors 6-4 6-1
7 - September 1976 - US Open F - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-6 6-4
8 - September/October 1976 - Caracas RR - Connors 6-4 5-7 6-3
9 - January 1977 - Pepsi Grand Slam F - Borg 6-4 5-7 6-3
10 - July 1977 - Wimbledon F - Borg 3-6 6-2 6-1 5-7 6-4
11 - January 1978 - Masters F - Connors - 6-4 1-6 6-4
12 - January 1978 - Pepsi Grand Slam F - Borg 7-6 3-6 6-1
13 - April 1978 - Tokyo (Suntory Cup) F - Borg 6-1 6-2
14 - July 1978 - Wimbledon F - Borg 6-2 6-2 6-3
15 - September 1978 - US Open F - Connors 6-4 6-2 6-2
16 - September 1978 - Buenos Aires F - Connors 5-7 6-3 6-3
17 - February 1979 - Pepsi Grand Slam F - Borg 6-2 6-3
18 - April 1979 - Las Vegas F - Borg 6-3 6-2
19 - July 1979 - Wimbledon SF - Borg 6-2 6-3 6-2
20 - November 1979 - Tokyo Indoor F - Borg 6-2 6-2
21 - December 1979 - Frankfurt RR - Borg 6-3 4-6 6-3 6-4
22 - December 1979 - WCT Challenge Cup F - Borg 6-4 6-2 2-6 6-4
23 - January 1980 - Masters RR - Borg 3-6 6-3 7-6
24 - February 1980 - Salisbury RR - Borg 6-3 6-1
25 - March 1980 - Copenhagen (Europe vs. USA) SF - Connors 6-4 6-2
26 - January 1981 - Masters SF - Borg 6-4 6-7 6-3
27 - February 1981 - Toronto (Molson Challenge) RR - Connors 7-5 6-3
28 - July 1981 - Wimbledon SF - Borg 0-6 4-6 6-3 6-0 6-4
29 - September 1981 - US Open SF - Borg 6-2 7-5 6-4
30 - July 1982 - Industry Hills F - Connors 5-7 6-2 6-2 6-7 6-2
31 - July 1982 - Richmond - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-5 6-3
32 - September 1982 - Ottawa - Borg 1-6 6-3 6-3 1-6 6-2
33 - October 1982 - Montreal (Molson Challenge) F - Connors 6-4 6-3
34 - November 1982 - Seattle - Connors 6-4 3-6 7-5
35 - November 1982 - Los Angeles - Connors 6-3 2-6 6-2
36 - November 1982 - Vancouver - Connors 6-2 5-7 6-4
37 - November 1982 - San Francisco - Connors 7-5 7-6
38 - January 1983 - Chicago RR - Borg 6-4 1-6 6-2
39 - February 1983 - Baton Rouge - Connors 6-7 6-4 6-3
40 - February 1983 - Providence - Connors 6-4 6-4
41 - April 1983 - Seoul - Connors 5-7 6-1 4-6 6-4 7-6
42 - April 1983 - Tokyo (Suntory Cup) F - Connors 6-3 6-4

The matches in bold took place either at sanctioned or invitational tournaments.

So I have their tournament h2h at 18-15 to Borg, and their overall h2h at 23-19 to Connors.

 

[kiki]

No problem!

Yes I have the 1982 Industry Hills 5 set thriller and their last ever match at the 1983 Suntory Cup and they didn't disappoint.

Actually I was more of a Mac fan (even though sometimes he annoyed me with his whining and tantrums) than a Connors or Borg one. I didn't dislike Connors or Borg at all though and I loved watching all 3 of them, together with Lendl as well.

My favourite player from that era was Gerulaitis (RIP). I loved both his entertaining, all court style of play and his rockstar personality. Watching him getting his *** kicked by Borg and Connors time after time was annoying though.

The Vitas match I missed watching was his 1979 USO sf against Tanner, when he trailed 0-2 to win, as well as his 1979 IO win against Vilas.

Doy you have any memories of them?