GameSampras
Banned
Had Borg grown up in around this time with today's access to nutritionists, trainers, the racket technology etc, how do you guys think Borg would fare?
Last edited:
Borg in today's era. How would he do?
- Thread starter GameSampras
- Start date
The-Champ
Legend
That would have been interesting to watch. Imagine Borg vs Federer on Nadal on clay and grass. He would win a couple of slams, that's for sure. A great player is a great player no matter what era.
IvanAndreevich
Legend
The game is very different today. It's hard to say how well he would play today's game.
My opinion: he would be beaten by both Nadal and Federer. Just an opinion not really based on anything.
My opinion: he would be beaten by both Nadal and Federer. Just an opinion not really based on anything.
I may be wrong, but... I'm starting to think that unless a miracle happens, Fed will be the last one of the "true greats". (And before I upset all other fans, I also love Nadal games and Murrays and ...) I just cannot see anybody else being so good and dominating on multiple surfaces - I believe in the future the number of slams may be spread more between players.
Then again, I have been wrong before, and will be wrong at some point into the future again. Bring on the miracle man!
How does this relate to Borg? Playing now, I think he should be able to pickup a couple of slams, but won't be as utterly dominant over grass and clay as his records indicate. He will be another good player with one or two under the belt.
I've probably opened the door for multiple fan attacks now.
Then again, I have been wrong before, and will be wrong at some point into the future again. Bring on the miracle man!
How does this relate to Borg? Playing now, I think he should be able to pickup a couple of slams, but won't be as utterly dominant over grass and clay as his records indicate. He will be another good player with one or two under the belt.
I've probably opened the door for multiple fan attacks now.
CyBorg
Legend
Borg would play a very different style, more universal. His game was perfectly suited for the technology and conditions of the time. Today he'd have less pronounced quirks and hit the ball very differently.
In terms of mobility, Borg would be the fastest in the world. He is perhaps the fastest in history to this day.
In terms of mobility, Borg would be the fastest in the world. He is perhaps the fastest in history to this day.
thalivest
Banned
He would do absolutely awesome. Only Nadal could challenge him at all on clay among the current men. On the current grass Federer and Nadal would be his main opponents. On hard courts he would have his most # of challengers but would still be a major contender. He would definitely win some slams and be a major contender for the #1 ranking, beyond any doubt.
Warriorroger
Hall of Fame
Difficult to say tenniswise, but atlethes do well in any era, Borg was a great athlete, so who knows.
swedechris
Banned
think the dude was good enough to be in the top 5 . he was silky fast and enduranace was also above and beyond normal. nadal like.
he didnt have the best of hands around the net but made up for that with the talents above.
he didnt have the best of hands around the net but made up for that with the talents above.
hoodjem
G.O.A.T.
CyB and BorgForever are certainly the authorities here.
I think Borg's topspin strokes would be very effective in tody's game. Plus I think with the new racquet and string technology, he would have a more effective power game--not as dependent on outlasting his opponenets.
In terms of athleticism and speed, I don't believe he would need to do anything at all--he still has not been matched today. (Imagaine the stamina and energy-level of Nadal combined with the elan and court coverage of Federer--that's Borg.)
I think Borg's topspin strokes would be very effective in tody's game. Plus I think with the new racquet and string technology, he would have a more effective power game--not as dependent on outlasting his opponenets.
In terms of athleticism and speed, I don't believe he would need to do anything at all--he still has not been matched today. (Imagaine the stamina and energy-level of Nadal combined with the elan and court coverage of Federer--that's Borg.)
Last edited:
Rabbit
G.O.A.T.
Borg had world class speed as a sprinter as evidenced by competition alongside track and field greats of the time.
Borg's power off the ground in the late 70s and early 80s with a wood frame was unmatched by any pro of the day. He was the only guy on the planet able to hit clean winner from the baseline with wood. Translate that to today with the current technology and he's still viable. Arguably one of the greatest clay court players ever, Guillermo Vilas, was owned by Borg. Their head to head on clay was 11 - 2 in favor of Borg.
Borg versus Nads? That would be a great match up. I give Borg the edge on serve and completeness of game. Borg was better at net. Borg and Nads are a push on movement. Off the ground, I give the edge slightly to Nads but if Borg had grown up using the same equipment, I have very little doubt that he'd have had at least as much work on his ball as Nads does now. The one big advantage Borg had was his physical durability. Nads' body, at 21, is breaking down. Borg's never did and even today he's still at 53 quite a physical specimen.
Borg versus Federer? On clay, it's a no contest: Borg. On today's grass I'm not so sure that Federer could have dented Borg. With the ball sitting up like it does, Federer's game may not have any purchase with Borg. It's true that Borg started off winning Wimbledon (and everything else) with defense, but he finished his career taking it to his opponents. I don't know that Federer has a good enough serve, ala Sampras, to put Borg on his heels on grass.
A much better, IMO, match up would be Borg and Sampras on the old grass. Sampras' serve was so much better than everyone else's and his net game so penetrating, that the contrasting styles would've made for a war. A buddy of mine who recently saw Samras play (and beat) James Blake said that he still has the best serve in the world.
Wow! what tournament was that.
Rabbit
G.O.A.T.
It was an Exo in Baton Rouge. My friend said they appeared to split the first two and then play the third for real.
mental midget
Hall of Fame
imagine davydenko about a third again as fast and consistent, and i think you've got a pretty fair picture of a modern-day borg. good enough to threaten at any slam, and a permanent fixture in the top 5.
Jtillinghast
New User
well it really depends on the racquet he would be using
joe sch
Legend
What makes GOAT contender players is athletic ability and psychological makeup. Borg had world class speed, reflexes, and endurance. Borg also had almost unbelievalbe ability to stay in the momment and play each point like its matchpoint for the Wimbledon title. Bjorn had one of the lowest pulse rates recorded and it did not rise during pressure. The points that Im trying to make is that Bjorn would probably be a GOAT contender in any era. Some of these same qualities are what have enabled Sampras, Federer, and Nadal to dominate.
An excellent analysis! I would only add that the things that made Borg great in his day--speed and mobility and great groundstrokes--are even more important parts of the current ATP men's game. Because of that, I think Borg would do even better today than he did in the 70s-early 80's. His one liability--the net game--is so little a part of modern men's tennis that he'd love the modern game even more (still, Borg had good hands and was a competent volleyer unlike some of the top 10 men today). His serve was very underrated, and would compare very favorably with Federer's and be much better than Nadal's...
Borg in his prime against Sampras in his prime on grass would truly be the match of the century in my book... On 1970's Wimbledon grass I'd take Sampras 6-4 in the fifth. On 2008 Wimbledon grass, I'd take Borg in four sets.
Rabbit
G.O.A.T.
Ditto for your post! I didn't consider how little the net game factors in, but you're exactly right. One point I did fail to mention was how much the clay (which was slower in Borg's time) contrasted with the grass (which was faster in Borg's time). Consider how much the difference was and it is even more amazing that Borg won the French and Wimbledon back to back more than once.
anointedone
Banned
Very good accessment of all those hypothetical matchups and Borg's game translated to today IMO.
max
Legend
In addition to his great speed, I was always one of those who was impressed with Borg's great concentration. Sampras had that as well, but I'm not sure if in an equal quantity.
I think a matchup between Sampras and John McEnroe would be interesting to see. Between the two. Sampras would have been a more difficult net rusher for Borg to handle. . . although if you equipped Borg with contemporary frames, his backcourt game would be much less defensive and more offensive.
I think a matchup between Sampras and John McEnroe would be interesting to see. Between the two. Sampras would have been a more difficult net rusher for Borg to handle. . . although if you equipped Borg with contemporary frames, his backcourt game would be much less defensive and more offensive.
Mahboob Khan
Hall of Fame
I think the precise question should have been: "If Borg was born in the same timeframe as Federer, and raised, coached, trained, by modern coaches with modern equipment, how would he fare with modern players?"
Well, he would have been bit better. Given his personality, mobility and mental strength, he would be as good as Nadal or Federer, and perhaps beat them. Remember, he had a winning record against Ivan Lendl on clay and Nadal was better on clay?
Lets look it from a different angle: If there were no names like Illie Nastase, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Borg, there would have been no Sampras, Agassis, Sampras, Nadals! I believe that these names fueled tennis evolution!
Well, he would have been bit better. Given his personality, mobility and mental strength, he would be as good as Nadal or Federer, and perhaps beat them. Remember, he had a winning record against Ivan Lendl on clay and Nadal was better on clay?
Lets look it from a different angle: If there were no names like Illie Nastase, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Borg, there would have been no Sampras, Agassis, Sampras, Nadals! I believe that these names fueled tennis evolution!
Kirko
Hall of Fame
he would be great!!!!! Borg alwast watched hi weight and kept it under control in fact he knew being light and fit was so important back when guys just did wha ever they liked.
