Dream matches you would like to see

[arvind13]

I wanted to ask TTW members to list some of the dream matches between two players that they would have liked to have seen (and what surface and conditions they would have liked to seen it in) but not possible now because one or both are retired. I'm requesting dream match suggestions that are not obvious and havent been mentioned to death already. i'm assuming all the players are in their prime and playing their best tennis in these dream matches

Here are two matches off top of my head:

Richard Krajicek vs Marat Safin on indoor carpet with fast balls flying through the air

Stefan edberg vs Rafael nadal on the old wimbledon grass with fast tennis balls and edberg using federer's pre 2014 wilson racquet with polygut hybrid strings and nadal using the same racquet he is now.

 

[SpaceAce42]

18 year old Nadal vs 18 year old Chang at the French, would be closer than you think!

 

[davced1]

Stefan edberg vs Rafael nadal on the old wimbledon grass with fast tennis balls and edberg using federer's pre 2014 wilson racquet with polygut hybrid strings and nadal using the same racquet he is now.

Yes please! But why should Edberg use the pre 2014 racquet?

 

[arvind13]

Yes please! But why should Edberg use the pre 2014 racquet?

because its a smaller head size, better for volleying

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Lendl vs. Djokovic on carpet. BOOM! Lendl wins.

 

[BTURNER]

Maria Bueno playing Suzanne Lenglen on /grass. Billie Jean King playing Maureen Connolly on grass. Martina Hingis playing Althea Gibson on hard courts. Helen Wills playing Margaret Court on clay but I want them all on tape. Lets learn something about these patterns and strokes of players we have yet to see for more than a few minutes and lets have Krosero or Moose do the stats on these matches.

 

[California]

Edberg vs. Borg at Wimbledon
Rafter vs. Nadal at the US Open, the old fast 90s courts
Pete vs. Fed at Wimbledon, with Pete in his prime. Old courts
Guga vs. Nadal at the French, in their primes of course
Novak vs. Agassi at the Aussie Open

Many more I would love to see just a couple off the top of my head.....

 

[jrepac]

so many choices....

Connors v. Nadal on hard courts
McEnroe vs. Fed on grass
Nadal vs. Lendl on clay
Nadal vs. Borg on clay
Sampras v. Borg on grass
Agassi vs. Djokovic on hard courts (any)
Murray v. Connors on grass
Edberg/Becker vs. Fed on grass

 

[Drob]

Lendl vs. Djokovic on carpet. BOOM! Lendl wins.

Interesting

 

[jean pierre]

Vilas - Federer on clay in 1977.

 

[Rui Lopes]

18 year old Nadal vs 18 year old Chang at the French, would be closer than you think!

You are crazy...Chang as no chance...He pulled a miracle at the age of 17 but that´s it...Just one more final in his carrer...Roland Garros , Nadal and Chang shouldn´t be in the same sentence...

 

[Rui Lopes]

Edberg vs. Borg at Wimbledon
Rafter vs. Nadal at the US Open, the old fast 90s courts
Pete vs. Fed at Wimbledon, with Pete in his prime. Old courts
Guga vs. Nadal at the French, in their primes of course
Novak vs. Agassi at the Aussie Open

Many more I would love to see just a couple off the top of my head.....

You saw what happened to Federer at the French open. federer is better than Guga on clay he has the record to prove it. he just can´t beat Nadal. Do you think that Guga has a chance against Nadal???
Who did Guga beat??? Where they that good? Even Wawrinka could kick is ass…
When you look at some players wins , don´t Forget to look who as he beaten...Guga 3 titlles agains an easy roaster…
Nadal would kill him...

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Guga kicked Federer's ass at the French. He was really good and would an interesting matchup with Nadal (if fit).
Beating Kafelnikov, Ferrero and Bruguera on clay is pretty good, all French winners. Did Federer ever beat a former champion at the French?

You saw what happened to Federer at the French open. federer is better than Guga on clay he has the record to prove it. he just can´t beat Nadal. Do you think that Guga has a chance against Nadal???
Who did Guga beat??? Where they that good? Even Wawrinka could kick is ass…
When you look at some players wins , don´t Forget to look who as he beaten...Guga 3 titlles agains an easy roaster…
Nadal would kill him...

 

[SpaceAce42]

You are crazy...Chang as no chance...He pulled a miracle at the age of 17 but that´s it...Just one more final in his carrer...Roland Garros , Nadal and Chang shouldn´t be in the same sentence...

He had no chance in 1989 and won.

 

[Rui Lopes]

That was the miracle i was talking about , but unless you are God , you won´t pull out more than one miracle in your life...

 

[SCRAP IRON]

Serena Williams vs Martina Navratilova with wood rackets!

 

[Rui Lopes]

Guga kicked Federer's ass at the French. He was really good and would an interesting matchup with Nadal (if fit).
Beating Kafelnikov, Ferrero and Bruguera on clay is pretty good, all French winners. Did Federer ever beat a former champion at the French?

The 3 names you gave are the reason of Guga´s victories. They suck compared to Djokovic , Wawrinka , that are RG champion´s and Federer has beaten them at RG. The only one he couldn´t beat is Nadal.
Yes, Guga beat Federer , but Federer wasn´t the player he became after. trust me , Federer is better on clay than Guga. If it wasn´t for the king of clay , federer would easely have 3 or 4 French Opens too… Don´t forget that.
By the way , i´m not one of those Fed fans that believe he is the best of all times. I love the Big 3 the same , but federer would have a lot more titles on clay , if Nadal came like 5 years later… Don´t you agree?
And even Thiem is better on clay than the 3 you´ve mentioned , and why has Thiem never won the French?
Nadal is the God of clay , and he is the one who changes all the numbers...

 

[California]

You saw what happened to Federer at the French open. federer is better than Guga on clay he has the record to prove it. he just can´t beat Nadal. Do you think that Guga has a chance against Nadal???
Who did Guga beat??? Where they that good? Even Wawrinka could kick is ass…
When you look at some players wins , don´t Forget to look who as he beaten...Guga 3 titlles agains an easy roaster…
Nadal would kill him...

Hey, these were matches I would like to see, why are you coming after me like that? It is a wish on matchups, you need to relax.

You are discounting Guga at his best on clay, not only did he beat up on Fed he had great ground strokes, and would challenge Nadal on clay for sure. He has 3 French Open titles, they don't give those away for nothing... He also beat Agassi and Sampras indoors! At his peak he is a match for anyone on clay, anyone.

I love Fed, he is a very good clay player but because of his backhand he can be exposed on clay, it can be broken down. It can be attacked. Yes, I agree he would have more FO titles without Nadal in the picture, but that also says a lot about the rest of the field too...

 

[Shaolin]

Rios vs Guga on clay
Rios vs Nadal on clay or hard
Rios vs Fed on clay (saw them play on hard and it sucked but Rios was past his peak)
Rios vs Rios on clay or hard

Prime Fed vs prime Sampras on fast grass or indoor

Sampras vs Nadal on fast indoor for a good laugh

 

[Rui Lopes]

Hey, these were matches I would like to see, why are you coming after me like that? It is a wish on matchups, you need to relax.

You are discounting Guga at his best on clay, not only did he beat up on Fed he had great ground strokes, and would challenge Nadal on clay for sure. He has 3 French Open titles, they don't give those away for nothing... He also beat Agassi and Sampras indoors! At his peak he is a match for anyone on clay, anyone.

I love Fed, he is a very good clay player but because of his backhand he can be exposed on clay, it can be broken down. It can be attacked. Yes, I agree he would have more FO titles without Nadal in the picture, but that also says a lot about the rest of the field too...

I just like to attack people like the guy on your pic atacked the net...He was the Best…
My Dream Matches? Edberg VS anyone...

 

[KG1965]

With old rackets:
on hc Kramer - Connors, Laver - Lendl, Rosewall - McEnroe, Connolly - Evert
on grass Hoad - Borg, Laver - Becker

With 2020 rackets:
on hc Sampras - Nadal, Agassi - Federer, Krajiceck - Djokovic, Rafter - Murray, Seles - Serena Williams
on red clay Kuerten - Federer
on grass Becker - Federer

 

[skaj]

Sampras vs. Nalbandian (Aussie Open)
Federer vs. Mecir (Roland Garros)
Mandlikova vs. Henin (Wimbledon)
Martina vs. Martina (US Open)
Rios vs. Monfils (ATP Finals)

 

[skaj]

masters:

IW: Noah vs Tsonga
MI: Santoro vs Nastase
MC: Gasque vs Pioline
RO: Evert vs Schiavone
MD: Seles vs Jankovic
CA: Edberg vs Murray
CI: Laver vs Safin
SH: Goolagong vs Hsieh
PA: Graf vs Radwanska

Olympics(grass): Court vs Mauresmo

 

[skaj]

18 year old Nadal vs 18 year old Chang at the French, would be closer than you think!

Sprinting race.

 

[jrepac]

You are crazy...Chang as no chance...He pulled a miracle at the age of 17 but that´s it...Just one more final in his carrer...Roland Garros , Nadal and Chang shouldn´t be in the same sentence...

It would be interesting....but I think Nadal would win.

 

[jrepac]

You saw what happened to Federer at the French open. federer is better than Guga on clay he has the record to prove it. he just can´t beat Nadal. Do you think that Guga has a chance against Nadal???
Who did Guga beat??? Where they that good? Even Wawrinka could kick is ass…
When you look at some players wins , don´t Forget to look who as he beaten...Guga 3 titlles agains an easy roaster…
Nadal would kill him...

Sorry, but I would pick Guga over Fed on red clay, assuming Guga is in peak form w/out injury.

 

[jrepac]

Sampras vs. Nalbandian (Aussie Open)
Federer vs. Mecir (Roland Garros)
Mandlikova vs. Henin (Wimbledon)
Martina vs. Martina (US Open)
Rios vs. Monfils (ATP Finals)

Henin v. Hana on grass would be fascinating. I'd pick Hana to win.
Martina v. Martina....hard court....hard to vote against MN. But Hingis was a crafty one....
Mecir could take Fed on clay, maybe nowhere else....

 

[skaj]

Henin v. Hana on grass would be fascinating. I'd pick Hana to win.
Martina v. Martina....hard court....hard to vote against MN. But Hingis was a crafty one....
Mecir could take Fed on clay, maybe nowhere else....

Yes, Henin and Hana, both exciting, elegant all-court players, neither won at Wimbledon...
I always thought Hingis is Evert with net game(less mentally stable though), so I am guessing the match between her and Navratilova would be highly competitive. Hard was Hingis' best surface.

 

[Rui Lopes]

Sorry, but I would pick Guga over Fed on red clay, assuming Guga is in peak form w/out injury.

It´s funny how people are so used to see Federer play over 30 , that they seem to forgett how he played in his mi 20´s. 25, 26 ,27 years old Federer would beat Guga on clay every time. That was his prime , not at the age of 23 when they played at the French...

 

[Rui Lopes]

It would be interesting....but I think Nadal would win.

Really? You have doubts??? What has Nadal left to do to convince people? And who the hell is Chang at the French? What the hell it´s is record? Seems like we are talking about the second best clay player of all times...???He is not even on the top 10 best clay players...

 

[skaj]

It´s funny how people are so used to see Federer play over 30 , that they seem to forgett how he played in his mi 20´s. 25, 26 ,27 years old Federer would beat Guga on clay every time. That was his prime , not at the age of 23 when they played at the French...

Federer won all the other slams that year and was the world number one. If 2004 was still not his peak, then it was very very close. I don't think it is realistic to think that peak Federer would beat Kuerten on clay every time.

 

[Macaque]

All in their prime, on fast grass...

Laurence Doherty vs John McEnroe, with wooden rackets.

John McEnroe vs Roger Federer, with modern rackets.

 

[California]

Really? You have doubts??? What has Nadal left to do to convince people? And who the hell is Chang at the French? What the hell it´s is record? Seems like we are talking about the second best clay player of all times...???He is not even on the top 10 best clay players...

I am with you on this one.... Nadal would crush Chang. I see a rough scoreline, say 2, 3, 2. No contest with both in their primes.

 

[Rui Lopes]

Sorry if was kind of rude to someone here , that was not my intention. To me a dream match without an unpredictable score doesn´t make any sence. There are some posts in here like the Nadal vs Chang , how can it be a dream match if Nadal is going to destroy Chang?
If the score doesn´t matter , than a dream match should be Sharapova vs Kirilenlo in their underware , or Kournikova vs Ivanovic , in underware...

 

[Mainad]

You are crazy...Chang as no chance...He pulled a miracle at the age of 17 but that´s it...Just one more final in his carrer...Roland Garros , Nadal and Chang shouldn´t be in the same sentence...

Chang made 3 other finals: 1995 RG (l.to Muster), 1996 AO (l.to Becker), 1996 USO (l.to Sampras).

 

[Rui Lopes]

Chang made 3 other finals: 1995 RG (l.to Muster), 1996 AO (l.to Becker), 1996 USO (l.to Sampras).

I was talking about Roland Garros. If you are going to pick a dream match and choose someone to face Nadal at Roland Garros , than Chang it´s really a poor choice...I would rather see again Kournikova back to face Nadal...

 

[NicoMK]

I would like to see two matches.

The first one would be the US Open 88 final with Ivan winning this one against Mats. Why? Because despite being Mats' greatest victory, achieving number one etc., he lost interest for the game short after and, at 24, he never won a GS anymore.

Had he lost this final against Ivan, he may have won the Australian in 1989 and other French Opens too and continue fighting for big titles with the Lendl, Becker, Edberg etc. for many more years.

The second one would be the McEnroe-Lendl 1984 French Open final with a win of Mac against Lendl.

I have a huge respect for what Ivan did that day and he truly deserves his first GS title... but even 36 years later, it still breaks my heart to see John losing this one, missing that easy FH volley on match point, playing so well on clay, being so close to win his first FO title but in the end... not having it (still, congrats to Ivan the warrior...).

You can't rewrite history but you can dream that some things happened differently. In tennis, that would be my dream matches to re-watch... with a different end!

 

[Mainad]

I was talking about Roland Garros. If you are going to pick a dream match and choose someone to face Nadal at Roland Garros , than Chang it´s really a poor choice...I would rather see again Kournikova back to face Nadal...

Out of past players, I'm not sure who I think would have been a match for Nadal at RG. Borg maybe? It's so difficult to imagine match-ups between players from different eras.

 

[Rui Lopes]

Of course...And that´s why the discussion on who is the best ever is so ambiguous. Players from other eras played other opponents , and in tennis the conditions have been changing everytime...
How can you compare Borg wins at roland Garros with Nadal? Borg played with a wood racket , with a head size of 80 tops and natural gut strings. Nadal plays with a graphite racket , 100 head size and polyester strings. The tennis balls are way different, and they never played the same opponents...
How can you compare that???
The endless discussion on how is the best of all times just looks stupid sometimes. There is a group of players that are among the best , but can we really pick one of them to be the GOAT , with dif conditions that are impossible to compare???
There is no GOAT , just how personal favourite, and mine is Edberg and will always be , just because there will never be someone playing like he did...

 

[Olli Jokinen]

The 3 names you gave are the reason of Guga´s victories. They suck compared to Djokovic , Wawrinka , that are RG champion´s and Federer has beaten them at RG. The only one he couldn´t beat is Nadal.
Yes, Guga beat Federer , but Federer wasn´t the player he became after. trust me , Federer is better on clay than Guga. If it wasn´t for the king of clay , federer would easely have 3 or 4 French Opens too… Don´t forget that.
By the way , i´m not one of those Fed fans that believe he is the best of all times. I love the Big 3 the same , but federer would have a lot more titles on clay , if Nadal came like 5 years later… Don´t you agree?
And even Thiem is better on clay than the 3 you´ve mentioned , and why has Thiem never won the French?
Nadal is the God of clay , and he is the one who changes all the numbers...

I'm a great Federer fan, and he is a great claycourter. I still believe that Guga would be a great competitor on clay against the big 3, had a lot of skill but had his career cut short by injuries. You don't and that's ok, we just disagree. Pro tip by the way: The apostrofe (') is placed on the same key as *.

 

[Rui Lopes]

I would like to see two matches.

The first one would be the US Open 88 final with Ivan winning this one against Mats. Why? Because despite being Mats' greatest victory, achieving number one etc., he lost interest for the game short after and, at 24, he never won a GS anymore.

Had he lost this final against Ivan, he may have won the Australian in 1989 and other French Opens too and continue fighting for big titles with the Lendl, Becker, Edberg etc. for many more years.

The second one would be the McEnroe-Lendl 1984 French Open final with a win of Mac against Lendl.

I have a huge respect for what Ivan did that day and he truly deserves his first GS title... but even 36 years later, it still breaks my heart to see John losing this one, missing that easy FH volley on match point, playing so well on clay, being so close to win his first FO title but in the end... not having it (still, congrats to Ivan the warrior...).

You can't rewrite history but you can dream that some things happened differently. In tennis, that would be my dream matches to re-watch... with a different end!

It´s funny how some people talk about players loosing interest and that´s why they didn´t win more...As far as i know , he continued to play many more years...
I only know one guy that really lost interest , and he just wen´t away at the age of 26 ( Borg ). He is the one who lost interest and never played again...
Players that were number one and then got passed by others , and the excuse is that they lost interest? How can you loose interest in being the best in the world ( number 1 ) ???
Maybe that´s why he always sucked at Wimbledon , he just wasn´t interested...
Some people just can´t listen to their own **** they say...

 

[NicoMK]

It´s funny how some people talk about players loosing interest and that´s why they didn´t win more...As far as i know , he continued to play many more years...
I only know one guy that really lost interest , and he just wen´t away at the age of 26 ( Borg ). He is the one who lost interest and never played again...
Players that were number one and then got passed by others , and the excuse is that they lost interest? How can you loose interest in being the best in the world ( number 1 ) ???
Maybe that´s why he always sucked at Wimbledon , he just wasn´t interested...
Some people just can´t listen to their own **** they say...

Kinda funny post…

I'm not Mats so I can't speak for himself but I think I know the story pretty well.

He said many times, even when he was still active, that he lost interest in the game after reaching the number one spot because, I quote: "I couldn't go higher, I couldn't do better". Fair enough.

In 1989, his father got sick. Mats said that it didn't help, as one can imagine.

He played the full year in 1989 but you could see that he was "on and off" mentally. Nothing as good as what he used to do on the court, few good wins and some bad losses.

He started 1990 well with a semi-final at the Australian Open but he said later that year that "he wasn't even pleased with his game". His father died in April I think and he didn't play both Roland-Garros and Wimbledon, coming back just before the US Open -- first round loss to Brad Gilbert. He played a final in Lyon in October and won his last title in Itaparica. Finished the year #41.

He barely played in 1991 and stopped after the Queen's. He lost in the second round at the FO, playing his worst match ever against Santoro and you could see that he didn't even care.

Went back on the ATP Tour two years later for "the fun of it and to play some local tournaments", that's what he said before the US Open. Up to 1995, he played some good matches, had some good wins : Pernfors, Kafelnikov, Ferreira amongst others, played semis in two big tournaments in the summer that year and that was pretty much all in terms of results.

At least you could see that he regained interest for the game but, at 31 and with peak Sampras and Agassi in an already strong field, his time has gone.

He retired short after the French, in June 1996.

I can try to imagine how he felt being number one. For some players, being number one and winning GS is everything. For some others, it's just too big to handle, and why not? Courier felt the same way around 1994 I believe.

And I don't think Mats sucked at Wimbledon. Had to play along true grass specialists as McEnroe, Cash, Edberg, Becker on a then very specific surface. 3 quarters and one title in doubles, that ain't bad!

C'mon, at least you can give him some credits, he's one of the GOATs whether you like him or not and he's a very nice man.

 

[Rui Lopes]

Kinda funny post…

I'm not Mats so I can't speak for himself but I think I know the story pretty well.

He said many times, even when he was still active, that he lost interest in the game after reaching the number one spot because, I quote: "I couldn't go higher, I couldn't do better". Fair enough.

In 1989, his father got sick. Mats said that it didn't help, as one can imagine.

He played the full year in 1989 but you could see that he was "on and off" mentally. Nothing as good as what he used to do on the court, few good wins and some bad losses.

He started 1990 well with a semi-final at the Australian Open but he said later that year that "he wasn't even pleased with his game". His father died in April I think and he didn't play both Roland-Garros and Wimbledon, coming back just before the US Open -- first round loss to Brad Gilbert. He played a final in Lyon in October and won his last title in Itaparica. Finished the year #41.

He barely played in 1991 and stopped after the Queen's. He lost in the second round at the FO, playing his worst match ever against Santoro and you could see that he didn't even care.

Went back on the ATP Tour two years later for "the fun of it and to play some local tournaments", that's what he said before the US Open. Up to 1995, he played some good matches, had some good wins : Pernfors, Kafelnikov, Ferreira amongst others, played semis in two big tournaments in the summer that year and that was pretty much all in terms of results.

At least you could see that he regained interest for the game but, at 31 and with peak Sampras and Agassi in an already strong field, his time has gone.

He retired short after the French, in June 1996.

I can try to imagine how he felt being number one. For some players, being number one and winning GS is everything. For some others, it's just too big to handle, and why not? Courier felt the same way around 1994 I believe.

And I don't think Mats sucked at Wimbledon. Had to play along true grass specialists as McEnroe, Cash, Edberg, Becker on a then very specific surface. 3 quarters and one title in doubles, that ain't bad!

C'mon, at least you can give him some credits, he's one of the GOATs whether you like him or not and he's a very nice man.

Never i would say he´s not one of the greats , and that i don´t like him , but all the crap about someone that didn´t do better because he was not that interested, just souds stupid...
was he the only professional athlete that had personal problems during the carrer, not only in tennis, but in every sports?
hearing someone saying , i didn´t win more because i didn´t try that hard , just makes that person look stupid. Great champions are not made that way. great champions win a lot , and when they loose they give credit to the competition that beated him , they don´t go like , oh , i wasn´t trying that hard...
But , hey , we can choose the guys we admire...You choose one of the most boring players to watch ( the ultimate pusher), that when he lost he said that he wasn´t trying that hard , and i choose Edberg , maybe the most exciting player ever to watch ( the ultimate attacker) ( surely one of the most fun to watch) , and a guy that always knew how to behave and never talked ****...
We all can make choices , but the choices we make say a lot of who we are...

 

[jrepac]

Really? You have doubts??? What has Nadal left to do to convince people? And who the hell is Chang at the French? What the hell it´s is record? Seems like we are talking about the second best clay player of all times...???He is not even on the top 10 best clay players...

LOL...I said interesting, not that Chang would win. Chang was a very dogged opponent and would hang with Nadal in many/most of the rallies. But, ultimately, I think Rafa would overpower him.

 

[NicoMK]

hearing someone saying , i didn´t win more because i didn´t try that hard , just makes that person look stupid. Great champions are not made that way. great champions win a lot , and when they loose they give credit to the competition that beated him , they don´t go like , oh , i wasn´t trying that hard...

Has Mats ever said that? I don't think so.

But , hey , we can choose the guys we admire...You choose one of the most boring players to watch ( the ultimate pusher),

One of the most boring players to watch? Man you should seriously re-watch some real classics!

We all can make choices , but the choices we make say a lot of who we are...

Indeed…

 

[Rui Lopes]

Has Mats ever said that? I don't think so.


One of the most boring players to watch? Man you should seriously re-watch some real classics!


Indeed…

Sorry, but you are the one who said that he mentioned that there was nothing above number one , and his father death , and he wasn´t trying anymore. That´s your words and his, i didn´t make anything up...
he has some great classics for shure , but that´s because of the other guy trying to attack , not because of him...If his that interesting , close your eyes and imagine a match Wilander vs Wilander...it´s a great way to fall asleep fast every night...Two guys on the baseline all time to see if the other one misses his shot...Thats awesome tennis...
And people say that Nadal is a defensive player...They shoul see a Wilander match...
Anyway , it´s all good man , and tennis wouldn´t be this fun if everyone played the same way...
Take care...

 

[Olli Jokinen]

You should really watch some Wilander games. He mainly played serve/volley on gras and displayed a fascinating mix of defensive/offensive against Lendl in the two finals at USO. He rushed the net a lot and surprised Lendl a number of times. He was a good volleyer and a clever bloke. On clay it was mainly pure percentage play from Wilander, agreed.

 

[Rui Lopes]

You should really watch some Wilander games. He mainly played serve/volley on gras and displayed a fascinating mix of defensive/offensive against Lendl in the two finals at USO. He rushed the net a lot and surprised Lendl a number of times. He was a good volleyer and a clever bloke. On clay it was mainly pure percentage play from Wilander, agreed.

That one with lendl was the only one were he tried to change stuff , and did well with that element of surprise...But i´m not saying i didn´t like him. You have to understand that for someone like me that is a huge Edberg fan , watching Wilander play it´s kind of meh...But i´m fine with every Styles of play...
What i won´t accept is that **** talk about someone that didn´t win more because he wasn´t trying that hard. That kind of **** it´s nothing besides stupid and disrespectfull to everyone...

 

[NicoMK]

What i won´t accept is that **** talk about someone that didn´t win more because he wasn´t trying that hard. That kind of **** it´s nothing besides stupid and disrespectfull to everyone...

Sorry mate but once again I don't think Mats ever said that "he didn't try hard". Never ever. What I wrote is that, during a very specific match - his second round loss at the 91 French Open - I had the feeling that he didn't try very hard, that's all. Plus, I might be wrong, maybe there was something else (a knee injury was mentioned then).

Mats said several times that it was hard for him finding a new motivation after reaching the number one spot, winning multiple slams etc., "more than I thought I could achieve,", he said something like that once. And I think that this very point is much understandable, whether in sports or in a more "normal life" when you've been doing the same stuff for a long time, especially since a young age like most of our champions, sometimes you may feel like doing something else.

Mats played music for a while, even recorded some songs - I have the CD! - Mac did the same circa 1987, what's the problem?

Yes, for a time he lost interested in his sports, retired for awhile, then came back and enjoyed it again. I don't see anything disrespectful in that…

You mentioned Borg earlier. He too stopped his pro career at a young age, that was a shame but hey, his choice. Didn't he try to come back years later in 1991?

That one with lendl was the only one were he tried to change stuff , and did well with that element of surprise...But i´m not saying i didn´t like him. You have to understand that for someone like me that is a huge Edberg fan , watching Wilander play it´s kind of meh...But i´m fine with every Styles of play...

A few balls from Wimbledon 1986 where you can see Mats serving and volleying on real grass :

And, for your own enjoyment, Wilander-Edberg at the 1987 US Open, where you can see a lot of attacking play too :

Hope you'll enjoy, cheers mate!

 

[Rui Lopes]

Sorry mate but once again I don't think Mats ever said that "he didn't try hard". Never ever. What I wrote is that, during a very specific match - his second round loss at the 91 French Open - I had the feeling that he didn't try very hard, that's all. Plus, I might be wrong, maybe there was something else (a knee injury was mentioned then).

Mats said several times that it was hard for him finding a new motivation after reaching the number one spot, winning multiple slams etc., "more than I thought I could achieve,", he said something like that once. And I think that this very point is much understandable, whether in sports or in a more "normal life" when you've been doing the same stuff for a long time, especially since a young age like most of our champions, sometimes you may feel like doing something else.

Mats played music for a while, even recorded some songs - I have the CD! - Mac did the same circa 1987, what's the problem?

Yes, for a time he lost interested in his sports, retired for awhile, then came back and enjoyed it again. I don't see anything disrespectful in that…

You mentioned Borg earlier. He too stopped his pro career at a young age, that was a shame but hey, his choice. Didn't he try to come back years later in 1991?




A few balls from Wimbledon 1986 where you can see Mats serving and volleying on real grass :

And, for your own enjoyment, Wilander-Edberg at the 1987 US Open, where you can see a lot of attacking play too :

Hope you'll enjoy, cheers mate!

Ok fine , i don´t wan´t to keep this thing going any longer. You have my point of view regarding sentences with `wasn´t trying is best or something `. To me it´s simple , if you don´t wan´t it don´t play it ( but no excuses ) .
Anyway , i like Wilander and he is for shure one of the greats...
And he is the one who brought that snake celebration to the tennis world...How could we live without that???