French Open 1984 vs French Open 1989

French Open 1984 vs. French Open 1989

  • French Open 1984

    Votes: 5 50.0%
  • French Open 1989

    Votes: 5 50.0%

  • Total voters
    10

Vensai

Professional
#1
In both of the French Open finals of 1984 and 1989, McEnroe and Edberg both lost their best chance of winning one FO title. Which loss do you think was more disappointing?
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
#2
Edberg had more chances, for sure. He led 2-1 in sets and broke Chang's serve in the first game of both the fourth and fifth sets. In the fourth set, Edberg got broken back straight away, and blew a ridiculous number of break points for the rest of the set. Edberg later failed to stop Chang winning the next 4 games in a row after he had broken Chang in the first game of the fifth set.

McEnroe was dominant in the first 2 sets, and he did go a break up in the fourth set at 4-3 (I think), but Lendl was improving as the match went on while McEnroe started getting tired and his serving consistency deserted him.

Both losses would have been unbelievably painful, but I think 1989 is worse. Unbelievable tournament for Chang, though, a brilliant achievement for a 17 year old. He played like a veteran with nerves of steel, not like a scared youngster.
 
Last edited:

Mainad

Bionic Poster
#3
In his book, "Serious", McEnroe describes how disgusted and disappointed he was with himself that he let that final go. It turned out to be his only chance of ever completing the CGS as he never made another final at RG.

Similarly for Edberg although I haven't come across any comments he ever made about that loss. The 1989 final was perhaps the more remarkable in that a seasoned multi-Slam winning champion lost out to an unknown 17 year old kid! As upsets go in Slam finals, I guess that one must sit up there amongst the all time stunners!

Both Lendl and Chang won their maiden Slam titles by denying 2 of the sport's greatest ever champions their only chance of completing the one thing missing from their resumés, the career Grand Slam!
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
#4
I wouldn't say that Chang was unknown. He first came to attention at the 1987 US Open, as a 15 year old amateur. He was known as a young kid learning his trade, and was already good enough to be the #15 seed in the 1989 French Open.
 
#5
I think the better questions of the '84 French are if Mac had won it, would he have even gone to Kooyong to aim for the Calendar Year Grand Slam? I feel he may have, but would he have won the final? Assuming he was No. 1 seed instead of Lendl, would he have been able to beat Wilander, his '83 semifinal rival in the final?
 
#6
Met and talked with Edberg many years ago and asked him about this loss. He said he wasn't too disappointed about it at that time since he felt confident he would get more chances to do well there for a few more years. didn't happen that way...
 

Vensai

Professional
#7
Met and talked with Edberg many years ago and asked him about this loss. He said he wasn't too disappointed about it at that time since he felt confident he would get more chances to do well there for a few more years. didn't happen that way...
Yeah. Stefan Edberg never made another French Open final after that one.
 
#9
Mac had bigger expectations than Edberg
Edberg was a bit lucky to survive Becker even if being impressive vs Peak Mancini in his IMO best cc match of his career
Mac trounced the likes of Higueras,Arias and Connors
 
#10
I think the better questions of the '84 French are if Mac had won it, would he have even gone to Kooyong to aim for the Calendar Year Grand Slam? I feel he may have, but would he have won the final? Assuming he was No. 1 seed instead of Lendl, would he have been able to beat Wilander, his '83 semifinal rival in the final?
Good question! There would have been tremendous pressure on him, which I think Mac could've handled. But Wilander clearly liked Australian grass and would have been tough. I still like the more aggressive player pressuring his opponent in this situation. With so much on the line, I think we would have seen Mac near or at his best which probably would ultimately defeat Mats.

The one thing that could trigger bad Mac I think would have been being forced to play a big server on one of Kooyong's infamously intimate outer courts.
 
#11
Met and talked with Edberg many years ago and asked him about this loss. He said he wasn't too disappointed about it at that time since he felt confident he would get more chances to do well there for a few more years. didn't happen that way...
Not surprising. Edberg never really got too high or too low. I think this served him well in his career, but on that day in Paris, I wish that he had felt a bigger sense of urgency. He fought for it and made Chang earn the win, but had Edberg played like his hair was on fire as he did in some of his Wimbledon and US Open runs, I think he woukd have won. Only speculation of course.

For me, I remember the 88-89 French Opens as real clunkers on the mens and womens sides. Lots of missing big names and upsets, which in later rounds showed me that "parity " was overated. So I picked the 1984 French because it seemed so important and got so much attention with a Mac loss to Lendl.
 
#12
Anyway, Edberg beat prime Becker, who had had better cc results than him, gave a cc specialist Chang a big fight and to me, his most impressive performance came in the last 16, when he dismatled the brilliant and powerful game of Mancini, who was having a heck of a season.

For those who don´t know Mancini, the argentinian would be comparable to Soderling or the 2003 Verkerk.
 
Top