how many slams would mcenroe have won with wood

[bjk]

McEnroe won his last slam at 25 in NY in 1984 against Lendl playing with a Dunlop racket that was probably graphite. How much was he hurt by the switch to new rackets? It was clear that his style of play was increasingly overpowered by the new rackets. Players like Lendl no longer had to worry about McEnroe. Watch Lendl show his respect here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jOn2e7JKweo#t=37

The decline of McEnroe's results is usually attributed to his time off, but he and Borg had the same problem: the switch to new rackets. The only player of that era to endure was Connors, who always player with a metal racket. The racket switch would also explain the early success of players like Chang, Sampras, Agassi, and Courier, who were the first generation to grow up with the new rackets.

 

[the green god]

The same. The O'Neal family was a career killer.

 

[CyBorg]

Hmmm... Mac switched to graphite I think right around Dallas WCT in 1983.

And then went on to have arguably the best campaign in the open era.

I think the problem was McEnroe's head, his personal problems and his decision to take time off. The game was changing very rapidly in these years, more rapidly than ever before, due to the fact that corporations began screwing with everything, so one couldn't afford to miss time.

 

[don_budge]

The 60,000 dollar question...

McEnroe won his last slam at 25 in NY in 1984 against Lendl playing with a Dunlop racket that was probably graphite. How much was he hurt by the switch to new rackets? It was clear that his style of play was increasingly overpowered by the new rackets. Players like Lendl no longer had to worry about McEnroe. Watch Lendl show his respect here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jOn2e7JKweo#t=37

The decline of McEnroe's results is usually attributed to his time off, but he and Borg had the same problem: the switch to new rackets. The only player of that era to endure was Connors, who always player with a metal racket. The racket switch would also explain the early success of players like Chang, Sampras, Agassi, and Courier, who were the first generation to grow up with the new rackets.

How did tennis ever change to new equipment anyways...who had the power to make that decision? Another uninvestigated crime of the century!

 

[don_budge]

All Oversized Grand Slam Semis?

How did tennis ever change to new equipment anyways...who had the power to make that decision? Another uninvestigated crime of the century!

I was there that day and the day before. Was it the first time that all four players played with oversized racquets in a Grand Slam semifinal?

 

[AngieB]

McEnroe won his last slam at 25 in NY in 1984 against Lendl playing with a Dunlop racket that was probably graphite. How much was he hurt by the switch to new rackets? It was clear that his style of play was increasingly overpowered by the new rackets. Players like Lendl no longer had to worry about McEnroe. Watch Lendl show his respect here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jOn2e7JKweo#t=37

The decline of McEnroe's results is usually attributed to his time off, but he and Borg had the same problem: the switch to new rackets. The only player of that era to endure was Connors, who always player with a metal racket. The racket switch would also explain the early success of players like Chang, Sampras, Agassi, and Courier, who were the first generation to grow up with the new rackets.

McEnroe had already switched racquets and won the 1984 US Open using graphite. His months long absence from the game and lack of motivation affected him more than the change of rackets.

Sampras, Agassi and Courier and players of their generation began playing tennis with wood in the 1970's during their youth. It wasn't until the early 80's that players began transitioning to graphite. That would have put the three around in their early teen's. Federer's generation is probably the first to never play with wood.

#PTL

AngieB

 

[urban]

I think, Mac played pure Wood only in his youth, maybe with the Wilson racket he used, when he first came onto the tour. When he changed to Dunlop in the late 70s, the racket had fiberglass ingredients (like the Donnay used by Borg), especially in the head and heart of the racket. They made the racket stiffer and gave more power on the serve.

 

[Goosehead]

was looking at april 1983 WCT final in dallas on youtube recently (the supermac matchpoint winner through the post final :twisted

you could see his new racquet. the commentators mention mcenroe's graphite wand at somepoint during the final I recall.

 

[big ted]

like others have said i think it was more his own undoing than equipment changes. some people say the power game overtook him but he was also losing to people like brad gilbert, annacone, de la pena, mecir, rostagno, woodforde...players who werent really big power hitters

 

[urban]

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't mean that Mac used graphite rackets before 1983, simply that since the mid 70s, wood rackets had some other ingredients to stiffen the racket. I mentioned on other threads, that a detailled analysis of the effects of new materials on the pro tour at the begin of open tennis, which means before the regular advent of graphite oversize rackets since the early 80s, still stands out. Since the late 60s, alu and steel rackets were used, and the Prince oversized racket was invented in the mid 70s as well, if i recall it right. Composite elements were inplemented in the wooden frame. Seldom anyone mentions the effects on the development of the serve or especially the return, or the evolving topspin game. The only two writers who cared about it, were to my knowledge John McPhee and Gene Scott.

 

[PMChambers]

I think he'd struggle with wood, especially in 84, the shorts he wore where definitely too tight for wood.

I personally don't call the Max 200G a graphite racquet. It's a plastic racquet with chopped graphite fibre in it. It plays closer to a woodie or composite (70" not 65") that a late 80's graphite racquet which is woven graphite sheet folded and formed with epoxy resin. I personally think he ended up over powered once the stiffer larger head racquets became prominent. His game did not suit the new power topsin of the late 80's and early 90's. I wsaw him play on several occasions in the late 80's and early 90's and he struggled to handle the power of Lendl and Becker. Even Chang was able to counter punch and lob him too well. I struggle to think of greats at 5'11" after the 1980's. Maybe Agassi, Hewitt got 2 GS but that's not great compared to Laver 5'8", Rosewell 5'7", Borg 5'11", Connors 5'10", Hoad 5;10". Oker 5'10, Villas 5'11" Etc. His push and tempo changes had less effect and top players started making him too many low volleys under pressure which is a result of the more powerful racquets and greater spin production. After wood and composite disappeared the smaller player 5'11 bellow, tendered to be base line counter punchers.

 

[jaggy]

More with Woodbridge than Woodforde Id have guessed.

 

[heninfan99]

Depends if Lendl is in his bracket. LOL

 

[Bionic slice]

I think we saw a change also in the fitness and athleticism in players from borg to lendl, look at what agassi did...with gill.....i think back to watching mac play in florida when i was a kid and I would have loved to have seen Rafter play during the mac and borg days...

 

[NLBwell]

As pointed out earlier, his problems were with his overall life. He had his best year with a graphite racket. He would have won the same no matter what rackets were being used.
This stuff about rackets and athleticism being different is way overblown. There were plenty of mid plus and oversize rackets available for years. The poly strings, however, have made a real difference.

 

[PMChambers]

He had his best year with a graphite racket.

Since the "graphite" racquet he used resembles nothing like what modern graphite racquet is and was basically a mid size head wood racquet. And his ability to handle pace deteriorated once "real" graphite racquets became common place, I think it has a lot more to do with it than you say. The Max200G had a RA of 36, which is about the same as wood and It had mass more in line with wood. Basically the modern graphite racquet became popularised at about the same time Mac was struggling with the pace and spin of the game. It was also a time where players his stature started to disappear from the Top 10. As I indicted in the last post the number of 5'11" under players that dominated through the 60-70-early 80's was signifigantly higher than those after mid 80's. Agassi and Hewitt are about it. Maybe Chan but h's not in the Laver, Rosewell, Borg, Connors camp. It's not the game got bigger, as there have always been big men, it's the small players disappeared and the "golden" zone become tighter both sides. Mac's game does not suit a modern graphite racquet of the late 80's. By 88 Lendl was playing with a ridgid hard racquet and was going through Mac.

 

[joe sch]

The Wilson Pro Staff was 100% wood and he used that until 1981 when he switched to the standard Maxply Fort (super flexi head that he leaded up).......and then his autograph model Maxply McEnroe was wood as well with some fiber and composite reinforcements to stiffen the frame and have it play more like his Pro Staffs. In 1983 when he went and switched to the 200G was his entry into pure composite.

No way on earth can you call the Maxply McEnroe graphite frame - it was 99% + wood with some graphite inlays.
The Head Vilas with its fiberglass inlay and "power wedge" in the hoop and even the Donnay Allwood and Borg Pro also have Vulcanized Fiber (in effect thick paper) to help adjust stiffness.

This is the truth and the early graphite rackets like the dunlop max 200g and the adidas gtx proT that these guys played were not power sticks but rather very flexible rackets that played more like woods than todays carbon fiber rackets, IMO.

Regarding the vid link of 84 USO, Jimmy Connors was the defending champion, but he was defeated by McEnroe in the semis. Mac then went on to win it, his fourth US Open title, defeating Lendl in his third consecutive final.

Mac would have won more titles if he did not end up in Malibu partying with the Hollywood crowd and the O'Neals. If the game stayed with woods then it would have changed many of the slams and yes, may have been a few more Mac slams.