Match Stats/Report - Becker vs Curren, Wimbledon final, 1985

W

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Boris Becker beat Kevin Curren 6-3, 6-7(4), 7-6(3), 6-4 in the Wimbledon final, 1985 on grass

Becker was 17, unseeded and it was his first Slam title. Curren had reached the final straight setting favourites McEnroe, Connors and the soon to be Australian Open champion Stefan Edberg along the way

Both players serve-volleyed off all their serves, with the exception of 1 Curren second serve

Becker won 162 points, Curren 140

Serve Stats
Becker...
- 1st serve percentage (85/140) 61%
- 1st serve points won (72/85) 85%
- 2nd serve points won (28/55) 51%
- Aces 22, Service Winners 6
- Double Faults 7
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (57/140) 41%

Curren...
- 1st serve percentage (76/162) 47%
- 1st serve points won (57/76) 75%
- 2nd serve points won (43/86) 50%
- Aces 19 (1 second serve), Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 8
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (65/162) 40%

Serve Patterns
Becker served...
- to FH 35%
- to BH 58%
- to Body 7%

Curren served....
- to FH 39%
- to BH 52%
- to Body 19%

Return Stats
Becker made...
- 89 (47 FH, 42 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 14 Winners (10 FH, 4 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 45 Errors, all forced...
- 45 Forced (18 FH, 27 BH), including 2 runaround FH and 1 return-approach attempt
- Return Rate (89/154) 58%

Curren made...
- 76 (25 FH, 51 BH), including 1 return-approach
- 5 Winners (3 FH, 2 BH)
- 29 Errors, all forced...
- 29 Forced (18 FH, 11 BH)
- Return Rate (76/133) 57%

Break Points
Becker 3/17 (10 games)
Curren 1/6 (3 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Becker 55 (17 FH, 7 BH, 13 FHV, 12 BHV, 6 OH)
Curren 29 (8 FH, 7 BH, 7 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 4 BHV, 2 OH)

Becker had 30 from serve-volley points
- 8 first volleys (4 FHV, 4 BHV)
- 21 second volleys (9 FHV, 6 OH, 6 BHV)
- 1 third volley (1 BHV)

- 14 returns, all passes
- 10 FHs (1 cc, 5 dtl, 1 inside-in and 3 inside-out)
- 4 BHs (2 cc and 2 inside-in)

-10 non-return passes (7 FH, 2 BH, 1 BHV)
- FHs - 4 cc, 1 dtl, 1 inside-out and 1 inside-out/dtl
- BHs - 2 cc and 1 inside-out/longline
- BHV was played closer to baseline than service line and not a net point

Curren had 15 from serve-volley points
- 6 first 'volleys' (3 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 1 FH at net, 1 BHV)
- 9 second volleys (4 FHV, 3 BHV, 2 OH)

- 5 returns, all passes
- 3 FHs (2 cc and 1 inside-in)
- 2 BHs (1 cc and 1 inside-in)

- 9 non return passes (4 FH, 5 BH)
- FHs - 1 cc (on run), 2 dtl and 1 longline
- BHs - 1 cc, 2 dtl, 1 longline and 1 lob

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Becker 39
- 10 Unforced (2 FH, 3 FHV, 5 BHV)
- 29 Forced (12 FH, 7 BH, 2 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 5 BHV, 1 BH1/2V, 1 OH)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 55

Curren 43
- 19 Unforced (3 FH, 8 FHV, 5 BHV, 3 OH)
- 24 Forced (2 FH, 10 BH, 3 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 7 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 53.2

(Note 1: All 1/2 volleys refer to such shots played at net. 1/2 volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke numbers)

(Note 2: the Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is an indicator of how aggressive the average UE was. The numbers presented for these two matches are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)

Net Points & Serve-Volley
Becker was...
- 74/109 (68%) at net, including...
- 73/106 (69%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 45/58 (78%) off 1st serve and...
- 28/48 (58%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/1 forced back

Curren was...
- 82/136 (60%) at net, including...
- 79/132 (60%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 37/56 (66%) off 1st serve and...
- 42/76 (55%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/1 return-approaching
- 1/2 forced back
 
Last edited:
Match Report
An out and out Big Game match with 100% serve-volleying. Becker is the better player in just about all areas - and it all starts with his superiority on the serve

Becker has better of first set. A bad Curren service game - 2 volleying and a groundstroke error at net, plus a double fault - to gives him the break, and he has break point in another 12 point game that Curren aces his way through to hold. Otherwise, both players hold comfortably. Curren does dish out less than 50% first serves in, but he's just as successful in winning second serve points so it doesn't matter. Becker gets the occasional meaty return back, especially off the FH.

Second set goes much like the first, with comfortable service holds but Becker looks the more threatening on return (though not particularly so). He puts Curren in a 0-40 hole and has a good look at a pass to miss 1 of the break points (Curren is in command of the other 2). So it goes to the tiebreak where Becker opens up a 3-0 and later, 4-2 lead.

The critical point is the seventh. A serve-volleying Becker has a high volley to make, but unwisely elects to runaround it to strike a FHV. He doesn't hit the ball well, and Curren is able to get a good pass back that forces a diving volley error. The South African does finish in style though - two excellent volleys, the first low, the second a drop - give him the next point and he finishes with a return winner and a coolly placed BH dtl pass to even the match.

Curren gets his first (and as it turns out, only) break mid-way through the 3rd set with some fine attacking play. A good lob forces an OH error, he advances forward to win a net-to-net duel and breaks with a BH dtl pass. But Boris breaks right back in an even better played return game, featuring two excellent BH cc passes (his only non-return BH passes in the match), a FH cc pass from mid-court (set up by a strong return) and powerful return that forces a 1/2 volley error.

Curren has to save 3 set points as he serves to take the set into another tiebreak. which he does with commanding play. But he's brushed aside in the breaker itself, crucially, missing a volley into a wide open court. Still, Becker's serve is untouchable and he reaches 6-0. Curren wins 3 points to make the scoreline look a bit more respectable, but he was never really in the tiebreak.

The 4th set is the most one sided. Curren plays poorly. To start with, he can only get first serve in 16/37. He loses 14/21 second serve points. And he seems to miss every makeable volley possible. He has 2 break points, both erased with unreturned serves (1 ace). His own service games never look secure, while Becker cruises along to well earned victory. Small consolation for Curren that he finished the match on an unbroken run of 17 first serve points won

Playing Dynamics - Serve & Return
Everything begins with Becker's advantage on the serve. Its more powerful, better placed and probably better disguised (Boris certainly seems to read the Curren serve better than Curren does his)

Becker's service motion isn't quite as elegant as it would become - the knee bend isn't quite as deep. Curren's by contrast is painful to look at. All elbows and knees, culminating in a propulsion of the arm that looks painful on the shoulder and one imagines, not difficult to read delivery.

Becker serves at an excellent 61%, Curren at a substandard 47%. But worse than that for the South African is the number of wasteful foot faults he gives up. I'd estimate 12-15 foot faults from Curren…. was this normal for him? He also has 10-15 first serve lets. Along with the ugly service motion, I confess, I was disappointed with Curren's serve

Becker has a 28-20 lead in aces/service winners but virtually equal unreturned serves (Becker 41%, Curren 40%). The latter is a bit deceptive; Becker made more 'good errors' (taking a good clean swing at the ball) than Curren, who was more often struggling to just get racquet on ball.

Stats are also suggesting Becker erred in his serving patterns. He's drawn 18 FH errors to 11 on the BH, despite serving 35% to the FH and 58% to the BH. Curren's FH does look like the lesser of his two groundstrokes (both in play and on return) but I'm not too familiar with his game. On the eye test level, I thought Curren served too much to Becker's FH.... he served more to the BH as the match wore on, but was near 50-50 for the first two sets, though it was clear Becker was getting more FH returns back in play and doing a lot more forcefully than off the BH (10 FH winners to 4 BH)

Becker's returning looks good by any standard and better than Curren's, though some of this is due to his having the better serve. Typically, Boris misses some returns going for big cuts, but when he makes it, it leaves Curren with work to do on the first volley (which he doesn't seem overly able to do). There are also a few dicey bounces and Becker misses a number of returns that seem to have not bounced as he'd anticipated. 1 Curren body serve goes right through him for an ace

Both players play around on the return. Its Curren who looks to move forward slowly on the return and as Becker makes his first volley. Becker imitates the move and once, intercepts a volley from just inside the court with a volley of his own for the winner. On important points, Becker takes to sweeping from side to side as Curren is about to serve. As the match wears on, Curren largely eschews fancy moves on the return

Volleying & Passing
Nothing extraordinary from either man, but again, Becker has the advantage in both areas and probably would do even without his edge in serving and returning

8 volleying UEs for Becker to 12 for Curren in the forecourt (Curren also has 1 non-net volley and 1 baseline OH error). They were about even for 3 sets, but Curren misses a bunch of makeable but not easy volleys (mostly marked 'unforced') in the final set. Neither player gives the impression that they could handle a series of low or/and powerfully hit passing shots and both look as likely as not to miss slightly difficult volleys (slightly low, hit slightly more powerfully than normal or requiring slight sideways movement). Both miss a few easy ones too

Note the forced groundstroke errors, which would all be passes. Becker has 12 FH and 7 BH, while Curren has 2 FH and 10 BH.... this is due to Becker predominantly volleying to Curren's BH (standards operating procedure) and Curren doing the opposite (unorthodox)

Not sure why Curren chose to target the Becker FH. One imagines he didn't know Becker's game too well, but would probably have studied it up a bit before the final. Both serving and volleying, he seems to have fancied Becker's FH.... was Becker particularly impressive with the BH at this Wimbledon? In general, dangerous as the Becker BH is, I would prefer targeting it.... and as that is the standard default big game strategy, one imagines Curren had what he thought was a good reason to deviate from this course. Didn't work too well

The forced volleying errors are telling you there wasn't much in it between the two passing. Curren was forced into 12 half-volley/volley errors, Becker 10.... with some of those coming from the return (and Becker returning more powerfully), we can say they were about even on the pass. Becker did look better on the pass because his better serve put him in stronger positions

A couple of other notes on Becker. His footwork is speedier than I've seen it in this match. And for the only time I've seen him, he's lightly grunting - even when he's volleying. He wasn't doing this a couple of weeks previously at the Queens Club final or a month or so afterwards in the Cincinnati final.
----

Summing up, difference between two big gamers on grass can be miniscule or even non-existent, but here Boris Becker is better in all areas - serve especially, but also return, volleying and at least equal on the pass. A well deserved win for the German

You find Becker's win over Johan Kriek at Queens here https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ort-becker-vs-kriek-queens-final-1985.609175/ and in Cincinnati over Mats Wilander here https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ker-vs-wilander-final-cincinnati-1985.608641/
 
Last edited:
Waspsting said:
Curren's by contrast is painful to look at. All elbows and knees, culminating in a propulsion of the arm that looks painful on the shoulder and one imagines, not difficult to read delivery.
Click to expand...

You've gotta be the first one I've come across that describes Curren's delivery as "not difficult to read." In fact quite the opposite is true as Kev was (in)famous for serving while the ball was still on the rise. Even Tanner and Goran let the ball drop a tiny bit, contrary to common misconceptions about both (especially Roscoe).

I know you got a bit defensive the other day when Moose gently cautioned you not to read too much into a single match, but it's really important to avoid making such a sweeping generalization about any player especially when he remains an unfamiliar name and many of us would presumably be reading in depth about his game for the first time in threads like this. Take it from me as well that such lapses in judgment detract from the otherwise excellent work you do.
 
I remember watching this and thinking that Curren under-performed, vastly at times. His service delivery, IMHO, was typically much harder to read than Becker's. But on this day, not so much. Having watched him simply demolish 2 all time greats (Mac, Connors) with un-returnable serves and and precise volleys, I expected him to win the title. Perhaps the occasion got to him and Becker simply had nothing to lose, and played very freely. Curren is one of the best players never to win a GS, truly. His S&V game could be devastating and likely cost Connors 2 wimbledon titles.
 
Waspsting said:
Becker won 157 points, Curren 137

(Note: I'm missing a Curren service game in which he held and two Becker service points - both of which he won. Curren's points total includes 4 from his missing hold. He may have won more points if the game went to deuce - and Becker may have won points in the game in question as well)

Serve Stats
Becker...
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (55/138) 40%

Curren...
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (60/150) 40%
Click to expand...
I was wondering if these could be the highest unreturned rates in a Wimbledon final up to that point in time, that we know about. I checked and if I haven't missed anything, the only higher rate we know of is Mac in '84.

1984 - Mac 47.3%
1980 - Mac 38.8%
1971 - Newcombe 38.5%, Smith 29.3%
1932 - Vines 38.0%
1981 - Mac 34.8%
1982 - Mac 34.4%
1979 - Borg 33.6%, Tanner 31.1%
1975 - Ashe 32.4%, Connors 21.4%
1977 - Borg 30.8%
1966 - Ralston 30.7%, Santana 29.3%
1969 - Newcombe 30.3%, Laver 18.0%

Some others:
1977 AO (Jan.) - Tanner 46.4%
1984 USO - Mac 45.2%
1980 USO - Mac 39.4%
1975 AO - Newcombe 32.6%, Connors 27.9%
1981 USO - Mac 30.7%
1930 Forest Hills - Doeg 29.6%, Shields 29.4%
1984 AO - Wilander 28.4%, Curren 25.7%
1933 Wimb - Vines 28.0%
1969 USO - Laver 27.9%, Roche 26.2%
1970 USO - Rosewall 27.7%, Roche 26.7%
1980 Wimb - Borg 28.6%
1976 Wimb - Borg 28.6%, Nastase 21.3%
1978 Wimb - Borg 28.2%
1981 Wimb - Borg 24.0%
1935 Wimb - Perry 25.0%, Von Cramm 19.6%
1934 Wimb - Perry 20.0%
1972 Wimb - Nastase 21.7%, Smith 17.9%
1970 Wimb - Newcombe 21.5%, Rosewall 21.0%

1960 Wimb - Fraser 31.1%, Laver 20.4% (watching 36 of 47 games)
1959 Wimb - Olmedo 28.3%, Laver 25.6% (watching 24 of 29 games)

If Hoad served 73 points in the '57 final against Cooper (that's an estimate, merely cutting in half the total number of points played), then his unreturned rate was 32.9%.

The '85 Becker/Curren rates (and Mac's '84 rate) were topped by Cash in the '87 final with 49.4%.

Anyone know Mac's rate against Lewis in '83?
 
Last edited:
NonP said:
You've gotta be the first one I've come across that describes Curren's delivery as "not difficult to read." In fact quite the opposite is true as Kev was (in)famous for serving while the ball was still on the rise. Even Tanner and Goran let the ball drop a tiny bit, contrary to common misconceptions about both (especially Roscoe).
Click to expand...

Yes, he barely tossed it and swung very fast! it was unique and hard to read. When he was on, it was pretty amazing. Unusual to watch. Kind of reminded me of Tanner. His game was all about the serve.
 
A couple of boxscores from American newspapers

48435170216_c14b48a37a_b.jpg


48435313392_d3a54d17b5_c.jpg


So Becker led in total points by 162-141.

The terms “winners” and “unforced errors” here include service (ie, aces and df's).

And the "winners" include shots that forced errors from the opponent. That's actually the way that old boxscores in British sources tended to count "winners", going back several decades. It's a method that made for inflated winner counts.
 
krosero said:
I was wondering if these could be the highest unreturned rates in a Wimbledon final up to that point in time, that we know about. I checked and if I haven't missed anything, the only higher rate we know of is Mac in '84....
The '85 Becker/Curren rates (and Mac's '84 rate) were topped by Cash in the '87 final with 49.4%.
Click to expand...

What is the highest overall you have?

I have Sampras with 59% in '97 versus Pioline

Only match we don't have that might challenge that is Krajicek in '96

krosero said:
A couple of boxscores from American newspapers

48435170216_c14b48a37a_b.jpg


48435313392_d3a54d17b5_c.jpg


So Becker led in total points by 162-141.

The terms “winners” and “unforced errors” here include service (ie, aces and df's).

And the "winners" include shots that forced errors from the opponent. That's actually the way that old boxscores in British sources tended to count "winners", going back several decades. It's a method that made for inflated winner counts.
Click to expand...

Great to compare

Not sure how they've classified things

On the top box score -

I have Becker with 45 return errors, Curren 29 (plus service winners Becker 6, Curren 1)... and aces Becker 22, Curren 19
they have Becker with 20 aces and Curren 19... so they might have given a couple non-clean aces

- their 37 'unforced errors' for Becker is near identical to my 'errors (serve and return excluded)' of 39 ... but they have Curren with 35 to my 43. The first part made me think maybe they've counted 'unforced errors' as 'any error in play' not including double faults or return errors

- subtracting 'unforced errors' at net from 'unforced errors', we get 'non-net unforced errors' of 32 for Becker and 21 for Curren. Subtracting double faults, that goes down to Becker 25, Curren 15

those are much too low to include return unforced errors (I have 0 for both men due to the 100% serve-volleying, but maybe they didn't count it that way)… so presumably, they've marked a lot of passing attempt errors as unforced (believe me, I'm tempted to oftentimes, but don't. Think I gave just 1)

The total points won of Becker 162, Curren 141 is 1 off mine for Curren. On that front, my total is lining up with total points served

There's a substantial difference across the 2 boxscores in first serve in count
- Box 1 - Becker 61.7%, Curren 46.9
- Box 2 - Becker 65%, Curren 51%

I have
- Becker 60.7%, Curren 46.9%
---

Do you have any memory of Curren's tendency to foot fault? He has about 15 or so in this match.... what a waste. And in a Wimbledon final, no less
And the number of first serve lets he makes (about 15 too) actually got annoying at times for me as a stats taker
 
Last edited:
@krosero
I had Newcombe with a Unreturned serve rare of 39.2% vs Kodes in the 73 USO final(missing some points)

Also, I have complete stats on Becker Curren that I emailed you a few years ago. Guess I didn't include unreturned serve rates? Will look that up for you.

@Waspsting
The highest unreturned rate I came across was 73% Gilles Muller had vs Donald Young at 2016 Newport. NonP has an extensive list in this thread https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/greatest-serves-of-all-time.306579/page-24

I saw Curren play many times, don't think he generally had that many foot faults. Have posted stats on several of his matches here(Curren Wilander 84 AO, Curren Harmon 83 W, Curren Lewis 83 W, Curren Connors 85 W)

Here were my stats on Curren Connors https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...nd-conners-in-same-major.367675/#post-5928708
He served at 65% and had 58% of his serves unreturned. lost serve only 4 times prior to the final. I'd be surprised if any prior finalist at Wimbledon had done something like that. This was a pretty significant final in the history of the sport in terms of the power game.
 
Last edited:
Moose Malloy said:
@krosero
I had Newcombe with a Unreturned serve rare of 39.2% vs Kodes in the 73 USO final(missing some points)

Also, I have complete stats on Becker Curren that I emailed you a few years ago. Guess I didn't include unreturned serve rates? Will look that up for you.
Click to expand...
Thanks for Newk-Kodes, I'd forgotten all about that one.
I found your Becker-Curren stats. You had Becker serving 141 points with 56 unreturned serves (39.7%), and Curren serving 162 points with 65 unreturned (40.1%)
 
Waspsting said:
What is the highest overall you have?

I have Sampras with 59% in '97 versus Pioline

Only match we don't have that might challenge that is Krajicek in '96



Great to compare

Not sure how they've classified things

On the top box score -

I have Becker with 43 return errors, Curren 28 (plus service winners Becker 6, Curren 1)... and aces Becker 21, Curren 16
they have Becker with 20 aces and Curren 19... so I think their ace count is just clean aces (and Curren served 3 in the game I'm missing)

- their 37 'unforced errors' for Becker is identical to my 'errors (serve and return excluded)' ... but they have Curren with 35 to my 40. The first part made me think maybe they've counted 'unforced errors' as 'any error in play' not including double faults or return errors

- subtracting 'unforced errors' at net from 'unforced errors', we get 'non-net unforced errors' of 32 for Becker and 21 for Curren. Subtracting double faults, that goes down to Becker 25, Curren 15

those are much too low to include return unforced errors (I have 0 for both men due to the 100% serve-volleying, but maybe they didn't count it that way)… so presumably, they've marked a lot of passing attempt errors as unforced (believe me, I'm tempted to oftentimes, but don't. Think I gave just 1)

----

The total points won of Becker 162, Curren 141 (I have Becker 157, Curren 133 with a Curren hold missing)…. is 1 off mine if the missing game had Curren win 7 points, Becker 5

This is also supported by their having an extra break point for Becker... that game must've been a long one

That would further cement Becker's superiority because the missing game is in the 1st set, which is all easy holds but for the 1 break. If Becker pushed Curren on another return game in that set, that'd be a further indicator of his being the better player for the set

---

Do you have any memory of Curren's tendency to foot fault? He has about 15 or so in this match.... what a waste. And in a Wimbledon final, no less
And the number of first serve lets he makes (about 15 too) actually got annoying at times for me as a stats taker
Click to expand...
Moose has 303 points played in the match, same as the boxscore does if the total Unforced Errors are simply added to the "Winners."

TA has the unreturned serves for Krajicek-Washington. I couldn't see where they had the unreturned percentage reported, but they give the total returns put in play, from which you can calculate the unreturned %.

Krajicek served 71 points including 3 double-faults, and Washington put 35 serves back in play

Washington served 88 points including 2 double-faults, and Krajicek put 65 serves back in play


Krajicek 71 points served, 33 unrt (including 15 aces): 46.48%

Washington 88 points served, 21 unrt (including 5 aces): 23.9%


I also got McEnroe-Lewis at TA:

McEnroe served 57 points, and 16 serves did not come back (he served zero aces): 28.1%

Lewis served 67 points, and 14 serves did not come back (he served 1 ace): 20.9%
 
Waspsting said:
What is the highest overall you have?

I have Sampras with 59% in '97 versus Pioline
Click to expand...
Before the Open Era, I have Pancho Gonzalez with at least 50.0% in a one-set match against Don Budge, at a tour stop in Dallas in '54. Pancho won the match 8-3, with 5 clean aces, drawing 14 other return errors. Unfortunately the newspapers don't say how many points Pancho served, or even whether he served 5 or 6 games. They do say he dropped only 8 service points. So I ran some calculations, and his unreturned rate has to be 50.0% at minimum; and it could technically top Muller's rate against Young, though that is not likely. My own estimate (or loose guess!) is 58%.

So Pancho at 50%-plus, in one match. I've got Tilden with 39.1% in the 1926 Newport final against Lewis White. And of course Vines has 38.0% in that famous '32 Wimbledon final against Bunny Austin, with 30 unreturned serves in total, including 4 clean aces.

I've got unreturned rates for most of the Wimbledon finals in the 1930s, but only a few from other decades, so far.

I thought that Vines' number might not be topped before the OE but it looks like Hoad may have topped it in the '57 Wimb final, a 6-2, 6-1, 6-2 win over Ashley Cooper. Lance Tingay wrote in the Daily Telegraph that Hoad had 24 service winners (including 1 clean ace). From the very detailed reports given in those days, it's possible to calculate that Hoad served between 58 and 62 points. I think the latter is more likely, which leaves Hoad with an unreturned rate of 38.7%. If he served 58 points, the rate would jump to 41.4%.

Tingay did not provide a full point score, and his numbers look like they might have a few slight mistakes here and there, so I wouldn't call this confirmed. But it looks like Hoad may have topped Vines in this particular stat.

 
Last edited:
Wasp do you know how many 1st serves Becker and Curren made on break points?

And maybe their first-serve percentages in the tiebreaks?
 
krosero said:
Wasp do you know how many 1st serves Becker and Curren made on break points?
Click to expand...

Becker 4/6 down break point
1) 1st serve... Return FE FH
2) 2nd… Becker FHV winner (1st volley, s/v)
3) 1st... Becker FHV winner (2nd volley)
4) 2nd... Curren winner BH dtl pass
5) 1st... Return FE BH
6) 1st... Ace

Curren 8/17 down break point
1) 2nd... Double Fault
2) 2nd... Return FE FH
3) 1 … Return FE BH
4) 1... Becker FE FH pass
5) 2nd… Curren winner FHV (2)
6) 1... Ace
7) 1... Return FE FH
8) 1... Curren BHV (2)
9) 1st... Becker winner BH cc pass
10) 1... Return FE BH
11) 2... Curren OH winner (2)
12) 2... Return FE FH
13) 2... Becker FE FH pass
14) 2... Return winner FH inside-out pass
15) 2... Return FE BH
16) 1... Ace
17) 2... Becker FE BH pass


krosero said:
And maybe their first-serve percentages in the tiebreaks?
Click to expand...

2nd Set
Becker 50% (3/6)
- won 3/3 first serve points
- won 0/3 second serve points

Curren 60% (3/5)
- won 2/3 first serve points
- won 2/2 second serve points

3rd Set
Becker 100% (5/5)
- won 3/5

Curren (40%) 2/5
- won 1/2 first serve points
- won 0/3 second serve points
 
Last edited:
Waspsting said:
Match Report
An out and out Big Game match with 100% serve-volleying. Becker is the better player in just about all areas - and it all starts with his superiority on the serve

Becker has better of first set. A bad Curren service game - 2 volleying and a groundstroke error at net, plus a double fault - to gives him the break, and he has break point in another 12 point game that Curren aces his way through to hold. Otherwise, both players hold comfortably. Curren does dish out less than 50% first serves in, but he's just as successful in winning second serve points so it doesn't matter. Becker gets the occasional meaty return back, especially off the FH.

Second set goes much like the first, with comfortable service holds but Becker looks the more threatening on return (though not particularly so). He puts Curren in a 0-40 hole and has a good look at a pass to miss 1 of the break points (Curren is in command of the other 2). So it goes to the tiebreak where Becker opens up a 3-0 and later, 4-2 lead.

The critical point is the seventh. A serve-volleying Becker has a high volley to make, but unwisely elects to runaround it to strike a FHV. He doesn't hit the ball well, and Curren is able to get a good pass back that forces a diving volley error. The South African does finish in style though - two excellent volleys, the first low, the second a drop - give him the next point and he finishes with a return winner and a coolly placed BH dtl pass to even the match.

Curren gets his first (and as it turns out, only) break mid-way through the 3rd set with some fine attacking play. A good lob forces an OH error, he advances forward to win a net-to-net duel and breaks with a BH dtl pass. But Boris breaks right back in an even better played return game, featuring two excellent BH cc passes (his only non-return BH passes in the match), a FH cc pass from mid-court (set up by a strong return) and powerful return that forces a 1/2 volley error.

Curren has to save 3 set points as he serves to take the set into another tiebreak. which he does with commanding play. But he's brushed aside in the breaker itself, crucially, missing a volley into a wide open court. Still, Becker's serve is untouchable and he reaches 6-0. Curren wins 3 points to make the scoreline look a bit more respectable, but he was never really in the tiebreak.

The 4th set is the most one sided. Curren plays poorly. To start with, he can only get first serve in 16/37. He loses 14/21 second serve points. And he seems to miss every makeable volley possible. He has 2 break points, both erased with unreturned serves (1 ace). His own service games never look secure, while Becker cruises along to well earned victory. Small consolation for Curren that he finished the match on an unbroken run of 17 first serve points won

Playing Dynamics - Serve & Return
Everything begins with Becker's advantage on the serve. Its more powerful, better placed and probably better disguised (Boris certainly seems to read the Curren serve better than Curren does his)

Becker's service motion isn't quite as elegant as it would become - the knee bend isn't quite as deep. Curren's by contrast is painful to look at. All elbows and knees, culminating in a propulsion of the arm that looks painful on the shoulder and one imagines, not difficult to read delivery.

Becker serves at an excellent 61%, Curren at a substandard 47%. But worse than that for the South African is the number of wasteful foot faults he gives up. I'd estimate 12-15 foot faults from Curren…. was this normal for him? He also has 10-15 first serve lets. Along with the ugly service motion, I confess, I was disappointed with Curren's serve

Becker has a 28-20 lead in aces/service winners but virtually equal unreturned serves (Becker 41%, Curren 40%). The latter is a bit deceptive; Becker made more 'good errors' (taking a good clean swing at the ball) than Curren, who was more often struggling to just get racquet on ball.

Stats are also suggesting Becker erred in his serving patterns. He's drawn 18 FH errors to 11 on the BH, despite serving 35% to the FH and 58% to the BH. Curren's FH does look like the lesser of his two groundstrokes (both in play and on return) but I'm not too familiar with his game. On the eye test level, I thought Curren served too much to Becker's FH.... he served more to the BH as the match wore on, but was near 50-50 for the first two sets, though it was clear Becker was getting more FH returns back in play and doing a lot more forcefully than off the BH (10 FH winners to 4 BH)

Becker's returning looks good by any standard and better than Curren's, though some of this is due to his having the better serve. Typically, Boris misses some returns going for big cuts, but when he makes it, it leaves Curren with work to do on the first volley (which he doesn't seem overly able to do). There are also a few dicey bounces and Becker misses a number of returns that seem to have not bounced as he'd anticipated. 1 Curren body serve goes right through him for an ace

Both players play around on the return. Its Curren who looks to move forward slowly on the return and as Becker makes his first volley. Becker imitates the move and once, intercepts a volley from just inside the court with a volley of his own for the winner. On important points, Becker takes to sweeping from side to side as Curren is about to serve. As the match wears on, Curren largely eschews fancy moves on the return

Volleying & Passing
Nothing extraordinary from either man, but again, Becker has the advantage in both areas and probably would do even without his edge in serving and returning

8 volleying UEs for Becker to 12 for Curren in the forecourt (Curren also has 1 non-net volley and 1 baseline OH error). They were about even for 3 sets, but Curren misses a bunch of makeable but not easy volleys (mostly marked 'unforced') in the final set. Neither player gives the impression that they could handle a series of low or/and powerfully hit passing shots and both look as likely as not to miss slightly difficult volleys (slightly low, hit slightly more powerfully than normal or requiring slight sideways movement). Both miss a few easy ones too

Note the forced groundstroke errors, which would all be passes. Becker has 12 FH and 7 BH, while Curren has 2 FH and 10 BH.... this is due to Becker predominantly volleying to Curren's BH (standards operating procedure) and Curren doing the opposite (unorthodox)

Not sure why Curren chose to target the Becker FH. One imagines he didn't know Becker's game too well, but would probably have studied it up a bit before the final. Both serving and volleying, he seems to have fancied Becker's FH.... was Becker particularly impressive with the BH at this Wimbledon? In general, dangerous as the Becker BH is, I would prefer targeting it.... and as that is the standard default big game strategy, one imagines Curren had what he thought was a good reason to deviate from this course. Didn't work too well

The forced volleying errors are telling you there wasn't much in it between the two passing. Curren was forced into 12 half-volley/volley errors, Becker 10.... with some of those coming from the return (and Becker returning more powerfully), we can say they were about even on the pass. Becker did look better on the pass because his better serve put him in stronger positions

A couple of other notes on Becker. His footwork is speedier than I've seen it in this match. And for the only time I've seen him, he's lightly grunting - even when he's volleying. He wasn't doing this a couple of weeks previously at the Queens Club final or a month or so afterwards in the Cincinnati final.
----

Summing up, difference between two big gamers on grass can be miniscule or even non-existent, but here Boris Becker is better in all areas - serve especially, but also return, volleying and at least equal on the pass. A well deserved win for the German

You find Becker's win over Johan Kriek at Queens here https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ort-becker-vs-kriek-queens-final-1985.609175/ and in Cincinnati over Mats Wilander here https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ker-vs-wilander-final-cincinnati-1985.608641/
Click to expand...
errr Curren's serve was v difficult to read, he hit the ball on the way up (like Tanner), that's exactly why he thrashed Mcenroe. His serve just wasnt firing as well in the final
 
NedStark said:
Given how both of them played terribly, IMO Becker would have beaten both, but with less lopsided scorelines.
Click to expand...
They played terribly against CURREN, who pretty much blew them away on serve. Maybe Becker would have won regardless, though I recall Tiriac saying he felt that if it was Mac or Connors, that would have been more challenging for Boris, psychologically, as they were giants of the game, past W winners, etc.
 
The biggest difference in the match is Becker overpowered Curren so much in the baseline rallies, hitting clean winners past him with ease when both were at the baseline. Add to that he served even bigger, and volleyed better, and it lead to an easy win that was easier than the scoreline suggested.
 
NedStark said:
Given how both of them played terribly, IMO Becker would have beaten both, but with less lopsided scorelines.
Click to expand...

Yes Curren didn't play great in the final, but it is laughable to Connors or McEnroe had a shot against Becker at this particular Wimbledon, given how well Becker was playing, especialy in the final, and how old and tired looking McEnroe and Connors both played at this Wimbledon. McEnroe did rebound to play a much better US Open than he did at this Wimbledon, and even there in much better form than his average at best (for him) Wimbledon form he lost in straight sets to Lendl. I know Becker didn't do great there but at this point in his career he was clearly a grass/carpet specialist only and irrelevant.
 
martinezownsclay said:
The biggest difference in the match is Becker overpowered Curren so much in the baseline rallies, hitting clean winners past him with ease when both were at the baseline. Add to that he served even bigger, and volleyed better, and it lead to an easy win that was easier than the scoreline suggested.
Click to expand...
so much of Curren's game was around his serving....when the serve was clicking, he could do no wrong. Don't get me wrong, he was competitive in the final, it just wasnt at the same level as earlier.
 
pierceforehands said:
Yes Curren didn't play great in the final, but it is laughable to Connors or McEnroe had a shot against Becker at this particular Wimbledon, given how well Becker was playing, especialy in the final, and how old and tired looking McEnroe and Connors both played at this Wimbledon. McEnroe did rebound to play a much better US Open than he did at this Wimbledon, and even there in much better form than his average at best (for him) Wimbledon form he lost in straight sets to Lendl. I know Becker didn't do great there but at this point in his career he was clearly a grass/carpet specialist only and irrelevant.
Click to expand...
That's hindsight exaggeration at work. They were both playing reasonably well....you can go look at their matches. I don't think they looked old or tired at all....Curren just smoked them. I do recall Connors having an injury (back?) at Queens the week before, but he had looked OK in his earlier matches. I just thought Curren took the racket out of their hands. They didn't get much of a way into the match....as someone else said, Curren was killing it on the returns as well. No way of knowing what would've been in Becker's head if it was one of them he met in the final. Even in the semis, Connor said he was a bit off because he was EXPECTING Mac there instead of Curren. So much of it is a mental game at those levels. I do think Mac or Jimmy would have played better than Curren did, but no way of knowing. Kriek should have gotten an award for predicting Boris's win in advance!!
 
McEnroe was spooked by Curren and Becker at 1985 Wimbledon, i.e. the way that they were serving. It was a brief glimpse into the upcoming future. Normality seemed to be restored in the 1985 North American hardcourt season, for a time, with the McEnroe and Lendl matches.

I thought Curren's best match was his 1985 Wimbledon semi final win over Connors. It was a real beatdown, 6-2, 6-2, 6-1. It both complimented and contrasted with Curren's win over reigning champion and tournament favourite Connors at 1983 Wimbledon, in 4 sets (6-3, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6). Curren was still using a wooden racquet in 1983.
 
Mustard said:
McEnroe was spooked by Curren and Becker at 1985 Wimbledon, i.e. the way that they were serving. It was a brief glimpse into the upcoming future. Normality seemed to be restored in the 1985 North American hardcourt season, for a time, with the McEnroe and Lendl matches.

I thought Curren's best match was his 1985 Wimbledon semi final win over Connors. It was a real beatdown, 6-2, 6-2, 6-1. It both complimented and contrasted with Curren's win over reigning champion and tournament favourite Connors at 1983 Wimbledon, in 4 sets (6-3, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6). Curren was still using a wooden racquet in 1983.
Click to expand...
when he was on, it was damn near impossible. But he wasn't "on" all the often. Getting 2 wins like that over Connors at W was quite remarkable...after all his name is not Bjorn or John
 
Mustard said:
...Curren's win over reigning champion and tournament favourite Connors at 1983 Wimbledon, in 4 sets (6-3, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6). Curren was still using a wooden racquet in 1983.
Click to expand...

Surprised to hear this
I have it on mutliple authorities tha the had 33 aces in that match
Don't know of any other wooden racquet match that's in the same ball-park of aces as that. And Connors isn't the easiest guy to ace either
 
Ive also read that, he was an ace dispenser (monster tally for those days even if he'd had graphite; dont recall that being beaten in 4 sets till Goran's 36 vs Pete at W92). Goran rained down 16 in the 1st set of the 94 final, could have been a very different match if he'd snagged one of those tie-breaks. + Goran beat Curren at W90. Curren got to semi as Queens in 82 and 83 as well (lost to Jimbo + JMac respectively), fair to say he was in the top of echelon of grass players from 83-85 till Edberg came along + Lendl started making W finals
 
Last edited:
martinezownsclay said:
The biggest difference in the match is Becker overpowered Curren so much in the baseline rallies, hitting clean winners past him with ease when both were at the baseline. Add to that he served even bigger, and volleyed better, and it lead to an easy win that was easier than the scoreline suggested.
Click to expand...
I don't know that I'd say it was easier than the scoreline suggested. Just reading the scoreline, I wouldn't realize that Curren was up a break at 4-3 in the third set and also had 2 break points in the fourth set.
 
Waspsting said:
Surprised to hear this
I have it on mutliple authorities tha the had 33 aces in that match
Don't know of any other wooden racquet match that's in the same ball-park of aces as that. And Connors isn't the easiest guy to ace either
Click to expand...
he could work some magic with that little wooden frame...I think he was also hitting 2 handed on both wings then....his toss was shorter and he hit it quickly, so very hard to read..
 
buscemi said:
I don't know that I'd say it was easier than the scoreline suggested. Just reading the scoreline, I wouldn't realize that Curren was up a break at 4-3 in the third set and also had 2 break points in the fourth set.
Click to expand...
he had his chances, no question. I was frustrated watching it...thinking where did the giant killer go? this "kid" is pushing him around!
 
GuyForget said:
Ive also read that, he was an ace dispenser (monster tally for those days even if he'd had graphite; dont recall that being beaten in 4 sets till Goran's 36 vs Pete at W92). Goran rained down 16 in the 1st set of the 94 final, could have been a very different match if he'd snagged one of those tie-breaks. + Goran beat Curren at W90. Curren got to semi as Queens in 82 and 83 as well (lost to Jimbo + JMac respectively), fair to say he was in the top of echelon of grass players from 83-85 till Edberg came along + Lendl started making W finals
Click to expand...
He alos got to an AO final on grass and blew that (vs. Wilander)
 
buscemi said:
I don't know that I'd say it was easier than the scoreline suggested. Just reading the scoreline, I wouldn't realize that Curren was up a break at 4-3 in the third set and also had 2 break points in the fourth set.
Click to expand...

The stats are super heavily in Becker's favor though, every single stat.
 
martinezownsclay said:
The stats are super heavily in Becker's favor though, every single stat.
Click to expand...
Becker did dominate early. As Curren said after the match, and Becker often repeated later on, you would expect a 17-year-old boy in a Wimbledon final to start really nervous. Instead, it was Curren who started nervous, while Becker went 3-0 up in the first set and it seemed to set the tone for the match, even though Curren did rally by winning the second set and going 4-3 up with a break of serve in the third set. Just when it looked like Curren was getting the edge, the question was posed to Becker "Can you respond?" and Becker did, broke back, won the third set, and then delivered in the fourth set to win the title.
 
Mustard said:
Becker did dominate early. As Curren said after the match, and Becker often repeated later on, you would expect a 17-year-old boy in a Wimbledon final to start really nervous. Instead, it was Curren who started nervous, while Becker went 3-0 up in the first set and it seemed to set the tone for the match, even though Curren did rally by winning the second set and going 4-3 up with a break of serve in the third set. Just when it looked like Curren was getting the edge, the question was posed to Becker "Can you respond?" and Becker did, broke back, won the third set, and then delivered in the fourth set to win the title.
Click to expand...
i never understood why a very young should be more nervous in a slam final than a experienced player who already played in a slam final. and even if you are nervous, you can still play your best.

even mcenroe talks this nonsense all the time, like in the last serena williams finals, which she all lost. i remember how he was sure that osaka would be sooooo nervous in her first slam final, and then she crushed williams in the first set.

there are so many examples where a young player plays his best tennis in his first slam final from the start, and the much more experienced player has a bad start.

experience is the most overrated thing in tennis.
 
Mustard said:
Really?
Click to expand...
yes, really.

becker wim 85
chang fo 89
sampras uso 1990
sharapova wim 2004
safin uso 2000
hewitt uso 2001
federer wim 2003
roddick uso 2003

and these are only a few examples where mcenroe and many others would say : oh the young player is nervous, he will have problems with the situation, the other guy has soooo much more experience bla bla bla.

there is no connection between level of play and if you are young, experienced, first slam final or 20th slam final.
 
JasonZ said:
yes, really.

becker wim 85
chang fo 89
sampras uso 1990
sharapova wim 2004
safin uso 2000
hewitt uso 2001
federer wim 2003
roddick uso 2003

and these are only a few examples where mcenroe and many others would say : oh the young player is nervous, he will have problems with the situation, the other guy has soooo much more experience bla bla bla.

there is no connection between level of play and if you are young, experienced, first slam final or 20th slam final.
Click to expand...
Plus Wilander fo 1982.
 
JasonZ said:
yes, really.

becker wim 85
chang fo 89
sampras uso 1990
sharapova wim 2004
safin uso 2000
hewitt uso 2001
federer wim 2003
roddick uso 2003
Click to expand...
Anything after 1985 doesn't count when talking about 1985 Wimbledon and the comments regarding a 17-year-old. Something called hindsight.
 
A younger, newer player has nothing to lose....can swing for the fences...someone experienced, who is expected to win, might be tighter. Curren was likely more nervous than Boris, was my take on it.
 
martinezownsclay said:
The biggest difference in the match is Becker overpowered Curren so much in the baseline rallies, hitting clean winners past him with ease when both were at the baseline. Add to that he served even bigger, and volleyed better, and it lead to an easy win that was easier than the scoreline suggested.
Click to expand...
Baseline rallies? How many baseline rallies could there have been in that match?
 
buscemi said:
Plus Wilander fo 1982.
Click to expand...
Who lost the first set, 1-6. Not a good start, therefore. Wilander won the 1982 French Open final against Vilas by playing the very long game. Wasn't that final something like 4 hours and 47 minutes, for a 1-6, 7-6, 6-0, 6-4 scoreline? That's even crazier than the Wilander vs. Lendl 1987 US Open final that also took 4 hours and 47 minutes for Lendl to win 6-7, 6-0, 7-6, 6-4.
 
It was asking an awful lot to expect Curren to play as well against Becker in the final as he had against Mcenroe and Connors. He was just off the charts in those two matches. He did not play bad against Becker, he just came down to earth. He was competitive, just not nearly as good as he was the two previous matches.

It is a great question to what would have happened if it was Connors or Mcenroe playing Becker in the final. Probably would have gone down to the wire.
 
Last edited:
jrepac said:
A younger, newer player has nothing to lose....can swing for the fences...someone experienced, who is expected to win, might be tighter. Curren was likely more nervous than Boris, was my take on it.
Click to expand...
a younger player has the same to lose as the experienced player. there is no connection between experience and performance.
 
Mustard said:
Anything after 1985 doesn't count when talking about 1985 Wimbledon and the comments regarding a 17-year-old. Something called hindsight.
Click to expand...

Chris Evert always repeated in her commentary "very few players win their first slam final". Which is factually very untrue of course, she simply said it since it gave her an excuse to bring up the 73 French Open final she loves to claim she gave away by choking. A. Since like a lot of the tennis community she heavily dislikes Court and wants to detort from her win, and B. It makes her look better, and she is annoyed she lost that match after serving for it in the 2nd set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Match Stats/Report - Becker vs Edberg, Stockholm final, 1991
Replies
9
Views
2K
Waspsting
W
W
Match Stats/Report - Curren vs Connors, Wimbledon semi-final, 1985
Replies
34
Views
768
NedStark
N
W
Match Stats/Report - Becker vs Nystrom, Wimbledon third round, 1985
Replies
4
Views
717
Waspsting
W
W
Match Stats/Report - Wilander vs Curren, Australian Open final, 1984
Replies
2
Views
1K
jrepac
J
W
Match Stats/Report - Becker vs Kriek, Queens final 1985
Replies
10
Views
2K
Mainad
Mainad
Back
Top