Match Stats/Report - Borg vs Connors, Boca Raton final, 1979

[Waspsting]

Bjorn Borg beat Jimmy Connors 6-2, 6-3 in the Boca Raton final, 1979 on green clay

This was the third successive year with this final and result. Borg would win the title the follow year also. Borg won $150,000 for the result, Connors half that. John McEnroe (who had lost to Connors in the semi) took third place by beating Guillermo Vilas (who had lost to Borg in the semis)

Borg won 71 points, Connors 58

(Note: Footage breaks off with score on 40-30, and resumes in the middle of another point, won by the the server to end the game
Its been assumed that incomplete point is the only one. Incomplete point has been deduced to have been a first serve, with only serve direction and return data unknown

Partial missing point - Set 2, Game 4, Point 6)

Serve Stats
Borg...
- 1st serve percentage (48/67) 72%
- 1st serve points won (27/48) 56%
- 2nd serve points won (13/19) 68%
- Aces 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (15/67) 22%

Connors...
- 1st serve percentage (48/62) 77%
- 1st serve points won (27/48) 56%
- 2nd serve points won (4/14) 29%
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (6/62) 10%

Serve Patterns
Borg served...
- to FH 33%
- to BH 59%
- to Body 8%

Connors served...
- to FH 31%
- to BH 69%

Return Stats
Borg made...
- 55 (24 FH, 31 BH), including 8 runaround FHs
- 6 Errors, comprising...
- 2 Unforced (2 FH)
- 4 Forced (1 FH, 3 BH)
- Return Rate (55/61) 90%

Connors made...
- 52 (22 FH, 29 BH, 1 ??), including 3 runaround FHs
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 11 Unforced (8 FH, 3 BH), including 3 runaround FHs
- 3 Forced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- Return Rate (52/67) 78%

Break Points
Borg 5/9 (6 games)
Connors 1/6 (3 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Borg 20 (13 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 2 BHV)
Connors 26 (5 FH, 6 BH, 5 FHV, 7 BHV, 3 OH)

Borg had 16 passes (13 FH, 3 BH)
- FHs - 4 cc, 6 dtl, 1 inside-out and 2 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net
- BHs - 1 cc and 2 dtl

- non-pass BH - 1 dtl at net

Connors' FHs - 2 cc, 1 inside-out, 1 inside-out/dtl and 1 drop shot
- BHs - 2 cc, 1 inside-out and 3 drop shots

- 1 from a serve-volley point, a first volley BHV

- 1 other FHV can reasonably be called an OH

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Borg 26
- 8 Unforced (6 FH, 2 BH)
- 18 Forced (8 FH, 10 BH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 41.3

Connors 35
- 34 Unforced (11 FH, 17 BH, 4 BHV, 2 OH)... with 1 swinging BHV
- 1 Forced (1 FH1/2V)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 45.9

(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 are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)

Net Points & Serve-Volley
Borg was 7/8 (88%) at net, with...
- 1/1 forced back

Connors was...
- 31/56 (55%) at net, including...
- 1/3 (33%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves

Match Report
Borg’s at his best and has ready answers for anything Connors can throw at him in a fun, bright though one sided match

Borg misses nothing on the return. Jimbo’s not so good and misses a fair bit
Return rates - Borg 90%, Jimbo 78%. 11/14 Jimbo return errors have been marked UEs (Borg 2/6)

They rally from the back. Rallies are dual winged and Jimbo hits hard, changes directions and generally tries to overpower. Borg is a sliding brick wall that misses nothing
Ground UEs - Borg 8, Jimbo 28

Jimbo comes to net. Borg passes him as often as not
Jimbo wins 55% net points. Borg has 16 passing winners (not counting to net-to-net volleys), Jimbo 15 volleying ones

Basic stats have come out nicely, with identical 27/48 first serve points won. That being so, Jimbo potentially has advantage, as his in-count is better (77% to 72%)

2nd serve points won- Borg 68%, Jimbo 29%. So much for a potential advantage

Gist of what that’s saying is serve strength is irrelevant. Court game is the playing field, and Borg’s well ahead in it

Serve & Return
Borg not doing much with the serve. Rarely, he throws out a big one, occasionally, a hefty one in Jimbo’s swing zone which isn’t tough to return on clay. Mostly, he contents himself with just starting the rally with his first serve (and always with the second)

Jimbo hits returns firmly. Not enough to do much damage, but enough to keep Borg from getting ideas of taking charge of the point (not that there’s any sign that Borg has any intention of doing that - or needs to). But he misses a bit too much

14 return errors from Jimbo - and 11 of them are unforced (6 first serves, 5 seconds). The firsts are routine returns, the seconds routine + slower. 3 of the UEs are runaround FHs

Pretty good serving from Jimbo, who gets balls out wide more so than is his habit. Nowhere near enough to trouble Borg, of course. The usual 90% return rate from Borg, but 4/6 errors have been marked FEs

Gist - Unreturned rates - Borg 22%, Jimbo 10%

Play - Baseline & Net
The norm for baseline rallies in a Borg-Connors match is -
- Jimbo taking the lead, Borg counter-punching
- Jimbo hitting harder, and changing directions
- Staple rally being Jimbo FH to Borg BH

Here, there’s no staple - and rallies are dual winged, switching about evenly between diagonals. More Jimbo BH to Borg FH than other way around, but essentially, even

Jimbo does hit harder, takes balls earlier and changes direction. He’s hard hitting enough to potentially be difficult to handle

If Borg finds it difficult, he hides it very well. Barely misses a ball, so its left for Jimbo to do so. On the run, on the move, dealing with slightly wide balls, whatever… Borg misses next to nothing

Ground UEs - Borg 8, Jimbo 28

Jimbo’s BH gets the worst of it with match high 17 UEs, while 6/8 of Borg’s are FHs.

Neutral UEs read Borg 7, Jimbo 20

Borg’s consistency advantage is self-evident from numbers. What isn’t is his shot tolerance. Plenty of room for him to have errors beaten or pressured out of him that - Jimbo is hard hitting and often goes slightly wide. Virtually no such errors come out of him though

Baseline rallies aren’t particularly long, but there’s enough force behind average shot to be pressuring. Much more credit to Borg for his wall-showing than discredit to Jimbo for looseness

Only way Jimbo seems to be able to win a baseline rally is by hitting a winner. He hits 11 (including 4 drop shots), which is a huge number on this surface and in this period over such a short match. It’s a lot less than his 28 ground UEs though. And despite the large number of winners, he still can’t force an error from the back.

Borg has 0 baseline-to-baseline winner

 

[Waspsting]

With hitting and court positioning advantage, that leaves Jimbo the alternative of attacking net. Which he does aplenty, particularly in the second set

Jimbo’s at net 56 times (Borg 8, about half of them forced). He comes in behind strongly hit and/or wide shots. Very few approach errors. Again, potentially problematic for Borg

Doesn’t prove to be much of one, as Borg passes him as often as not

Borg with 16 passing winners (not counting 2 net-to-net volleys), Jimbo with 15 volleying ones. Jimbo’s kept to winning 55% net points, which is considerably better than he’s doing rallying from back, but less than a net charger would like or expect it to be

Borg passes marvellously. He doesn’t need a “good look” on the pass. Anything shy of a hopeless look is as likely as not to be struck wide for a winner. First class stuff from Borg on the pass

The volley vs pass battle centers on wide passes, not low. Jimbo putsaway volleys above net, often having to move quickly sideways to reach them or gets passed. Very little low volleying to be seen

6 forecourt UEs for Jimbo. Not bad for so many approaches. Almost all of Borg’s 18 FEs would be passing errors

Very unusually, Jimbo has just 1 FE, a FH1/2V on a rare serve-volley point. Indicative of action being completely on his racquet… Borg keeps ball in play from the back, and passes as forced to do

Action changes across match. In first set, baseline rallies make up the bulk of action, with Jimbo coming in fair amount. Baseline rallies end with Jimbo making errors and at net, Jimbo wins 57%

In second set, Jimbo’s at net constantly. His success rate though doesn’t change and he wins 55%. Better than rallying from the back - hence, the improvement in scoreline from winning 2 games to winning 3. Minority, but significant lot of baseline rallies continue to go overwhelmingly to Borg and for the same reasons as earlier

Jimbo’s approaches by set
- 1st - 14 in 57 points
- 2nd - 42 in 72 points

Match Progression
Great start to the match. Borg putsaway an angled BHV winner and Connors responds with 2 FH winners (cc and inside-out) in the first 3 points. Jimbo holds the game

Borg’s in trouble the game after and has to save 3 break points in a 14 point game of hard hitting baseline play. Jimbo opens the game with another baseline winner, this time BH cc before pressuring Borg with other hard hit shots

Jimbo makes baseline errors on all 3 break points he has. Wins both points he comes to net for by drawing passing errors. And loses the game when he misses consecutive runaround FH returns to second serves

Borg breaks next game - starting the game with FH dtl pass winner and ending it with a return to the serve-volleying Jimbo’s feet, forcing a FH1/2V error. It’s the only FE Jimbo has all match

Borg still doesn’t have it easy and has to save break point to consolidate, this time in a 12 point game. Jimbo falters on the chance, missing a BHV for the winner after pushing Boris away from net, and Borg goes on to hold, with Jimbo’s BH blinking on last two points

Jimbo holds to love, including with 2 drop shot winners. Borg makes no effort to chase them. Later, Ground errors get Jimbo broken again to go down 2-5, before Borg serves it out. Again, not an easy serve out, with Jimbo having 15-30 on back of 2 winners ( FH cc and BH cc), but Borg doesn’t lose a point after, wrapping up a BH dtl pass winner

Good set of tennis. 6-2 looks - and is - comfortable, but Jimbo getting into return games too. Borg serves 37 points for his 4 holds

Jimbo attacks net much more readily in second set. Good move, the baseline rallies weren’t going well for him, with his BH faltering. He’s at net at least 3 times in every game of the set. In all, comes in 42/72 points (including double faults and return errors) or 58% of all points - all but twice rallying there

The main battle front becomes Borg pass vs Jimbo volley - and Borg passing is top notch. Jimbo usually comes in behind well hits shots, often wide. Unless the approach shot leaves a completely hopeless ball, Borg’s on it

It comes as a surprise when Borg doesn’t put a pass in play. More often, he hits it for a winner. When he doesn’t, its still a wide pass that Jimbo has to move sideways to cut off (though at good height for putting away). Throws up a few no-choice-but-to lobs too

Some great shots come out of it all. Borg breaks to open, finishing with 3 winners. First two are passes and on break point, he runs down a drop shot and pokes it back into play. Jimbo at net smacks a full bloodied BH cc, that Borg’s anticipated/guessed right about, and reflex FHV winners it away. Several games later, they play a very similar point, only this time, Jimbo goes BH dtl and Borg BHVs it

Great running-down-net-chord-dribbler at net winner by Borg to move to 2-0 and he breaks again soon after for a 4-1 lead. Jimbo’s at net 8/12 points in that break. He’s got 4 volley winners, Borg has 3 passes (including to seal the break), and Jimbo makes 2 not-easy forecourt UEs

Jimbo wins next 2 games. Breaks by winning 3/3 net points, including 1 where he defensively BHOHs ball, before going onto strike BHV winner. Tehn holds a 10 point game, saving a break point with a serve-volleying, first winner

That’s the last game he wins, though the last 2 games are tough. Borg holds 12 point game, 7 of which Jimbo’s at net for

And Borg breaks in a 10 point game to bring match to its end, finishing with 3 winners in a row (BH dtl at net against a poor drop shot and 2 FH passes - cc and inside-out)

Summing up, superlative showing from Borg - returning everything, barely missing a ball, resisting power and wide hits, passing fantastically against all but the impossible ball

Smart match from Connors, who tries his hand at outhitting Borg from the back, with highlights reel enriching success amidst general failure. In light of that failure, takes to all out net rushing - very consistent on the approach, but still strong of shot. He’s kept from doing too well up there by aforementioned fantastic passing

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Borg has 0 baseline-to-baseline winner

It is interesting that Borg, as great baselines as he was, almost never hit a baseline-to-baseline winner. I remember he hit a couple in the USO final against Mac in 1980 and 1981 (mostly from the middle of the court though). On clay I only ever saw him hitting one, a return winner against Orantes in the 1974 FO final. One may say that it wasn’t really common back in the day, but as we see in this match here, Connors hit 11, Lendl hit multiple in the FO 81 etc. so even compared to peers that wasn’t Borg’s forte.

 

[WCT]

I am shocked at those 1st set vs 2nd set net stats for Connors. I don't do stats by set, but I can't believe it didn't stand out to me. I did stats for this match years ago, but just net and unreturned sets. I would also always count approach shot winners and errors.

Early on, I never counted the points, just the games. So stupid because that gives you context. I did stats again, maybe 5 or 6 years ago, to get the points and then also counted winners and unforced errors. I've never done forced errors. I didn't redo the net and other stats I had done before.

I don't think my copy was missing a point yet you still have 1 more point. I had 70-58. The same unreturned serves. Unforced errors 40-6. That's so subjective. Connors I had with 27 winners, another fhv. Net 31 of 56 and 4 of 4.

Borg may not have been serving that hard, but he had 9 more points that ended without the serve being put in play. Besides that it's only a few points difference between them. I don't see this as the beatdown that 79 Wimbledon was. A bunch of close games, especially in the 2nd.

Borg just plays him so differently than at the 78 US Open and Wimbledon. He is not going for much off the ground strokes. I'd say brick wall is a perfect description. This match is a perfect example of puncher Connors vs counterpuncher Borg. Look at the commentary when they are warming up, They are not the same player. The styles are very contrasting. In this match, definitely.

Up to this point, this was the best I ever saw him pass Connors. He had a lot of passes in 77 Pepsi in a lot longer match. And he just didn't miss. There were some approaches that were just not good enough, a whole lot were pretty damn good, though. I am still dumbstruck by that net difference in the 2 sets. I just can't believe I didn't notice that. He didn't exactly avoid it in the 1st set. 25% on a clay court isn't low.

I normally don't like posting links because I don't want to get pages taken down. However, this one is years old. I waited 30 years to see this interview again. I first got this match in 99 or 2000, I think. The entire match was there, no interview. Maybe 2009 is when Tennis Channel showed it with the interview.

This interview is how Tony Trabert viewed how Jimmy Connors played tennis. OF COURSE he is going to come in a lot on the short ball. The same Tony Trabert who, in the US Open Mcenroe match when John Newcombe asks, Tony, do you think Jimmy should come in more, replied, well it's really not his game. Watching it live I was saying, you sure as hell used to think it was his game.

The matches are all up, The 76 US Open, at least 2 of the Pepsi matches. The 77 Masters. Does Trabert say this will be a baseline duel between 2 guys who don't come in much? You bet your ass he doesn't.

Cliff Drysdale did the same thing. At ESPN, Connors was aggressive, but aggressive from the baseline. That wasn't what he said when he started out doing matches for those WCT special events that were shown as edited matches in syndication. I have one vs Nastase in early 79. He sure as hell isn't saying it in that match.

I got them both on New York sports radio in the mid 80s. 85-88ish. Got them separately and asked, not why did you change your tune, but why weren't you pointing out that this guy didn't play the same. I didn't disagree with their opinion in that moment, just acknowledge the difference. They both conceded that I was right. And this was long before I got any old matches, but I knew I was right. Getting them just confirmed it.

Connors is, IMO, grudging is his praise of Borg's play. I'll never forget this. In the next day's papers I saw Borg quoted as saying, Jimmy has one weakness, he can't say the other guy played well. Probably in the press conference after the match. Noone is going to convince that wasn't related to this on court interview. As opposed to the Orantes US Open match or even his interview, talking about Tanner, after their 1976 Wembley match. Here is the link.

 

[KG1965]

Return Stats
Borg made...
- 55 (24 FH, 31 BH), including 8 runaround FHs
- 6 Errors, comprising...
- 2 Unforced (2 FH)
- 4 Forced (1 FH, 3 BH)
- Return Rate (55/61) 90%

Connors made...
- 52 (22 FH, 29 BH, 1 ??), including 3 runaround FHs
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 11 Unforced (8 FH, 3 BH), including 3 runaround FHs
- 3 Forced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- Return Rate (52/67) 78%

The match has a very clear result, it seems there was no real match.
On closer inspection, Borg scores 13 more points, which are not few but not many either.

Bjorn makes an ace and no double faults unlike Jimbo: no aces and a double fault.

It seems that in this match finally the serve doesn't count for much.

And instead there are the errors in return: 6-14.

Basically Borg wins 10 points with serve/return and the difference is 13 points.

This match was also addressed by the serve.

 

[KG1965]

Taking not only inspiration but also from your inherent data 13 matches (Boca Raton 79, Masters GP 1977, Suntory Cup 83, Wimbly 1977, Wimbly 81, Wimbly 79, USO 76, USO 78, Wimbly 78, Masters GP 79, Boca Raton 77, USO 81 and Richmond 82.... in 8 Borg won, in 5 Jimbo won) between the two players the result very tight is this:
1407 points Borg
1276 points Connors
------------------------
+ 131 points Borg

"Only serves and returns (aces, winners and errors)": - 201 Jimbo, - 39 Bjorn = 162 points of advantage for Borg .

If it follows that purifying from the total by the data "Only serves and returns" it results that Connors has made 1237 points v 1206 of Borg (31 points of advantage for Connors).

I looked at the previous data and found some inaccuracies and corrected them.
I think it is interesting to note that having all this waspsting data available over 13 h2h it turns out that Borg averaged 10.08 points more each match overall, thanks to his serve/return (+12.6) while Connors is better in other shots (+2.38 each match)

 

[KG1965]

Return Stats
Borg made...
- 55 (24 FH, 31 BH), including 8 runaround FHs
- 6 Errors, comprising...
- 2 Unforced (2 FH)
- 4 Forced (1 FH, 3 BH)
- Return Rate (55/61) 90%

Connors made...
- 52 (22 FH, 29 BH, 1 ??), including 3 runaround FHs
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 11 Unforced (8 FH, 3 BH), including 3 runaround FHs
- 3 Forced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- Return Rate (52/67) 78%

Connors continues to have problems with Bjorn's serve.
In this match he makes 14 mistakes which seem few but in just two sets they are many.

IMO there are some keys in the improvement of Borg's performance against Jimbo gradually since 1977 but significantly in the year 1979.
The main one is Jimbo's poor bh return (the opposite of what all think).
Connors had a great return especially on fh (not bh as everyone has written) but also on bh but not on very violent serves on his bh.
Bjorn understands this and has been shooting at him since 1977.

 

[Waspsting]

Connors is, IMO, grudging is his praise of Borg's play. I'll never forget this.

Before I watched the '79 Wimby semi, I remember reading what Connors had to say after the match. Paraphrasing -

"He has no variation, he plays the same way all the time. He served pretty well but he wasn't overpowering me in any way"

Now, given the scoreline, that sounds like a very sour (and dumb assessment). Here's the really funny thing

he's not wrong
I think he's focusing on all the wrong things, missing the forest for the trees, but he hasn't said anything that isn't true there

The main one is Jimbo's poor bh return (the opposite of what all think).
Connors had a great return especially on fh (not bh as everyone has written) but also on bh but not on very violent serves on his bh.
Bjorn understands this and has been shooting at him since 1977.

Do you think relative strength of his returns changed over the years? Or did the FH always stay stronger?

Borg certainly targetted BH return, but when his time came, Lendl did the opposite - both with a lot of success

Of the two, Lendl strikes me as the more calculating, thinker and more likely to be doing what he's doing for a very good reason. Borg more likely to follow standard-operating-procedure as default (as serving to the BH is)

 

[jrepac]

Before I watched the '79 Wimby semi, I remember reading what Connors had to say after the match. Paraphrasing -

"He has no variation, he plays the same way all the time. He served pretty well but he wasn't overpowering me in any way"

Now, given the scoreline, that sounds like a very sour (and dumb assessment). Here's the really funny thing

he's not wrong
I think he's focusing on all the wrong things, missing the forest for the trees, but he hasn't said anything that isn't true there



Do you think relative strength of his returns changed over the years? Or did the FH always stay stronger?

Borg certainly targetted BH return, but when his time came, Lendl did the opposite - both with a lot of success

Of the two, Lendl strikes me as the more calculating, thinker and more likely to be doing what he's doing for a very good reason. Borg more likely to follow standard-operating-procedure as default (as serving to the BH is)

Well, Connors said stuff like that. True, but stupid too (like Lendl "bunting" the ball).
I would love to see some sort of aggregated stats on his forehand vs. backhand returns.
I do recall some of his most impressive returns were off the forehand side.
The backhand was probably most dangerous if you came to net and gave him a target.
He could do almost anything with it.

 

[WCT]

Before I watched the '79 Wimby semi, I remember reading what Connors had to say after the match. Paraphrasing -

"He has no variation, he plays the same way all the time. He served pretty well but he wasn't overpowering me in any way"

Now, given the scoreline, that sounds like a very sour (and dumb assessment). Here's the really funny thing

he's not wrong
I think he's focusing on all the wrong things, missing the forest for the trees, but he hasn't said anything that isn't true there



Do you think relative strength of his returns changed over the years? Or did the FH always stay stronger?

Borg certainly targetted BH return, but when his time came, Lendl did the opposite - both with a lot of success

Of the two, Lendl strikes me as the more calculating, thinker and more likely to be doing what he's doing for a very good reason. Borg more likely to follow standard-operating-procedure as default (as serving to the BH is)

Difference with Wimbledon is those quotes aren't with Borg standing right next to him. Later on, he is just not a gracious loser, period. But he was against both Newcombe and Orantes in 1975. He was also far less abusive to umpires and linesmen early on.

It's going to take a pretty large sample size to convince me that Connors' FH return is clearly better than his BH. I've said for years that the difference in quality of hi FH vs BH service return is pretty clearly less than his regular BH vs FH.

Borg certainly did not start beating Connors regularly by not giving him pace. He had been slicing a pretty good amount of backhands. Not like Lendl where it was pretty much every backhand. By around 78 he stopped doing that. No slices except on the approach and if he was really stretched out with no choice.

 

[jrepac]

It's going to take a pretty large sample size to convince me that Connors' FH return is clearly better than his BH. I've said for years that the difference in quality of hi FH vs BH service return is pretty clearly less than his regular BH vs FH.

Borg certainly did not start beating Connors regularly by not giving him pace. He had been slicing a pretty good amount of backhands. Not like Lendl where it was pretty much every backhand. By around 78 he stopped doing that. No slices except on the approach and if he was really stretched out with no choice.

I tend to agree w/you on the BH return, but wonder if data supports that? Yeah, Borg did not do the 'rope a dope' thing ala Lendl. I always assumed Roche got Ivan to modify his strategy against JC, but that's a guess at best.

 

[WCT]

I tend to agree w/you on the BH return, but wonder if data supports that? Yeah, Borg did not do the 'rope a dope' thing ala Lendl. I always assumed Roche got Ivan to modify his strategy against JC, but that's a guess at best.

I tend to doubt that since he was slicing quite a bit against him before Roche began coaching him.

 

[KG1965]

Do you think relative strength of his returns changed over the years? Or did the FH always stay stronger?

Borg certainly targetted BH return, but when his time came, Lendl did the opposite - both with a lot of success

Of the two, Lendl strikes me as the more calculating, thinker and more likely to be doing what he's doing for a very good reason. Borg more likely to follow standard-operating-procedure as default (as serving to the BH is)

It's hard for me to answer your question about Jimbo's return.
Connors game evolves over the years sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.
There are few videos up to 1975 but, for example, the serve worsens considerably in mid-1975 (I never understood the reason, it certainly lowers the speed of execution a lot and also the position of the feets in the serve from the right, try to notice it) , the groundstrokes improve instead (he makes fewer mistakes) in 1976 (- Wimbly 77?) but the bh is less violent.
In my opinion, the return does not evolve instead.
The return is clearly the best of all the players of that period but in bh struggles on very powerful serves (a two-handed problem).

The strategic device of entering more field than Borg since 1978 is very good.

Apart from the serve, Jimbo's problems are two: he is no longer able to be aggressive towards the net (I think it is very tiring to do it like up to 1977) and the fh which over time becomes very solid suddenly loses its regularity in 1979 (when the two face each other many times).

Lendl's strategy seems good but in my opinion it's because Jimbo can't push as much as before at a certain point in his career.
The strategy of waiting on fast courts never did well for Jimbo's opponents until 1984 (succeeded Orantes a couple of times in his career but on clay)

 

[jrepac]

I tend to doubt that since he was slicing quite a bit against him before Roche began coaching him.

I was looking for when he teamed up w/Roche and Wiki had it as 1985. That was the start of his huge run of wins vs. Jimmy. And, he surely was hitting a lot of backhand slice...seemed like a ton. Whereas earlier, maybe less of it?

 

[jrepac]

Lendl's strategy seems good but in my opinion it's because Jimbo can't push as much as before at a certain point in his career.
The strategy of waiting on fast courts never did well for Jimbo's opponents until 1984 (succeeded Orantes a couple of times in his career but on clay)

There's some truth that...Lendl said Jimmy couldn't push him around as much, but this was when Lendl was peak and Connors was 35 going on 40.
But, earlier matches, let's say USO finals for instance...those were hammer and tongs kind of things. Particularly in '82, where I felt Lendl was trying to go through/out hit Jimmy and it really was not working for him. '83 perhaps was more of a hodgepodge of things going on....a sordid stew! '84 Forest Hills was Lendl waiting and Connor stinking up the joint. But, in the last 2 wins Jimmy had over him in '84, seemed to me that Connors was a bit more consistent off the ground and attacking Ivan on any short-ish balls.

 

[WCT]

I was looking for when he teamed up w/Roche and Wiki had it as 1985. That was the start of his huge run of wins vs. Jimmy. And, he surely was hitting a lot of backhand slice...seemed like a ton. Whereas earlier, maybe less of it?

Check out the 83 Masters match. I mean the one played in January of 84. Lendl is hitting a lot of bh slices in that match. Certainly not all, but I'd say definitely more than half. Unless he knows Connors is coming in. A lot of Connors' approaches are sneaks where he catches Lendl slicing.

Now, later on at times it seemed like the slice bh was all he hit. This match isn't that, but it's enough to make me believe that it wasn't Roche's original idea to employ. The dramatic change in fortunes was a lot more than just Lendl slicing. He was getting better and getting in better shape while Connors was declining some.

KG's points. You are not going to convince me that Connors stopped coming in as much because it was too tiring. It shortens the points. The bh return wide in the deuce court. Ashe employed that in 75. When Borg would occaisonally s/v against him on surfaces other than grasss, it was basically always wide to the bh in the deuce court. Other s/v players used it as well. Reach not as great and pulls him out of court.

That said, I don't see the disparity. Go look at some of his best returning days vs Mcenroe. I remember a ton of great returns, off of both wings. This is naked eye, though, not a statistical study. I'm open to being proven wrong by that, but with a reasonably large sample size.

 

[Waspsting]

That said, I don't see the disparity. Go look at some of his best returning days vs Mcenroe. I remember a ton of great returns, off of both wings. This is naked eye, though, not a statistical study. I'm open to being proven wrong by that, but with a reasonably large sample size.

@KG1965

I can suggest how to go about this, if anyone's interested in following up

I've got 52 matches of Connors statted

- look at his opponenets serve patterns (percentage served to FH and percentage served to BH)
- look at Connors return errors (calculate percentage of FH errors and BH errors)

 

[WCT]

@KG1965

I can suggest how to go about this, if anyone's interested in following up

I've got 52 matches of Connors statted

- look at his opponenets serve patterns (percentage served to FH and percentage served to BH)
- look at Connors return errors (calculate percentage of FH errors and BH errors)

I freely acknowledge that I could be wrong. I just want to see hard evidence. My opinion is all eye test and memory. I'll give an example right now of me being wrong using that. Your stats on the Mcenroe/Connors matches showing Mcenroe serving far less into Connors' body than my memory told me. It's that I thought he served the most there, but I sure thought the % was more than single digits.

 

[Drob]

Off topic, but has anyone ever seen a full video of the 1975 WCT Finals, Ashe v. Borg? Or offered for sale online anywhere? I imagine it must be a most interesting match.

 

[WCT]

By full video I assume you mean the entire match? Not that I have ever heard of. There is maybe a 25 minute highlight film of the entire tournament. More time is spent on the final than any of the other matches. Maybe 6 to 8 minutes. It's up on youtube.

I have yet to see any full matches from 1970s Dallas matches. Well, they only showed the final when it was on NBC which was through 1978. In 79, there was no network coverage. WCT showed the tournament through heavily edited matches shown months later on tape delay. In 1980 ESPN took over.

The earliest video I've seen from a final is 1980. Someone put up about half the match, part 2. They said they couldn't find part 1. This was several years ago and I never saw part 1. But it is video from the tv broadcast.

1975 was not the only year with a film. There was a yearly highlight film into the 80s. Not telling you they are all on youtube, though. I saw the 1977 one a couple weeks back.

World Championship Tennis used to have a website. I remember it saying that their archives were complete. Maybe there are copies of the finals that were preserved. Mind you, I read this multiple years ago.