Match Stats/Report - Borg vs Connors, Wimbledon semi-final, 1981

[Waspsting]

Bjorn Borg beat Jimmy Connors 0-6, 4-6, 6-3, 6-0, 6-4 in the Wimbledon semi-final, 1981 on grass

Borg would go onto lose the final to John McEnroe. This was Borg’s record 41st straight win at the event, which remains a Slam record. The two had previously played finals in ’77 and ’78 and a semi-final in ’79, with Borg having won all the matches. Connors would win the title the following year

Borg won 142 points, Connors 138

Borg serve-volleyed off majority of first serves

Serve Stats
Borg...
- 1st serve percentage (68/138) 49%
- 1st serve points won (47/68) 69%
- 2nd serve points won (35/70) 50%
- Aces 16
- Double Faults 4
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (33/138) 24%

Connors...
- 1st serve percentage (119/142) 84%
- 1st serve points won (71/119) 60%
- 2nd serve points won (11/23) 48%
- Aces 1 (a second serve)
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (15/142) 11%

Serve Patterns
Borg served...
- to FH 22%
- to BH 72%
- to Body 5%

Connors served...
- to FH 19%
- to BH 80%
- to Body 1%

Return Stats
Borg made...
- 125 (30 FH, 95 BH), including 6 runaround FHs
- 2 Winners (1 FH, 1 BH)
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 10 Unforced (10 BH)
- 4 Forced (2 FH, 2 BH)
- Return Rate (125/140) 89%

Connors made...
- 101 (19 FH, 82 BH), including 4 runaround FHs & 1 return-approach
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 17 Errors, comprising...
- 8 Unforced (3 FH, 5 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 9 Forced (4 FH, 5 BH)
- Return Rate (101/134) 75%

Break Points
Borg 7/22 (10 games)
Connors 6/12 (8 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Borg 31 (6 FH, 7 BH, 7 FHV, 7 BHV, 2 OH, 1 BHOH)
Connors 49 (14 FH, 10 BH, 9 FHV, 9 BHV, 7 OH)

Borg had 12 from serve-volley points
- 8 first volleys (4 FHV, 2 BHV, 2 OH)
- 3 second volleys (2 BHV, 1 OH)
- 1 third volley (1 BHV)

- 1 BHOH can reasonably be called a swinging BHV

- 7 passes (3 FH, 4 BH)
- FHs - 3 dtl
- BHs - 2 cc, 1 dtl and 1 inside-in return

- regular FHs - 1 dtl, 1 inside-out/longline at net and 1 net chord dribbler return
- regular BHs - 3 dtl (2 at net)

Connors had 13 passes (8 FH, 5 BH)
- FHs - 2 cc, 2 dtl, 2 inside-out, 1 lob and 1 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net
- BHs - 4 cc (1 return, 1 net chord pop over) and 1 lob

- regular FHs - 2 cc, 1 inside-out at net, 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 longline and 1 net chord dribbler
- regular BHs - 1 cc, 3 dtl and 1 net chord dribbler

- 1 FHV can reasonably be called an OH
- 1 OH was on the bounce from the baseline

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Borg 70
- 38 Unforced (15 FH, 17 BH, 5 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 32 Forced (10 FH, 13 BH, 2 FHV, 3 BHV, 3 BH1/2V, 1 BHOH)... with 1 non-net BHV
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.1

Connors 76
- 51 Unforced (20 FH, 26 BH, 2 FHV, 3 BHV, 1 OH)... with 1 FH at net
- 25 Forced (5 FH, 15 BH, 3 FHV, 2 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.1

(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...
- 45/80 (56%) at net, including...
- 24/41 (59%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves
---
- 3/9 (33%) forced back/retreated

Connors was...
- 46/69 (67%) at net, including...
- 0/1 serve-volleying, a 1st serve
---
- 0/1 return-approaching
- 1/2 forced back

Match Report
A great match that climaxes with a particularly good final set, though as the peculiar scoreline with the reverse bagels imply, not an easy one to breakdown. The strangest part is that there is no strangeness involved; no great shift of momentum or balance of play. Action in the fourth set where Borg bagels Connors isn’t so far removed from the first where Connors bagels Borg

If the match does turn subtly, its early in the third set. After Borg holds the first game, Connors advances to 40-0

At that stage, 127 points have been played. In them -
- ground UEs - Borg 14, Connors 16
- net UEs - Borg 4, Connors 1
- approaches from rallies - Borg 15, Connors 30

In matches remaining 153 points -
- ground UEs - Borg 18, Connors 29
- net UEs - Borg 2, Connors 5
- approaches from rallies - Borg 24, Connors 43

In stage 1, ground UEs virtually equal. In context of Connors being more aggressive, coming to net regularly and being all but flawless up there - that’s a very bad sign for Borg (0-6, 3-6 bad)

In stage 2, Borg enjoying healthy ground consistency advantage (which is typical of the match up), Connors’ net play dropping to human standards and Borg being more active in coming to net. Note Borg’s UE frequency remaining about the same as it had been in stage 1, implying that equality on that front earlier had been due to Connors over-performing, not Borg under-performing

Still, its not a huge change. Borg’s got consistency advantage and is coming to net some more, but Connors is still coming in a lot more and still doing very well in forecourt. An improvement from Borg’s point of view, but doesn’t sound like a 3, 0 & 4 improvement

Perhaps more simply, Borg’s first serve in count goes up from 43% in Stage 1 to 54% in Stage 2

This is somewhat brought home in the very exciting final set. Connors falls to 0-40 in 3 successive service games. He holds the first 2 and is 1 point away from reaching the relative safety of deuce the third time before he’s broken

5/6 of the two 0-40 break points he staves off involve winning lengthy rallies. So is an additional break point in one of the games later. So does reaching 30-40 in the third service game where he’s down

That’s 8/9 break points saved via a lot of gruelling work, with outcome uncertain until its settled. In between all that, Borg faces 2 break points. He aces both away

In a couple of nutshells -

- Connors as aggressive as ever, but surpassing himself of consistency to the tune of matching Borg on that front means advantage Connors. Accentuated by Borg’s low in-count not making up the slack
(also, extremely efficient in his aggression - Jimbo barely misses a ball in forecourt while striking all kinds of great volleys)

- Connors’ consistency dropping to his normal levels (considerably beneath Borg’s high one) and Borg upping his aggression some means advantage Borg. Enhanced by a higher in count
(also a slight drop in Jimbo’s aggressive efficiency, which had been tottering around unsustainable levels. He misses a volley now and then)

That’s the difference between 0-6, 4-6 and 6-3, 6-0, 6-4

Serve & Return
Standard, hefty serving from Borg. He’s the kind of server who, when he’s not serving aces, doesn’t look overly formidable. So it is here

He’s got fat load of 16 aces (Jimbo has 15 unreturned serves total). Those aside, nothing too hot to handle from Borg’s serve. Sans serve-volleying, good lot of his first serves would qualify as unforceful

Of the 11 first serve he stays back on, Borg draws 2 return errors - 1 marked forced, the other unforced

49% in count at that kind of serving doesn’t represent a great showing. Were he constantly sending down near unplayable stuff, it might be, but he could expect to get 55-60% serves in with the force he’s put into his first serves

Jimbo returns heftily and it takes some dandy shoelace and half-volleying to keep him from winning points outright with the return early on. Jimbo goes on to win many such points anyway by wading into the weak half-volleys

Some good, near the baseline returns when Borg stays back too, with the occasional one pulled BH inside-in threateningly. It keeps Borg on his toes, but Borg’s very comfortable on is toes and manages without much trouble

Weak serving from Jimbo. Weaker than his other Wimby matches with Borg - and none of them are strong. You’d think his first serves are seconds, until you see the seconds, which are weaker still

His only ace is a second serve that Borg mis-anticipated the direction of. Just 4/14 return errors drawn have been marked FEs - 1 of them due to a bad bounce. You can count on one hand the number of forceful serves Jimbo sends down all match

Serving as much as he does to Borg’s BH - he directs 112 serves there, to 26 to the FH - he’s able to catch Borg out with the odd one to FH. Its so slow that Borg can usually adjust and return it anyway, though not with some strain

Borg returning in his usual way, down from his norm. Misses the odd, routine return. Still ends up with return rate of 89% which astonishingly, is his lowest in 4 matches on this court with Jimbo

The only time Connors serve-volleys, Borg passes him with the return

 

[Waspsting]

Serve-Volley & Net Play
In all, Borg serve-volleys 79% of the time off first serves

Serve-volleying, he wins 24/41 or 59%
Not serve-volleying, he wins 7/11 or 64%

He doesn’t serve-volley off any second serves

He starts match serve-volleying non-stop. First 29 first serves are all serve-volleys, and its half-way into the third set when he stays back for the first time. So from his first non serve-volley,

He serve-volleys 12 times, stays back 11

Faces a hefty returning throughout. Makes most of the half-volleys he’s fed, but can only get them over weakly and Jimbo’s usually up to making the follow up pass

Some beautiful, just about perfect BHVs from Borg, right into the other corner for winners. FHV doesn’t look as good or reliable 5/6 volleying UEs are on that side

Jimbo’s net game is superb. For starters, he has a good approach shot day. Borg misses about as many approach shots as Jimbo does

He comes in both after gaining advantage from rally, usually by hitting wide, or by manufacturing an approach. Skilled enough at this that it seems he can do it whenever he truly wants, but he doesn’t overdo it

Once at net, usual Jimbo stuff of nature, but better. Gets in close to net, swats away anything above it. He does particularly well to wide volleys as well, running them down or lunging to reach them - often for winners

In stage 1, Borg rarely manufactures approaches, preferring to come in from strong positions. Stage 2 starts when eh shifts to making his own way more. Likes to come in behind slices, more side-spun than back-spun

Volley winners - Borg 18, Jimbo 25
Volley UEs - Borg 6, Jimbo 5
Volley FEs - Borg 8, Jimbo 5 (discounting a non-net volley for Borg)

… everything sizably in Jimbo’s favour

Passes better too
Passing winners - Borg 7, Jimbo 13 (excluding net to net exchanges from where there are a few winners for both players)

And then there’s the lobbing. Note Borg forced back from net 9 times, and having 2 BHOH winners

Jimbo leads all net points won 67% to 56%. Just rallying to net -
- Jimbo 46/67 or 69%, Borg 21/39 or 54%

With approach errors about the same, Jimbo’s coming out ahead on all fronts on net vs pass battle. Volleys better - both in terms of missing less and finishing more cleanly - and passes better

Baseline Play
The UE counts tell bulk of the tale. Borg the steadier. Jimbo’s more damaging though

Baseline to baseline winners - Borg 2, Jimbo 8 (discounting an OH on the bounce)

A few errors forced in baseline rallies (and a good deal more thwarted by the running and counter-punching from defensive position by both players). Would also favour Jimbo, to a lesser extent than the winner counts

Throw in Jimbo approaching considerably more often, and he’s done more than enough to off set his consistency disadvantage

Baseline UEs -
Borg 32 (15 FH, 17 BH)
Jimbo 45 (19 FH, 26 BH)

… and breakdown of just those UEs -
- Defensive - Jimbo 1
- Neutral - Borg 20, Jimbo 25
- Attacking - Borg 10, Jimbo 15
- Winner Attempts - Borg 2, Jimbo 4

Staple of play is Jimbo FH to Borg BH. Longline change-ups are less frequent than norm for the pair, but would be on high side by normal standards. As usual, Jimbo leads more, Borg reacts. Jimbo maybe hitting a bit harder, but no significant advantage. Fair amount of slicing or side-spun shots by both players… its not an outright slugfest. Both players keep an eye on control too

You’d have to say relatively bad from Jimbo’s BH, given its seeing less action than his FH. Conversely, very good from the FH that’s held its own with Borg’s BH

Borg almost always approaches off BH, and most of his attacking errors would be such misses. Jimbo comes in off both sides, but his BH misses more approach shots than FH. Jimbo’s attacking errors would include higher lot of dtl shots, including the winner attempts. With 8 winners to show for his trouble of 4 UEs trying for them is a good outcome with the racquets on show

Overall play favours Jimbo -

Points ended aggressively - Jimbo 81, Borg 56
UEs - Jimbo 51, Borg 38
Differential between 2 - Jimbo +30, Borg +18

Given his handicap on serve, it would have to for the match to be as close as it is. When he merely holds even in play, result is a straight set whipping, like their matches in ‘78 and ‘77

Match Progression
Nothing like a bagel to start off with. Jimbo’s returns draw 2 half-volleys and he follows up passes both times, including a running FH dtl. In between, a FH dtl/inside-out forces an error and he outlasts Borg in a cc duel where Borg’s BH gives up the error

Jimbo follows up with a hold, including a third ball FH winner into open court after dragging Borg wide with the serve

Borg’s broken a second time missing routine BHV and a BH approach shot, and Jimbo again wraps up with a running FH dtl pass winner - this time moving forward some, as well as across.

Borg takes Jimbo to deuce in a game where both players take net 3 times, both striking 2 winners. Jimbo holds

Bad game by Borg to be broken the last time. Easy FHV miss, and then he misses 3 FHs. He somewhat tanks the last game of the set. Jimbo wins 28 points, Borg 13 in the set. Borg makes just 10/23 first serves, not that he does well on those points either, winning just 4

Jimbo remains as consistent off the ground as Borg in set 2 and Borg continues to serve at low in-count, this time making 13/30 first serves. Still has to face difficult feet height first volleys more often than he’d like, and still makes most of them

Borg’s BH is a bit shakey in the cc exchanges with Jimbo’s FH. Not easy to breakdown, but it isn’t a fortress either

Jimbo erases 2 break points in his first serve game with OH winners, and Borg misses his 6th return in just 4 games (which for him, is unthinkable). Jimbo breaks right after in a vigorous game where he guides his sole return winner of the match BH cc past the in-rushing Borg

Set ends with a lot of fun. Game 8 lasts 24 points. Jimbo crowds net, Borg gets his share of strong passes off. Borg converts his 5th break point when Jimbo misses a not-easy BHV

Jimbo breaks right back. With Borg making just 1 first serve in 6 points, Jimbo takes net to win a couple points, Borg misses a routine BH and Jimbo’s has break point. That’s when Borg gets his first serve in, only to have the return come back to his feet and this time, he can’t make the BH1/2V

Jimbo again crowds net to serve it out. On set point, his serve leaps up off a bad bounce to force an error and is 2 sets to love

Its early in set 3 that things change subtly as outlined earlier. With Jimbo at 40-0, Borg scores 2 points with a dtl return and by creating an ambitious approach. Thereafter, its Jimbo missing groundstrokes to lose his serve

2 trade breaks awhile later. Wonderful lunging volley winner by Jimbo and another return to shoelaces stand out and Borg misses a slice on break point. Borg restores his lead right away though, again manufacturing approaches to do so, though on break point, Jimbo misses an easy FHV. Not his first net UE, but his first really easy one

Right after, Borg stays back off a first serve for the first time. Rest of match, he does so as often as not. Not the most comforable serve out. At 30-30, Jimbo’s return lands just out, before Borg finishes with an OH winner

Its bagel time again. Jimbo does a bit better than Borg did in the first set. Borg wins 26 points, Jimbo 12 in the set. Jimbo takes Borg deuce once, a game he loses by missing an attacking return against a second serve

The final set is a thriller, if somewhat loaded in Borg’s favour. Break point numbers for the set read

- Borg 1/10 (3 games), Jimbo 0/4 (2 games) and Borg serves 42 points to Jimbo’s 34 in it

Still, with Jimbo down 0-40 in 3 successive games, and getting out the first two times by winning long rallies, set isn’t all that different from the one before. In this case, 6-4 is just a nudge and push away from having been 6-1

Down 40-15 after escaping 0-40 the first time, Jimbo unleashes 3 top notch passing winners in a row - a running-down-drop-volley FH dtl at net and lobs of each side to give himself break point

Ace

He brings up another chance by winning an exciting net point

Ace

2 approach errors and being passed by the return on his only serve-volley point of the match sees Jimbo down 0-40 for the third time in a row. He gets to 30, but misses a third ball FH to a deep return to get broken

Things remain tense as Borg serves to consolidate. Borg eases up on his groundies, looping them more safely and with less force as the game goes on. Jimbo for his part, makes no effort to approach after bringing up break point with a wide FHV winner. Jimbo misses BHs on both break points and on game point, where he hits a weird inside-out’ish BH wide

No more competitive thrills as the remaining 2 games are straightforward holds. Borg finishes with a second volley BHV winner, with Jimbo having run himself off the court to reach the first volley

Summing up, a great match. Connors is on fire for much of it - returning powerfully, hitting hard but staying safe, coming to net regularly, volleying splendidly. Its unlikely to last and doesn’t, as the staying safe part dips a bit, just as Borg’s willingness to take net and serve percentage rise a bit

Its not a big change, but enough to turn result around

 

[KG1965]

Bjorn Borg beat Jimmy Connors 0-6, 4-6, 6-3, 6-0, 6-4 in the Wimbledon semi-final, 1981 on grass

Borg would go onto lose the final to John McEnroe. This was Borg’s record 41st straight win at the event, which remains a Slam record. The two had previously played finals in ’77 and ’78 and a semi-final in ’79, with Borg having won all the matches. Connors would win the title the following year

Borg won 142 points, Connors 138

Borg serve-volleyed off majority of first serves

Serve Stats
Borg...
- 1st serve percentage (68/138) 49%
- 1st serve points won (47/68) 69%
- 2nd serve points won (35/70) 50%
- Aces 16
- Double Faults 4
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (33/138) 24%

Connors...
- 1st serve percentage (119/142) 84%
- 1st serve points won (71/119) 60%
- 2nd serve points won (11/23) 48%
- Aces 1 (a second serve)
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (15/142) 11%

Serve Patterns
Borg served...
- to FH 22%
- to BH 72%
- to Body 5%

Connors served...
- to FH 19%
- to BH 80%
- to Body 1%

Return Stats
Borg made...
- 125 (30 FH, 95 BH), including 6 runaround FHs
- 2 Winners (1 FH, 1 BH)
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 10 Unforced (10 BH)
- 4 Forced (2 FH, 2 BH)
- Return Rate (125/140) 89%

Connors made...
- 101 (19 FH, 82 BH), including 4 runaround FHs & 1 return-approach
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 17 Errors, comprising...
- 8 Unforced (3 FH, 5 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 9 Forced (4 FH, 5 BH)
- Return Rate (101/134) 75%

Break Points
Borg 7/22 (10 games)
Connors 6/12 (8 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Borg 31 (6 FH, 7 BH, 7 FHV, 7 BHV, 2 OH, 1 BHOH)
Connors 49 (14 FH, 10 BH, 9 FHV, 9 BHV, 7 OH)

Borg had 12 from serve-volley points
- 8 first volleys (4 FHV, 2 BHV, 2 OH)
- 3 second volleys (2 BHV, 1 OH)
- 1 third volley (1 BHV)

- 1 BHOH can reasonably be called a swinging BHV

- 7 passes (3 FH, 4 BH)
- FHs - 3 dtl
- BHs - 2 cc, 1 dtl and 1 inside-in return

- regular FHs - 1 dtl, 1 inside-out/longline at net and 1 net chord dribbler return
- regular BHs - 3 dtl (2 at net)

Connors had 13 passes (8 FH, 5 BH)
- FHs - 2 cc, 2 dtl, 2 inside-out, 1 lob and 1 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net
- BHs - 4 cc (1 return, 1 net chord pop over) and 1 lob

- regular FHs - 2 cc, 1 inside-out at net, 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 longline and 1 net chord dribbler
- regular BHs - 1 cc, 3 dtl and 1 net chord dribbler

- 1 FHV can reasonably be called an OH
- 1 OH was on the bounce from the baseline

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Borg 70
- 38 Unforced (15 FH, 17 BH, 5 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 32 Forced (10 FH, 13 BH, 2 FHV, 3 BHV, 3 BH1/2V, 1 BHOH)... with 1 non-net BHV
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.1

Connors 76
- 51 Unforced (20 FH, 26 BH, 2 FHV, 3 BHV, 1 OH)... with 1 FH at net
- 25 Forced (5 FH, 15 BH, 3 FHV, 2 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.1

(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...
- 45/80 (56%) at net, including...
- 24/41 (59%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves
---
- 3/9 (33%) forced back/retreated

Connors was...
- 46/69 (67%) at net, including...
- 0/1 serve-volleying, a 1st serve
---
- 0/1 return-approaching
- 1/2 forced back

Match Report
A great match that climaxes with a particularly good final set, though as the peculiar scoreline with the reverse bagels imply, not an easy one to breakdown. The strangest part is that there is no strangeness involved; no great shift of momentum or balance of play. Action in the fourth set where Borg bagels Connors isn’t so far removed from the first where Connors bagels Borg

If the match does turn subtly, its early in the third set. After Borg holds the first game, Connors advances to 40-0

At that stage, 127 points have been played. In them -
- ground UEs - Borg 14, Connors 16
- net UEs - Borg 4, Connors 1
- approaches from rallies - Borg 15, Connors 30

In matches remaining 153 points -
- ground UEs - Borg 18, Connors 29
- net UEs - Borg 2, Connors 5
- approaches from rallies - Borg 24, Connors 43

In stage 1, ground UEs virtually equal. In context of Connors being more aggressive, coming to net regularly and being all but flawless up there - that’s a very bad sign for Borg (0-6, 3-6 bad)

In stage 2, Borg enjoying healthy ground consistency advantage (which is typical of the match up), Connors’ net play dropping to human standards and Borg being more active in coming to net. Note Borg’s UE frequency remaining about the same as it had been in stage 1, implying that equality on that front earlier had been due to Connors over-performing, not Borg under-performing

Still, its not a huge change. Borg’s got consistency advantage and is coming to net some more, but Connors is still coming in a lot more and still doing very well in forecourt. An improvement from Borg’s point of view, but doesn’t sound like a 3, 0 & 4 improvement

Perhaps more simply, Borg’s first serve in count goes up from 43% in Stage 1 to 54% in Stage 2

This is somewhat brought home in the very exciting final set. Connors falls to 0-40 in 3 successive service games. He holds the first 2 and is 1 point away from reaching the relative safety of deuce the third time before he’s broken

5/6 of the two 0-40 break points he staves off involve winning lengthy rallies. So is an additional break point in one of the games later. So does reaching 30-40 in the third service game where he’s down

That’s 8/9 break points saved via a lot of gruelling work, with outcome uncertain until its settled. In between all that, Borg faces 2 break points. He aces both away

In a couple of nutshells -

- Connors as aggressive as ever, but surpassing himself of consistency to the tune of matching Borg on that front means advantage Connors. Accentuated by Borg’s low in-count not making up the slack
(also, extremely efficient in his aggression - Jimbo barely misses a ball in forecourt while striking all kinds of great volleys)

- Connors’ consistency dropping to his normal levels (considerably beneath Borg’s high one) and Borg upping his aggression some means advantage Borg. Enhanced by a higher in count
(also a slight drop in Jimbo’s aggressive efficiency, which had been tottering around unsustainable levels. He misses a volley now and then)

That’s the difference between 0-6, 4-6 and 6-3, 6-0, 6-4

Serve & Return
Standard, hefty serving from Borg. He’s the kind of server who, when he’s not serving aces, doesn’t look overly formidable. So it is here

He’s got fat load of 16 aces (Jimbo has 15 unreturned serves total). Those aside, nothing too hot to handle from Borg’s serve. Sans serve-volleying, good lot of his first serves would qualify as unforceful

Of the 11 first serve he stays back on, Borg draws 2 return errors - 1 marked forced, the other unforced

49% in count at that kind of serving doesn’t represent a great showing. Were he constantly sending down near unplayable stuff, it might be, but he could expect to get 55-60% serves in with the force he’s put into his first serves

Jimbo returns heftily and it takes some dandy shoelace and half-volleying to keep him from winning points outright with the return early on. Jimbo goes on to win many such points anyway by wading into the weak half-volleys

Some good, near the baseline returns when Borg stays back too, with the occasional one pulled BH inside-in threateningly. It keeps Borg on his toes, but Borg’s very comfortable on is toes and manages without much trouble

Weak serving from Jimbo. Weaker than his other Wimby matches with Borg - and none of them are strong. You’d think his first serves are seconds, until you see the seconds, which are weaker still

His only ace is a second serve that Borg mis-anticipated the direction of. Just 4/14 return errors drawn have been marked FEs - 1 of them due to a bad bounce. You can count on one hand the number of forceful serves Jimbo sends down all match

Serving as much as he does to Borg’s BH - he directs 112 serves there, to 26 to the FH - he’s able to catch Borg out with the odd one to FH. Its so slow that Borg can usually adjust and return it anyway, though not with some strain

Borg returning in his usual way, down from his norm. Misses the odd, routine return. Still ends up with return rate of 89% which astonishingly, is his lowest in 4 matches on this court with Jimbo

The only time Connors serve-volleys, Borg passes him with the return

Taking not only inspiration but also from your inherent data 9 matches (Wimbly 81, Wimbly 79, USO 76, USO 78, Wimbly 78, Masters GP 79, Boca Raton 77, USO 81 and Richmond 82.... in 6 Borg won, in 3 Jimbo won) between the two players the result very tight is this:
1013 points Borg
944 points Connors
-----------------------
+ 69 points Borg

"Only serves and returns (aces, winners and errors)": -126 Jimbo, - 9 Bjorn = 117 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 935 points v 887 of Borg (48 points of advantage for Connors).

I think that it is very interesting to point out the fact that
1) the serve of Borg was a real weapon (arm) that disempowered the most famous shot of Connors (return), ... while on the contrary ...
2) in the remaining shots (baseline, approach and net-game) Connors leads to surprise and not a little.

 

[KG1965]

Serve-Volley & Net Play
In all, Borg serve-volleys 79% of the time off first serves

Serve-volleying, he wins 24/41 or 59%
Not serve-volleying, he wins 7/11 or 64%

He doesn’t serve-volley off any second serves

He starts match serve-volleying non-stop. First 29 first serves are all serve-volleys, and its half-way into the third set when he stays back for the first time. So from his first non serve-volley,

He serve-volleys 12 times, stays back 11

Faces a hefty returning throughout. Makes most of the half-volleys he’s fed, but can only get them over weakly and Jimbo’s usually up to making the follow up pass

Some beautiful, just about perfect BHVs from Borg, right into the other corner for winners. FHV doesn’t look as good or reliable 5/6 volleying UEs are on that side

Jimbo’s net game is superb. For starters, he has a good approach shot day. Borg misses about as many approach shots as Jimbo does

He comes in both after gaining advantage from rally, usually by hitting wide, or by manufacturing an approach. Skilled enough at this that it seems he can do it whenever he truly wants, but he doesn’t overdo it

Once at net, usual Jimbo stuff of nature, but better. Gets in close to net, swats away anything above it. He does particularly well to wide volleys as well, running them down or lunging to reach them - often for winners

In stage 1, Borg rarely manufactures approaches, preferring to come in from strong positions. Stage 2 starts when eh shifts to making his own way more. Likes to come in behind slices, more side-spun than back-spun

Volley winners - Borg 18, Jimbo 25
Volley UEs - Borg 6, Jimbo 5
Volley FEs - Borg 8, Jimbo 5 (discounting a non-net volley for Borg)

… everything sizably in Jimbo’s favour

Passes better too
Passing winners - Borg 7, Jimbo 13 (excluding net to net exchanges from where there are a few winners for both players)

And then there’s the lobbing. Note Borg forced back from net 9 times, and having 2 BHOH winners

Jimbo leads all net points won 67% to 56%. Just rallying to net -
- Jimbo 46/67 or 69%, Borg 21/39 or 54%

With approach errors about the same, Jimbo’s coming out ahead on all fronts on net vs pass battle. Volleys better - both in terms of missing less and finishing more cleanly - and passes better

Baseline Play
The UE counts tell bulk of the tale. Borg the steadier. Jimbo’s more damaging though

Baseline to baseline winners - Borg 2, Jimbo 8 (discounting an OH on the bounce)

A few errors forced in baseline rallies (and a good deal more thwarted by the running and counter-punching from defensive position by both players). Would also favour Jimbo, to a lesser extent than the winner counts

Throw in Jimbo approaching considerably more often, and he’s done more than enough to off set his consistency disadvantage

Baseline UEs -
Borg 32 (15 FH, 17 BH)
Jimbo 45 (19 FH, 26 BH)

… and breakdown of just those UEs -
- Defensive - Jimbo 1
- Neutral - Borg 20, Jimbo 25
- Attacking - Borg 10, Jimbo 15
- Winner Attempts - Borg 2, Jimbo 4

Staple of play is Jimbo FH to Borg BH. Longline change-ups are less frequent than norm for the pair, but would be on high side by normal standards. As usual, Jimbo leads more, Borg reacts. Jimbo maybe hitting a bit harder, but no significant advantage. Fair amount of slicing or side-spun shots by both players… its not an outright slugfest. Both players keep an eye on control too

You’d have to say relatively bad from Jimbo’s BH, given its seeing less action than his FH. Conversely, very good from the FH that’s held its own with Borg’s BH

Borg almost always approaches off BH, and most of his attacking errors would be such misses. Jimbo comes in off both sides, but his BH misses more approach shots than FH. Jimbo’s attacking errors would include higher lot of dtl shots, including the winner attempts. With 8 winners to show for his trouble of 4 UEs trying for them is a good outcome with the racquets on show

Overall play favours Jimbo -

Points ended aggressively - Jimbo 81, Borg 56
UEs - Jimbo 51, Borg 38
Differential between 2 - Jimbo +30, Borg +18

Given his handicap on serve, it would have to for the match to be as close as it is. When he merely holds even in play, result is a straight set whipping, like their matches in ‘78 and ‘77

Match Progression
Nothing like a bagel to start off with. Jimbo’s returns draw 2 half-volleys and he follows up passes both times, including a running FH dtl. In between, a FH dtl/inside-out forces an error and he outlasts Borg in a cc duel where Borg’s BH gives up the error

Jimbo follows up with a hold, including a third ball FH winner into open court after dragging Borg wide with the serve

Borg’s broken a second time missing routine BHV and a BH approach shot, and Jimbo again wraps up with a running FH dtl pass winner - this time moving forward some, as well as across.

Borg takes Jimbo to deuce in a game where both players take net 3 times, both striking 2 winners. Jimbo holds

Bad game by Borg to be broken the last time. Easy FHV miss, and then he misses 3 FHs. He somewhat tanks the last game of the set. Jimbo wins 28 points, Borg 13 in the set. Borg makes just 10/23 first serves, not that he does well on those points either, winning just 4

Jimbo remains as consistent off the ground as Borg in set 2 and Borg continues to serve at low in-count, this time making 13/30 first serves. Still has to face difficult feet height first volleys more often than he’d like, and still makes most of them

Borg’s BH is a bit shakey in the cc exchanges with Jimbo’s FH. Not easy to breakdown, but it isn’t a fortress either

Jimbo erases 2 break points in his first serve game with OH winners, and Borg misses his 6th return in just 4 games (which for him, is unthinkable). Jimbo breaks right after in a vigorous game where he guides his sole return winner of the match BH cc past the in-rushing Borg

Set ends with a lot of fun. Game 8 lasts 24 points. Jimbo crowds net, Borg gets his share of strong passes off. Borg converts his 5th break point when Jimbo misses a not-easy BHV

Jimbo breaks right back. With Borg making just 1 first serve in 6 points, Jimbo takes net to win a couple points, Borg misses a routine BH and Jimbo’s has break point. That’s when Borg gets his first serve in, only to have the return come back to his feet and this time, he can’t make the BH1/2V

Jimbo again crowds net to serve it out. On set point, his serve leaps up off a bad bounce to force an error and is 2 sets to love

Its early in set 3 that things change subtly as outlined earlier. With Jimbo at 40-0, Borg scores 2 points with a dtl return and by creating an ambitious approach. Thereafter, its Jimbo missing groundstrokes to lose his serve

2 trade breaks awhile later. Wonderful lunging volley winner by Jimbo and another return to shoelaces stand out and Borg misses a slice on break point. Borg restores his lead right away though, again manufacturing approaches to do so, though on break point, Jimbo misses an easy FHV. Not his first net UE, but his first really easy one

Right after, Borg stays back off a first serve for the first time. Rest of match, he does so as often as not. Not the most comforable serve out. At 30-30, Jimbo’s return lands just out, before Borg finishes with an OH winner

Its bagel time again. Jimbo does a bit better than Borg did in the first set. Borg wins 26 points, Jimbo 12 in the set. Jimbo takes Borg deuce once, a game he loses by missing an attacking return against a second serve

The final set is a thriller, if somewhat loaded in Borg’s favour. Break point numbers for the set read

- Borg 1/10 (3 games), Jimbo 0/4 (2 games) and Borg serves 42 points to Jimbo’s 34 in it

Still, with Jimbo down 0-40 in 3 successive games, and getting out the first two times by winning long rallies, set isn’t all that different from the one before. In this case, 6-4 is just a nudge and push away from having been 6-1

Down 40-15 after escaping 0-40 the first time, Jimbo unleashes 3 top notch passing winners in a row - a running-down-drop-volley FH dtl at net and lobs of each side to give himself break point

Ace

He brings up another chance by winning an exciting net point

Ace

2 approach errors and being passed by the return on his only serve-volley point of the match sees Jimbo down 0-40 for the third time in a row. He gets to 30, but misses a third ball FH to a deep return to get broken

Things remain tense as Borg serves to consolidate. Borg eases up on his groundies, looping them more safely and with less force as the game goes on. Jimbo for his part, makes no effort to approach after bringing up break point with a wide FHV winner. Jimbo misses BHs on both break points and on game point, where he hits a weird inside-out’ish BH wide

No more competitive thrills as the remaining 2 games are straightforward holds. Borg finishes with a second volley BHV winner, with Jimbo having run himself off the court to reach the first volley

Summing up, a great match. Connors is on fire for much of it - returning powerfully, hitting hard but staying safe, coming to net regularly, volleying splendidly. Its unlikely to last and doesn’t, as the staying safe part dips a bit, just as Borg’s willingness to take net and serve percentage rise a bit

Its not a big change, but enough to turn result around

I can't remember if I ever complimented you on the huge, amazing, fantastic job you've done all these years analyzing tennis matches.
Thank you.

 

[WCT]

Was I smoking something when I did the stats for this match? It was one of the earlier ones I did because I only have the unreturned serves and the net points. I have Borg with 33 and Connors with 1 s/v attempt. However, I have Connors with 19 unreturned serves. And here is the real what is going on with my stats. I have Connors with 58 net points. With Connors and his delayed approaches I can see possible differences, but not 11. I remember you and I had about the same net points for him at 77 Wimbledon and the 76 US Open. Perhaps I added incorrectly when I tallied them. Once I transfer them to a summary sheet I discard the sheet where I charted the match. 11 is a lot to be off.

I still firmly maintain Connors is not as aggressive getting to the net as earlier. Absolutely not as much in 74. Confidently not as much in 77. I don't think quite as much as 78 or 79. And I'm talking s/v aside where it's blatantly obvious since he only did it 1 point this match.

Bunch of balls landing at or inside the service box where he stays back. Specifically, on a couple of those break points in the 5th. Also, Borg made multiple unforced errors in those blown 0-40 chances in the 5th. I thought he had a few more of these in this match than a totally in form Borg would give you.

Borg made some beautiful low angled backhand volleys. Not dying quails either, firm volleys. When Borg did stay back on 1st serve, did you keep track of which court it was? It seemed to me that it was almost always the ad court. Seems to me that his favorite s/v ploy vs Connors was wide to his two hander in the deuce court.

That was something that I misremembered for years until I saw this match again. My memory had been that Borg has s/v on every 1st serve this match. HBO had showed this match in it' entirety the next day. Something they rarely did then. But I did watch it back then. Thoe first 2 sets Dan Maskell was saying that Connors was reminescent
of Lew Hoad.

 

[Drob]

Great details on a great match. As KG1965 seems to suggest, the Borg service might have been the difference, or half the difference - +15 free service points must have had some impact. Borg afterward said the fifth set was was totally up for grabs.

 

[Waspsting]

Taking not only inspiration but also from your inherent data 9 matches (Wimbly 81, Wimbly 79, USO 76, USO 78, Wimbly 78, Masters GP 79, Boca Raton 77, USO 81 and Richmond 82.... in 6 Borg won, in 3 Jimbo won) between the two players the result very tight is this:
1013 points Borg
944 points Connors

Hold onto this. Got a few more coming up

I can't remember if I ever complimented you on the huge, amazing, fantastic job you've done all these years analyzing tennis matches.
Thank you.

Thanks, KG. You were an inspiration to me when I first joined this forum. Still are actually

Was I smoking something when I did the stats for this match? It was one of the earlier ones I did because I only have the unreturned serves and the net points. I have Borg with 33 and Connors with 1 s/v attempt. However, I have Connors with 19 unreturned serves. And here is the real what is going on with my stats. I have Connors with 58 net points. With Connors and his delayed approaches I can see possible differences, but not 11. I remember you and I had about the same net points for him at 77 Wimbledon and the 76 US Open. Perhaps I added incorrectly when I tallied them. Once I transfer them to a summary sheet I discard the sheet where I charted the match. 11 is a lot to be off.

can't speak to your smoking habits (and refuse to discuss my drinking ones), but net points are what I tally and mark first and most carefully because there's no double checking mechanism for them

Everything else (excpet break points, which are easy) has multiple, in-built double checking mechanisms and can confirm that Connors' unreturneds were 15

When A plays B, A's points total will equal

- A's unreturneds
- B's double faults
- A's winners
- B's errors

And A's unreturned's will line up with B's returns made and also equal total of A's aces/service winners + B's return errors

etc. etc.

Borg made multiple unforced errors in those blown 0-40 chances in the 5th. I thought he had a few more of these in this match than a totally in form Borg would give you.

a bit off, maybe. It was the early missed returns that caught my eye because you never see him missing returns like that

Still, I've credited Connors for hanging in there with him for half the match on the UE front

For neutral UEs to be Borg 20, Connors 25.... is a huge win for Jimbo

When Borg did stay back on 1st serve, did you keep track of which court it was? It seemed to me that it was almost always the ad court. Seems to me that his favorite s/v ploy vs Connors was wide to his two hander in the deuce court.

I can give you an exact number if you like, but without doing that can 100% confirm your impression

Deuce court, out wide to BH... absolutely Borg's favourite go to place to serve-volley to Connors. In all their matches

I remember a particular point (when he was still serve-volleying 100% of the time) when he went down the middle. A volley to his feet was his reward

Thoe first 2 sets Dan Maskell was saying that Connors was reminescent
of Lew Hoad.

in the '83 Queen's final, Maskell says

Dan Maskel - not a man given to hyperbole - explicitly states he's never seen anyone hit the ball harder than Connors does in this match. Adding upon being probed that perhaps Ellsworth Vines in the 1930s may have hit as hard

Great details on a great match. As KG1965 seems to suggest, the Borg service might have been the difference, or half the difference - +15 free service points must have had some impact. Borg afterward said the fifth set was was totally up for grabs.

That's my favourite thing about this one. 5th sets are usually lower quality of play, with 'what will happen next? who'll win?' questions providing the excitement

This ones a great one though

As for being totally up for grabs, I'd have favoured Borg and it occured to me that with Connors going down 0-40 every game, this set could have just turned into a continuation of the 4th set bagel


Anything's possible and Connors could have saved himself all those times and broken twice too, but I'm talking about realisitic possiblities

Both in general and in this set, when Connors gets into trouble on serve, its usually because of UEs.
By contrast, when Borg does, its because of Connors' aggression.

And Connors tends to have runs of UEs. As WCT noted, Borg making quite a few errors on the break points he had were surprising (I'd add, Connors holding out long enough for Borg to do so is the same)

By contrast, Jimbo has to play 3 amazing passing shots to bring up a break point. And it just gets aced away

 

[WCT]

Hold onto this. Got a few more coming up



Thanks, KG. You were an inspiration to me when I first joined this forum. Still are actually


can't speak to your smoking habits (and refuse to discuss my drinking ones), but net points are what I tally and mark first and most carefully because there's no double checking mechanism for them

Everything else (excpet break points, which are easy) has multiple, in-built double checking mechanisms and can confirm that Connors' unreturneds were 15

When A plays B, A's points total will equal

- A's unreturneds
- B's double faults
- A's winners
- B's errors

And A's unreturned's will line up with B's returns made and also equal total of A's aces/service winners + B's return errors

etc. etc.



a bit off, maybe. It was the early missed returns that caught my eye because you never see him missing returns like that

Still, I've credited Connors for hanging in there with him for half the match on the UE front

For neutral UEs to be Borg 20, Connors 25.... is a huge win for Jimbo



I can give you an exact number if you like, but without doing that can 100% confirm your impression

Deuce court, out wide to BH... absolutely Borg's favourite go to place to serve-volley to Connors. In all their matches

I remember a particular point (when he was still serve-volleying 100% of the time) when he went down the middle. A volley to his feet was his reward



in the '83 Queen's final, Maskell says






That's my favourite thing about this one. 5th sets are usually lower quality of play, with 'what will happen next? who'll win?' questions providing the excitement

This ones a great one though

As for being totally up for grabs, I'd have favoured Borg and it occured to me that with Connors going down 0-40 every game, this set could have just turned into a continuation of the 4th set bagel


Anything's possible and Connors could have saved himself all those times and broken twice too, but I'm talking about realisitic possiblities

Both in general and in this set, when Connors gets into trouble on serve, its usually because of UEs.
By contrast, when Borg does, its because of Connors' aggression.

And Connors tends to have runs of UEs. As WCT noted, Borg making quite a few errors on the break points he had were surprising (I'd add, Connors holding out long enough for Borg to do so is the same)

By contrast, Jimbo has to play 3 amazing passing shots to bring up a break point. And it just gets aced away

Connors only had 5 mor

Hold onto this. Got a few more coming up



Thanks, KG. You were an inspiration to me when I first joined this forum. Still are actually


can't speak to your smoking habits (and refuse to discuss my drinking ones), but net points are what I tally and mark first and most carefully because there's no double checking mechanism for them

Everything else (excpet break points, which are easy) has multiple, in-built double checking mechanisms and can confirm that Connors' unreturneds were 15

When A plays B, A's points total will equal

- A's unreturneds
- B's double faults
- A's winners
- B's errors

And A's unreturned's will line up with B's returns made and also equal total of A's aces/service winners + B's return errors

etc. etc.



a bit off, maybe. It was the early missed returns that caught my eye because you never see him missing returns like that

Still, I've credited Connors for hanging in there with him for half the match on the UE front

For neutral UEs to be Borg 20, Connors 25.... is a huge win for Jimbo



I can give you an exact number if you like, but without doing that can 100% confirm your impression

Deuce court, out wide to BH... absolutely Borg's favourite go to place to serve-volley to Connors. In all their matches

I remember a particular point (when he was still serve-volleying 100% of the time) when he went down the middle. A volley to his feet was his reward



in the '83 Queen's final, Maskell says






That's my favourite thing about this one. 5th sets are usually lower quality of play, with 'what will happen next? who'll win?' questions providing the excitement

This ones a great one though

As for being totally up for grabs, I'd have favoured Borg and it occured to me that with Connors going down 0-40 every game, this set could have just turned into a continuation of the 4th set bagel


Anything's possible and Connors could have saved himself all those times and broken twice too, but I'm talking about realisitic possiblities

Both in general and in this set, when Connors gets into trouble on serve, its usually because of UEs.
By contrast, when Borg does, its because of Connors' aggression.

And Connors tends to have runs of UEs. As WCT noted, Borg making quite a few errors on the break points he had were surprising (I'd add, Connors holding out long enough for Borg to do so is the same)

By contrast, Jimbo has to play 3 amazing passing shots to bring up a break point. And it just gets aced away

Question. How do you define neutral UE? I mean as opposed to overall. Obviously, a volley would be included in the overall total and that would be different, Is it when they are both just rallying and one of them makes an UE? If this is the case then I would agree that Connors being only plus 5 over 5 sets would be a win for him.

As an aside, I love Dan Maskell. Found myself watching the 82 US Open final again because this was the BBC version.

 

[Waspsting]

Question. How do you define neutral UE? I mean as opposed to overall. Obviously, a volley would be included in the overall total and that would be different, Is it when they are both just rallying and one of them makes an UE

Exactly that - an error to a routine ball and the shot choice is not an attacking one

Approach shots are always marked 'attacking'
Volleys are either 'attacking' or 'winner attempt'... no neutral forecourt shots

Instead of simply comparing a players winners with his UEs, I look to compare -

- his winners with his winner attempt UEs
- the errors he's forced with his attacking UEs
- his neutral UEs with his opponents neutral UEs

 

[WCT]

Exactly that - an error to a routine ball and the shot choice is not an attacking one

Approach shots are always marked 'attacking'
Volleys are either 'attacking' or 'winner attempt'... no neutral forecourt shots

Instead of simply comparing a players winners with his UEs, I look to compare -

- his winners with his winner attempt UEs
- the errors he's forced with his attacking UEs
- his neutral UEs with his opponents neutral UEs

Another question on how you keep stats. What is your position on passing shots? Connors hits an excellent low return. The volley lands maybe mid court or a tad deeper. It's not a sitter, but Connors has a very good look at the passing shot and misses it. Either into the net, long or wide. Would you call that an unforced error or do you consider the other player being at net as somewhat forcing?

 

[Waspsting]

Another question on how you keep stats. What is your position on passing shots? Connors hits an excellent low return. The volley lands maybe mid court or a tad deeper. It's not a sitter, but Connors has a very good look at the passing shot and misses it. Either into the net, long or wide. Would you call that an unforced error or do you consider the other player being at net as somewhat forcing?

If its not a sitter, I tend to go with FE

A sitter, particularly if the court is open, is about the only time I'll give a passing UE

Other factor to consider in marking a pass UE or FE is if its easy to put the ball in play commandingly

By that, I mean player can put pass in play to give a difficult volley that's not bound to be putaway without trouble. But he misses going for the winner

Still, usually go FE for those, but not always

Remember thinking about whether to consider the degree of a miss in judging UE or FE - for example, if a guy misses a not difficult pass by a long way as opposed to just misses the line, does that effect judgment of UE or FE?

Decided against considering it a factor, and just look at the shot on offer, not the extent of the miss

 

[WCT]

If its not a sitter, I tend to go with FE

A sitter, particularly if the court is open, is about the only time I'll give a passing UE

Other factor to consider in marking a pass UE or FE is if its easy to put the ball in play commandingly

By that, I mean player can put pass in play to give a difficult volley that's not bound to be putaway without trouble. But he misses going for the winner

Still, usually go FE for those, but not always

Remember thinking about whether to consider the degree of a miss in judging UE or FE - for example, if a guy misses a not difficult pass by a long way as opposed to just misses the line, does that effect judgment of UE or FE?

Decided against considering it a factor, and just look at the shot on offer, not the extent of the miss

My rule had always been pretty iron clad. No UE on passing shots, but I've been starting to wonder if I should reconsider.