Match Stats/Report - Bruguera vs Courier, French Open final, 1993

[Waspsting]

Sergi Bruguera beat Jim Courier 6-4, 2-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-3 in the French Open final, 1993 on clay

It was Bruguera’s first title at the event and he would go onto defend it the following year. Courier was the double defending champion. In the lead in to the event, Bruguera had won Monte Carlo, Courier Rome, beating Bruguera along the way. Courier led the head-to-head 4-0, including 3-0 on clay, coming into the match

Bruguera won 153 points, Courier 146

Serve Stats
Bruguera...
- 1st serve percentage (75/133) 56%
- 1st serve points won (49/75) 65%
- 2nd serve points won (37/58) 64%
- Aces 7 (1 second serve), Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (25/133) 19%

Courier...
- 1st serve percentage (92/166) 55%
- 1st serve points won (64/92) 70%
- 2nd serve points won (35/74) 47%
- Aces 5
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (33/166) 20%

Serve Patterns
Bruguera served...
- to FH 34%
- to BH 66%

Courier served...
- to FH 41%
- to BH 58%
- to Body 1%

Return Stats
Bruguera made...
- 132 (55 FH, 77 BH), including 2 runaround FHs & 4 return-approaches
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 28 Errors, comprising...
- 16 Unforced (9 FH, 7 BH)
- 12 Forced (5 FH, 7 BH)
- Return Rate (132/165) 80%

Courier made...
- 106 (45 FH, 61 BH), including 16 runaround FHs & 4 return-approaches
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 17 Errors, comprising...
- 11 Unforced (7 FH, 4 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 6 Forced (5 FH, 1 BH)
- Return Rate (106/131) 81%

Break Points
Bruguera 5/26 (9 games)
Courier 4/12 (6 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Bruguera 46 (17 FH, 15 BH, 2 FHV, 6 BHV, 6 OH)
Courier 41 (13 FH, 7 BH, 8 FHV, 6 BHV, 7 OH)

Bruguera's FHs - 6 cc (1 at net), 1 cc/down-the-middle pass, 1 dtl pass, 6 inside-out, 2 inside-in, 1 drop shot
- BHs - 6 cc (5 passes), 6 dtl (2 passes), 1 dtl/inside-out pass, 1 inside-in/cc return, 1 lob

- 1 from a return-approach point, a BHV
- 1 FHV was a swinging cc shot & 2 OHs were on the bounce (1 from just behind the service line)

Courier's FHs - 6 cc (1 pass), 1 dtl, 3 inside-out, 2 inside-in, 1 inside-in/longline
- BHs - 3 cc (1 return, 2 passes), 3 dtl (2 passes), 1 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net

- 1 OH was possibly not clean and another was on the bounce

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Bruguera 70
- 31 Unforced (14 FH, 17 BH)... with 1 FH at net
- 39 Forced (18 FH, 20 BH, 1 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.8

Courier 81
- 64 Unforced (33 FH, 25 BH, 1 FHV, 5 BHV)... with 1 BH at net & 1 non-net BHV
- 17 Forced (8 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 2 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)… with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 47.3

(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
Bruguera was 25/35 (71%) at net, with...
- 2/4 (50%) return-approaching
- 2/2 forced back

Courier was...
- 57/74 (69%) at net, including...
- 1/2 serve-volleying, both 1st serves
---
- 1/4 (25%) return-approaching
- 1/1 forced back

Match Report
Great match and quite simple of action. Courier couples power-hitting with approaching net, leaving Bruguera to counter-punch and pass as needed. But beyond that bulk, Bruguera’s capable of doing almost everything Courier does from the back - working his opponent over, moving him around, engaging in pounding shot-making, especially off the FH, and coming to net to finish. And he’s a rock from the back. Result is fitting - Bruguera has significantly better of things overall, and Courier chokes a bit at the end, giving up errors more readily than at any other stage of the match (though he’s outdone in that area all match, too)

Brug wins 51.2% of the points, while serving 44.5% of them
Break points - Brug 5/26 (9 games), Courier 4/12 (6 games)

Clear cut superiority for Brug there. Which becomes more apparent in removing 2 outlier long breaks, 1 for each player. Courier’s broken in a 22 point game, Brug in a 16 point one

Excluding the 22 point game, Brug wins 50.9% of points, serving 48.0% of them, with his break points shifting to 4/18 (8 games) - a shift from clear superiority to Brug still shading things
Excluding the 16 point game, Brug wins 51.6% of points, serving 41.3%, with Courier’s break points shifting to 3/6 (5 games) - a shift from clear superiority to very convincing, nearing thrashing territory

Sans these 2 longest games of match, Brug’s taken to deuce twice (including in serving out the match), Courier 7 times

Not all great matches are simple, but this one is. The few lines in intro paragraph would do to summarize match, without missing much. Other aspects of the match

- Serve is a significant factor, with both players using it to gain advantage they can build up on. Courier does so consistently, Brug more sparring when he needs to

- If serve is a significant factor, than return has to be. Both players have a go at attacking returns - again, Courier more persistently, Brug more choosily

- Brug considerably gets better of Courier from back of court, especially in consistency. And its due to him being so very good, there’s little that’s loose from Courier. Brug being a wall, so Courier ending up missing deal. Being a wall involves withstanding a heavy firepower as well as excellent basic consistency because Courier hammers the ball

- Net play - the head of Courier’s spear and its that way before pattern of Brug being too solid to be taken down from the back emerges (which wouldn’t be a given in this match-up). A good approach to play by Courier. Whether its pre-planned or just how he was playing isn’t clear, but still, very well played. He’d have got crushed sticking to baseline power-hitting - Brug is too good from there

- Brug’s variety. Calling him a wall is fair nod to his solidity, consistency, shot-resistance, but he’s no shrinking violet. He can and does take command of rallies when he chooses to, holds his own when challenging for lead role of action from neutral situations, bosses play with his FH, engages in beat-down FH play building up to backcourt finishing, comes to net.

Gist - excellent, all around display from Brug. Outdone as he is from the back despite playing well himself, Courier would be forced to use net play to stay competitive, and he doesn’t hesitate to do so, taking to it as though its his first choice

Basic Stats & Courier’s Varying Game
First serve in - Brug 56%, Courier 55%
First serve won - Brug 65%, Courier 70%
Second serve won - Brug 64%, Courier 47%

Why is Brug winning at same rate across his two serves?
Are they same calibre serves? No. He does send down regulation first serves quite often, but zips through stronger ones regular. He’s got higher first serve ace rate than the bigger serving Courier
Does Courier return them the same way? No. Courier usually takes second returns from pace and a half inside court, particularly in ad court. Wallops the return early. He occasionally does the same against first serves, but far, far less often

No problem with return consistency from Courier. Misses a few because of early position, but worth it to get big returns off when he connects

Typically, after his return to second serves, Courier’s neutralized servers advantage. Potentially even snatched initiative. Kept from doing more of both by Brug’s ability to handle the big, early taken ripped return

By contrast, after first return, Brug retains some advantage. He scores more freebies with the first serve

Logically, there should be no reason for Brug to win same amount of second serve points as firsts.

One reason is Courier’s differing approach to attacking across service and return points. As stated earlier, his chief offence is net play (and his chief game is offence, he doesn’t do well rallying with Brug from the back- more on that later)

Courier’s 49/68 at 72% rallying to net. Broken down by serve/return point type -
1st serve - 26/32 or 81% (92 points, so 35% of points)
2nd serve - 10/16 or 63% (74 points, so 22% of points)
1st return - 8/11 or 73% (75 points, so 15% of points)
2nd return - 5/9 or 56% (58 points, so 16% of points)

(the percentage of points he approaches on are rough indicators, not accouting for unreturned serves, double faults, Bruguera coming in, chip-charges and serve-volleys etc. But it points in the right directions)

Natural for highest frequency and success to be on first serve points. Strong first serve naturally leads to good starting point for rally. Courier rarely comes in direclty off the third ball. Usually hammers a groundie or 2 at least to command rally (push Brug back, wide etc.) before coming in to finish. And to be clear, its not hit-couple-power-shots-then-come-in like clockwork. There are plenty of approaches after medium length rallies (with Courier maintaining lead position through it all)

Natural for lowest frequency to be on first return points too, with Brug commanding action much of the time

The standout is second return points having just as low frequency and lowest success rate. And that is why Bruguera wins as many second serve points as firsts

Realistically, it’s the lowest frequency since Brugera would have higher lot of unreturned first serves than seconds. Its not keeping with Courier’s returning style. He usually takes second returns from inside court and smacks them hard, sometimes a little wide too. Troubling to handle, potentially even point-ending

 

[Waspsting]

In short, pretty good starting position for rally for Courier after his second return. At least neutral, in leading position more often than reactive

He’s at his best all match when using such position to come forward. But he doesn’t. Spends much of it trying to beat-down Brug - and it doesn’t work. Brug holds the fort ‘til Courier misses or Brug grinds Courier down… and Brug wins 64% second serve points

Courier’s also just 1/4 return-approaching, all against second serves. Hit and run deals, not chip-charges. Brug’s no slouch on the pass either (more on that later), its not just a case of get-to-net-and-its-point-over

Generally speaking, Courier vs Bruguera from baseline is an open contest. Wouldn’t have been surprise to see Courier win baseline contest (in fact, probably more likely outcome heading into match), so no obvious reason for Courier to look for net regularly the way there would be for someone like Edberg, whose unlikely to be able to hold up with Brug from the back

Courier doesn’t play badly from back, Brug plays exceptionally well to dominate things there. Leaving net play a must for Courier to compensate. He doesn’t do it on second return points, leading to Brug having sizably easier time holding serve

Doesn’t take long for Courier to start approaching regularly, so he’s not averse to it or in two-minds whether to keep banging away from back or come in. Might have done him some good to have shifted to more proactively looking for net on some return points, particularly as he’s able to create good positions to rally from with big returns

Rest of basic stats are readily explainable

-Courier edging first serves points indicator of his better serve
- not too high first serve points won by both players indicator of a tough contest going on
- Brug winning 53% second return points indicator of his court superiority

Leaving the big one - Brug as successful behind second serves as firsts - Courier more apt to look to beat-down with baseline power than ally that power to approaching. It doesn’t go well for him

Serve & Return
Unlike many clay matches from the period, serve is important. More for Courier than Brug
Courier has more powerful serve, Brug’s is more deceptive

Both players with damagingly powerful first serves, both players save the better ones for when particularly needed. Courier finds himself needing it it more and is belting them all down by half way point. Brug remains reserved with what he keeps back, and occasionally, kicks first serves down or otherwise sends down decent point starters. His bigger ones tend to catch Courier out, especially if Courier’s looking to smack them early

Powerful serving isn’t necessarily about drawing freebies (that’s optimal - and a bonus), but drawing weak returns. Especially for Courier (as opposed to just getting rallies started). Brug strikes fine balance in his not-big serves, because he needs to keep Courier from particularly attacking returns

Courier takes most second returns from inside court. And occasionally firsts. Leads to a few rushed errors, but he does belt them hard, early, sometimes a little wide. Also runsaround to swat FHs regularly, occasionally in ad court, where he’s apt to go for point ending force (in deuce court, only an extra powerful return)

As with the serve, Brug’s more choosey in when to pick on a return, moving in with seeming decisive intent and smacking the ball from well in court. Rare, but intimidating - on top of what it does for the point, a good way to keep Courier on his toes, as well as having a weapon for oppurtune time up his sleeve

Courier’s stock hefty first serve is powerful enough to have Brug blocking back FH returns. Something he does in general, not just here and not due to serve being overpowering. Does allow Courier to serve to both wings (as opposed to predictably to BH, as happens for much much of the time)

It comes out near even in numbers. Courier probably having slightly better of it

In count virtually equal (Brug 56%, Courier 55%). In light of Courier with bigger serve and more often going for big ones is a win for Courier (practically, it ends up not mattering since Brug wins just as many second serve points)

A bit surprisingly, Brug doing better on aces. He sends down ace/service winner 9.3% off first serves to Courier’s 5%. Partially due to standing further back on the return and partially for surprise factor. When he cranks up the bigger ones, there’s little to telegraph it coming, with Brug’s loose limbed, whippy delivery. Brug’s got a second serve ace too

Negligible double faults (Brug 2, Courier 1). Always good, in this case, particularly for Brug whose under more pressure from Courier’s regular early, big cut second returning

Most importantly, unreturneds - Brug 19%, Courier 20%. Decent numbers for clay, Courier getting his due for serving bigger. He gives up a few missed returns for taking return early, so the sliver 1% difference in freebies under-represents how much bigger Courier’s serve is

Return UEs - Brug 16, Courier 11
Return FEs - Brug 12, Courier 6

Relatively tough for UEs, with many drawn by healthy first serves in swing zone (with Brug blocking FH returns too). That FH return is a minor weakness. If its unusual to block FH returns, Brug not gaining compensation in greater consistency. He’s got 14 errors off each wing, with Courier serving 41% to FH, 58% to BH. FHs more apt to give up error and less strong than normal FHs. Still, at overall 80% return rate, good enough from Brug

Both players return-approach 4 times, both doing so in hit hard and come in way, not chip-charge. Not much success (Brug wins 2, Courier 1). Worth doing a bit more off, despite it not coming off. Courier indulging more often (he faces 58 second serves, Brug 74). He’s a third of the way to net most of the time just hitting his normal second return

Those big cut, early taken second returns of Courier’s have potential to cause havoc. All credit to Brug’s play for it not ending up doing so. The returning itself is very good. He doesn’t look to hit wider still for potential winners, on top of taking them as early as he does and ripping them

In all, Courier having better of serve-return complex, with both doing well
- serving bigger, drawing weaker returns. Able to serve both wings with equal confidence
- returning more aggressively, with the errors he makes so doing compensated for by the greater lot of defensive return UEs his bigger serve draws
- combining the two, freebies virtually equal, but Courier in better position for upcoming rally - in good position on his first serve (better than Brug is on his), often in good position after second return (again, better than Brug is when shoes on other foot)

Then they rally

Play - Baseline & Net
All court match, with Courier the aggressor
Almost all points start on baseline (Courier’s 1/2 serve-volleying, and the 2 playes combine for 3/8 return-approaching), so lets start there

Dual winged play, with Courier harder hitter. Looks to beat down Brug (hit hard to overpower him for errors, that failing draw weak balls he can attack harder still). Brug is not to be overpowered - consistency, shot resistance to power and defence are all up to considerable challenge its faced with

The dual winged thing comes about from Courier trying everything. Hammering FH cc’s, backing away to slap FH inside-outs, powerful BH cc’s. Nothing particularly dents Brug, who hits back with more top-spin, less power - but rarely misses

Courier looks comes into net behind his more powerful shots and looks to finish there

On flip side, Brug’s heavy spun FH causes Courier trouble. Get up high on him, and curbs his hitting. Brug persists with more and more heavy FHs to push Courier back. His FH proves a great finisher - the best of any groundie on show. Building up to to it as described, not going for kill shots from routine positions

In numbers
- Winners - Brug 46, Courier 41
- Errors Forced -Brug 17, Courier 39
(Aggressively ended points - Brug 63, Courier 80)
- UEs - Brug 31, Courier 64

Great numbers, reflecting a great match

Courier wins 51 net points and has 21 ‘volley’ winners. Roughly than he forces 30 passing errors and about 10 baseline-to-baseline
Brug wins 25 net points and has 14 ‘volley’ winners. Roughly than, he also forces about 10 passing errors and 8 baseline-to-baseline

Baseline rallies -
- Winners - Brug 20 (14 FH, 6 BH), 14 Courier (12 FH, 2 BH)
- Errors Forced (approximate) - Courier 10, Brug 8
- UEs - Brug 30 (13 FH, 17 BH), Courier 57 (33 FH, 14 BH)

Neutral UEs - Brug 18, Courier 33

For starters, Brug’s big consistency advantage on the neutrals. Courier isn’t unduly loose, Brug is particularly secure - all credit to him for how that goes

Brug's FH shining with match high winners, match low UEs (both baseline to baseline and otherwise). Its +1 winners in baseline rallies on winners/UEs (next best differential is -11 so vast gap there)

Punishing ability not just coming through in high winners, and look at their distributions. 6 inside-out winners (Courier has 3), 5 cc (Courier also 5). Wherever he plays it from, Brug’s FH is very capable of ending points. And he’s not in a rush to do so - he’ll discomfit and somewhat bully Courier with it, only dropping the hammer when its well prepped to

With FH UEs reading Brug match low 13, Courier match high 33, coupled with Courier Courier’s large 33 neutral UEs, his FHs the shot that’s given way. Not easily and against a wall of for opposition. Many errors striving for depth. Brug’s ability to handle strong shots push him (along with his desire to dictate) to go for that depth. Alternative is to hit less strongly, play who-blinks-first. Probably not a good idea against Brug

 

[Waspsting]

Brug’s FH the star of pure baseline rallies (slightly silly statement - it’s the star period). Its not just a wall, it’s a wall that closes in when it wants to squeeze and squash what’s in its way

BH UEs - Brug 17, Courier 14. A bit surprising. Courier spends more time than Brug playing probing or beat-down FH inside-outs, so some amount of Brug’s UEs would when up against that

Just BH-BH rallies, Brug probably edging consistency, but not by match. Again, Courier hits harder and this time, Brug very rarely goes on offence. His BHs there to hold the fort and pass when needed. Can and does change direction with it, but not aggressively. Brug’s higher BHs discomfit Courier, who falls back and swings shoulder high balls back cc without as much force. Not as much force, but not softly either, and Brug isn’t one to punish the not-strong ball on his BH, and he’s not much of a back-away FH’er

Who has better of it isn’t too important. Probably Brug, but not to substantial extent. Suffice to say, both players doing well with BHs - hitting well, staying steady. Would be a good match of just trading BH cc’s

Given he’s so outdone of FH but holding even with BH, just trading BHs doesn’t look a bad option for Courier. Its not his way and generally, he likes to dictate with FH (running around or otherwise). As he does here too (with net play thrown in, which isn’t generally true)

Subtracting net UEs from attack and winner attempt UEs

Brug has 4-5 attacking UEs for forcing 10 errors and 7-8 winner attempt UEs for striking 20 winners
Courier has about 10-15 attacking errors for forcing 10 errors and 10-15 winner attempt UEs for striking 14 winners (the attacking UEs and winner attempt ones being inversely related)

However you slice it, Brug’s doing better - both forcing errors and hitting winners. Courier’s making more errors doing both

Gist of pure baseline action -
- Brug steadier, with Courier’s FH the standout loose shot
- relative looseness of Courier’s FH not due to absolute looseness, but Brug being that much more secure still
- BH play about equal - both steady, both good hitting in different ways (Courier harder, Brug with more top spin). Courier not ready to duke things out who-blinks-first style on it, and moves over to play FHs and look to control play with power instead
- While Courier leads action more, Brug’s no silent partner. Counter-punching and reacting more often than not, but when he gets on front foot, he gradually crushes Courier down with heavier and heavier FHs, gaining position by the shot until he’s ready to finish point

Its not a ‘pure’ baseline match though and baseline play is interwined with net play

Rallying to net - Courier 49/68 at 72%, Brug 23/31 at 74%

Courier very rarely manufactures approaches from neutral situations. Instead, he outhits Brug and then comes in. 68 is a lot of approaches, so that’s a lot of outhitting Brug (which, were it possible, would be a plus for Courier from the baseline). Good move to come in and finish rather than try to force the issue from the back, given how resistant Brug is there and as noted earlier, its not a change of plan to do so; from get go almost, Courier comes in after gaining strong position in baseline rallies, which he does with is power, particularly the 33 UE FH. Lot of UEs, but lot of setting up that 72% net points he wins too - so better than it looks showing from Courier’s FH

Strong approaches from Courier, not overwhelming. And his volleying is solidly good, without being too fancy (angling volleys right into corners or dropping them dead etc.)

‘Volley’ winners - Courier 21, Brug 14
Volley UEs - Courier 5, Brug 0 (Courier has a non-net one as well)

Volley FEs - Courier 5, Brug 1
Passing winners - Courier 5, Brug 11
Passing errors (approximate) - Courier 10, Brug 30

With near identical success at net (Courier 69%, Brug 71%), of course overall things come out about even. And the differences are along natural lines of one player coming in twice as much

Brug coming in from better positions - his proportion of volley winners to errors forced is very high, and just 1 volley error (an FE). He too, doesn’t come in from overwhelming approach, so care is needed on the volley. Just 1 error, no UEs and all those winners - job well done. 8/12 Courier ground FEs are FHs, so extra care needed against that very powerful, dangerous shot. And a nice touch to go with his baseline superiority, even if it were only to keep Courier on his toes and away from net. Winning 25 points goes well beyond the simple positive of keeping Courier on his toes. Neat, efficient volleying from Brug. He isn’t challenged too much, but misses almost literally nothing and doesn’t leave ready passing chances. Particularly good on tricky, back-pedalling OHs (and smart enough to more safely take them on the bounce when possible)

Courier coming in so much inevitably misses a few volleys. 5 UEs is small enough to be good. 21 winners, forcing 30 errors is a very good ratio for coming in so much on clay. Also inevitable is Brug getting a few good passes off, with the 11 winners and forcing 6 errors. Courier faces more difficult volleys than Brug does and makes most. About half his FEs are impossible ‘volleys’ - but he doesn’t give confidence that he can handle difficult ones for long

Room for Brug to pass better, simply on percentage basis, but he passes just fine. And Courier’s approaches flow smoothly from advantage gained via outhitting Brug from back

Gist of net play - Courier smartly and without hesitation coming forward finish and efficient in doing so. Efficiency, not brilliance, is what he needs to cap times when he overpowers Brug from the back (which back-cuts big into Brug’s nominal baseline advantage outlined earlier). Brug using net well too

It would be beyond Courier’s comfort zone to manufacture approaches from neutral situations. Nor is his net play so good, along with how good Brug is on the pass, that such an approach promises to yield good results for Courier. What he does - come in after overpowering Brug is best way to end points in such situations - and he’s done well both for his approach and in execution to action. And Brug is just so - coming in less (because he doesn’t need to and also because its not his way), but very effective when he does

 

[Waspsting]

Match Progression
Courier comes out hammering groundies right off the bat, and Brug counter-punches. Gradually, Courier comes to net a little more. Early on Brug’s counter-punching holds Courier off but as first set goes on, Brug starts bossing action with his FH. Hitting harder and deeper leads to more long errors for Courier

Courier thoroughly leads action for first 2 games. After holding to 15, he’s got break point, that’s erased by a FH inside-out winner and Brug sends down his second ace of the game to hold for 1-1

Tussle starts in earnest in game 3, which lasts 14 points with Brug grabbing the break on his 6th chance. Courier making errors from the ground going long, while going hard at ball and he flirts with approaching as an alternative. His sole serve-volley is met with a low wide return he can’t handle. Third ball FH error brings up break point number 6. A great defensive get by Brurg against a potentially winningly powerful FH cc keeps the point alive, before Courier misses an attacking FH inside-out

The break settles Brug down and he dominates his service games with hearty FH play. 9/17 FH winners come in the set. Courier meanwhile has to save 4 more break points to hold for 3-4 - couple of routine return errors by Brug and a BHV winner from Courier get server out of 40-40 jam. There’s another break point though, on which Courier comes up with a not-obvious FH inside-out winner before holding

Nice touch by Brug to return-approach a couple times in his last return game. The BHV winner he hits on the first is Edberg-esque, going through like a rifle shot for a winner, not far from Courier, but Courier knocks away BH dtl pass winner next point, before dispatching a FH cc winner against a FH inside-in to hold

Not an easy serve out. Brug serves an ace to get to 30-30. Not a good pass from Courier point after, but Brug keeping net play up his sleeve ‘til now is another good move as he comes away with an OH winner to reach 40-30. third ball FH inside-out winner from mid-court to end it

Courier maintains power-hitting game in second set, but now comes in more and earlier. Also starts returning second serves from well inside court and slugging them

This crashes through Brug for a break and 3-1. Good hard tennis for rest of set. Courier breaks again to end the set - a long, 16 point game, where Brug lands 7/16 first serves, and loses 6/9 second serve points. He misses a third ball BH dtl winner attempt - his going for such a shot is sign of being pressured by Courier’s hard-hitting approach - on 6th break point and its 1 set apiece

Brug walls up in third set, and getting an error out of him is like pulling teeth. Courier’s still attacking second returns, but Brug wins perfect 8/8 second serve points. Courier probes around - with his FH, with his BH, to Brug’s FH, to Brug’s BH - no weakness to be found and its left for Courier to miss groundies. He also continues hitting his way to net to good effect though

16 point game to end last set, and a 22 point one to start this one. Brug takes his 8th break point. Unable to penetrate the wall, net play is Courier’s equalizer and he wins 5/5 in first 20 points

Which becomes 5/7 from full 22, with Brug knocking away consecutive BH cc passing winners to break - the second one particularly difficult. Brug adds another break in middle of set - starting with a very early taken, BH inside-in/cc return winner, ending with Courier missing third ball FH - and is untroubled on serve to go up 2-1

Fourth set is best of the match (and they’re all good). Courier cleans up his errors, but Brug remains wall-like. With Courier holding up better, Brug takes to going for his shots - and keeps nailing them
Early break makes it 2-0 to Courier, but he’s strained to hold onto that lead. His last 3 holds last 8, 10 (1 break point) and 8 points (down 0-40). Brug’s last 5, 6 and 6 points

BHV and FH inside-out winners from Courier in break game, the latter coming out of routine positon. And Brug missing a couple of attacking groundies. 2-0, and rest of set, Courier’s up against it to keep his lead. Net play sees him just about manage

He’s down 0-40 on the serve-out, missing a couple of FH winner attempts. Net play and a strong serve gets him to deuce, before Brug misses a routine second return to give up the set

Going into 5th set, momentum is with Brug whose been better player previous set, despite losing it
Courier breaks to start the decider, finishing the game with some brutally powerful shots. And consolidates to 15 quickly. So much for the momentum being with Brug

Turns out it is because 2-0 is last bit of good news for Courier. Brug stays wall-ish, but Courier chokes a bit. He gives up blinky errors (unpressured UEs, quickly in rallies) to an extent greater than at any stage in match. He’s not tired - both players, but Courier more, are moving as well as at the start

Brug wins 29 points to Courier’s 15 to run off the match

Brug breaks back for 2-2. Lovely BH lob winner and a FH drop shot one after pushing Courier back raises break point. Dubious choice to go dtl neutrally on a FH he’s comfortably covered leads to an error by Courier

2 poor games in a row by Courier to follow up, filled with quick ground errors - and Brug’s up 4-2. 5-2 after a commanding hold, which ends with another regulation ground error from Courier

Net play gets Courier a hole and force Brug to serve things out. Couple of blinks make it 0-30 and a whacked return to the baseline makes it 15-40
Strong serve saves first break point. Courier misses FH inside-in winner attempt that was there for the shot on the second and its deuce

Great rally, where Brug’s on defensive, but comes away with a BH cc passing winner to raise match point. Another big return from Courier on it (against first serve) and he wins point with a huge FH inside-in

Just good enough serve to force an error brings up match point for second time. Rally develops which Courier works nicely to come to net and hit a corner volley. Brug runs it down and comes up with a wide, low pass that Courier can’t handle

Summing up, great match and great showings from both players, especially Bruguera. Courier hammers the ball and allies that to coming to net to good effect. Bruguera is usually wall-like from the back, encouraging Courier to miss his powerful, deep, would-be beat-down groundstrokes, particularly FHs, but when he chooses, is able to dominate baseline action with persistent, heavy FHs of his own

Bruguera’s consistency, shot tolerance, defence are all excellent. And when he takes charge of rallies, he’s even better than his opponent at it, doing so safely and building up to squashing Courier with heavier and heavier FHs until he’s ready to take the kill shot

Courier has power, looks to take ball from inside court, rips FHs and sometimes BHs too. Its not enough to finish Bruguera, and he ends up making strained errors more often than not. Has to come to net to do the finishing, a path he embraces. Might have done well to be even more proactive in searching for it in return games

Both players are good in areas that their showings don’t feature prominently too - Bruguera’s net play, Courier’s defence too
Bruguera has better of things and would be most fitting winner. Slightest of blemishes in Courier choking up errors near the end seals that ultimate result more surely

 

[Galvermegs]

Match Progression
Courier comes out hammering groundies right off the bat, and Brug counter-punches. Gradually, Courier comes to net a little more. Early on Brug’s counter-punching holds Courier off but as first set goes on, Brug starts bossing action with his FH. Hitting harder and deeper leads to more long errors for Courier

Courier thoroughly leads action for first 2 games. After holding to 15, he’s got break point, that’s erased by a FH inside-out winner and Brug sends down his second ace of the game to hold for 1-1

Tussle starts in earnest in game 3, which lasts 14 points with Brug grabbing the break on his 6th chance. Courier making errors from the ground going long, while going hard at ball and he flirts with approaching as an alternative. His sole serve-volley is met with a low wide return he can’t handle. Third ball FH error brings up break point number 6. A great defensive get by Brurg against a potentially winningly powerful FH cc keeps the point alive, before Courier misses an attacking FH inside-out

The break settles Brug down and he dominates his service games with hearty FH play. 9/17 FH winners come in the set. Courier meanwhile has to save 4 more break points to hold for 3-4 - couple of routine return errors by Brug and a BHV winner from Courier get server out of 40-40 jam. There’s another break point though, on which Courier comes up with a not-obvious FH inside-out winner before holding

Nice touch by Brug to return-approach a couple times in his last return game. The BHV winner he hits on the first is Edberg-esque, going through like a rifle shot for a winner, not far from Courier, but Courier knocks away BH dtl pass winner next point, before dispatching a FH cc winner against a FH inside-in to hold

Not an easy serve out. Brug serves an ace to get to 30-30. Not a good pass from Courier point after, but Brug keeping net play up his sleeve ‘til now is another good move as he comes away with an OH winner to reach 40-30. third ball FH inside-out winner from mid-court to end it

Courier maintains power-hitting game in second set, but now comes in more and earlier. Also starts returning second serves from well inside court and slugging them

This crashes through Brug for a break and 3-1. Good hard tennis for rest of set. Courier breaks again to end the set - a long, 16 point game, where Brug lands 7/16 first serves, and loses 6/9 second serve points. He misses a third ball BH dtl winner attempt - his going for such a shot is sign of being pressured by Courier’s hard-hitting approach - on 6th break point and its 1 set apiece

Brug walls up in third set, and getting an error out of him is like pulling teeth. Courier’s still attacking second returns, but Brug wins perfect 8/8 second serve points. Courier probes around - with his FH, with his BH, to Brug’s FH, to Brug’s BH - no weakness to be found and its left for Courier to miss groundies. He also continues hitting his way to net to good effect though

16 point game to end last set, and a 22 point one to start this one. Brug takes his 8th break point. Unable to penetrate the wall, net play is Courier’s equalizer and he wins 5/5 in first 20 points

Which becomes 5/7 from full 22, with Brug knocking away consecutive BH cc passing winners to break - the second one particularly difficult. Brug adds another break in middle of set - starting with a very early taken, BH inside-in/cc return winner, ending with Courier missing third ball FH - and is untroubled on serve to go up 2-1

Fourth set is best of the match (and they’re all good). Courier cleans up his errors, but Brug remains wall-like. With Courier holding up better, Brug takes to going for his shots - and keeps nailing them
Early break makes it 2-0 to Courier, but he’s strained to hold onto that lead. His last 3 holds last 8, 10 (1 break point) and 8 points (down 0-40). Brug’s last 5, 6 and 6 points

BHV and FH inside-out winners from Courier in break game, the latter coming out of routine positon. And Brug missing a couple of attacking groundies. 2-0, and rest of set, Courier’s up against it to keep his lead. Net play sees him just about manage

He’s down 0-40 on the serve-out, missing a couple of FH winner attempts. Net play and a strong serve gets him to deuce, before Brug misses a routine second return to give up the set

Going into 5th set, momentum is with Brug whose been better player previous set, despite losing it
Courier breaks to start the decider, finishing the game with some brutally powerful shots. And consolidates to 15 quickly. So much for the momentum being with Brug

Turns out it is because 2-0 is last bit of good news for Courier. Brug stays wall-ish, but Courier chokes a bit. He gives up blinky errors (unpressured UEs, quickly in rallies) to an extent greater than at any stage in match. He’s not tired - both players, but Courier more, are moving as well as at the start

Brug wins 29 points to Courier’s 15 to run off the match

Brug breaks back for 2-2. Lovely BH lob winner and a FH drop shot one after pushing Courier back raises break point. Dubious choice to go dtl neutrally on a FH he’s comfortably covered leads to an error by Courier

2 poor games in a row by Courier to follow up, filled with quick ground errors - and Brug’s up 4-2. 5-2 after a commanding hold, which ends with another regulation ground error from Courier

Net play gets Courier a hole and force Brug to serve things out. Couple of blinks make it 0-30 and a whacked return to the baseline makes it 15-40
Strong serve saves first break point. Courier misses FH inside-in winner attempt that was there for the shot on the second and its deuce

Great rally, where Brug’s on defensive, but comes away with a BH cc passing winner to raise match point. Another big return from Courier on it (against first serve) and he wins point with a huge FH inside-in

Just good enough serve to force an error brings up match point for second time. Rally develops which Courier works nicely to come to net and hit a corner volley. Brug runs it down and comes up with a wide, low pass that Courier can’t handle

Summing up, great match and great showings from both players, especially Bruguera. Courier hammers the ball and allies that to coming to net to good effect. Bruguera is usually wall-like from the back, encouraging Courier to miss his powerful, deep, would-be beat-down groundstrokes, particularly FHs, but when he chooses, is able to dominate baseline action with persistent, heavy FHs of his own

Bruguera’s consistency, shot tolerance, defence are all excellent. And when he takes charge of rallies, he’s even better than his opponent at it, doing so safely and building up to squashing Courier with heavier and heavier FHs until he’s ready to take the kill shot

Courier has power, looks to take ball from inside court, rips FHs and sometimes BHs too. Its not enough to finish Bruguera, and he ends up making strained errors more often than not. Has to come to net to do the finishing, a path he embraces. Might have done well to be even more proactive in searching for it in return games

Both players are good in areas that their showings don’t feature prominently too - Bruguera’s net play, Courier’s defence too
Bruguera has better of things and would be most fitting winner. Slightest of blemishes in Courier choking up errors near the end seals that ultimate result more surely

I need to see this match. I have very little knowledge of bruguera but have seen him in passing. Courier was gutted he lost.. the beginning of the end of his dominance of the game.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

yippee!! been anticipating this report for a long time and i'm very pleased by your analysis!

 

[I get cramps]

I need to see this match. I have very little knowledge of bruguera but have seen him in passing. Courier was gutted he lost.. the beginning of the end of his dominance of the game.

You should watch the copy on Teldedeporte (a strictly Spanish sports channel of yesteryear). It is an edited version of 3h 53' 11" in length, as the match was almost 4 hours long or went over it by about three minutes, and the broadcast starts in the sixth minute of the match.

Why the Spanish broadcast? It is the only one you will find in 1280x720p on YouTube, and the ball can be easily seen: ROLAND GARROS 1993 MEN'S FINAL S BRUGUERA—J COURIER. I would not want that because of me. Roland Garros would claim its property rights on the match and be removed from YouTube.

A few weeks ago, Voo de Mar uploaded the semi that Bruguera played against Medvedev in its entirety, divided into three segments corresponding to the sets played.

Let's see:

Sergi attacked short balls, returned very long, or made the most of the positional advantages before playing Pete in the quarterfinals. SB effectively defeated his opponents, never spending more time on the court than necessary.

Lluís and Sergi Bruguera were looking at a somewhat different play pattern against Courier than the one that took place. To begin with, Lluís' strategic focus was on Sergi going out on court to win a set and disregarding anything else except being far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him.

Lluís thought that, thus, Sergi could remove some pressure from himself when he faced Courier on the Chatrier—Courier, against whom he had not won a single set and had lost nine.

The chances that Bruguera could beat Courier were discussed before the match between McEnroe and Andres Gimeno. The New Yorker thought that if the final would be decided based on current form, either player could win; however, the memory of the previous matches played between both players and Jim's experience in big matches made him a clear favorite.

Higueras said how he saw the chances of one and the other on Saturday, June 5:

Ranking Bruguera-Muster-Courier on clay

Some people like to debate between Federer and Djokovic on clay and who should rank higher, but personally I find this comparision far more interesting. What order do the trio of Bruguera, Muster, and Courier rank in on clay. I think all agree that the trio are quite close overall. And the...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Sergi has stated in several oral interviews that he felt physically spent when he was trailing 0-2 in the deciding set. Then, Lluís told him to look at Courier, silently hinting, "And so he is." According to the Barcelona native, that indication made him pick himself up from exhaustion.

Why couldn't Bruguera be as offensive in his game as they planned? Because of how Courier reacted when he was. Jim wasn't going to give an inch. He was determined not to back down. But, according to the Brugueras, Jim's holding firm without giving ground under Sergi's high kicking and heavy ball finally led to his physical downfall in the fifth set.

 

[Galvermegs]

You should watch the copy on Teldedeporte (a strictly Spanish sports channel of yesteryear). It is an edited version of 3h 53' 11" in length, as the match was almost 4 hours long or went over it by about three minutes, and the broadcast starts in the sixth minute of the match.

Why the Spanish broadcast? It is the only one you will find in 1280x720p on YouTube, and the ball can be easily seen: ROLAND GARROS 1993 MEN'S FINAL S BRUGUERA—J COURIER. I would not want that because of me. Roland Garros would claim its property rights on the match and be removed from YouTube.

A few weeks ago, Voo de Mar uploaded the semi that Bruguera played against Medvedev in its entirety, divided into three segments corresponding to the sets played.

Let's see:

Sergi attacked short balls, returned very long, or made the most of the positional advantages before playing Pete in the quarterfinals. SB effectively defeated his opponents, never spending more time on the court than necessary.

Lluís and Sergi Bruguera were looking at a somewhat different play pattern against Courier than the one that took place. To begin with, Lluís' strategic focus was on Sergi going out on court to win a set and disregarding anything else except being far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him.

Lluís thought that, thus, Sergi could remove some pressure from himself when he faced Courier on the Chatrier—Courier, against whom he had not won a single set and had lost nine.

The chances that Bruguera could beat Courier were discussed before the match between McEnroe and Andres Gimeno. The New Yorker thought that if the final would be decided based on current form, either player could win; however, the memory of the previous matches played between both players and Jim's experience in big matches made him a clear favorite.

Higueras said how he saw the chances of one and the other on Saturday, June 5:

Ranking Bruguera-Muster-Courier on clay

Some people like to debate between Federer and Djokovic on clay and who should rank higher, but personally I find this comparision far more interesting. What order do the trio of Bruguera, Muster, and Courier rank in on clay. I think all agree that the trio are quite close overall. And the...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Sergi has stated in several oral interviews that he felt physically spent when he was trailing 0-2 in the deciding set. Then, Lluís told him to look at Courier, silently hinting, "And so he is." According to the Barcelona native, that indication made him pick himself up from exhaustion.

Why couldn't Bruguera be as offensive in his game as they planned? Because of how Courier reacted when he was. Jim wasn't going to give an inch. He was determined not to back down. But, according to the Brugueras, Jim's holding firm without giving ground under Sergi's high kicking and heavy ball finally led to his physical downfall in the fifth set.

Many thanks for your advice and the comprehensive breakdown of the tactics against courier.
Certainly both players played smart tennis but i do feel there is a brutal efficiency to courier but on the other side was a good deal of flair.
Bruguera perhaps should have made more RG finals than either courier or agassi, but he still did a great job when it mattered most (unlike a muster or medvedev )

 

[Waspsting]

I need to see this match. I have very little knowledge of bruguera but have seen him in passing

Another one worth checking out is the '91 Monte Carlo final against Boris Becker
Even better than this match, in my opinion

Sergi attacked short balls, returned very long, or made the most of the positional advantages before playing Pete in the quarterfinals. SB effectively defeated his opponents, never spending more time on the court than necessary.

Lluís and Sergi Bruguera were looking at a somewhat different play pattern against Courier than the one that took place. To begin with, Lluís' strategic focus was on Sergi going out on court to win a set and disregarding anything else except being far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him.

Lluís thought that, thus, Sergi could remove some pressure from himself when he faced Courier on the Chatrier—Courier, against whom he had not won a single set and had lost nine.

Interesting. I'd expect most likely outcome of "being far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him" would be failing completely and getting thrashed
And you say Brug was pretty aggressive in his early round to begin with

That outlook strikes me as being intimidated by reputation, feeling you have to do more than what you have because opponent is just too good

How often does a player straining beyond his comfort zone of aggression manage to pull it off?

Why couldn't Bruguera be as offensive in his game as they planned? Because of how Courier reacted when he was. Jim wasn't going to give an inch. He was determined not to back down. But, according to the Brugueras, Jim's holding firm without giving ground under Sergi's high kicking and heavy ball finally led to his physical downfall in the fifth set.

Probably a blessing in disguise for Brug

I'm curious how Courier was playing earlier in the tournament, and would be surprised if it was as net seeking as here
For that matter, what playing dynamics for their lead-up match in Rome was like

 

[I get cramps]

Many thanks for your advice and the comprehensive breakdown of the tactics against courier.
Certainly both players played smart tennis but i do feel there is a brutal efficiency to courier but on the other side was a good deal of flair.
Bruguera perhaps should have made more RG finals than either courier or agassi, but he still did a great job when it mattered most (unlike a muster or medvedev )

My pleasure.

 

[I get cramps]

Interesting. I'd expect most likely outcome of "being far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him" would be failing completely and getting thrashed
And you say Brug was pretty aggressive in his early round to begin with

That outlook strikes me as being intimidated by reputation, feeling you have to do more than what you have because opponent is just too good

How often does a player straining beyond his comfort zone of aggression manage to pull it off?

I want to clarify that I transcribe and translate what the Brugueras say, and I am faithful to their own words, but certainly not verbatim. If I were to make them verbatim, I would bore the sheep.

Moose and you (for instance) have repeatedly noted in this forum that players' recollections of their careers and matches are unreliable.

A week ago, I rewatched the semi between Andrei and Sergi. I saw Sergi's match against Leconte when it was broadcast and a few times afterward. I could say the same thing about the quarterfinal match between Pete and Sergi. Here, my memory is more recent, as I rewatched it at least twice since Reiner Zufall uploaded it to YouTube a little over two years ago. By the way, in that match, you can see McEnroe in the stands, who, on Sunday, June 6th, would tell Gimeno that Jim was the clear favorite to win the final.

Regarding Sergi's aggressiveness:

Sergi reaches the final having been on court 10 h 21', an average of 1 h 43' on court per match played by the Catalan.

In the quarterfinals against Pete and the semis against Andrei, Sergi is very close to the baseline, and he hits very long and with great depth from both wings. Add to this the forward momentum of Sergi's ball once it bounces. The long-armed player attacks Pete's backhand with his FH and doesn't mind exchanging CC FHs with him, and when the Californian leaves a short ball, the Spaniard punishes it and goes to the net.

In the semi, Bruguera does not run around his backhand and exchanges CC backhands, but he is so confident in his backhand that he redirects (looking for winners) with surprising frequency. At least for what he got me used to seeing from him.

He hits his FH with very little height for his standards and draws what I think you would mark as FE's. The difference in speed and court coverage between the two is disproportionate. Bruguera seems to be as relaxed as someone in a hitting session, hitting all balls either within the bounds of the court or very close to the bounds. Medvedev's serve is broken back to back midway through the first set, and Andrei is not on the scoreboard. His facial expression is that of someone who has to contain a nervous breakdown. He is so anxious that he can't take a step backward from the baseline, not one.

It's not a spectacular match, but that's not the Catalans' fault. AFAIK, this match was not broadcast in the USA.

I wrote that Bruguera was not as aggressive as his side had planned during the match, "Lluís and Sergi Bruguera were looking at a somewhat different play pattern against Courier than the one that took place. To begin with, Lluís' strategic focus was on Sergi going out on court to win a set and disregarding anything else except being far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him."

I'm curious how Courier was playing earlier in the tournament, and would be surprised if it was as net seeking as here
For that matter, what playing dynamics for their lead-up match in Rome was like

I have not seen any previous match between Jim and Sergi to this final.

Not only did the Bruguera's (singularly Lluís) think that winning the first set against Jim was decisive, but so did Santana, who had followed Courier's performance during the tournament. For all purposes, Santana was a member of "Team Bruguera". Santana told Lluís, as the latter tells us, that Jim was winning his matches in four sets but making life difficult for himself. Courier would win the first set he played without difficulty and then struggle to finish off his opponents. Santana and Higueras, as the latter said on Saturday the fifth, did not see the same Jim who won the tournament in 1992. https://www.atptour.com/en/players/...matchType=Singles&year=1993&tournament=520_GS

This did not alter the fact that Courier led the head-to-head with Bruguera by nine sets to zero. When Gimeno talks to McEnroe about the final, he tells the left-hander that he disagrees with John, as "current form" can completely change things.

All these are, after all, logical fallacies if we maintain some rigor. What if, once on the court, Sergi felt that who he had in front of him was the seventh player he would beat?

As Sergi advanced in the tournament, Spanish tennis fans felt ambivalent, a mixture of joy and terror. No Spanish male tennis player had been in a grand slam final since 1975. Gimeno minutes before the quarterfinal match against Sampras, "I'm nervous. Sampras is number one in the world; he is a very dangerous player." En terre battue, really? Before the first set's end, Gimeno: "Sergi is playing phenomenal!"

Lluís was not a good player, but he understood the game, was bold, and knew how to encourage or inspire other players. Manuel Orantes and José Higueras befriended him. Lluís was chosen as Davis Cup captain because Orantes and Higueras wanted him to be, but I insist that Lluís knew how to read the game.

Higueras and Lluís are still friends and have talked about the final. They both think the match's hardness started to wear on Jim's stamina in the fifth set.

 

[Waspsting]

yippee!! been anticipating this report for a long time and i'm very pleased by your analysis!

Angrybirdstar, question for you

When you go through my threads, what do you focus on, what do you pay particular attention to, what do you look at first?

The stats? The report? a particular stat? A particular aspect of the report? Does it vary by match?

 

[Waspsting]

Regarding Sergi's aggressiveness:

Sergi reaches the final having been on court 10 h 21', an average of 1 h 43' on court per match played by the Catalan.

In the quarterfinals against Pete and the semis against Andrei, Sergi is very close to the baseline, and he hits very long and with great depth from both wings. Add to this the forward momentum of Sergi's ball once it bounces. The long-armed player attacks Pete's backhand with his FH and doesn't mind exchanging CC FHs with him, and when the Californian leaves a short ball, the Spaniard punishes it and goes to the net.

In the semi, Bruguera does not run around his backhand and exchanges CC backhands, but he is so confident in his backhand that he redirects (looking for winners) with surprising frequency. At least for what he got me used to seeing from him.

He hits his FH with very little height for his standards and draws what I think you would mark as FE's. The difference in speed and court coverage between the two is disproportionate. Bruguera seems to be as relaxed as someone in a hitting session, hitting all balls either within the bounds of the court or very close to the bounds. Medvedev's serve is broken back to back midway through the first set, and Andrei is not on the scoreboard. His facial expression is that of someone who has to contain a nervous breakdown. He is so anxious that he can't take a step backward from the baseline, not one.

Ok, I understand better

When I hear a phrase like -

far more aggressive in his play than what was usual for him.

- first though is of stepping in and smacking winners or coming to net to do the same

Which I really don't think would have been a good idea for Brug against Courier

Most of the description you've given now ('great depth of both wings' in particular)... that's more doable. Its sort of thing Courier himself excels at. I'd call it persistent, beat-down tennis
Even if it draws errors, (even those I mark UEs), its aggressive. Muster did it too. Lendl is another (limited to off the FH)

Contrast to looping balls in play, which I think of as 'who-blinks-first'

Its clay court aggressive, where stepping in and smacking winners regularly from back... is unlikely to pay dividends. Rios, Guga could pull it off now and then, but it wasn't Guga's only line of play (and if it was Rios' - I don't know if it was, I haven't seen that much of him - that'd explain his lack of success at French. Nadal too could pull if off, but he only turned to it as last resort, like French Open final, 2014

The exception, or part that would fit the image I have off 'far more aggressive in his play than what was usual' is -

Bruguera does not run around his backhand and exchanges CC backhands, but he is so confident in his backhand that he redirects (looking for winners) with surprising frequency.

Now that is aggressive, on any surface

Couple of thoughts. I love the form of Brug's BH. Looks like he could play it all day and stay solid, and its not wanting for force. Like Agassi's or Djokovic's - a shot he can have utter confidence in. A shot good enough that he doesn't have to go into a match worrying "what if my opponent targets my BH?" - which is a thought most players will have against certain opponents

Players with BHs that good of form... always make me wonder about how successful they'd be if they kept playing down-the-line

Would they miss a bunch? or would they just win points more quickly than they could by going cc, cc, cc 'til error pops up?

Medvedev also has a very good BH, and trading cc shots with him... no guarentee Brug comes up ahead doing that (unlike Sampras, who I'd expect him to be able to grind down) in that way

going dtl to shorten the rallies against tough BH like Med... yes, that's bold and aggressive from Brug

Lluís was not a good player, but he understood the game

the piece you posted on his take going into the '94 final... spot on, nicely worked out

I particularly like the bit (paraphrasing), "... when he hits a winner, you just applaud and encourage him, he'll end up losing more than he wins playing that way"

Higueras and Lluís are still friends and have talked about the final. They both think the match's hardness started to wear on Jim's stamina in the fifth set.

Put it this way. I don't think stamina was a factor

I consider stamina to be a factor when one guy has a noticable advantage over the other. One guy is still moving well, the other isn't. One guy is commited to rallying tough every point, the other guy isn't

2012 Aus final is an example. Both players are fried, but they're equally fried - so no advantage coming out of stamina for either player

Of course by 5th set on clay, both players will have less of that grit than they did earlier, but if they're equally worn down - what does it matter, in terms of prospects winning?

And I don't think Courier is any more worn down than Brug is at the end, I see it more as -

Sergi has stated in several oral interviews that he felt physically spent when he was trailing 0-2 in the deciding set. Then, Lluís told him to look at Courier, silently hinting, "And so he is." According to the Barcelona native, that indication made him pick himself up from exhaustion

If Courier had ended up winning, I'm sure you'd have gotten the same take in reverse. Some guy in Courier's camp saying "Bruguera was tired at the end"
Of course he's tired - you guys haven't been sipping tea for 4 hours - but your as tired as he is, so that's not why you won


I'll share a boxing parallel At the end of their last match, both Muhammed Ali and Joe Frazier were as gone as gone can be
Before the last round, Ali was telling his coach to throw in the towel, he can't go another round. Coach ignored him
Frazier was telling his coach "let me at him, boss". His coach cut his gloves

It'd be goofy to attribute the result to Frazier being worn down - and simply stating the obvious to point out that he was... that, is how I see raising issue of how tired Courier was at the end of this match. Bruguera isn't exactly turning cartwheels either

'84 final between Lendl and Mac... same deal, both players worn out by end, in about equal measure (and both very, very worn down)
Neither player looks that worn down, as '84, where you feel they might go and collapse in dressing room

 

[Angrybirdstar]

Angrybirdstar, question for you

When you go through my threads, what do you focus on, what do you pay particular attention to, what do you look at first?

The stats? The report? a particular stat? A particular aspect of the report? Does it vary by match?

i tend to fully skip the initial stats section and read through the whole report, occasionally skimming the match progression section. if i've watched the match or have some preconceptions about one of the players, i try to look for comments of yours that i strongly agree/disagree with, and figure out how i want to update my mental model of those players (Becker snippets are some of my faves), surface+era dynamics, or anything else

e.g.

That [Bruguera's] FH return is a minor weakness.

something i felt about Bruguera not just on return but on defense against beat-down type aggression - his grip and windup seemed to force more slicing than preferable

[Bruguera] Can and does change direction with it [his backhand], but not aggressively.

was surprised by this one, because my impression was that he did it frequently enough to the point of feeling like an effortless "Djokovic punishing ad court campers" showing

Going into 5th set, momentum is with Brug whose been better player previous set, despite losing it

at this point in the match, was thinking about how Bruguera had so clearly been the "better" clay court player (and also was feeling unimpressed with Courier's showing). later came to the conclusion that Courier played admirably to his strengths of focus and stamina to squeeze the most advantage out of letups from a superior opponent on paper

insert obligatory Tym post which aligns with a lot of what you said in your comparisons between Bruguera and Courier's capabilities on offense and from neutral

This match is a classic example of why one reporter once wrote of Bruguera, he only seems to be bothered to lay it all on the line at the French. When Bruguera was fully focused and not keeling over looking like he was dying and moping and looking lethargic as he was prone to do periodically, he was imo, clearly a step ahead of Courier in foot speed, could fully match his power and occasionally surpass it (Courier was consistently more powerful, whereas Bruguera had a greater top speed due to his racket head speed...but because of his extreme motion and grip, didn't bring it out all that often, he had to pick his spots), and was more versatile groundstroker. Courier was a more straight ahead guy, he was tennis' version of a bulldog at his best. He had stamina for days, he did not wilt, he did not lose concentration in his prime. He said later that he felt like he let up in his focus that fifth set, and he feels he should have had it. Imo, that maybe by his standards, but compared to the absolute gifts of concentration and focus lapses that Bruguera was apt to give you, there's really no comparison.

This was a classic match of two kinds of top players. You have the Muster, Chang, Courier, Rafter, Lendl types who can seemingly focus for days, then you have the guys like Kafelnikov, Rios, young Agassi, Leconte, Bruguera, Medvedev, Krajicek, Goran, Pioline, Stich, Safin, etc. who are very prone to mid-match mental lapses. Quite simply they just have a bad habit of going off the bonker for awhile, or dogging it for periods. In general a lot of top players will fit into one of these categories.

Imo, more often than not, however, it's the guys who are flightier mentally who tend to have the higher top gear. Courier struck me as a guy who like Muster, when their fitness was at its absolute peak and intimidating to all the other players, they could and were dominant. They're different from Chang, however, because they actually had forcing weapons, such as Muster's incredibly heavy, powerful, and relentless topspin; and Courier's whopping and laser accurate inside-out and inside-in forehand.

Still, guys like Courier and Muster are rarely able to sustain their dominance for long. Quite simply, their mind and focus and fitness levels just have to be almost unhumanly good to keep it up for long, and it rarely happens.

Guys in the other category tend to not find their "second wind" if/when injuries being to take their toll. In other words, a guy like Tommy Haas has more of a natural fighter's spirit in him than these other guys, and I feel that's why someone like him is able to repeatedly claw back from injury and more or less scrape his way back to where he was.

A guy like Korda, or Rios, or Bruguera, or Safin, or Pioline once their spirit is broken, it's pretty clear, and they go away pretty quickly. They may hang on a little after, later, but it's almost like they're just not their anymore.

To me, I liken it to how some types are completely unsettled by a major life change or move, whereas others can jump right back in and not skip a beat.

Imo, Muster and Courier were nightmare matchups for Bruguera. Bruguera played an exhausting game, a powerful but GRINDING game. At his best, he combined offense with defense like few ever have. However, in terms of fitness, he simply did not have the NATURAL stamina of guys like Muster or Courier imo, it's not just who worked harder (which both did), but also imo, that some guys just naturally have the capacitcy for GREAT stamina, and others don't.

Muster, however, was more difficult to overcome for Bruguera. Bruguera would momentarily "wilt" against both of them, BUT against Courier, his actual style matched up, imo, pretty favorably once you eliminate the focus/stamina variable.

Bruguera's inside-out forehand was as dangerous as anyone's on clay, so in a way, Courier and his most obvious strengths were neutralized. With Muster, his fierce inside-out forehand went to Bruguera's wide forehand, he had a great running forehand, but in general, he rarely would go for OFFENSE from this side. He would try to loop it back heavy and deep.

Furthermore, whereas Muster's backhand was not a weapon in the sense that he went for winners, in terms of consistently powerful and heavy spin, there have been one-handers to ever stand up to that measure. Muster's backhand was rock solid and heavy UNTIL you could break him down with flat shots...Bruguera don't do that. Bruguera could generate all kinds of angles and spins on the ball off the ground, but hitting flat as a forte was not one of them.

Even his slices, Bruguera had a natural tendency, a natural inclination, to try and over exaggerate EVERY kind of spin he tried. I think when you get that reptuation, it tends to feed into your identity, psyche/ego on a sub-conscious level. His slices, he NEVER tried to KNIFE it, he'd always try to SWERVE it, one of the most retardely exaggerated slice motions I've seen. His volleys? Almost ALWAYS he'd try to go for a cutesy drop volley...he was actually pretty darn good at these, but also it was very predictable.

All in all, this match to me just showed that Bruguera at peak intensity was definitely gonna come out on top against Courier more often than not, during his lapses, it was the opposite way around. It tends to even out. Was one of the most titanic and dramatic grand slam finals ever. I think it's an outrage that the Tennis Channel hasn't shown it yet when it is CLEARLY one of the greatest grand slam finals of all time imo. It had EVERY kind of drama. The last game, Courier you could see why he was so intimidating at that time, on the big points, Courier was NOT afraid to let it ALL hang out back then. Many a player would have crumbled under that pressure, and Bruguera almost did, visibly tightening up that last game, but in the end, it was just his day. Just as much as it was Courier claiming he lost his focus and LET Bruguera get back in that fifth set, I thought it was actually more Bruguera still carrying over the mopey, dogging it, hang-dog look of the fourth set. Meaning, it's a natural hangover from when you assume that kind of body language. It's difficult to just immediately shake it off. I felt like Bruguera did once he woke up and realized and slapped himself knowing that he was letting the moment he'd dreamed of singe he was a kid slip away.

and then i usually browse the comments to get insight into your thought process

When motivated, he [Djokovic] looks as good as he's ever been

Serve might be at its best now. Hell of a lot better than 2011
Returns just as well
Groundstrokes just as strong and varied
Slice has improved, net game has improved, willingness to serve-volley has gone up and net play too probably

He might not be as quick as he used to be, but remains one of the quickest around. If this were a new player, would you look at him and say he's got a movement problem? He moves better than Boris Becker ever did and Andre Agassi for all but the very start of his career

Still a pain in the butt to force an error out of, still able to hit neutralizing shots on the run/stretch routinely

Most of all, he's smarter now with the shot choices and strategies. And he's collected (in his play). He could go a bit off the road in years gone by now and then. Now, he always seems to know exactly what he wants/needs to do

8 years ago he went into a French Open final and thought it'd be a bright idea to push at a Wawrinka who was in sufficient form to reach the final

here, e.g., i disagree with a few points in the first chunk but also strongly agree with later ones, so i understand why there might be a discrepancy between what i've heard about matches (the Ruud slam finals) and what you thought about them

 

[Waspsting]

@I get cramps

" ...Courier claiming he lost his focus and LET Bruguera get back in that fifth set" (quoted from post by !Tym, quoted by @Angrybirdstar )

This is the way with tennis. Subtly different ways people frame the same things

Camp Brugera say Brug wore Courier down (implication of credit deserves to go to Brug)
Camp Courier says the above (implication of it was my fault, he didn't outplay me)

I saw it as Courier choking and giving up a bunch of ready errors early-mid way in the fifth - not fully in line with either. Would be more in in line with Courier, only he was getting outplayed for most of fourth set, so it sounds stupid to say he 'let' Brug back

Just as an excercise in logic - camp Brug sounds more convincing
Courier was a tough customer, with a champions mind and experienced. Not at all a La-dee-da-dee-da kind of guy
Why would such a player lose focus in the 5th set of a Slam final, other than for being worn down?


-----
Enjoyed this too "....when Bruguera was fully focused and not keeling over looking like he was dying and moping and looking lethargic as he was prone to do periodically"

Brug's general demeanour looks like the first part of a constipation medicine ad

 

[I get cramps]

@Waspsting @Angrybirdstar

I just need to gather my thoughts a little [laughs].

You pinned everything down regarding what the Bruguera family of pros defined as a greater need for aggressiveness in the game pattern when Courier played Sergi on Sunday. In the interview with Gonzalo Lopez, Sergi states:

"I talked enough with my father, and he psychologically prepared me well to face the final. We thought about what I could feel during the match. As a result, I went out calm and played very well, winning the first set.

My usual playing style was based on taking exactly the risks necessary to win. I never thought about doing more damage [I disagree with his statement https://www.atptour.com/en/players/...matchType=Singles&year=1990&tournament=520_GS]. Against Courier, that would not be enough to beat him. Going for all the balls and prolonging the match would lead me nowhere.

I would have to give more pace to my ball, gaining ground when the opportunity arose (within my limits). When I say aggressive, I don't mean looking for winners; I mean having more pace on the ball, establishing a faster rhythm in the exchanges than my patterns had been, and having more depth. However, I could not completely change my tendency to shoot with high safety. Now, if Courier leaves a short ball, I will punish it, and if I make a mistake, it won't affect me.

Could I put this approach to the match into practice? Courier's forte was not his speed in recovering position or chasing down balls. He was devastating when he attacked well positioned, but if you could get him to defend, he struggled; he didn't have good hand skills when stretched and had no reach."

GL - Did you notice that Kuerten hit the ball harder than any player of your generation?

SB - No, because Agassi hit the ball earlier than anybody else. Kuerten. Aside from what has been said so many times about his game's characteristics, Kuerten's most significant impact on the red clay circuit was that he could execute the style of play of the fast surface baseliners much better than they could on clay. Kuerten moved much better on clay than any of them. A precious advantage of Guga over the fast court baseliners on clay: they couldn't read the bounces on clay like Kuerten could.