Match Stats/Report - Cash vs Lendl, Wimbledon final, 1987

[Waspsting]

Pat Cash beat Ivan Lendl 7-6(5), 6-2, 6-4 in the Wimbledon final, 1987 on grass

It would turn out to be Cash's sole Slam title and Lendl's second and last Wimbledon final. The two had met in the semis at the Australian Open on grass earlier in the year, with Cash having won

Cash won 120 points, Lendl 92

With the exception of 1 Lendl second serve, both players serve-volleyed off all serves

Serve Stats
Cash...
- 1st serve percentage (53/81) 65%
- 1st serve points won (45/53) 85%
- 2nd serve points won (21/28) 75%
- Aces 4
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (40/81) 49%

Lendl...
- 1st serve percentage (80/131) 61%
- 1st serve points won (55/80) 69%
- 2nd serve points won (22/51) 43%
- Aces 6, Service Winners 4
- Double Faults 6
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (35/131) 27%

Serve Patterns
Cash served...
- to FH 34%
- to BH 51%
- to Body 15%

Lendl served...
- to FH 29%
- to BH 67%
- to Body 4%

Return Stats
Cash made...
- 90 (23 FH, 67 BH), including 2 return-approaches
- 10 Winners (2 FH, 8 BH)
- 25 Errors, all forced...
- 25 Forced (9 FH, 16 BH)
- Return Rate (90/125) 72%

Lendl made...
- 39 (15 FH, 24 BH), including 1 return-approach
- 2 Winners (1 FH, 1 BH)
- 36 Errors, all forced...
- 36 Forced (14 FH, 22 BH)
- Return Rate (39/79) 49%

Break Points
Cash 4/18 (7 games)
Lendl 1/1

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Cash 44 (6 FH, 16 BH, 11 FHV, 6 BHV, 5 OH)
Lendl 27 (7 FH, 2 BH, 9 FHV, 7 BHV, 2 OH)

Cash had 20 from serve-volley points -
- 8 first volleys (4 FHV, 4 BHV)
- 12 second volleys (6 FHV, 1 BHV, 5 OH)

- 2 from return-approach points (1 FHV, 1 BHV)

- 22 passes - 10 returns (2 FH, 8 BH) and 12 regular (4 FH, 8 BH)
- FH returns - 1 dtl and 1 inside-in
- BH returns - 2 cc, 4 dtl and 2 inside-in
- regular FHs - 1 cc (net chord pop over), 1 dtl and 2 lobs
- regular BHs - 4 dtl, 1 inside-out and 3 lobs

Lendl had 22 from serve-volley points -
- 11 first 'volleys' (5 FHV, 2 BHV, 3 FH at net, 1 BH at net)... the BH at net was a drop shot
- 11 second 'volleys' (3 FHV, 5 BHV, 2 OH, 1 FH at net)

- 4 passes - 2 returns (1 FH, 1 BH) and 2 regular (1 FH, 1 FHV)
- FH return - 1 inside-in
- BH return - 1 dtl
- regular FH - 1 lob
- the FHV was a swinging, non-net shot

- regular (non-pass) FH - 1 dtl

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Cash 28
- 5 Unforced (2 FHV, 3 BHV)
- 23 Forced (9 FH, 9 BH, 2 FHV, 3 BHV)... with 1 FH pass (lob) attempt at net, 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net and 1 non-net FHV from no-man's land
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 54

Lendl 30
- 19 Unforced (2 BH, 5 FHV, 11 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)... with 1 BH at net and 1 BH pass attempt
- 11 Forced (2 FH, 4 BH, 2 BHV, 3 BH1/2V)... with 1 BH at net. 1 BH1/2V was possibly a BHV
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 54.2

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

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

Net Points & Serve-Volley
Cash was...
- 64/79 (81%) at net, including...
- 62/75 (83%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 41/49 (84%) off 1st serve and...
- 21/26 (81%) off 2nd serve
---
- 2/2 return-approaching

Lendl was...
- 66/114 (58%) at net, all serve-volleying, comprising...
- 45/70 (64%) off 1st serve and...
- 21/44 (48%) off 2nd serve

Match Report
Cash is close to flawless while Lendl returns particularly badly in an all out serve-volley match. Match is as one sided as you can get for such a scoreline

- Points served - Cash 81, Lendl 131
- Average length of service game - Cash 4.69 points, Lendl 7.81
- Returns made - Cash 90, Lendl 39

Cash wins 20 straight service points at one stage, including all of them in second set and ends the match on an unbroken run of 15 straight. In first set, he enjoys 'just' a 12 point run. 9/16 service games are holds to love

That's the match. Cash holding with thorough ease, Lendl barely making a return and Cash putting away volleys. Not even passing shot chances for Ivan. He has just 5 passing FEs, 2 passing winners in play and Cash with a handful of volleying errors (3 UEs, 4 FEs)... everything else is unreturned serve (40) or Cash volleying winner (21 in service games). Complete ease

Cash's Serve Games
Does Cash serve phenomenally well? No. His is at best, an above average serve. Somewhere between a typical Edberg and Wilander showing. Good lot of serves invite a pounding, inviting firsts - serves you wouldn't be surprised to see smacked for winners. Lendl pounds them all right... into the net or long. Also shanks/mishits fairly regularly. With Cash serve-volleying 100% of the time, they all get marked forced errors, but quality of Cash's serve is about average. Just a hash on the return by Lendl for the very high 49% unreturned rate

Lendl takes returns from slightly behind regulation position and looks to slap them hard down the middle. The aim seems to be overpower Cash down the middle, not beat him to the side. Doesn't try anything much different as match goes on either. He takes a decent swing at the ball, unlike Cash (more on that later). Against Cash's 2nd serve in particular, its possible to step in and smack the returns from inside the court even, but Lendl stays put behind baseline

He misses much too much while keeping direction basic against a decent first serve and an attackable second. Just plain bad returning from Ivan
Which doesn't take away from Cash's volleying, which is top notch. What little Lendl puts in play are of all types - high balls, regulation net balls, particularly powerfully hit balls and a few down to the feet (not too much wide). Most are at least particularly powerful

Whatever he's faced with, Cash is well nigh flawless on the volley. The few shoelace volleys stand out, but he's no less at dispatching volleys above net. 12 second volley winners to 8 firsts is a bit unusual and both a product of Lendl's average returning being powerful enough to not be dispatchable and Cash essentially playing a 2-volley style. Not much chance for Lendl on the pass, the volleying is clinically efficient

With Cash so good on the volley, Lendl's under pressure to return particularly well as its unlikely regulation returning would suffice. Being constantly under the gun when serving would add to the pressure. Despite all that, 49% return rate against this serve is downright poor from Lendl. 70-75% is manageable against what he's faced with

In nutshell, at most decent serving from Cash + poor returning from Lendl who seems to have all kinds of trouble timing the ball, including against serves asking to be belted + superb volleying from Cash = Very, very easy time on serve for Cash

 

[Waspsting]

Lendl's Serve Games
Lendl's serve is actually more powerful than Cash's. Sizably. And he doesn't send down 'sit-up' serves the way Cash does either, even on second serves. Only Cash returns almost as well as he volleys

Cash's returning is excellent and unusual in the incongruence between shot quality and look of shot. He takes returns a little further forward then Lendl does and takes short swings. The returns typically give Lendl 'regulation +' volleys (as in, above average paced, slightly under net) or a little more difficult (average above pace, considerably under net)

Its almost perfect in its balance... difficult enough that nothing short of the very best volleyers volleying very well on the day can cope (for example, Cash's own showing on the volley). Anything less than that standard is likely to -
a) miss a few volleys
b) leave good passing chances when they make the volleys

- but not so difficult as to give up lots of unreturned rate. 72% return rate at this level of yielding not-easy/tricky volleys would stump anyone. Probably even the best of volleyers eventually.

Lendl isn't the best of volleyers. he volleys decently, makes most low volleys, fair amount of shoelace ones, and doesn't unduly miss the staple not-easy/tricky volleys... but the persistence of it is too much for him. He's got 18 UEs, but isn't as bad as that looks (Cash's returns skirt the lines between forceful and unforceful, so the UEs are on difficult side for being so marked) and 6 FEs. 58% net points won (all of it serve-volleying) is respectable figure for Lendl against what he's faced

The unusual part of Cash's returning is when against particularly good serves. He makes them looking rushed, or jammed or as if the ball has kept unexpectedly low or he's just about reached it on stretch and is off balance etc.... if you freeze framed the shot at point of impact, you'd think he must have missed the return. In fact, he sends down some of his very best, low, flat returns at these times.

Lendl having high 4 service winners is another testament to Cash's returning quality. These 'should' be aces... only he gets a healthy racquet on the ball. There's also the small matter of 10 return winners. And finally, a couple of return-approaches - both of them ending with Cash winners

Lendl places his volleys adequately. Cash runs down everything and makes him at least play an extra volley. Some of his passing winners are also spectacular, on the run with the ball inches off the ground affairs. and the lobbing is better still - not a ghost of a chance for Ivan against the 5 lob winners

Lendl stays back off 1 serve for the match and whacks a third ball FH dtl winner on it. He'd have done well to consider having stayed back more often. After 2 sets, Ivan's 12/36 second serve points won... he pulls it up in the decider, but for most of match, has a terrible time against Cash's dtl return winners or low returns

In nutshell, good, hefty serving from Lendl - better than Cash. Excellent returning against it by Cash - consistent but challenging in general, with good lot of unplayable sprinkled in. Adequate volleying from Lendl, but he's tasked with more than he can handle on the volley

Match Progression
No breaks in the first. Cash breezes through service games, while Lendl is made to struggle. He survives 20 and 16 point holds, and ends up serving 63 points in the set, to Cash's 37

Cash completely controls the tiebreak too. Lendl misses a slightly low, but floating ball on BHV and back to back BH return winners puts Cash up 6-1 with 2 serves to follow. Lendl makes the scoreline respectable by winning next 4 points, before Cash closes it third time of asking on his own serve.

Scoreline reads 7-6(5).
With Cash having to serve 31 points to hold 6 times, Lendl 57 and Cash leading tiebreak 6-1. That's grass court tennis. Despite Cash having so much easier a time of it, throw in a bad service game from him or a stellar returning one from Lendl, and result is up in the air

Second set is Cash at his very best. He doesn't lose a point on serve, putaway regulation volleys and deals with anything to his feet as easily as if it were a routine volley. The passing and returning isn't far behind. 2 BH lobs get him first break and series of first class BH passes - including 1 inside-out and a dtl virtually half-volleyed - get him the second. 14 winners, 0 UEs for Cash in the set. It reaches a stage that it comes as suprise when he misses a pass

Cash's only hiccup in the match is in the third, and even that's minor. Sandwiched between deuce holds (including down from 0-40), Lendl breaks with Cash making 3 of his match total 5 UEs. Cash is down 15-30 the game after too.

Lendl plays one of his most impressive service games, with 3 winners to hold for 5-2 before normal service is resumed and Cash reels off the last 5 games to take the match. He holds all his service games to love, breaks with strong returns and passes the first time and the second by drawing tricky volleying errors.

Summing up, top drawer showing from Cash, fit to stand with the very best at Wimbledon. Clinical on the volley, striking perfect balance of getting return in trickily consistently with damaging winners liberally sprinkled in and excellent on the follow up pass too. He's helped by poor returning by Lendl, who makes a complete hash of returning a normal serve. Not bad from Lendl otherwise, but he's scarcely give a shot on the pass and his volleying isn't up to coping with the very high standard return-passing its up against

 

[Cashman]

Lovely write-up, as usual. Thanks.

 

[jrepac]

Cash was awfully good that day; I did not think Lendl had much hope after the 1st set and I was proven right. There was no recovery, just Cash turning up the heat on Ivan. He did return very well, as you point out, nullifying a very big Lendl strength. Pat's play here was even better than the semi, where he was also quite strong. Going into this, I thought Lendl had a good shot as I did not view Cash as the powerhouse that Boris was. But, this was another grass court match where as a viewer, Ivan seemed out of sorts, off a step, not in synch with the ball exactly, which Pat either caused or exploited. Lendl's history there is clear...he nearly almost always lost to a past winner or someone who was just a little more comfortable on the turf than he was.

 

[flanker2000fr]

Superb write-up. Everything spot-on, as I remember this final vividly.

The one thing I would add is how good Cash was on the BH that day, be it return, pass or lob. I was really impressed by the quality of that shot, and your stats on returns / passes show that. For all of Lendl's good serving, I think he was picking the wrong spots: he should have gone body or FH much more often, seeing how good Cash was on the BH on that day.

It's a lack of tactical flexibility I have seen a number of times from Lendl, where he stuck rigidly to his predetermined game plan, and didn't alter it in spite of unfavorable odds as a match unfolded. The other example is the 89 Wimbledon semi-final against Becker, where he kept trying to hit all of his BH returns instead of using more slice to give Becker difficult volleys in his shoelaces, and keep Becker guessing.

 

[flanker2000fr]

Cash was awfully good that day; I did not think Lendl had much hope after the 1st set and I was proven right. There was no recovery, just Cash turning up the heat on Ivan. He did return very well, as you point out, nullifying a very big Lendl strength. Pat's play here was even better than the semi, where he was also quite strong. Going into this, I thought Lendl had a good shot as I did not view Cash as the powerhouse that Boris was. But, this was another grass court match where as a viewer, Ivan seemed out of sorts, off a step, not in synch with the ball exactly, which Pat either caused or exploited. Lendl's history there is clear...he nearly almost always lost to a past winner or someone who was just a little more comfortable on the turf than he was.

Completely agree with that. He didn't stand a chance against pure S/V players of the caliber of Becker in 86 or Cash in 87, who were both playing extremely well in those finals. I think his best ever Wimbledon, in terms of how fluently he was playing on grass, was actually 89 when he made the semi vs. Becker. It took a Becker playing like a house on fire to stop him that year. That was unlucky for Lendl, because on that form I think he would have beaten Edberg in the final.

 

[jrepac]

Completely agree with that. He didn't stand a chance against pure S/V players of the caliber of Becker in 86 or Cash in 87, who were both playing extremely well in those finals. I think his best ever Wimbledon, in terms of how fluently he was playing on grass, was actually 89 when he made the semi vs. Becker. It took a Becker playing like a house on fire to stop him that year. That was unlucky for Lendl, because on that form I think he would have beaten Edberg in the final.

He was playing very, very well in '89. He was a bit unlucky to lose in the semis. But, he was unlucky there in general, unfortunately.

 

[Waspsting]

But, this was another grass court match where as a viewer, Ivan seemed out of sorts, off a step, not in synch with the ball exactly, which Pat either caused or exploited.

Agree completely

Pat's play here was even better than the semi, where he was also quite strong.

I prefer the semi showing as far as Cash's serve games go

There, he's got Connors rushed on the serve regularly
Here, good lot of 'sitting up' serves that Lendl just makes meal off

Both matches he barely misses a volley

There though, he's hitting difficult volleys for winners
Here, he's a step below that and putting them in play with authority, leaving low percentage passing chances

And of course, with the unreturned rate much higher here, there's more volleying going on, which is a better watch

Return games are completely different - he's starting points from baseline in the semi and return-passing here. Does both very well

It's a lack of tactical flexibility I have seen a number of times from Lendl, where he stuck rigidly to his predetermined game plan, and didn't alter it in spite of unfavorable odds as a match unfolded. The other example is the 89 Wimbledon semi-final against Becker, where he kept trying to hit all of his BH returns instead of using more slice to give Becker difficult volleys in his shoelaces, and keep Becker guessing.

I've seen him make changes on the fly to good effect too

'85 Indianapolis... he steps way back to return and it shuts Boris down
'85 Wembley... he eases up on first serves to get more in, does so and denies Boris chip-charging chances and shuts him down

My lot of grass matches for him is small, but yes, on it he just seems to stick to serve to BH, volley to BH (doesn't punch volleys through thoroughly, though he's not a plonker either) even if he's getting burnt

Do you know exactly when he started employing the chip return to get the ball down low without much power to volleyers feet?

He destroyed Boris with it at Queen's Club '90 and used it to good effect at times in '90 Aus final against Edberg
Also a very small amount in the '89 Wimby semi with Boris, which was successful, but he stopped. For no reason that I can make out

But I've never seen him employ it to McEnroe - matches ranging from '82 to '89. Not once... just slams the returns hard as he can, like here, regardless of how well he does

The vigour with which Lendl swings at the ball makes it look like he's frustrated, but that might be a mis-perception because he returns the same way when its working too. Looks rather gung-ho, almost wild

The aim seems to be to simply overpower the serve-volleyer with pace. Even when he gets them in, the best of volleyers can usually cope with the heat. He flays at returns, but he does it from relatively backward position. Contrast with likes of Agassi, Courier, who step in + wallop the ball and actually are able to overwhelm the net rusher with sheer power (having 2 hands on the BH doesn't hurt)

Stepping in further would bring with it its own set of problems for him. He's a bit slow to move on the return. Body serves cause him all kinds of trouble, even averaged paced ones

The take back and swing on the return could do with some shortening too. Its very noticable here because Cash is so compact, while Lendl flays with his arm

Alternatives would be to hit with less power/more control and go wide, but for whatever reason, he doesn't seem to like that

I think his best ever Wimbledon, in terms of how fluently he was playing on grass, was actually 89 when he made the semi vs. Becker

He was playing very, very well in '89.... he was a bit unlucky to lose in the semis

That match is similar to this one in the sense of how much easier Lendl's opponents have it on serve

Lendl served 202/348 of the points there or 58%
Here, its 131/212 or 61%

There he made most of his break chances, but Boris had many, many more right from the get go and was holding easily much more often

Here, he basically has no chances ever
---
Question for you both - What did you think of his '88 and '90 prospects?

Was there ever a time you felt he was favourite going into Wimbledon?

 

[flanker2000fr]

I prefer the semi showing as far as Cash's serve games go

Do you know exactly when he started employing the chip return to get the ball down low without much power to volleyers feet?

He destroyed Boris with it at Queen's Club '90 and used it to good effect at times in '90 Aus final against Edberg
Also a very small amount in the '89 Wimby semi with Boris, which was successful, but he stopped. For no reason that I can make out

But I've never seen him employ it to McEnroe - matches ranging from '82 to '89. Not once... just slams the returns hard as he can, like here, regardless of how well he does



Question for you both - What did you think of his '88 and '90 prospects?

Was there ever a time you felt he was favourite going into Wimbledon?

On the first question, I remember him doing this to good effect in one of the Masters finals he had against Becker. I think the 1986 one, where a lot of his BH returns are either to the feet of Becker, or sliced longline often resulting in an outright winner.

On the second question: I didn't think much in terms of his '88 or '90 prospects as I never thought of him as a favourite to win Wimbledon. For the reasons you and jrepac described: his lack of fluency on the surface, always seeming slightly out of step. I always thought that all it took was a talented S/V player playing hot on a given day to take him out. Case in point Leconte in '85. And there were a number of them in those days.

 

[BringBackWood]

Lendl is overrated, which is a pretty bold opening, but what I really mean is that people nowadays don't know how Ivan won ~90% of his matches off fast surfaces, so I will tell you. He grinded. He didn't go for many winners, he wouldn't run round many BH's to hit FH's. His underrated serve, reliable topspin groundies, pretty good returning off grass, & superior stamina got him many wins. In short, he was not the aggressive baseliner many today perceive him to be. By the by he also took an age between points in his pomp.

That is why he had to SV off both serves on grass. He couldn't take the ball early off the bounce, or readily adjust his swing to cope with imperfect bounces! A guy like Connors (or Leconte if he wanted) could do that. A corollary of this was that he did not possess the early block return of Becker. The very fact that Ivan got to 2 finals is a testament to both his serve, & the work he put in with Tony Roche. My favourite is his 87 semi vs Edberg.

 

[jrepac]

Agree completely



I prefer the semi showing as far as Cash's serve games go

There, he's got Connors rushed on the serve regularly
Here, good lot of 'sitting up' serves that Lendl just makes meal off

Both matches he barely misses a volley

There though, he's hitting difficult volleys for winners
Here, he's a step below that and putting them in play with authority, leaving low percentage passing chances

And of course, with the unreturned rate much higher here, there's more volleying going on, which is a better watch

Return games are completely different - he's starting points from baseline in the semi and return-passing here. Does both very well



I've seen him make changes on the fly to good effect too

'85 Indianapolis... he steps way back to return and it shuts Boris down
'85 Wembley... he eases up on first serves to get more in, does so and denies Boris chip-charging chances and shuts him down

My lot of grass matches for him is small, but yes, on it he just seems to stick to serve to BH, volley to BH (doesn't punch volleys through thoroughly, though he's not a plonker either) even if he's getting burnt

Do you know exactly when he started employing the chip return to get the ball down low without much power to volleyers feet?

He destroyed Boris with it at Queen's Club '90 and used it to good effect at times in '90 Aus final against Edberg
Also a very small amount in the '89 Wimby semi with Boris, which was successful, but he stopped. For no reason that I can make out

But I've never seen him employ it to McEnroe - matches ranging from '82 to '89. Not once... just slams the returns hard as he can, like here, regardless of how well he does

The vigour with which Lendl swings at the ball makes it look like he's frustrated, but that might be a mis-perception because he returns the same way when its working too. Looks rather gung-ho, almost wild

The aim seems to be to simply overpower the serve-volleyer with pace. Even when he gets them in, the best of volleyers can usually cope with the heat. He flays at returns, but he does it from relatively backward position. Contrast with likes of Agassi, Courier, who step in + wallop the ball and actually are able to overwhelm the net rusher with sheer power (having 2 hands on the BH doesn't hurt)

Stepping in further would bring with it its own set of problems for him. He's a bit slow to move on the return. Body serves cause him all kinds of trouble, even averaged paced ones

The take back and swing on the return could do with some shortening too. Its very noticable here because Cash is so compact, while Lendl flays with his arm

Alternatives would be to hit with less power/more control and go wide, but for whatever reason, he doesn't seem to like that




That match is similar to this one in the sense of how much easier Lendl's opponents have it on serve

Lendl served 202/348 of the points there or 58%
Here, its 131/212 or 61%

There he made most of his break chances, but Boris had many, many more right from the get go and was holding easily much more often

Here, he basically has no chances ever
---
Question for you both - What did you think of his '88 and '90 prospects?

Was there ever a time you felt he was favourite going into Wimbledon?

By 1990, I had given up on Lendl ever winning Wimbledon, honestly.
I thought '87 was his best shot, followed by '89.
Lendl winning Queens over Boris in '90 was a surprise, but Boris was a little unpredictable...not as consistent as Ivan.
But Ivan was always going to be tested...his losses were nearly always to guys who were great on the turf, no pikers in the pack
(Mac, Connors, Boris, Edberg, Cash)

 

[jrepac]

Lendl is overrated, which is a pretty bold opening, but what I really mean is that people nowadays don't know how Ivan won ~90% of his matches off fast surfaces, so I will tell you. He grinded. He didn't go for many winners, he wouldn't run round many BH's to hit FH's. His underrated serve, reliable topspin groundies, pretty good returning off grass, & superior stamina got him many wins. In short, he was not the aggressive baseliner many today perceive him to be. By the by he also took an age between points in his pomp.

That is why he had to SV off both serves on grass. He couldn't take the ball early off the bounce, or readily adjust his swing to cope with imperfect bounces! A guy like Connors (or Leconte if he wanted) could do that. A corollary of this was that he did not possess the early block return of Becker. The very fact that Ivan got to 2 finals is a testament to both his serve, & the work he put in with Tony Roche. My favourite is his 87 semi vs Edberg.

Ouch. Not sure about the over-rated part, the guy was a wall in the mid-to-late 80s--just damn consistent. Some would say, "Mac became a head case, Connors got old" well, sure, but Lendl got better. His serve was one of the best of its day, nearly as good as Mac's. Certainly he was more consistent with it. And, his forehand was crushing at times. You may recall that earlier on, his stamina was suspect, particularly in a few of the Connors matchups (see '84W semi). He improved his fitness quite a bit by '85 and his movement seemed much better to me...quicker side to side. But, it's been said that the way he hits his groundies...the need to set up....always put him at a disadvantage on grass. Where other guys who took it early, had no such problem. I always questioned his S&V approach on grass, but setting that aside, he was never going to have it easy

 

[flanker2000fr]

Lendl is overrated, which is a pretty bold opening, but what I really mean is that people nowadays don't know how Ivan won ~90% of his matches off fast surfaces, so I will tell you. He grinded. He didn't go for many winners, he wouldn't run round many BH's to hit FH's. His underrated serve, reliable topspin groundies, pretty good returning off grass, & superior stamina got him many wins. In short, he was not the aggressive baseliner many today perceive him to be. By the by he also took an age between points in his pomp.

That is why he had to SV off both serves on grass. He couldn't take the ball early off the bounce, or readily adjust his swing to cope with imperfect bounces! A guy like Connors (or Leconte if he wanted) could do that. A corollary of this was that he did not possess the early block return of Becker. The very fact that Ivan got to 2 finals is a testament to both his serve, & the work he put in with Tony Roche. My favourite is his 87 semi vs Edberg.

I am not sure I understand the "grinder" comment on fast surfaces. Sure, he would grind on clay (like everybody else) , had to force himself to S/V systematically on grass (for the very reasons you mentioned), but on outdoors hard courts or especially on fast indoor courts, he was playing with aggression, certainly from 1985 onwards. By aggression, I mean that he might not have had many ouright winners, but he was hitting very hard on both wings, applying tremendous pressure from the baseline and forcing mistakes out of the opponents. Or forcing a short ball he could attack and come to the net on his terms, where he was pretty decent at concluding points.

 

[BringBackWood]

I am not sure I understand the "grinder" comment on fast surfaces. Sure, he would grind on clay (like everybody else) , had to force himself to S/V systematically on grass (for the very reasons you mentioned), but on outdoors hard courts or especially on fast indoor courts, he was playing with aggression, certainly from 1985 onwards. By aggression, I mean that he might not have had many ouright winners, but he was hitting very hard on both wings, applying tremendous pressure from the baseline and forcing mistakes out of the opponents. Or forcing a short ball he could attack and come to the net on his terms, where he was pretty decent at concluding points.

I said 'off fast surfaces'. On fast surfaces he was liable to be against a net rusher and to his credit Ivan realised at some point that he had to be aggressive himself to prevent him always having to pass. Or if he was playing a more passive player like Mats he would sometimes loosen up and go for his shots. Have you seen 1985 Toyko? To me that was a model of Ivan playing wonderful aggressive tennis.

 

[Mustard]

Cash was way too good on the day, especially when he didn't even drop a point on serve in the second set. Lendl should have won the third set though, being 5-2 up and losing 5 straight games. In Lendl's other Wimbledon final in 1986, he had set points in the third set, at 0-40 on Becker's serve, but couldn't take it.

Lendl's best chance of winning Wimbledon was probably 1989, and then strangely 1983. And perhaps 1990, if he had brought his excellent 1990 Queen's Club form to 1990 Wimbledon, but he simply didn't. Lendl had terrible bad luck in the 1989 semi against Becker. After winning the second set tiebreak to make it 1 set all, Lendl had a surge of momentum to break Becker twice and lead 3-0 in the third set when the rain came down. When the match restarted, even though Lendl won the third set 6-2 to lead 2-1 in sets, the momentum was more of a slight edge to Lendl rather than the Lendl surge that had existed before the rain. Lendl even went a break up in the fourth set at 4-3 (or was it 3-2?), but Becker broke straight back. For the rest of the match, Becker ground his way back in and all the close line calls went against Lendl. You could hear the utter despair in Lendl's voice. This defeat was when Lendl became utterly obsessed with winning Wimbledon. It was threatening to consume him by this point, announcing that he wouldn't play any clay matches in the spring of 1990, and would play golf and practice tennis on grass. Unfortunately for Lendl, while he played awesome in winning 1990 Queen's Club, he was seldom as good at 1990 Wimbledon and Edberg beat him in straight sets in the semis. Lendl had beaten Edberg at Wimbledon before, 1987 semis.

1983, on the other hand, Lendl lost a close straight setter to McEnroe, with Chris Lewis waiting in the final. I think even 1983 Lendl beats Lewis in the Wimbledon final. This may have sown a seed in Lendl's mind. Before 1983, it was "grass is for cows", yet he could have won Wimbledon in 1983, and so he believed he would win it at some point, and become the bigger name in tennis history that comes with it.

 

[sandy mayer]

Cash was way too good on the day, especially when he didn't even drop a point on serve in the second set. Lendl should have won the third set though, being 5-2 up and losing 5 straight games. In Lendl's other Wimbledon final in 1986, he had set points in the third set, at 0-40 on Becker's serve, but couldn't take it.

Lendl's best chance of winning Wimbledon was probably 1989, and then strangely 1983. And perhaps 1990, if he had brought his excellent 1990 Queen's Club form to 1990 Wimbledon, but he simply didn't. Lendl had terrible bad luck in the 1989 semi against Becker. After winning the second set tiebreak to make it 1 set all, Lendl had a surge of momentum to break Becker twice and lead 3-0 in the third set when the rain came down. When the match restarted, even though Lendl won the third set 6-2 to lead 2-1 in sets, the momentum was more of a slight edge to Lendl rather than the Lendl surge that had existed before the rain. Lendl even went a break up in the fourth set at 4-3, but Becker broke straight back. For the rest of the match, Becker ground his way back in and all the close line calls went against Lendl. You could hear the utter despair in Lendl's voice. This defeat was when Lendl became utterly obsessed with winning Wimbledon. It was threatening to consume him by this point, announcing that he wouldn't play any clay matches in the spring of 1990, and would play golf and practice tennis on grass. Unfortunately for Lendl, while he played awesome in winning 1990 Queen's Club, he was seldom as good at 1990 Wimbledon and Edberg beat him in straight sets in the semis. Lendl had beaten Edberg at Wimbledon before, 1987 semis.

1983, on the other hand, Lendl lost a close straight setter to McEnroe, with Chris Lewis waiting in the final. I think even 1983 Lendl beats Lewis in the Wimbledon final. This may have sown a seed in Lendl's mind. Before 1983, it was "grass is for cows", yet he could have won Wimbledon in 1983, and so he believed he would win it at some point, and become the bigger name in tennis history that comes with it.

Good post. I wonder why he played worse in Wimbledon 90 than he did at Queen's. Did the pressure get to him because he was running out of chances and he so badly wanted to win Wimbledon? With 1983 I don't think he had a very strong chance to win. McEnroe was always the overwhelming favourite to win on grass. It may have been close straight sets, but the fact it was straight sets tells you Mac wasn't in serious danger of losing. If Lendl had faced Lewis he would have been favourite, but Lewis would have had a much better chance against Lendl than Mac. If 1983 Lewis could beat 1983 Curren at Wimbledon, 1983 Lewis had a decent chance of beating 1983 Lendl.

 

[jrepac]

Good post. I wonder why he played worse in Wimbledon 90 than he did at Queen's. Did the pressure get to him because he was running out of chances and he so badly wanted to win Wimbledon? With 1983 I don't think he had a very strong chance to win. McEnroe was always the overwhelming favourite to win on grass. It may have been close straight sets, but the fact it was straight sets tells you Mac wasn't in serious danger of losing. If Lendl had faced Lewis he would have been favourite, but Lewis would have had a much better chance against Lendl than Mac. If 1983 Lewis could beat 1983 Curren at Wimbledon, 1983 Lewis had a decent chance of beating 1983 Lendl.

I was a bit surprised that Lendl did not get to the 1990 final based on the form he showed at Queens. In 1983, Connors was the favorite...even over Mac at the time, since he beat Mac in straight sets at Queens, fairly decisively. The conversation was all around a potential Mac v. Jimmy showdown. I vividly remember HBO playing "Every Breath You Take' by the Police, hyping up a showdown that never happened. Lendl was an afterthought. If Ivan had somehow gotten past Mac, I'd say his chances vs. Lewis were likely 50/50. The guy had some game...I thought he'd make more of an impression going forward, but it was not to be. I was rather surprised he took out Curren.....but seemed like Curren was a good giant killer--he relished the role-- and perhaps was less effective against the lesser ranked. There's a psychological study in there somewhere...

 

[Quaichang]

I am not sure I understand the "grinder" comment on fast surfaces. Sure, he would grind on clay (like everybody else) , had to force himself to S/V systematically on grass (for the very reasons you mentioned), but on outdoors hard courts or especially on fast indoor courts, he was playing with aggression, certainly from 1985 onwards. By aggression, I mean that he might not have had many ouright winners, but he was hitting very hard on both wings, applying tremendous pressure from the baseline and forcing mistakes out of the opponents. Or forcing a short ball he could attack and come to the net on his terms, where he was pretty decent at concluding points.

I would never associate the word grinder to describe Lendl’s game. His serve and forehand was one of the most lethal one two combination in the sport.

 

[jrepac]

I would never associate the word grinder to describe Lendl’s game. His serve and forehand was one of the most lethal one two combination in the sport.

I agree; that's not the right word for Lendl.
More like 'punisher'