Stefan Edberg beat Ivan Lendl 6-7(3), 7-5, 6-1, 4-6, 9-7 in the Australian Open semi-final, 1985 on grass
Edberg would go onto beat double defending champion Mats Wilander in the final to win his first Slam title. Lendl had recently won the US Open and was the world #1
Edberg won 209 points, Lendl 183
Edberg serve-volleyed off all but 2 first serves and all but 8 seconds. Lendl serve-volleyed off all but 5 first serves and majority of seconds
(Note: I've made educated guesses regarding serve type for a small number of points)
Serve Stats
Edberg...
- 1st serve percentage (115/180) 64%
- 1st serve points won (85/115) 74%
- 2nd serve points won (36/65) 55%
- Aces 8
- Double Faults 8
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (64/180) 36%
Lendl...
- 1st serve percentage (126/212) 59%
- 1st serve points won (82/126) 65%
- 2nd serve points won (42/86) 49%
- Aces 8, Service Winners 2
- Double Faults 11
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (58/212) 27%
Serve Patterns
Edberg served...
- to FH 29%
- to BH 60%
- to Body 11%
Lendl served...
- to FH 28%
- to BH 67%
- to Body 5%
Return Stats
Edberg made...
- 143 (46 FH, 97 BH), including 3 runaround FHs & 2 return-approaches
- 8 Winners (2 FH, 6 BH)
- 48 Errors, comprising...
- 3 Unforced (3 BH), including 2 return-approaches
- 45 Forced (12 FH, 33 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- Return Rate (143/201) 71%
Lendl made...
- 108 (32 FH, 76 BH), including 1 return-approach
- 11 Winners (3 FH, 5 BH)
- 56 Errors, comprising...
- 5 Unforced (3 FH, 2 BH)
- 51 Forced (20 FH, 31 BH)
- Return Rate (108/172) 63%
Break Points
Edberg 7/27 (14 games)
Lendl 3/11 (6 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Edberg 65 (13 FH, 19 BH, 14 FHV, 12 BHV, 6 OH, 1 BHOH)
Lendl 51 (10 FH, 16 BH, 10 FHV, 10 BHV, 5 OH)
Edberg had 29 from serve-volley points
- 18 first volleys (10 FHV, 8 BHV)... 1 FHV was a net chord dribbler
- 9 second volleys (3 FHV, 2 BHV, 4 OH)... 1 FHV can reasonably be called an OH
- 2 third volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHOH)
- FH passes - 2 cc (1 return), 1 cc/inside-in, 4 dtl, 2 inside-out (return), 1 longline/inside-out at net and 2 lobs
- BH passes - 4 cc, 6 dtl (2 returns, 1 at net), 2 inside-out returns, 1 inside-out/dtl, 2 inside-in returns, 1 longline at net, 1 longline/inside-out and 1 running-down-drop-volley cc at net
- other passes - 1 BHV drive from just behind service line that has not been counted a net point and 1 OH on bounce from behind baseline
- regular FH - 1 inside-in
- regular BH - 1 inside-out
Lendl had 28 from serve-volley points
- 14 first 'volleys' (5 FHV, 5 BHV, 2 FH at net, 2 BH at net)... 1 FH at net was a drop shot and 1 BH at net was also a pass
- 12 second volleys (4 FHV, 4 BHV, 4 OH)
- 2 third volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 1 from a return-approach point, an OH
- FH passes - 2 cc returns, 1 dtl, 1 inside-in return and 1 lob
- BHs (all passes) - 6 cc (5 returns), 5 dtl (2 returns), 1 inside-out return (that Edberg left), 1 longline/cc and 1 lob
- regular FHs - 3 cc
Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Edberg 66
- 20 Unforced (3 FH, 3 BH, 8 FHV, 6 BHV)... with 1 BH pass attempt & 1 BH at net
- 46 Forced (10 FH, 18 BH, 8 FHV, 6 BHV, 3 BH1/2V, 1 BHOH).. with 1 BH pass at net, 1 BH running-down-drop-volley at net & 1 non-net FHV
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 51.5
Lendl 69
- 22 Unforced (3 FH, 6 BH, 7 FHV, 6 BHV)... with 1 FH pass at net, 1 BH at net & 1 non-net FHV
- 47 Forced (11 FH, 21 BH, 3 FHV, 4 FH1/2V, 7 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)... with 1 FH pass at net, 1 FH running-down-drop-volley at net, 1 BH at net & 1 BH running-down-drop-volley at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 50.9
(Note 1: All 1/2 volleys refer to such shots played at net. 1/2 volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke numbers)
(Note 2: the Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is an indicator of how aggressive the average UE was. The numbers presented for these two matches are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)
Net Points & Serve-Volley
Edberg was...
- 123/181 (68%) at net, including...
- 106/154 (69%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 75/105 (71%) off 1st serve and...
- 31/49 (63%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/2 return-approaching
Lendl was...
- 104/171 (61%) at net, including...
- 98/159 (62%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 70/111 (63%) off 1st serve and...
- 28/48 (58%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/1 return-approaching
- 0/2 retreated
Match Report
Topsy-turvy match with good but short of great action. Edberg is steady of level while Lendl's play fluctuates with his mood. Edberg has the better of play more often than not... but not only is that no guarantee of victory, for most of match, it results in the other player coming out ahead
Play is mostly serve-volley. Edberg does so 98% off first serves (all but 2) and 86% off seconds, Lendl 96% off firsts (all but 5) and 64% off seconds
Action is fairly simple to describe and explain and figures for both are uncannily similar
- baseline UEs - Edberg 5, Lendl 8
- baseline FEs - Edberg 26, Lendl 28
- 'volley' winners - Edberg 33, Lendl 29 (including 4 groudstrokes)
- baseline winners (including returns) - Edberg 32, Lendl, 22
... coupled with Edberg leading unreturned rate 36% to 27% (and being -3 on double faults), gives Edberg a noticeable advantage. Note also -
- Points served - Edberg 180, Lendl 212
- Break Points - Edberg 7/27 (14 games), Lendl 3/11 (6 games)
... and Edberg's lead is clearer. Still, its not enough to override a 'played-big-points-better' bug turning result other way, as a final set 9-7 scoreline indicates. Lendl probably does play the big points better, but he's sufficiently behind in play that there are a lot more 'important points' for him to have to play better on then there are for Edberg
The Serve
Little between the two on the serve
Edberg's is a bit stronger than it would come to be, the action is more powerful. Still, not a very strong server and mostly a tool to get up to net
Lendl doesn't serve too strongly either. Slightly stronger than Edberg on average, but short of heavy bombs he's capable of
High first serve in count for both (Edberg 64%, Lendl 59%) hints at neither serving too strongly. Lendl generally tended to blast first serves at expense of high in-count but holds back here. Wind is likely a factor in this
Edberg at net vs Lendl return & pass
This match up is a bit disappointing
Generally, Lendl's apt to to completely blast returns against quality serve-volleyers in such a way that he's bound to miss a bunch but whatever he makes gives difficult first volleys. he doesn't do that here - returning is less strong. 63% return rate is about his norm when blasting returns successfully, but that rate at the power he returns at is below par for him
Grass surface might have a hand in that, but bounce is fairly comfortable and not too low. Maybe he didn't rate the teenage Edberg's volley highly enough to go all out. Also firm blocks a good number of BH returns... a way of making returning safely, not deliberately give low volleys as he'd come to do in future
Still, he returns more powerfully than Edberg does, though short of his own norm. Edberg faces harder hit and more regular low first volleys than Lendl does
He's not too great on the volley either. 15 forecourt UEs to Lendl's 14... and Lendl had to make more first volleys. Still, he's better than Lendl in being more decisive, as the as the 18 first volley winners indicate (Lendl has 14 - including 4 groundstrokes)... and he typically faces a tougher first volley
Quite a lot of drop/stop volleys from Edberg by his standard. Other notable point is his preference, especially early on, for the FHV. He moves around to take balls to FHV, preferring inside-out'ng them to playing BHV. This changes as match goes on and by the end, he's playing a balanced game
Note coincidence of identical error types across error types for Edberg - FHV has 8 errors apiece UE and FE and BHV has 6
Edberg has big advantage over Lendl on the low volley. He faces more because Lendl's passing & returning is stronger and makes most, placing the ball reasonably well. His low volleys don't necessarily leave Lendl with easy passes
Though not quite volleying into corner, Edberg does snap his volleys through in customary style and Lendl's hard pressed to reach balls for passing shots. Large parts of match he seems to frustrated and distracted to focus on making good passes and tends to play wild shots that invariably miss. The odd one he gets right... there's an absolutely hammered BH down the middle of court that Edberg just ducks out the way of. More credit to Edberg's volley than discredit Lendl's pass, but some of the latter too
Edberg would go onto beat double defending champion Mats Wilander in the final to win his first Slam title. Lendl had recently won the US Open and was the world #1
Edberg won 209 points, Lendl 183
Edberg serve-volleyed off all but 2 first serves and all but 8 seconds. Lendl serve-volleyed off all but 5 first serves and majority of seconds
(Note: I've made educated guesses regarding serve type for a small number of points)
Serve Stats
Edberg...
- 1st serve percentage (115/180) 64%
- 1st serve points won (85/115) 74%
- 2nd serve points won (36/65) 55%
- Aces 8
- Double Faults 8
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (64/180) 36%
Lendl...
- 1st serve percentage (126/212) 59%
- 1st serve points won (82/126) 65%
- 2nd serve points won (42/86) 49%
- Aces 8, Service Winners 2
- Double Faults 11
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (58/212) 27%
Serve Patterns
Edberg served...
- to FH 29%
- to BH 60%
- to Body 11%
Lendl served...
- to FH 28%
- to BH 67%
- to Body 5%
Return Stats
Edberg made...
- 143 (46 FH, 97 BH), including 3 runaround FHs & 2 return-approaches
- 8 Winners (2 FH, 6 BH)
- 48 Errors, comprising...
- 3 Unforced (3 BH), including 2 return-approaches
- 45 Forced (12 FH, 33 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- Return Rate (143/201) 71%
Lendl made...
- 108 (32 FH, 76 BH), including 1 return-approach
- 11 Winners (3 FH, 5 BH)
- 56 Errors, comprising...
- 5 Unforced (3 FH, 2 BH)
- 51 Forced (20 FH, 31 BH)
- Return Rate (108/172) 63%
Break Points
Edberg 7/27 (14 games)
Lendl 3/11 (6 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Edberg 65 (13 FH, 19 BH, 14 FHV, 12 BHV, 6 OH, 1 BHOH)
Lendl 51 (10 FH, 16 BH, 10 FHV, 10 BHV, 5 OH)
Edberg had 29 from serve-volley points
- 18 first volleys (10 FHV, 8 BHV)... 1 FHV was a net chord dribbler
- 9 second volleys (3 FHV, 2 BHV, 4 OH)... 1 FHV can reasonably be called an OH
- 2 third volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHOH)
- FH passes - 2 cc (1 return), 1 cc/inside-in, 4 dtl, 2 inside-out (return), 1 longline/inside-out at net and 2 lobs
- BH passes - 4 cc, 6 dtl (2 returns, 1 at net), 2 inside-out returns, 1 inside-out/dtl, 2 inside-in returns, 1 longline at net, 1 longline/inside-out and 1 running-down-drop-volley cc at net
- other passes - 1 BHV drive from just behind service line that has not been counted a net point and 1 OH on bounce from behind baseline
- regular FH - 1 inside-in
- regular BH - 1 inside-out
Lendl had 28 from serve-volley points
- 14 first 'volleys' (5 FHV, 5 BHV, 2 FH at net, 2 BH at net)... 1 FH at net was a drop shot and 1 BH at net was also a pass
- 12 second volleys (4 FHV, 4 BHV, 4 OH)
- 2 third volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 1 from a return-approach point, an OH
- FH passes - 2 cc returns, 1 dtl, 1 inside-in return and 1 lob
- BHs (all passes) - 6 cc (5 returns), 5 dtl (2 returns), 1 inside-out return (that Edberg left), 1 longline/cc and 1 lob
- regular FHs - 3 cc
Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Edberg 66
- 20 Unforced (3 FH, 3 BH, 8 FHV, 6 BHV)... with 1 BH pass attempt & 1 BH at net
- 46 Forced (10 FH, 18 BH, 8 FHV, 6 BHV, 3 BH1/2V, 1 BHOH).. with 1 BH pass at net, 1 BH running-down-drop-volley at net & 1 non-net FHV
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 51.5
Lendl 69
- 22 Unforced (3 FH, 6 BH, 7 FHV, 6 BHV)... with 1 FH pass at net, 1 BH at net & 1 non-net FHV
- 47 Forced (11 FH, 21 BH, 3 FHV, 4 FH1/2V, 7 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)... with 1 FH pass at net, 1 FH running-down-drop-volley at net, 1 BH at net & 1 BH running-down-drop-volley at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 50.9
(Note 1: All 1/2 volleys refer to such shots played at net. 1/2 volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke numbers)
(Note 2: the Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is an indicator of how aggressive the average UE was. The numbers presented for these two matches are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)
Net Points & Serve-Volley
Edberg was...
- 123/181 (68%) at net, including...
- 106/154 (69%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 75/105 (71%) off 1st serve and...
- 31/49 (63%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/2 return-approaching
Lendl was...
- 104/171 (61%) at net, including...
- 98/159 (62%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 70/111 (63%) off 1st serve and...
- 28/48 (58%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/1 return-approaching
- 0/2 retreated
Match Report
Topsy-turvy match with good but short of great action. Edberg is steady of level while Lendl's play fluctuates with his mood. Edberg has the better of play more often than not... but not only is that no guarantee of victory, for most of match, it results in the other player coming out ahead
Play is mostly serve-volley. Edberg does so 98% off first serves (all but 2) and 86% off seconds, Lendl 96% off firsts (all but 5) and 64% off seconds
Action is fairly simple to describe and explain and figures for both are uncannily similar
- baseline UEs - Edberg 5, Lendl 8
- baseline FEs - Edberg 26, Lendl 28
- 'volley' winners - Edberg 33, Lendl 29 (including 4 groudstrokes)
- baseline winners (including returns) - Edberg 32, Lendl, 22
... coupled with Edberg leading unreturned rate 36% to 27% (and being -3 on double faults), gives Edberg a noticeable advantage. Note also -
- Points served - Edberg 180, Lendl 212
- Break Points - Edberg 7/27 (14 games), Lendl 3/11 (6 games)
... and Edberg's lead is clearer. Still, its not enough to override a 'played-big-points-better' bug turning result other way, as a final set 9-7 scoreline indicates. Lendl probably does play the big points better, but he's sufficiently behind in play that there are a lot more 'important points' for him to have to play better on then there are for Edberg
The Serve
Little between the two on the serve
Edberg's is a bit stronger than it would come to be, the action is more powerful. Still, not a very strong server and mostly a tool to get up to net
Lendl doesn't serve too strongly either. Slightly stronger than Edberg on average, but short of heavy bombs he's capable of
High first serve in count for both (Edberg 64%, Lendl 59%) hints at neither serving too strongly. Lendl generally tended to blast first serves at expense of high in-count but holds back here. Wind is likely a factor in this
Edberg at net vs Lendl return & pass
This match up is a bit disappointing
Generally, Lendl's apt to to completely blast returns against quality serve-volleyers in such a way that he's bound to miss a bunch but whatever he makes gives difficult first volleys. he doesn't do that here - returning is less strong. 63% return rate is about his norm when blasting returns successfully, but that rate at the power he returns at is below par for him
Grass surface might have a hand in that, but bounce is fairly comfortable and not too low. Maybe he didn't rate the teenage Edberg's volley highly enough to go all out. Also firm blocks a good number of BH returns... a way of making returning safely, not deliberately give low volleys as he'd come to do in future
Still, he returns more powerfully than Edberg does, though short of his own norm. Edberg faces harder hit and more regular low first volleys than Lendl does
He's not too great on the volley either. 15 forecourt UEs to Lendl's 14... and Lendl had to make more first volleys. Still, he's better than Lendl in being more decisive, as the as the 18 first volley winners indicate (Lendl has 14 - including 4 groundstrokes)... and he typically faces a tougher first volley
Quite a lot of drop/stop volleys from Edberg by his standard. Other notable point is his preference, especially early on, for the FHV. He moves around to take balls to FHV, preferring inside-out'ng them to playing BHV. This changes as match goes on and by the end, he's playing a balanced game
Note coincidence of identical error types across error types for Edberg - FHV has 8 errors apiece UE and FE and BHV has 6
Edberg has big advantage over Lendl on the low volley. He faces more because Lendl's passing & returning is stronger and makes most, placing the ball reasonably well. His low volleys don't necessarily leave Lendl with easy passes
Though not quite volleying into corner, Edberg does snap his volleys through in customary style and Lendl's hard pressed to reach balls for passing shots. Large parts of match he seems to frustrated and distracted to focus on making good passes and tends to play wild shots that invariably miss. The odd one he gets right... there's an absolutely hammered BH down the middle of court that Edberg just ducks out the way of. More credit to Edberg's volley than discredit Lendl's pass, but some of the latter too