Match Stats/Report - McEnroe vs Connors, San Francisco final, 1982

[Waspsting]

John McEnroe beat Jimmy Connors 6-1, 6-3 in the San Francisco final, 1982 on carpet

It was McEnroe’s third title at the event, and his second of the year (the first having come 8 months earlier in January). Connors had recently won the US Open. The two had played the Wimbledon final earlier in the year, with Connors winning

McEnroe won 64 points, Connors 42

McEnroe serve-volleyed off all first serves and almost all seconds

(Note: I’m missing 4 McEnroe service points - 2 he won, 2 he lost.
Missing Points Set 1, Game 4, Points 1-4

Missing points have been included in the points total only. Ending of points are unaccounted for)

Serve Stats
McEnroe...
- 1st serve percentage (27/51) 53%
- 1st serve points won (20/27) 74%
- 2nd serve points won (14/24) 58%
- ?? serve points won (2/4) 50%
- Aces 7, Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (21/51) 41%

Connors...
- 1st serve percentage (35/51) 69%
- 1st serve points won (16/35) 46%
- 2nd serve points won (7/16) 44%
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (4/51) 8%

Serve Patterns
McEnroe served...
- to FH 50%
- to BH 30%
- to Body 20%

Connors served...
- to FH 49%
- to BH 49%
- to Body 2%

Return Stats
McEnroe made...
- 47 (27 FH, 20 BH), including 3 runaround FHs & 1 runaround BH
- 4 Errors, comprising...
- 1 Unforced (1 BH)
- 3 Forced (3 BH)
- Return Rate (47/51) 92%

Connors made...
- 29 (12 FH, 17 BH), including 1 runaround BH
- 13 Errors, comprising...
- 2 Unforced (1 FH, 1 BH)
- 11 Forced (7 FH, 4 BH)
- Return Rate (29/50) 58%

Break Points
McEnroe 5/13 (6 games)
Connors 1/3 (2 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
McEnroe 17 (5 FH, 2 BH, 2 FHV, 1 BHV)
Connors 11 (3 FH, 2 BH, 1 FHV, 3 BHV, 2 OH)

McEnroe had 9 from serve-volley points
- 6 first volleys (5 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 3 second volleys (3 OH)

- FHs - 2 dtl and 1 inside-out
- BHs (all passes) - 3 cc (1 net chord flicker)

Connors' FHs (all passes) - 1 cc, 1 cc/inside-in and 1 dtl
- BHs (all passes) - 1 cc and 1 inside-out

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

- 1 other BHV was a swining, non-net pass

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
McEnroe 24
- 10 Unforced (5 FH, 2 BH, 2 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 14 Forced (2 FH, 8 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 BH1/2V, 1 Back-to-Net)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 52

Connors 24
- 16 Unforced (12 FH, 2 BH, 1 FHV, 1 OH)... the OH was on the bounce from the baseline
- 8 Forced (4 FH, 1 BH, 1 FHV, 2 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 43.1

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

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

Net Points & Serve-Volley
McEnroe was...
- 26/41 (63%) at net, including...
- 22/37 (59%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 12/19 (63%) off 1st serve and...
- 10/18 (56%) off 2nd serve
---
- 0/3 forced back

Connors was...
- 19/27 (70%) at net, including...
- 5/5 (100%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves
---
- 1/2 forced back

Match Report
McEnroe’s serve is too good for his opponent, and Connors’ FH is terrible from the baseline in this one sided encounter on a very fast court

McEnroe serve-volleys all but always (stays back off 5 second serves, winning 4). Connors sticks it out on the baseline in his service games

Mac holds regularly, if not always comfortably. The key to his success is the serve shot itself. The volley isn’t particularly impressive (it doesn’t have to be). Jimbo by contrast, is broken in his first 5 service games, before holding the last 3. Mac returnd with facile ease sets the groundwork, and the rest is mostly down to Jimbo’s FH stinking up the joint

There are points of interest in action, despite one-sidedness of encounter. Things that are outside the norms of most Mac-Jimbo encounters

- Mac’s body and body-ish serving. Generally, Mac serves classically out wide to one wing or the other, with well placed body serves as the exception

Here, there’s a lot more body serving. Mac directs 20% serves to the body, and a good deal more is crampingly body-ish of direction. Looks more like an Edberg service display than a Mac

Not quite. The close serving makes the wide ones even more deadly. 7 aces, 1 service winner for Mac from just 27 first serves or 30% of the time. Possibly the highest I’ve seen from him. It was 27.5% in celebrated showing in ‘84 Wimby final

- Mac’s aggressive FH shot choices. Amidst the baseline rallies that last awhile, Jimbo does most of the directing. Generally, Mac just dances his tune. He does that for most part here too, but lets looses with FH winner attempts from half-chances, particularly dtl

Not a result determining matter, but unusual enough to be worth noting. Mac’s not a go dtl for the winner kind of player, and with Jimbo’s FH falling apart all by itself, even more reason to avoid low percentage attacking shots and just playing back safely cc. This makes for better watch. He’s got a couple dtl winners (also an inside-out one) and misses a couple other attempts, Jimbo has no ground-to-ground winners

Particularly important stats are
- Mac with 41% unreturned serves
- Mac with 92% return rate
- Jimbo with 12 FH UEs

Mac’s serve game
It’s the kind of court where a good server can expect to hold like clockwork, and the returner would look for the odd game here and there for chances

By that standard, Jimbo does well on return. Breaks once, takes Mac to deuce 3 other times in 8 return games. Wouldn’t be surprised to see Mac putting together a run of winning 20/22 service points in a row on a court like this - so that’s very good from Jimbo

41% unreturned serves is obviously a big load. The returns Jimbo makes aren’t easy either. He’s not slow to move out the way and give himself room to handle the body-line serves, and pokes back a couple of powerful wide ones too. What he can reach, he hits with authority too. About as well as could be expected from Jimbo on the return

Mac’s not too good on the volley. His volley winners in service game are putaways. But even against the firmly struck return above the net, let alone the net high ones, he’s apt to volley the ball back to Jimbo, without any great punch

Not much of a problem, given the freebies and regular lot of putaways, but lots of room for improvement there for Mac on volley. And not much shot on breaking for Jimbo

Long and short of it though, Mac’s only broken once. Which is more than he needs since…

 

[Waspsting]

Jimbo’s serve game
Jimbo’s broken 5 times, holds three

Even he can expect to get some freebies on this court. He gets exactly 4, Mac returning the remaining 92%. Simply a numbers game… ordinary serve or not, getting that many back is impressive

They rally from the back. Jimbo FH has 12 UEs. Putting that in perspective
- Mac has 10 UEs (all shots)
- Jimbo non-FH UEs 4
- Jimbo FEs - 8
- Jimbo winners 11

Its not the just the volume of them, but the kinds of balls he misses. Routine balls, third balls against pushed returns, in short rallies. Its often the case with UEs that you have to look up numbers to tell which shots have been stable and which not

Not here. A casual watch will easily identify the multitude of errors coming out of Jimbo’s FH

11/16 Jimbo UEs are neutral shots and 12/16 are FHs. In other words, most of the FHs are just routine balls he’s not even trying to do anything with. Just keeps missing them

With next to no freebies and FH on a donation bin, what does that leave Jimbo to do?

When rallies get going, he hits harder, moves Mac about some while playing a lot closer to baseline than Mac does. Its almost amusing to watch Mac softly breeze side to side to push and touch balls back without strain, even as Jimbo grunts and groans to try to pressure him. Now and then, Mac hammers back his own groundies to match Jimbo for hitting strength. And he goes for dtl point finishers off the FH as mentioned earlier

Sizable disadvantage for Jimbo in back-court rallies, thanks to his woeful FH. So why not come to net?

He does some early on, but Mac’s very good on the pass. He’s at net 12 times in the first 5 service games that all turn into break. Wins 6 of them. Just 1 volleying UE all match, he doesn’t lose these points for poor forecourt play and doesn’ t even miss approach shots. Good passing by Mac

He takes net more after that. Gains his first hold by serve-volleying off all 3 first serves, and actively looks to come in after that. Doesn’t get broken again (when not getting broken again is a win, you know the guy’s having a bad day), but he’s already down a break and a set by then

Match Progression
Perfect start for Mac as he breaks to love. Couple of winners (BHV and FH inside-out) get him to 0-30 and Jimbo does the rest missing 2 routine FHs (1 a third ball)

Jimbo breaks right back though. Just 2/8 first serves help, as does a double fault, but some strong returns and passes needed

All that’s undone as Mac breaks again, in a 14 point game. Jimbo takes net regularly, but is met by defensive lobs that force him back or precise BH passes. He saves 4 break points, before succumbing with another routine FH miss

After a Mac hold to 30, last 3 games of the set have break points in them too. Not a bad game b Jimbo to be broken for 1-4 and he hammers returns and passes to take Mac to 12 points to consolidate. Set ends though with another break to love, and again, Jimbo missing 2 FHs (1 routine, 1 he had to move a bit to - both third balls), seals it

7 games, 6 of them with break points in them, and the other at 30-30

Jimbo’s broken at start of 2nd set, beginingg and ending with FH UEs - the first a routine third ball. Pushes Mac to deuce game after

Jimbo changes tacks, having lost all 5 of his service games. Serve-volleys to hold to love. Thereafter, he proactively seeks net on his service games. Still gets into trouble and is down 15-40 next time around, break points coming up off a third ball FH UEs. Takes net to save the game and hold

Couple of holds later, Mac serves out the match to deuce. Not much tension - he’s up 40-15 in the game and wraps it up with 2 serve-volleying winners

Summing up, one sided match. McEnroe’s serving is great - with cramping body serves mixed in with line lickers. Connors actually does well returning it, getting meaty returns off when he can, but much of it is unreturnable or bound to draw weak returns allowing the winner to hold with reasonable comfort

Credit also McEnroe for sure returning, as he misses nothing on the second shot. He faces an ordinary serve, but court is quick and wherever the line for ‘returning well’ against an ordinary serve is, 92% return rate is surely beyond it

Connors’ FH is very poor, regularly missing routine balls and/or in short rallies to set him behind in baseline rallies, and McEnroe handles power with grace from the back, while throwing in some great FH attacking shots to put the winner over in baseline rallies to. Some precise passing from him too

 

[WCT]

Another match I have not watched since seeing it live. I remember it as a butt kicking. 4/51 unreturned serve? Brutal and in the same year that h had improved his serve earlier. If memory serves Mcenroe was on a run that fall, Won several indoor tournaments.

 

[Waspsting]

Another match I have not watched since seeing it live. I remember it as a butt kicking. 4/51 unreturned serve? Brutal and in the same year that h had improved his serve earlier. If memory serves Mcenroe was on a run that fall, Won several indoor tournaments.

Also a slump for rest of the year

This was his first title since January. I think all his title that year might have been indoors

 

[jrepac]

If you read Mac's book, he mentioned this match as a comeback of sorts. He was not 100% at Wimby (surely not great if you are playing Connors) and he was a bit rusty at the USO. It was not a stellar year for him, but the Fall was a bounce back. His '83 was not shabby, but that was an odd year w/4 different guys winning the GS events. I recall Connors, Mac and Lendl trading off the #1 slot, w/a lot of folks also feeling Wilander was the best player of the year.