Points that changed the outcome of a slam

1975 U.S. Open. Vilas was up on Orantes, two sets to one and 5-0 in the 4th set. After Orantes held to get to 5-1, Vilas had two match points on his serve. Orantes saved both, won the fourth set 7-5, and then took the fifth set 6-4. In the finals, he straight setted Connors for the title. If Vilas takes either of those match points Vilas or Connors would have added another Major to their tallies.
 
Besides the ones played on match point, a lot of these don't really change the outcome of the slams they were played in. You can't know for certain how the rest of the match would have played out, and the result easily could still have been kept the same. You can definitely speculate, but in the end, we'll never know for certain.
 
Panatta saved a MP against Hutka in the first round of the '76 French. Don't know how the point played out, but had he lost Borg most likely would have won a third straight title and increased his tally in Paris to 7 and his total slam tally to 12.
 
nowhereman said:
Panatta saved a MP against Hutka in the first round of the '76 French. Don't know how the point played out, but had he lost Borg most likely would have won a third straight title.
Click to expand...

Wow, great bit of trivia. This one might top the net cord that Becker needed to beat Rostagno:

With his head hardly clear from his spectacular victory at the Foro Italico in Rome only three days before, Panatta lost the fourth set 0-6 to the switch hitter. Twice in the fifth set Panatta was two points from defeat and once there was match point against him. Only a leaping backhand overhead off his racket frame and a diving backhand volley, again off the wood, saved the point, the set, the match (2-6, 6-2, 6-2, 0-6, 12-10) and, as it turned out, the tournament. "Every game I am saying to myself who cares about this guy? I win Rome," Panatta said afterward. "Then I say, come on, why not try?"
​
Someone needs to find a video of this point! Plus, I want to see how Hutka played. Look at this description of his game from the prior paragraph:

The first round of men's play was enlivened by Panatta's standard act, his brush with match-point danger. This time his co-star was Pavel Hutka. Hutka is a slender, short-haired Czech, a basic European roadrunner except that he serves and smashes left-handed and hits everything else right-handed. Don't ask why.​
 
buscemi said:
Wow, great bit of trivia. This one might top the net cord that Becker needed to beat Rostagno:

With his head hardly clear from his spectacular victory at the Foro Italico in Rome only three days before, Panatta lost the fourth set 0-6 to the switch hitter. Twice in the fifth set Panatta was two points from defeat and once there was match point against him. Only a leaping backhand overhead off his racket frame and a diving backhand volley, again off the wood, saved the point, the set, the match (2-6, 6-2, 6-2, 0-6, 12-10) and, as it turned out, the tournament. "Every game I am saying to myself who cares about this guy? I win Rome," Panatta said afterward. "Then I say, come on, why not try?"
​
Someone needs to find a video of this point! Plus, I want to see how Hutka played. Look at this description of his game from the prior paragraph:

The first round of men's play was enlivened by Panatta's standard act, his brush with match-point danger. This time his co-star was Pavel Hutka. Hutka is a slender, short-haired Czech, a basic European roadrunner except that he serves and smashes left-handed and hits everything else right-handed. Don't ask why.​
Click to expand...
What an epic way to save it. :eek:
 
Helterskelter, Becker did not face any match points vs camporese in 91. Camporese did save 3 match points and broke Becker when he served for the match at 11-10. He also broke Becker when he served for it again at 12-11. Guessing that didn't happen to Becker often, getting broken twice when serving for the match.

Wilander had a couple close calls at 88 Roland Garros. Zivojinovic served for the match at 5-3, 30 all in the 5th and failed to put away a high bh volley that would have given him match point. And Emilio Sanchez failed to put away a short fh at 5-1 in the 2nd that would have given him a 2 sets to love lead. Imagine an Agassi Sanchez semi instead, with the winner to face Leconte.

Also sabatini failed to put away a volley that would have given her match point vs Graf in the 91 Wimbledon final.
 
Moose Malloy said:
Wilander had a couple close calls at 88 Roland Garros. Zivojinovic served for the match at 5-3, 30 all in the 5th and failed to put away a high bh volley that would have given him match point. And Emilio Sanchez failed to put away a short fh at 5-1 in the 2nd that would have given him a 2 sets to love lead. Imagine an Agassi Sanchez semi instead, with the winner to face Leconte.
Click to expand...
the wilander-zivojinovic match is probably the 1st "coming back from the brink" tennis match i witnessed on TV... as a kid, i was fascinated by how the final outcome was unfolding ! :eek:
 
The_Order said:
2013 US Open: Nadal serving at 15-40 4 all third set. Long rally and Novak hits the high part of the net.
Click to expand...
Didn't really change the outcome. For all we know, Nadal could have won that match anyway. We can speculate that had Novak gotten the break, he would have won the third and maybe finished it in 4, but we can't know for certain. As I said before, the only points where the outcome is changed for sure are the ones where MP(s) are saved.
 
eagletennis said:
This is so true.Didn't they have few more 40-40 after that
Click to expand...

Nadal was just better from the baseline in the 5th set. Djokovic served kept him going for a few games but Nadal really raised his game to win the epic 5th set.

I don't think Nadal ever played at that level again on clay.
 
DreddyTennis45 said:
These points strike me as crucial points that were lost/won which essentially changed the outcome of a slam:

Wimby 2008: Nadal with a massive serve at the 4-3 and 30-40 down in the fifth set of the final.

Wimby 2009: Roddick's missed volley in the 2nd set TB, would've gone 2 sets up

RG 2009: Federer forehand vs Haas in the 3rd set at 4-3 and 30-40 down.

RG 2011: Federer missed drop shot first set in the final, likely would have gone a set up, probably wouldn't have effected the outcome too much but interesting nonetheless.

AO 2012- that backhand

RG 2013: Djokovic and the net

Wimby 2014: Federer missed overhead in the fifth set of the final

Anyone have any more?
Click to expand...
Probably controversial, but I will wade in....Federer's drop shot against Nadal in the first set of the French open final on 2011. He would have won the first set in a dominant fashion and would have continued with confidence sky high. The drop shot was probably less than an inch out.
 
nowhereman said:
Didn't really change the outcome. For all we know, Nadal could have won that match anyway. We can speculate that had Novak gotten the break, he would have won the third and maybe finished it in 4, but we can't know for certain. As I said before, the only points where the outcome is changed for sure are the ones where MP(s) are saved.
Click to expand...
Uh I don't know man.That match is probably one of most painful to watch as a Djokovic fan cause momentum was so much on Djokovic side and after that point was such a abrupt switch that Novak never recovered.He folded like paper.And no one in history of tennis can smell the blood better than Nadal.Couple of his vamos screams and he destroyed Novak
 
Fed's forehand against Haas in 09 was just... Lets just say he doesn't have RG in the cabinet if he missed that.
 
eagletennis said:
Uh I don't know man.That match is probably one of most painful to watch as a Djokovic fan cause momentum was so much on Djokovic side and after that point was such a abrupt switch that Novak never recovered.He folded like paper.And no one in history of tennis can smell the blood better than Nadal.Couple of his vamos screams and he destroyed Novak
Click to expand...
But like I said, we still don't know how the rest of the match would have turned out. Just because the momentum was on Novak's side doesn't mean he wouldn't have lost it in the next set or later on in the match. The most likely outcome would have been Novak winning, but we can't know for sure.
 
nowhereman said:
Didn't really change the outcome. For all we know, Nadal could have won that match anyway. We can speculate that had Novak gotten the break, he would have won the third and maybe finished it in 4, but we can't know for certain. As I said before, the only points where the outcome is changed for sure are the ones where MP(s) are saved.
Click to expand...

The OP listed quite a few points that weren't MPs. Maybe you should go back and read again. It's all opinion based that's what a discussion forum is for. It gets pretty boring if we always talk undeniable facts. Had Novak got that break, he would've most likely taken the third set and the match.
 
The_Order said:
The OP listed quite a few points that weren't MPs. Maybe you should go back and read again. It's all opinion based that's what a discussion forum is for. It gets pretty boring if we always talk undeniable facts. Had Novak got that break, he would've most likely taken the third set and the match.
Click to expand...
Good point. Although the title is "Points that changed the outcome of a slam", so I took that literally and didn't try to bring up anything that would leave room for speculation. But you are right though.
 
Wimbledon 2007 final fifth set. Federer was 15-40 down on his first two service games. He saved them all and then ran away with the set. If Nadal had converted at least one of those it could have been a different story.
 
RG 2006 final, 3rd set, Nadal serving down 1-2 0-40 and several Ad-out for Roger. Had he converted maybe he'd have run the 3rd, but against Nadal, that's not a guarantee.
Also in the 4th set tiebreak, Fed went up 2-0, only to lose 4-7.
Then there's RG 2005 semis, same opponents, Fed was up 3-1 in the 4th down 2-1 in sets. But light was fading out and Nadal came back just in time to win the match. Had Federer hold his lead, maybe the match would have ended in Saturday, allowing more rest time to Puerta.
 
Fedole said:
Fed's forehand against Haas in 09 was just... Lets just say he doesn't have RG in the cabinet if he missed that.
Click to expand...

I actually think that he would have had a decent chance to break Haas back even if he had missed that FH. There is a good chance that Haas would have choked while serving for the match.
 
Although not strictly on topic, I also think that the AO 2009 final would have had a different result if Federer had won the third set. He had so many chances in that set but just could not take them. Nadal looked tired and he was just hanging in there. If Federer had won that set, he most likely would have won the match in 4. As it happened, Nadal somehow managed to win the third set and Federer mentally collapsed in the fifth set.
 
Last two slams:

-Wawrinka saving a match point against Evans at USO 2016
-Nadal missing a forehand against Fed on game point, 3-2 up in the fifth at the AO
 
Last edited:
2005 AO semifinal. Safin saving a match point against Federer in the 4th set tiebreak, awesome point. Won the epic 5th that could have easily gone the other way. Phew.
2004 RG final. Poor El Mago choked badly despite winning first two sets and having CPs in the fifth on his serve. It's very sad someone of his quality doesn't have one RG.
 
1) Don't know if it changed but it certainly decided the match

Backhand lob by Edberg to secure the decisive break in the 5th set 1990 Wimbledon final

Becker had come in off a not great approach and was like a cat eyeing a mouse hole waiting to to see which way the inevitable passing shot attempt would go.

It ended up going between his head and the sky, completely stunning the defending champion

2) not necessarily a point that changed the match but possibly a series of one's that could have changed history.

US Open final 2007, serving for the 1st set, 40-15, Novak Djokovic committed 4 rudimentary unforced errors. He just dumped regulation ground strokes of Federer's return halfway up the net.

If memory serves, realizing what was happening Fed smartly did little more than gently lift the last two returns over the middle of the net. Same response from Djokovic, whack, into the net.

Djokovic was a break up in all 3 sets in that match and of course, lost in straights.

I wonder if he'd eked out the 1st whether it would have changed the outcome?

Furthermore, coming off a sensational win in Canada where he beat Nalbandian, Roddick, Nadal and Federer in succession and going on to win Australian in 2008 (plus Indian Wells), I wonder how history might have been different if he'd won in New York
 
Noleberic123 said:
That net in the RG 2013 semi still haunts me till this day
Click to expand...

dfg8qf.jpg
 
DreddyTennis45 said:
Last two slams:

-Wawrinka saving a match point against Evans at USO 2016
-Nadal missing a forehand against Fed, 40-40 3-2 up in the fifth at the AO
Click to expand...

According to this article, "[o]nly 12 men in the Open era, which began in 1968, have saved a match point on the way to winning a Grand Slam title in singles." This article was from 2014, so Wawrinka would be #13. The article references Djokovic at the 2011 U.S. Open and Becker at the 1989 U.S. Open. Others mentioned in this thread are (1) Orantes at the 1975 U.S. Open; (2) Safin at the 2005 Australian Open; (3) Panatta at the 1976 French Open; (4) Coria at the 2004 French Open; (5) Sampras at the 1996 U.S. Open; and (6) Roddick at the 2003 U.S. Open. So, that's nine out of the thirteen, with Wawrinka included. Interestingly, six out of those nine came at the U.S. Open.

Does anyone know the other four?

[Edit: Here's the list: The other three are: (1) Newcombe saved three match points against Roche in the 1975 Australian Open SF before winning the final; (2) Kriek saved 1 match point against McNamee in the 1982 Australian Open SF before winning the final; (3) Edberg saved 2 match points in the 1985 Australian Open SF against Masur before winning the title; and (4) Kuerten saved 1 match point against Russell in the 2001 French Open fourth round before winning the title.].
 
Last edited:
wimbledon 91 rd16 volkov was serving for the match at 5-4 30all. stich hit a netcord that passed volkov. otherwise it would have been matchpoint for volkov. stich went on to win the tournament over courier (rg champ), edberg (def. champ, #1), becker (3times champ #2).
 
Waspsting said:
1) Don't know if it changed but it certainly decided the match

Backhand lob by Edberg to secure the decisive break in the 5th set 1990 Wimbledon final

Becker had come in off a not great approach and was like a cat eyeing a mouse hole waiting to to see which way the inevitable passing shot attempt would go.

It ended up going between his head and the sky, completely stunning the defending champion

2) not necessarily a point that changed the match but possibly a series of one's that could have changed history.

US Open final 2007, serving for the 1st set, 40-15, Novak Djokovic committed 4 rudimentary unforced errors. He just dumped regulation ground strokes of Federer's return halfway up the net.

If memory serves, realizing what was happening Fed smartly did little more than gently lift the last two returns over the middle of the net. Same response from Djokovic, whack, into the net.

Djokovic was a break up in all 3 sets in that match and of course, lost in straights.

I wonder if he'd eked out the 1st whether it would have changed the outcome?

Furthermore, coming off a sensational win in Canada where he beat Nalbandian, Roddick, Nadal and Federer in succession and going on to win Australian in 2008 (plus Indian Wells), I wonder how history might have been different if he'd won in New York
Click to expand...
Would Novak have still won in Melbourne, had he won in New York in 2007?
 
buscemi said:
According to this article, "[o]nly 12 men in the Open era, which began in 1968, have saved a match point on the way to winning a Grand Slam title in singles." This article was from 2014, so Wawrinka would be #13. The article references Djokovic at the 2011 U.S. Open and Becker at the 1989 U.S. Open. Others mentioned in this thread are (1) Orantes at the 1975 U.S. Open; (2) Safin at the 2005 Australian Open; (3) Panatta at the 1976 French Open; (4) Gaudio at the 2004 French Open; (5) Sampras at the 1996 U.S. Open; and (6) Roddick at the 2003 U.S. Open. So, that's nine out of the thirteen, with Wawrinka included. Interestingly, six out of those nine came at the U.S. Open.

Does anyone know the other four?

[Edit: Here's the list: The other three are: (1) Newcombe saved three match points against Roche in the 1975 Australian Open SF before winning the final; (2) Kriek saved 1 match point against McNamee in the 1982 Australian Open SF before winning the final; (3) Edberg saved 2 match points in the 1985 Australian Open SF against Masur before winning the title; and (4) Kuerten saved 1 match point against Russell in the 2001 French Open fourth round before winning the title.].
Click to expand...
Fixed ;)
 
buscemi said:
According to this article, "[o]nly 12 men in the Open era, which began in 1968, have saved a match point on the way to winning a Grand Slam title in singles." This article was from 2014, so Wawrinka would be #13. The article references Djokovic at the 2011 U.S. Open and Becker at the 1989 U.S. Open. Others mentioned in this thread are (1) Orantes at the 1975 U.S. Open; (2) Safin at the 2005 Australian Open; (3) Panatta at the 1976 French Open; (4) Coria at the 2004 French Open; (5) Sampras at the 1996 U.S. Open; and (6) Roddick at the 2003 U.S. Open. So, that's nine out of the thirteen, with Wawrinka included. Interestingly, six out of those nine came at the U.S. Open.

Does anyone know the other four?

[Edit: Here's the list: The other three are: (1) Newcombe saved three match points against Roche in the 1975 Australian Open SF before winning the final; (2) Kriek saved 1 match point against McNamee in the 1982 Australian Open SF before winning the final; (3) Edberg saved 2 match points in the 1985 Australian Open SF against Masur before winning the title; and (4) Kuerten saved 1 match point against Russell in the 2001 French Open fourth round before winning the title.].
Click to expand...
Also, according to this link, these should be all guys who won slams after saving MP's.

http://www.tennis28.com/slams/saved_matchpoint.html
 

Harsh stuff. This one is the Most dramatic and Most unpredictable turn of events in the history of a match.
 
mike danny said:
Would Novak have still won in Melbourne, had he won in New York in 2007?
Click to expand...

I was assuming he would and wondering if back to back slams might have 'got him going' so to speak... and what that might have meant for him, for Federer and for Nadal. Perhaps even for the up and coming Andy Murray (as if he hasn't had it tough enough, the poor guy)

As it is, it took him 3 more years and for most of that time, Federer remained comfortably the better hard courter and Nadal mostly went unchallenged on clay
 
1. The Rostagno let cord on MP which allowed Becker to eventually win the 1989 US Open
2. Becker's let cord at the 1989 Masters against Lendl on MP
3. Fed's errant FH in the fifth set of the 2008 Wimbledon final, at 4-3, 30/40.
 
Waspsting said:
2) not necessarily a point that changed the match but possibly a series of one's that could have changed history.

US Open final 2007, serving for the 1st set, 40-15, Novak Djokovic committed 4 rudimentary unforced errors. He just dumped regulation ground strokes of Federer's return halfway up the net.

If memory serves, realizing what was happening Fed smartly did little more than gently lift the last two returns over the middle of the net. Same response from Djokovic, whack, into the net.

Djokovic was a break up in all 3 sets in that match and of course, lost in straights.

I wonder if he'd eked out the 1st whether it would have changed the outcome?

Furthermore, coming off a sensational win in Canada where he beat Nalbandian, Roddick, Nadal and Federer in succession and going on to win Australian in 2008 (plus Indian Wells), I wonder how history might have been different if he'd won in New York
Click to expand...

djokovic did not have a break in the 3rd set of that USO match.

the first set "choke" from djokovic was a mix of errors from djoko and clutch play from federer.
 
tennisaddict said:
USO 09 Final : Fed's casual drop shot that would have likely given him a straight set win
Click to expand...


USO 09 Final has 2 match changing points when Federer was serving at 5/4 2nd set:
The bad dropshot by Federer instead of an easy put away FH
Then the passing shot by Del Potro, called out, overruled after challenge that gives him BP (which he converted with another good passing)
I still hate that match, even if i like Del Potro, it was Federer's best shot to an historic 6th title at the USO :mad:

A point i didn't see anyone talking about, the set point for Federer against Soderling in the 3rd set of their RG10 match. Federer managed to make a counter smash but Soderling managed to hit a BH very high volley. That match had a lot of importance since it broke Federer slams SF streak and also, by virtue of losing so early and Nadal winning that RG, he was stopped at 285 weeks at number 1. He eventually managed to beat the record but it took him 2 years, while qualifying for the SF would have allowed him to do it much sooner.
At 14:55
 
kishnabe said:
Yeah, he should have had zero US Open. Federer was the better playing in all their US Open meetings.
Click to expand...

I think Djokovic was superior in 2010. Federer played that match pretty badly, he said something after about playing thinking too much about keeping energy for the final on the next day and that translated into playing way too casually. He stil managed to get match points but that was a bit lucky to get there already tbh.
In 2011, the match was much closer imo, i'd say they were about equal, but this time he was unlucky to lose.
 
Youtube is really awesome sometimes, so i found the whol Borg/MacEnroe 81 Wimbledon final. Borg had 2 set points in the 3rd.

Watch from 1:45:00, Mac Enroe looks about to implode after the umpire overrules, but he managed to keep his composure and save both with authority.

Edit: there were actually 4 set points !
 
I'm thinking of another one, a bit different:
At 1:42:52, match point for Isanisevic. He serves an ace, but it's called let!
The match goes on for another hour and a half and 31 games. Had he closed the match earlier, maybe he would be better in final against Sampras. He lost a close match where he was gassed in the 5th. I admit this is very theoretical.
 
1 potential history changer and 1 definite slam changer/potential history changer.

1) Borg's championships points in 4th set of Wimbledon final 80. If he'd nailed one, the results the same but maybe his rivalry with John McEnroe would have played out differently

2) Gerulaitis missing a backhand for the win Wimbledon semi 77. If he'd got that, he'd have been in the final with Connors.

(source is BBC, though it's not in the list @buscemi provided. Can anyone verify?)

The final that year also featured a very significant point. Connors double faulted at a crucial stage late in the 5th. Borg commented later if he hadn't, Connors would probably have won the match.

As it actually happened, Connors only beat Borg again twice while losing 13 and Borg went his merry way at Wimbledon
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Giroudsleftboot
Most crucial points won/lost in a slam?
Replies
26
Views
2K
Mustard
Mustard
G
That one point that could change the outcome of a match and rivalry,
2
Replies
74
Views
7K
merwy
M
MichaelNadal
Lemme change like 4 points ;)
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
nolefam_2024
N
Hitman
The two crucial dropshots that significantly impacted the outcome of the slam race
2
Replies
84
Views
1K
Mustard
Mustard
M
Most Impressive Grand Slam of Big 3 That He Didn't Win
Replies
47
Views
3K
Gonzo_style
Gonzo_style
Back
Top