Stats for 1981 USO Final(Austin-Navratilova)

[Moose Malloy]

Austin d Navratilova 1-6, 7-6(4), 7-6(1)

Austin won 124 pts, Navratilova 126

Austin served at 73%(86 of 117)
Navratilova served at 58%(77 of 133)

Austin won 49 of 86 pts on 1st serve(57%)
She won 15 of 31 on 2nd(48%)

Navratilova won 47 of 77 pts on 1st serve(61%)
She won 26 of 56 pts on 2nd(46%)

Austin had 32 non service winners: 19 fh, 7 bh, 5 fhv, 1 bhv
Navratilova had 39: 4 fh, 5 bh, 12 fhv, 12 bhv, 6 ov

Austin had 21 passing shot winners(14 fh, 7 bh)
Navratilova had 6(3 fh, 3 bh)

Austin had 3 aces, 2 df's
Navratilova had 5 aces, 13 df's

Austin had 12 unreturned serves, 2 I judged service winners
Navratilova had 24, 5 I judged service winners

Austin was 9 of 17 at net(53%)
Navratilova was 87 of 146(60%)

Austin was 4 of 21 on break points. Navratilova 6 of 11.

CBS had this stat at 6-5 in the 3rd:

Unforced Errors
Austin 15 fh, 12 bh
Navratilova 27 fh, 16 bh

here's some youtube clips

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x0vJxBJzxU

Navratilova saved 3 match points when Austin served for the match at 6-5.

from SI

But Navratilova's victorious struggle over Evert Lloyd left behind some incriminating evidence. Her stamina could be seen as suspect, and Marty Riessen, Austin's new coach, recognized how much havoc Evert Lloyd had created by lobbing. Austin's lobs in the final were even better than Evert Lloyd's had been, and they took a great toll. What let Navratilova down the most was her forehand volley. The most disquieting of her countless mistakes off that stroke was a sitter she plunked into the net at break point for 5-4 in the second set. For want of that shoe was the kingdom lost.

Austin, of course, was enjoying a revival herself, having been shelved for four months earlier this year with a serious lower-back disability. It wasn't till last month's Canadian Open that she regained her form, which is all the more reason to credit her courage, because when she at last found herself tested she was up to the task. Tested? Navratilova simply knocked her back on her heels, 6-1, in a 25-minute opening set.

But Austin steadied herself, even as she fidgeted more on every point—like some third-base coach, touching her hair, her face, her dress, her necklace—and in the two tiebreakers she needed for victory, she routed the 24-year-old Navratilova 7-4 and 7-1, respectively. In the end, the difference was not just the execution the prodigy has always been famous for, but also a brilliant piece of bold strategy. Leading 1-0 in the final tiebreaker and having played Navratilova's backhand all day, Austin won two straight points by slamming drives to the forehand corner. In both cases Navratilova was caught dumb struck and wrong-footed.

 

[krosero]

Navratilova had 5 aces, 13 df's

Ouch.
.........

 

[Edward DFW]

if you ignore the equipment what level would you think these ladies were playing at if you saw them in the park? 4.0? 4.5?

Martina's slice and Tracy's serve are pretty week when taken at face value

impressive spin for small head size wood rackets but still...

 

[Mick]

i don't know. but they were the best women's players in the world at the time so in my opinion, they had to be a lot better than today's 4.5

 

[Edward DFW]

I'm talking about appearances only... austin's serve in particular is just... well, look at it

 

[10SDude]

I remember watching this match on TV. Unless my memory fails me (which is very possible), I recall a critical point where Tracy hit a two handed forehand volley winner. (Maybe both players were at the net and she had to react quickly???)

 

[krosero]

Austin d Navratilova 1-6, 7-6(4), 7-6(1)

Austin won 124 pts, Navratilova 126

This happened to Martina at least in two other matches that we know (something we've also seen with Federer a few times):

Mandlikova d Navratilova 76(3), 16, 76(2)

Navratilova won 118 pts, Hana 113.

Sukova d Navratilova 1-6, 6-3, 7-5

Navratilova won 109 pts, Sukova 103.

 

[BTURNER]

This happened to Martina at least in two other matches that we know (something we've also seen with Federer a few times):

Each time involved a 6-1 set going toward Martina. If you could keep things very tight vs Martina in that last set , you might see her crack just enough, no matter how glorious she played in chunks of that match. That mental fragility never fully disappeared.

 

[krosero]

Each time involved a 6-1 set going toward Martina. If you could keep things very tight vs Martina in that last set , you might see her crack just enough, no matter how glorious she played in chunks of that match. That mental fragility never fully disappeared.

That's right, each one had a 6-1 set. But I don't know if it always demonstrates mental fragility when that happens. At the 81 USO, yeah, I was thinking something like that, since Martina started strong and finished weakly. Dominated the first set 6-1 and could not keep it up.

But at the 85 USO, she took the second set 6-1, and then it was because Hana was the one who was running hot and cold and couldn't keep her level of play consistent. Martina on the other hand, in that match, was perfectly consistent for all three sets and she didn't exactly finish weakly: Hana just went into hot mode at the very end when she needed it, and whenever she did that there was no stopping her.

So I'm just thinking that this stat (winning more points but losing the match), can show mental fragility: but another way it can happen is if one player is just supremely consistent in all the sets (that is, more consistent than the player who ends up winning the last point).

 

[Moose Malloy]

I remember watching this match on TV. Unless my memory fails me (which is very possible), I recall a critical point where Tracy hit a two handed forehand volley winner. (Maybe both players were at the net and she had to react quickly???)

It was at 1-1, 40-30, Austin serving. Both players were at net. It gave Austin her first lead of the match, 2-1 in the 2nd.

This happened to Martina at least in two other matches that we know

Austin lead in pts the last 2 sets, 109-97.

But I don't know if it always demonstrates mental fragility when that happens. At the 81 USO, yeah, I was thinking something like that, since Martina started strong and finished weakly. Dominated the first set 6-1 and could not keep it up.

Yeah, I think its a bit unfair to call this loss a result of Martina choking. Tracy really raised her level in the last 2 sets(& the entire match was played under really windy conditions, so I'm sure that was a factor in fluctuating level of play)

The closest Martina got to winning this match was 2 break points at 4-4 in the 2nd, but Austin played 2 great points(I don't think it was an 'easy' volley that Martina misssed on one of them, according to SI. Austin really cranked her bh on that one)

And Austin had a lot more bp's than Martina in the last 2 sets, she could have won easier than 7-6 in the 3rd, Martina played some amazing tennis just to get to 6-6. The 146 net approaches for Martina is one of the highest I can recall for a 3 set match, esp since she had to work her way into net after long rallies on many of them, not just S&V on 1st & 2nd serve/ chip & charge on everything, like she did when she switched to graphite & hooked up with Estep. Must have been very physically demanding to play that way that day.

 

[krosero]

Austin lead in pts the last 2 sets, 109-97

Which means a 95-92 lead apart from the tiebreaks, so essentially even.

Yeah, I think its a bit unfair to call this loss a result of Martina choking. Tracy really raised her level in the last 2 sets(& the entire match was played under really windy conditions, so I'm sure that was a factor in fluctuating level of play)

The closest Martina got to winning this match was 2 break points at 4-4 in the 2nd, but Austin played 2 great points(I don't think it was an 'easy' volley that Martina misssed on one of them, according to SI. Austin really cranked her bh on that one)

And Austin had a lot more bp's than Martina in the last 2 sets, she could have won easier than 7-6 in the 3rd, Martina played some amazing tennis just to get to 6-6.

I wouldn't have called it a choke either, though I was agreeing with Bturner that the scoreline and the overall point score might reflect some mental fragility on Martina's part. She started in complete control of the match, at the top of her game, and could not keep it up. Then she missed the high FHV at 4-all, break point in the second set, and while Austin deserves credit for ripping her backhand, that’s a shot that Martina should make. There were other shots ripped at her that she put away. So I would have put that one error down as an unforced error.

And there were other bad errors from the FHV in the two tiebreaks.

I do think that the match is played up too much as Martina’s failure rather than Austin’s win. So I’m glad you’re pointing out that Tracy picked up her level of play in the last two sets, and that Martina actually had to work hard to stay even with her. The article in SI gives the impression that Martina was on a roll and simply choked on one crucial point, when actually the match was tight by then, and had been for some time.

Of course one thing people always talk about is how Martina double-faulted on match point and was crying during the ceremony.

But why was she crying? Because of the standing ovation that the crowd was giving her? Because she felt she had chances and squandered them? Or was it just disappointment at not winning a title she wanted very badly?

Well we’re not mind readers, so who knows for sure. But I think there’s something to the mental fragility argument in this match. Not so in the 1985 final, I don’t think. There she played well from start to finish, and if you remember, right after it was over Virginia Wade said that Martina gave it her best but that she was just beaten by a better player on the day. Virginia did commentary for the ’81 final too, and her comments then were different. She talked about how Martina had her chances in the second set and said she felt sorry for her because her FHV let her down in the match.

Again, maybe that angle is played up too much, but I think there’s something to it.

 

[BTURNER]

Just to be clear, I think choke is too strong of a word. Martina did not blow three of four points in a row, or freeze up, but unforced errors would creep in, on shots she would normally make, shot selection might get suspect here or there as the tension mounted.

 

[krosero]

CBS had this stat at 6-5 in the 3rd:

Unforced Errors
Austin 15 fh, 12 bh
Navratilova 27 fh, 16 bh

These numbers must include volleys, because according to your stats more than half the points in the match finished with Martina playing a net point. So it would be hard to believe that Martina had 43 unforced errors from groundstrokes alone: if that were true you would then have to add all her unforced errors up at net (particularly the forehand volley), plus her 13 double-faults. Her error count at that point would skyrocket and Tracy, who hardly volleyed or double-faulted, would have an overwhelming margin in this category. And all that would make it hard to explain how Martina ended up winning more points overall than her opponent.

Plus it just seems unlikely that CBS, when reporting unforced errors, would limit themselves to groundstrokes -- particularly when the two opponents played contrasting styles.

(I've seen other minor indications, here and there, that volleys were being included in these numbers, for example by tracking CBS' running counts during the match, or by comparing their numbers to stats in the print media).

Anyway this leaves Navratilova with 43 unforced errors, and Austin with 27, only two games before the end. That's already a large margin, and it grows if you add the 12 double-faults Martina had already made (Tracy only had two).

And in your numbers, Martina's edge over Tracy in clean winners/aces was not very large. So if Martina won more points overall, she must have had a somewhat sizable margin over Tracy in the category of forced errors.

And that's believable, given that she spent so much time up at net forcing errors.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

^^^^^^
unforced errors...winners....



Tracy Austin represented a threat to the Martina-Chris stranglehold on the WTA in that she showed NO FEAR vs. the big-2....and "they" knew it. Martina was ("fitness-wise") in Chris' head, i.e. Chris knew that Martina was the new king/queen-of-the-hill....and Tracy was having none of it. The pinafore kid was taking on all comers at that point.

* (Evert=125 clay court streak wrecked by Austin).

*(Martina at the U.S. Open 'psyched-out' by the runt, Austin, one of modern tennis' waaay-underrated champions).

Tracy straight-up vs. Graf ending up Steffi 6-0-ish??....more, maybe, it was about the different time frame?....

: had Austin played on a "level playing field" (born '62 vs. Graf '69) I'd be interested in seeing what Austin (who didn't choke against against Martina-Chris, much like the golf fraternity did vs. Tiger..and as did the WTA did vs. Graf) would've done vs. Steffi.

 

[krosero]

By my count:

Austin made 6 of 9 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

3 of 5
3 of 4 (no mini-breaks on first or second)

Navratilova made 7 of 10 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

5 of 6 (but she lost 4 of the 5)
2 of 4 (and she lost both)

So in the tiebreaks Martina won only 1 of 7 points when she made her first serve (14.3%).

It got even worse in the '85 final.