Stats for 1985 USO Final(Mandlikova-Navratilova)

[Moose Malloy]

These are my stats:

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

Mandlikova served at 59%(76 of 129)
Navratilova served at 66%(67 of 102)

Mandlikova won 50 of 76 pts on 1st serve(66%)
She won 22 of 53 on 2nd(42%)

Navratilova won 41 of 67 pts on 1st serve(61%)
She won 20 of 35 pts on 2nd(57%)

Navratilova won 118 pts, Hana 113.

Mandlikova had 37 non service winners(8 fh, 10 bh, 8 fhv, 9 bhv, 2 ov)
Navratilova had 52(14 fh, 12 bh, 13 fhv, 10 bhv, 3 ov)

Winners by set
Mandlikova: 18, 7, 12
Navratilova: 22, 14, 16

Mandlikova had 6 aces, 4 doubles
Navratilova had 4 aces, 1 double

Mandlikova had 25 unreturned serves, 2 I judged service winners
Navratilova had 31, 4 I judged service winners

Mandlikova was 3 of 5 on break points
Navratilova was 5 of 17

Mandlikova had a 5-0 lead in the 1st set & a 5-3 lead in the 3rd. She received a code violation for 'obscene language' at 2-2 in the 3rd after she thought she hit an ace.

at 4-3 in the 3rd CBS had Martina with 50 winners, Hana 42.

 

[BTURNER]

this was an inexplicable match, to me, like so many Hana victories. I thought she had more winners than Martina, and a higher percentage of first serves but memory serves me a double fault. It was incredibly dramatic.

 

[pc1]

this was an inexplicable match, to me, like so many Hana victories. I thought she had more winners than Martina, and a higher percentage of first serves but memory serves me a double fault. It was incredibly dramatic.

I was at that match and it seemed to me that Martina was intimidated by the incredible play of Hana in the first five games. Hana was taking Navratilova's first serve (if memory serves), moved in and was going for winners. She often made them in that streak of games. She won the first five games of the match in a super display of tennis.

I would have thought Hana had more winners too but often in our memory we recall the non volleying winners. Hana had a lot of passing shot winners, especially in the first five games of the match.

In those days, Navratilova was considered virtually unbeatable and most people thought if Navratilova played below her normal level that she still would win easily against almost anyone. I think this was probably true at the time.

However with Mandlikova, a lot of people (including me) thought Hana's best tennis was generally superior to Navratilova's so often any match between the two depended on how the unpredictable Mandlikova was playing and not Navratilova. Overall I felt Mandlikova had more power off both sides than Navratilova and I think a harder first serve. Both were excellent volleyers but Martina was more consistent by far at the net.

It was a fun match to watch and one of the most memorable that I've seen at the US Open.

Thanks Moose.

 

[jrepac]

I was at that match and it seemed to me that Martina was intimidated by the incredible play of Hana in the first five games. Hana was taking Navratilova's first serve (if memory serves), moved in and was going for winners. She often made them in that streak of games. She won the first five games of the match in a super display of tennis.

I would have thought Hana had more winners too but often in our memory we recall the non volleying winners. Hana had a lot of passing shot winners, especially in the first five games of the match.

In those days, Navratilova was considered virtually unbeatable and most people thought if Navratilova played below her normal level that she still would win easily against almost anyone. I think this was probably true at the time.

However with Mandlikova, a lot of people (including me) thought Hana's best tennis was generally superior to Navratilova's so often any match between the two depended on how the unpredictable Mandlikova was playing and not Navratilova. Overall I felt Mandlikova had more power off both sides than Navratilova and I think a harder first serve. Both were excellent volleyers but Martina was more consistent by far at the net.

It was a fun match to watch and one of the most memorable that I've seen at the US Open.

Thanks Moose.

I remember watching this as well; yes, Hana floored Martini in the first set w/her play; it was amazing! But, nerves and some inconsistency crept in, not to mention Martina, which made it a very close match. I thought Martina was going to pull it out at the end, which really would've been awful for Hana, who was amazing on that day. She had beaten Chris in the earlier round, if I am not mistaken, so that was a warning, for sure. Hana was the McEnroe of the ladies game, at her best, simply dazzling. She could make Chris and Martina look like hackers...but, rarely could she perform at that peak level for an extended period. The '87 AO also comes to mind as a case where Hana put on an amazing display in her win against Martina (on grass at the time, so quite a feat).

 

[Moose Malloy]

I would have thought Hana had more winners too but often in our memory we recall the non volleying winners. Hana had a lot of passing shot winners, especially in the first five games of the match.

Martina had more non volleying winners(27) than Hana(18)
Also had more passing shot winners. I think we tend to remember 'flashy' winners more than actual number of winners, a stat which Hana always did well in. But making a crazy winner on the run way behind the baseline isn't worth more than hitting 'normal' winners. Hana was my favorite player back then because I was probably taken in with her flashy game, but rewatching so many of these matches today, I really don't think 'at her best' she would have been able to take out Martina at her best, at least not on a consistent basis due to a nunber of factors: Hana's 1st serve % was never that high(even in the 1st five games of the match she wasn't making many 1st serves, in retrospect is it that surprising Martina could get back in that set when Hana was only around 50%? She wasn't comfortable S&Ving on 2nds, & Martina could exploit that.

Also Hana's fh was sort of on the wristy side(many commentators mentioned this) so she could really shank balls if she was being pressured or was off. And finally, what made Martina so hard to beat - she constantly attacked & S&Ved on virtually every 2nd serve(which players like Hana, Shriver, Sukova did not) And she chip & charged a ton. Consistently passing Martina on this type of surface was pretty much impossible, until Graf came along. And Martina frequently had pretty high serve %'s in big matches in the 80s(70+), that sort of number from a S&V player kinda wears you.

Martina did beat Hana 29 times, its sort of silly for someone to get beat that many times & just chalk it up to to 'not being at her best' we aren't talking about a Tracy Austin type player, someone who never really got a chance to be at 'her best.' hana had plenty of shots at that. And if being at 'her best' translates to her having to hit winners every other point, I'm not sure how anyone could expect her to be at 'her best' more than a couple times a year vs someone like Martina. And even then it may not be enough(see '86 W, Hana came out on fire(again). Then Martina basically didn't miss another serve the rest of the match. Suddenly the winners from Hana stopped flowing. Martina at her best was pretty great at finding another gear & making adjustments)

here are the last 6 games of the '85 USO Final:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbDeM2vwRDE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29o35mTLY58&playnext=1&videos=BtM7sR8_JH0

 

[BTURNER]

Both Chris and Martina knew what they were in for with Hana. There were times in Hana matches, when it was simply out of their control, a rare felling for them, especially Martina. Their goal was keep the ball deep, their first serve in, to ensure that percentages would tilt their way over the long haul. And pray that the gold plating on her racket begins to chip.

 

[jrepac]

Both Chris and Martina knew what they were in for with Hana. There were times in Hana matches, when it was simply out of their control, a rare felling for them, especially Martina. Their goal was keep the ball deep, their first serve in, to ensure that percentages would tilt their way over the long haul. And pray that the gold plating on her racket begins to chip.

Yeah, you definitely got the feeling that Chris and Martina were mere "observers" when Hana was in the zone; they were just waiting (hoping?) for her game to come back down to Earth. Still, Hana was incredibly talented and some of those wins, the USO Final in particular, are quite memorable and remarkable.

 

[boredone3456]

Martina was only 5 of 17 in Breakpoints?? That is a pretty low stat, she converted more, but she blew way to many.

 

[krosero]

For published stats all I have this from the Washington Post:

Of the 106 outright winners hit, 49 were at the net -- a marked departure from the traditional women's tennis played from the base line.

The stats look great, Moose. A lot to digest there; and one of my favorite matches.

 

[suwanee4712]

I agree with much of what has been said in this thread. This is one of the greatest matches I've ever seen because of the matchup, the drama, and the occasion. Others felt the same way as well, yet this match is so often overlooked these days. Mary Carillo actually called it the best match of 1985 which would include the much more ballyhooed French final between Chris and Martina.

I too would've thought Hana would come out better in the stats. But what I think this illustrates is just how much more dangerous Martina was when she is down as compared to Hana. The first 5 games Hana won in a flurry of winners, but Martina was still competitive. All she needed was to get a game or two in her column and she was fine. When Martina came back, Hana was a lot less competitive than Martina had been. That's why when Hana saved all of those break points at 5-5 in the first set, that was a real turning point for Hana and for her career. The old Hana wouldn't have survived that game. But this showed the improvement of Hana into a player that could take out the number 1 and 2 players to win the US Open. That was special to witness.

Hana was also my favorite player during this time, but I don't think her best would beat Martina's best. The reason being that Martina's best means that she is going to have her share of winners but fewer unforced errors than Hana. Also, Martina is going to serve at a higher percentage of first serves than what she did here and she's going to get her nose out in front and probably stay there. Someone else brought up the 1986 Wimbledon final. That's more of an example of Martina at her best in my opinion. Hana's still hitting winners, but Martina is matching those winners and playing more consisently. Her second serve is also holding up better than Hana's.

I do disagree with Carillo though on the best match of 1985. That was the Virginia Slims Championships SF between Martina and Hana. Of all of their matches vs. one another, that match is the closest thing to Martina at her best vs. Hana at her best. And what a spectacle that was to see! It was 7-5, 7-6 for Martina, but Hana had set point in both sets. Martina was lucky to win that one. But she won it because she didn't have a lapse in concentration as Hana did so critically at the end of the first set.

 

[Moose Malloy]

^I was wondering if you'd emerge to read this thread, thanks for posting. Now I'll have to check out that VS match, it already was one I wanted to see just on the basis of the score & players involved.

That's why when Hana saved all of those break points at 5-5 in the first set, that was a real turning point for Hana and for her career

Martina had 8 break points in that game. she had makeable shots on the 1st 2, but hana played great on the other 6. It probably was one of the most important games of her career.

Hana was taking Navratilova's first serve (if memory serves), moved in and was going for winners.

She only came in 3 times on Martina's 1st serve in the match(won 2) but one of the times was on set point in the 1st, so I can see why you would remember this. Very gutsy play, but it was probably a good idea to only try that 3 times.

 

[krosero]

These are my stats:

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

Since my baby boy was born unexpectedly last week, I don't know how many new stats I'll be able to get in the near future; so I'm glad you did this match. It's one of my favorites and I'd always been meaning to get to it; but my free time has been getting pinched for months now. I do have old work, already done, that I may post (both stats and non-stats). And maybe I'll find time soon to do new work. But anyway, thanks for doing this match. I look forward to more stats.

 

[krosero]

When she lost to Austin in the '81 final Martina won only 1 of 7 points in the tiebreaks when she made her first serves (none in the final tiebreak), and something similar happened this time.

By my count:

Mandlikova made 6 of 10 first serves in the tiebreaks (60%). By tiebreak:

2 of 5 (she won 1 of the 2)
4 of 5 (she won 3 of the 4)

Navratilova made 5 of 9 first serves in the tiebreaks (56%). By tiebreak:

2 of 5 (but she lost them both)
3 of 4 (but she lost all 3)

So in the tiebreaks, Martina didn't win any points when she made her first serve.

 

[krosero]

Navratilova/Graf at the '86 Open deserves its own stats and thread but I did get the tiebreak stats.

Navratilova made 9 of 14 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

5 of 5 (she won 3 of 5)
4 of 9 (she won 2 of the 4)

Graf made 10 of 14 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

4 of 5 (no mini-breaks on first or second)
6 of 9

First serves were made on every set point and every match point in the tiebreaks.

Martina made all her first serves in the first tiebreak but still lost it. She won the final tiebreak despite making fewer first serves than Graf.

Martina had lost two U.S. Open finals in third-set tiebreaks. In each of those tiebreaks, in 1981 and 1985, she had lost every point in which she made her first serve. Here, finally, she won two points on first serves, and it was enough.

A wide first serve to Graf's backhand ended it.

 

[krosero]

1987 USO, Navratilova d. Graf 7-6 (4), 6-1

In the tiebreak, Navratilova made 5 of 6 first serves, Graf 3 of 5.

1991 USO, Navratilova d. Graf 7-6 (7-2), 6-7 (6-8 ), 6-4

Navratilova made 8 of 11 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

3 of 4 (she won all 3)
5 of 7 (she won 3 of the 5)

Graf made 8 of 12 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

3 of 5 (she lost 2 of the 3)
5 of 7 (she won 4 of the 5)

 

[kiki]

Great posts.I agree and since Hana was the player that caught me completely dazzed since 1980, I was extremely rigorist with her.She had some great matches like the first set of the 1980 USO final against Chris, and of course her 1981 SF at the FO, not to mention the 1981 quarters at Wimbledon that year; I think that was one of the best female matches ever, and one of the best Hana vs Martina ones.

With Chris, Hana had the big problem of making % work.It was just a menthal thing.But against Martina, there was a very important psicological factor since Martina was the role model in Czeckoslovakia and also due to the very different personal visions they held at that moment, it was really a subtle factor that was always on their matches.Hana wanted to beat Martina more than anyone and Martina feared her more than anybody else.That brought flaws and lapses but also tennis at its most brilliant stages.And there have been many examples of that as many posters have reflected here, including the VS finals.

Hana had absolutely everything, technical, talent wise, footwork, body athleticism to become one of the best if not the absolute best ever women player.Just as simple as that.

If she had had 80% of Chris will to win and concentration or Martina´s focus and desire, Steffi Graf would have never on earth won even half of the slams she got.

 

[kiki]

Yeah, you definitely got the feeling that Chris and Martina were mere "observers" when Hana was in the zone; they were just waiting (hoping?) for her game to come back down to Earth. Still, Hana was incredibly talented and some of those wins, the USO Final in particular, are quite memorable and remarkable.

I just don´t think we have seen a women´s tennis match like this over the last 30 yrs.The level of play, the go for broke winner, the tension and excitment is something I still can feel now.Don´t forget Hana also defeated Evert in a close sf match and both, Martina and Chris played some of their best evert tennis in 1985 (RG and Wimbledon).

But, yeah, every match out of 4 or 5 you could feel the clouds darkening, preluding the storm coming in form of unpalatable play.And the storm would clean up everything on court with no possible way to escape.
Martina and Chris always hoped that this was a short summer storm not a long one.But what kind of storm that was, that, even Hana didn´t know.

 

[BTURNER]

Navratilova/Graf at the '86 Open deserves its own stats and thread but I did get the tiebreak stats.

Navratilova made 9 of 14 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

5 of 5 (she won 3 of 5)
4 of 9 (she won 2 of the 4)

Graf made 10 of 14 first serves in the tiebreaks. By tiebreak:

4 of 5 (no mini-breaks on first or second)
6 of 9

First serves were made on every set point and every match point in the tiebreaks.


Martina made all her first serves in the first tiebreak but still lost it. She won the final tiebreak despite making fewer first serves than Graf.

Martina had lost two U.S. Open finals in third-set tiebreaks. In each of those tiebreaks, in 1981 and 1985, she had lost every point in which she made her first serve. Here, finally, she won two points on first serves, and it was enough.

A wide first serve to Graf's backhand ended it.

Martina has to be just spinning those first deliveries in during big TB's, to keep her percentage high and ensure she gets to the net, knowing both these two can blast forehands on her second. Normally its a real weapon in tight situations.

 

[kiki]

Navratilova´s lefty side wide sliced serve was even more dangerous than Mc Enroe.She could also serve wide out to the right side of the court.Evert,Mandlikova and Graf knew that very well.However it was a weapon developed by the middle 80´s.

 

[suwanee4712]

A key quote by Martina was, "I thought consistency would win over flare." I get the point of her quote which is generally a sound philosophy, but not necessarily for Martina. She made the classic mistake of waiting until she was down to hit out.

BJK used to say, "Champions force the issue." Hana took more risks than Martina and it paid off for her, especially when it was tight.

 

[Kirijax]

I remember the '85 US Open final very well. I couldn't believe how Hana had found a way to win. One of the tourneys that have remained stuck in my mind over the years. The look of "What the heck is going on" on Martina's face in the 3rd set tie break was understandable.

 

[kiki]

Mandrakova there