Stats for Borg and McEnroe in 1980-81

[krosero]

This has been a fascinating rivalry to study and pick apart. I'm starting this thread just to list some of the unusual or interesting stats that Borg and McEnroe had in 1980-81.

In those calendar years they played 6 "big" matches: two each at the Masters, Wimbledon and the USO.

Each man won 3 matches.

Here are the threads:

1979 Masters -- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=217304
1980 Wimbledon -- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=165907
1980 USO -- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=218007
1980 Masters -- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=209610
1981 Wimbledon -- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=165964
1981 USO -- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=219827

Strangest stat of all: in these 6 matches, the winner always served more points than the loser.

Granted, 81USO doesn’t really fit the pattern, because McEnroe served only 3 points more than Borg did, and the only reason was that he had one more service game than Borg.

But in the other matches the margin is always larger, and unexpected. I’d be surprised if I find this pattern again in another rivalry – and I don’t know what the pattern means, if it means anything at all.


The man who lost the first set was usually the winner, except at the 1980 USO and the second Masters match.


McEnroe served at his highest percentage (63%) in a match he lost, the 80W.

Borg served at 62% there -- and at 63% and 64% in the two Masters matches. Not coincidentally those were the three matches he won. In all his losses to McEnroe he was under 60%.

McEnroe served at his lowest (51%) at the first Masters. Borg served at his lowest (47%) at the first USO.

The player with the higher service percentage usually won the match. The two exceptions were the 80W where McEnroe served at one percentage point higher than Borg, and the 81 USO where Borg served at one point higher than McEnroe.

Best service percentage in a set, as far as I know: 74% by Borg in the fifth set at 80W. McEnroe served at 70.4% in the fourth set of the same match. I don’t know the first set at the first Masters meeting or the first two sets at the second Masters meeting.

Winners were not the key factor in their matches. The player who had more winners won three of the matches (the first Masters, second W and second USO). The other matches went to the player with fewer winners.

You could almost say that Borg led McEnroe in winners in 1980 while McEnroe led in 1981. It's almost perfectly true, except that McEnroe had just 1 more winner than Borg at 80W. So essentially the pattern is true, except for a technicality.


All three of the matches that Borg won went to 6-all in the deciding set. McEnroe won his three matches by more comfortable margins, at least in terms of sets.

The closest margin in Total Points Won was at the 81W (just 6 points) – excluding the Masters matches, for which I have incomplete info.

Borg took 3 tiebreaks from McEnroe, and in each case he had to win the tiebreak or lose the match: two in the ultimate set of the Masters matches (McEnroe obviously had to win those too), and one while facing a straight-set elimination at the ’80 USO.

McEnroe took 6 tiebreaks from Borg: the famous one (when it was McEnroe who faced elimination), another at each of the Masters matches, one to open the ’80 USO final, and two consecutive at 81W.

McEnroe won a set twice from set point down: the fourth set at the 80W and the third set the next year.

The highest count of winners is McEnroe’s at the 81W: 72 winners/aces. Borg has 72 at the '80 USO, though that was a longer match.

In every match except the 81W, McEnroe had more winners from his FHV than his BHV. It was especially powerful at the second Masters, with 23 winners. It was usually the stroke that got him the most winners, except at the 80W where the leading stroke on both sides of the net was actually McEnroe's BH ground stroke.

McEnroe’s FH outperformed his BH in winners at both USO matches and the first Masters match.

In every match except the 80W, Borg had more winners from his BH than his FH. In every match his FHV is tied with or slightly ahead of his BHV in winners.

The highest winner count for any of their strokes was Borg’s BH at the ’80 USO: 27 winners.

In every match, Borg has more winners from ground strokes and McEnroe from volleys/smashes. But at the 80W the proportions are the closest, I think, to being reversed for each player. In other words, they were nearest to being all-courters, in that match.

Greatest number of aces: McEnroe’s 11 at 80W.

Lowest number of aces (in a best-of-five): Borg’s 4 at ‘80 USO.

Greatest number of double-faults: McEnroe’s 10 at 81W.

Lowest number of double-faults (in a best-of-five): 3 by McEnroe at 80W.

Longest streak of points won on serve: 19 by Borg at 80W.

Greatest number of return errors made: 64 by Borg at ‘80 USO.

 

[Waspsting]

Not a "big match", but I have (almost) full stats for Stockholm 80 final (6-3, 6-4 to Borg). you presented cursory stats for that before https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/watch-this-match.395868/#post-7618818

It fits into about half the patterns you've identified

Strangest stat of all: in these 6 matches, the winner always served more points than the loser.

Fits
Borg serves 64 times, Mac 62... but there's a Borg service game missing, so Borg serves at least 6 more points and probably more (not a lot of love games in this match)

so 7/7 matches, this pattern holds. Hard to call it a coincidence than

I'd hypothesise that between these guys, service blowouts weren't a realistic option

IOW, both players would inevitably create chances on return

So the winner is the guy who can best thwart those chances... thus lengthening out their service games and saving break points

The alternative is getting broken (if break chances are a given)

Best explanation I can think of - over 7 matches, it is an unexpected finding

Borg served at 62% there -- and at 63% and 64% in the two Masters matches. Not coincidentally those were the three matches he won. In all his losses to McEnroe he was under 60%.

Close
Borg served 59%. the key stat of the match is Mac serving at just 32%

You could almost say that Borg led McEnroe in winners in 1980 while McEnroe led in 1981. It's almost perfectly true, except that McEnroe had just 1 more winner than Borg at 80W. So essentially the pattern is true, except for a technicality.

No fit.
Borg 18 winners, Mac 23

In every match except the 81W, McEnroe had more winners from his FHV than his BHV... In every match except the 80W, Borg had more winners from his BH than his FH. In every match his FHV is tied with or slightly ahead of his BHV in winners.

No fit.
Mac 8 BHV winners, to 7 FHV
Borg 10 FH winners, to 5 BH
only fit is on the Borg volley... just the 1 winner, a FHV

----

Other stats of interest....

- just the one ace in the match.... McEnroe served it and it was a second serve

- Unforced errors in play, Borg 6, McEnroe 17 (including 12 BHs).... not really a surprise but I was interested in seeing how well Mac might handle the heavyweight Borg baseline-to-baseline on this slow court. He did about as well as I'd think he would have (not well)

- net stats - Borg 47%, Mac 58%

-----

Just one match in this period - big or small - between the pair we don't have stats for (Milan 1981). Maybe there's a box score for that lying around somewhere

 

[Drob]

Not a "big match", but I have (almost) full stats for Stockholm 80 final (6-3, 6-4 to Borg). you presented cursory stats for that before https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/watch-this-match.395868/#post-7618818

It fits into about half the patterns you've identified



Fits
Borg serves 64 times, Mac 62... but there's a Borg service game missing, so Borg serves at least 6 more points and probably more (not a lot of love games in this match)

so 7/7 matches, this pattern holds. Hard to call it a coincidence than

I'd hypothesise that between these guys, service blowouts weren't a realistic option

IOW, both players would inevitably create chances on return

So the winner is the guy who can best thwart those chances... thus lengthening out their service games and saving break points

The alternative is getting broken (if break chances are a given)

Best explanation I can think of - over 7 matches, it is an unexpected finding



Close
Borg served 59%. the key stat of the match is Mac serving at just 32%



No fit.
Borg 18 winners, Mac 23



No fit.
Mac 8 BHV winners, to 7 FHV
Borg 10 FH winners, to 5 BH
only fit is on the Borg volley... just the 1 winner, a FHV

----

Other stats of interest....

- just the one ace in the match.... McEnroe served it and it was a second serve

- Unforced errors in play, Borg 6, McEnroe 17 (including 12 BHs).... not really a surprise but I was interested in seeing how well Mac might handle the heavyweight Borg baseline-to-baseline on this slow court. He did about as well as I'd think he would have (not well)

- net stats - Borg 47%, Mac 58%

-----

Just one match in this period - big or small - between the pair we don't have stats for (Milan 1981). Maybe there's a box score for that lying around somewhere

Guys should watch the 1980 Stockholm match. I have dvd but I think it is available on youtube. May be Borg's best match (against McEnroe) during the time frame and a really important match for Borg - he had never won at Stockholm prior to 1980, and things were not going well between he and the Swedish media at the time. The post-match interview is rather revealing in this regard. But Borg's tennis . . . sublime.

 

[Drob]

Strangest stat of all: in these 6 matches, the winner always served more points than the loser.

Granted, 81USO doesn’t really fit the pattern, because McEnroe served only 3 points more than Borg did, and the only reason was that he had one more service game than Borg.

But in the other matches the margin is always larger, and unexpected. I’d be surprised if I find this pattern again in another rivalry – and I don’t know what the pattern means, if it means anything at all.

Does it mean that, at least w/in the limited sample size, possibly the "closest rivalry"? In this case both were strong servers. Another possible example, but one which perhaps underscores your point because the leader was clearly the weaker server: Segura-Sedgman 1953 WCS tour. Segura had the one match edge. Bet he hit a lot more serves than Sedge. Rosewall's career advantage on Sedge, Hoad, many others, also more serves by winner, possibly. Crochet-Tilden, more serves by winner, I'll wager.

If you take Connors-McEnroe from its inception only up through 1983, I bet you'd get more serves by Jimmy, who had a 12-11 edge at end-1983.

Agassi's surprising match domination over Becker - more serves by Agassi surely. But, again, this rather shows your point if you are saying that it is remarkable - possibly unique - that the winner in contests between two strong servers would serve more often (i.e., the big server with the better serve that day will win nearly always - let's talk 1988 Masters Final or 1996 Masters Final, for example. They will probably show the winner served less often).


Impressive, impressive compilation BTW, and a most interesting observation. Basically, I think you are correct. It is going to be unusual (but not unique) that the leader in the head-to-head served more frequently overall. Compliments. (And I trust I even got your point and did not misinterpret).

 

[Drob]

Perhaps needless to say, I would count Stockholm a big match. Also 1979 WCT Finals final.

 

[krosero]

Fits
Borg serves 64 times, Mac 62... but there's a Borg service game missing, so Borg serves at least 6 more points and probably more (not a lot of love games in this match)

so 7/7 matches, this pattern holds. Hard to call it a coincidence than

I'd hypothesise that between these guys, service blowouts weren't a realistic option

IOW, both players would inevitably create chances on return

So the winner is the guy who can best thwart those chances... thus lengthening out their service games and saving break points

The alternative is getting broken (if break chances are a given)

Best explanation I can think of - over 7 matches, it is an unexpected finding

Hard to say what the cause is but this sounds perfectly logical. I've posted before, speculating that maybe this can happen if the winner of the match has one or more key games in which he fights off break points; I speculated in particular that you might see this with Borg because we've tracked so many of his matches that were tight struggles and he did save many break points. Generalizing beyond Borg, or any of his rivalries, is something else. So many dynamics are possible.

But I do think the way you've laid it out for Borg-Mac is logical: yes, both men are strong servers so you wouldn't expect too many breaks at love, or easy breaks. That's a solid starting point. I'd add, you wouldn't see many breaks at all. You'll be seeing both men holding consistently, and in that case what it may come down to is who saves break points in some key games. That would result in the winner of the match perhaps having to serve more points.

As always we need more data but I like the theory.

Borg served 59%. the key stat of the match is Mac serving at just 32%

That is just astounding. So then this is surely the main reason that this match went in straight sets. They were playing so many matches in this time period (beginning of '80 through early '81) that went down to the wire, and I always thought maybe the relatively slowness of this court was the main reason this match was not competitive. But surely Mac serving at 32% has to be a bigger factor. Give him 20 more percentage points and you can easily see this match becoming close.

Short list I've been adding to:

Tom Nijssen – 21.3% in a loss to Sampras at ’91 Lyon
McEnroe – 32.3% in a loss to Borg in 1980 Stockholm final
Fish – 34.0% in a win over Federer at ’08 Indian Wells
Lendl – 36.36% in a loss to Connors at ’84 Tokyo Indoor
Safin - 36.36% in a loss to Sampras at 2000 Lisbon Masters Cup
Sampras – 37.3% in a win over Courier at ’91 Cincinnati
Lendl – 37.8% in a loss to Noah at ’83 RG
Cash – 38% in a loss to Edberg at ‘89AO
Becker - 38.2% in a loss to Gilbert at ’89 Cincinnati
Sampras – 41.0% in a loss to Agassi at ’92 RG

 

[krosero]

Does it mean that, at least w/in the limited sample size, possibly the "closest rivalry"? In this case both were strong servers. Another possible example, but one which perhaps underscores your point because the leader was clearly the weaker server: Segura-Sedgman 1953 WCS tour. Segura had the one match edge. Bet he hit a lot more serves than Sedge. Rosewall's career advantage on Sedge, Hoad, many others, also more serves by winner, possibly. Crochet-Tilden, more serves by winner, I'll wager.

If you take Connors-McEnroe from its inception only up through 1983, I bet you'd get more serves by Jimmy, who had a 12-11 edge at end-1983.

Agassi's surprising match domination over Becker - more serves by Agassi surely. But, again, this rather shows your point if you are saying that it is remarkable - possibly unique - that the winner in contests between two strong servers would serve more often (i.e., the big server with the better serve that day will win nearly always - let's talk 1988 Masters Final or 1996 Masters Final, for example. They will probably show the winner served less often).


Impressive, impressive compilation BTW, and a most interesting observation. Basically, I think you are correct. It is going to be unusual (but not unique) that the leader in the head-to-head served more frequently overall. Compliments. (And I trust I even got your point and did not misinterpret).

That last part, which I've bolded, is something that I intuitively expected, before I had any data. This data that I've collected here is suggestive, but far too limited. However, @Gary Duane recently told me that he'd observed that top players tend to serve about 95 points for every 100 that they receive, going by ATP data. So that backs up the theory with some data.

I have much older data on Tilden, Gonzalez and Vines. All of them ATGs of course, and ATG servers. And the pattern holds for two of them. Pancho served 95 for every 100 (his total served was 2690 points, total received 2843). Vines, it's 96 for 100 (5292 vs. 5534). Big Bill doesn't fit the pattern. He served 12597 points while his opponents totalled only 12281; that works out to 103 points served for every 100 received.

You mention Cochet-Tilden, and it's a good example, because Cochet's serve was far weaker than Bill's. But I've got Tilden serving 1266 points, Cochet only 1238.

Ok Tilden lost most of those matches (3 wins 7 losses). But now look what I have for Tilden's matches against Bill Johnston, another relatively weak server: Tilden won 8 meetings, lost only 4. But Big Bill served 1607 points, Little Bill only 1399. Huge gap there.

Vines, like I said, generally served fewer points than his opponent, in the sample of point scores that I've collected. But his matches against Cochet were an exception: he dominated Henri 4-0 in my sample; but Elly served 491 times, Cochet only 477.

Another exception for Elly was his matches against Les Stoefen. Les was a monster server; could not be more of a contrast with Cochet. Yet Elly worked harder than Les did, on serve. Elly won all 5 matches against Stoefen in my sample, but Elly served 409 times, Les only 388.

A lot of counter-intuitive stuff here, and most of it is, honestly, unexplained. What we need is more data.

 

[Waspsting]

Tom Nijssen – 21.3% in a loss to Sampras at ’91 Lyon
McEnroe – 32.3% in a loss to Borg in 1980 Stockholm final
Fish – 34.0% in a win over Federer at ’08 Indian Wells
Lendl – 36.36% in a loss to Connors at ’84 Tokyo Indoor
Safin - 36.36% in a loss to Sampras at 2000 Lisbon Masters Cup
Sampras – 37.3% in a win over Courier at ’91 Cincinnati
Lendl – 37.8% in a loss to Noah at ’83 RG
Cash – 38% in a loss to Edberg at ‘89AO
Becker - 38.2% in a loss to Gilbert at ’89 Cincinnati
Sampras – 41.0% in a loss to Agassi at ’92 RG

that's quite a list... the Sampras-Courier match sounds particularly interesting to me

Four to add - based on ATP site, I can't confirm them from my own viewing

One I hazily recall - and checked the ATP site for. Becker served 34.3% in loss to Sampras, Rome 94


Mary Carillo in the USO final, 1996 claimed that Michael Chang served at 41% in reaching the final - so I looked up stats for that run on the ATP site too

2 under 40s in it... in the first round against Oncins, 39.9% (Oncins himself served 36.0%) and in the third round against Spadea 35%

 

[Waspsting]

Tom Nijssen – 21.3% in a loss to Sampras at ’91 Lyon
McEnroe – 32.3% in a loss to Borg in 1980 Stockholm final
Fish – 34.0% in a win over Federer at ’08 Indian Wells
Lendl – 36.36% in a loss to Connors at ’84 Tokyo Indoor
Safin - 36.36% in a loss to Sampras at 2000 Lisbon Masters Cup
Sampras – 37.3% in a win over Courier at ’91 Cincinnati
Lendl – 37.8% in a loss to Noah at ’83 RG
Cash – 38% in a loss to Edberg at ‘89AO
Becker - 38.2% in a loss to Gilbert at ’89 Cincinnati
Sampras – 41.0% in a loss to Agassi at ’92 RG

McEnroe squeezing in with 39.7% in win over Gerulaitis, '83 Forest Hills