Stats from Laver-Ashe, Wimbledon 1969 sf

[urban]

Thanks to Krosero, we have now stats of winners hit in the matches Laver-Newcombe Wim 1969, Newcombe-Connors AO 1975, Borg McEnroe Wim 1980. I made a similar stats analysis of the Laver-Ashe semi Wimbledon 1969. It was a very short match, little over 1 and a half hours, and 38 games in 4 sets. Score was 2-6, 6-2, 9-7, 6-0.
Laver had 53 winners: 10 aces (3 df), 15 fh (5 returns), 13 bh (4 returns), 5 fh volleys, 4 bh volleys, 6 smashes.
Ashe had 33 winners: 7 aces (5 df), 6 (1) fh, 14 (5) bh, 1 fh volley, 2 bh volleys, 3 smashes.
The sets scores were, by numbers of winners:
12-13, 14-5, 17-12, 10-3.
The two first sets were a real 'blitzkrieg' in groundstroke hitting: Ashe had 9 clean groundstroke winners, in the first set, 6 coming from the sharp backhand. Laver had 8 groundies winners, despite losing the set 2-6. Laver had 12 (6 in each set) forehand groundstroke winners alone in the first two sets, in 16 games.
As it is said, the match was relatively short in time and games. So the numbers of winners hit seem to be quite high. If you reckon it on a normal 5 set grass match, you get something of over 70 winners for Laver and around 50 for Ashe. And no forced errors on the serve (or the volley) are counted here.

 

[krosero]

Glad to see you doing this too.

The sets scores were, by numbers of winners:
12-13, 14-5, 17-12, 10-3.

This is quite interesting, because the third set was exactly twice as long in game as either of the first two sets; it had as many games as the first two sets combined. But you don't see that in the winners. The 6-2 sets produced a much higher rate of winners than the 9-7 set.

I had seen this match but I didn't notice the differences from set to set.

Laver had 53 winners: 10 aces (3 df), 15 fh (5 returns), 13 bh (4 returns), 5 fh volleys, 4 bh volleys, 6 smashes.
Ashe had 33 winners: 7 aces (5 df), 6 (1) fh, 14 (5) bh, 1 fh volley, 2 bh volleys, 3 smashes.

When I count winners, I have not been counting aces in the totals. I have been listing aces and doubles because they're easy to count and they're an interesting total, but the winners are separate in my counts.

When I started watching Wimbledon in the 80s and NBC would flash a "winners" stat, I always presumed that this meant ground strokes, volleys and smashes. Aces are always listed separately.

By my count, Laver had 54 winners in the final against Newcombe (apart from 10 aces), and 43 in the semifinal against Ashe.

But is that the convention, and has it changed in the past? (I know that today service winners are counted among total winners).

 

[urban]

Its ok with me, Krosero, to count aces (and service winners) and other winners separetely. But i think, in most statistical accounts of today, aces and serve winners are counted within the overall winners numbers. But maybe someone more accustomed to the ATP stat counts, can tell us more here. In any way, i think this kind of stats, which i very appreciate, show, that many commments about wooden era tennis are myths. It was not the stoneage, and the tennis was damned good. Not a chess game between white knights with long shorts, but strong, aggressive and interesting.

 

[urban]

Yes. Krosero. The 3rd set was quite tame, in contrast to the other 3. Ashe had started in 5th gear, hitting winners all over the place, got caught by the fierce counterpunches of Laver in the second, and in the last set was completely outplayed.

 

[Moose Malloy]

When I count winners, I have not been counting aces in the totals. I have been listing aces and doubles because they're easy to count and they're an interesting total, but the winners are separate in my counts.

When I started watching Wimbledon in the 80s and NBC would flash a "winners" stat, I always presumed that this meant ground strokes, volleys and smashes. Aces are always listed separately.

In today's match stats, aces & service winners are counted in the overall winner count. Steve Flink, who used to do stats for the US Open said this wasn't always the case. So I wouldn't be sure that the winner counts for those 80s matches show the total amount of winners by todays standards.

 

[Moose Malloy]

There is an article on Ashe by Steve Flink on the Tennis Channel website that describes this match, here is the excerpt & link to the full article.

"On the backhand side, both off the ground and on the volley, he was dazzling. He punched the backhand volley with authority and consistency both down the line and crosscourt. His backhand ground stroke was sweepingly beautiful. I will never forget his cavalcade of backhand return and passing shot winners during a 1969 Wimbledon semifinal against Rod Laver. This was devastatingly potent stuff. Ashe was sprinkling the court with blinding topspin backhand placements, and even the great Laver was reduced to becoming a spectator on the other side of the net. For me, it was a treat to be present for that soaring clash.

With typical pride and perspicacity, Laver survived a shot making avalanche from Ashe and turned the match around convincingly, winning 2-6, 6-2 9-7, 6-0. But for one set against a man on his way to a second Grand Slam, Ashe was on the edge of invincibility. The problem at that time for Ashe was that he had a glaring weakness on his forehand ground stroke and his low forehand volley. Off the ground on that side, he lacked consistency because his grip was too continental. On the low forehand volley, he had too little margin for error.

Be that as it may, let's return to the subject of that Wimbledon 1975 final against Connors. By then, Ashe had learned to temporize, to modify his game, to play the percentages as well as taking the right kinds of risks. And he had worked assiduously on improving the low forehand volley. As he told me later that year, "I'm concentrating on not hitting that low forehand volley into the net as I did in the past. I would say 80% of those forehand volley misses were in the net. Now, I may miss it, but I'm going to hit it over the baseline. And now, if it does go over the net, it usually goes in. My backhand volley is really an offensive weapon whereas the forehand volley, unless I've got a sitter, is a shot to set up the next one."

Ashe's nearly impeccable execution on the low forehand volley was one of the keys to his improbable 6-1, 6-1, 5-7, 6-4 victory over Connors at Wimbledon in one of the biggest upsets in modern times on the fabled Centre Court. His strategic acumen that day was nothing short of stupendous. He baffled Connors with a wide array of spins and speeds, exchanging his normally potent ground strokes for subtle and effective variations of pace, swinging his slice serve wide in the deuce court to stifle Connors on his two-handed backhand return, pulling his rival off the court time and again with that play. As Ashe said, "I hit that wide serve in the deuce court better than anybody else. I can swing a left-hander wider than any other right-handed big server."


http://www.tennischannel.com/news/NewsDetails.aspx?newsid=3838

here is the link to krosero's youtube highlights of Laver-Ashe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpdPX9avs1M

 

[Hey Moe!]

Thanks, Moose, for the insights. I've read volumes about the '69 match, and watched the '75 match on TV. Steve Flink's comments are on the money. I remember World Tennis magazine commenting about Ashe's play in the first set of the '69 match. It is likely his best tennis of all.

 

[urban]

The best piece i have read about this match (and one of the best pieces in all tennis literature) was by David Gray, in his book "Shades of Gray", posthume edited by Lance Tingay. It was also collected in a Volume about Ashe, edited after his death by the ATP, alongside the 1975 final. Apparently, these were Ashe's signature matches. It is to be said, that he always lost to Laver, in fact 18 straight times, before he finally caught the aging Rocket at the Aetna World Cup in 1974.

 

[AndrewD]

Urban,

I'd be curious to know how many forehand volley errors Ashe made. Any idea ?

 

[urban]

Quite a lot. He netted his low forehand volley quite often, i think something with his grip wasn't perfect. Boris Becker also had problems with low forehand volleys, due to his grip.

 

[Moose Malloy]

There is an article on this match at tennisweek:

http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=547838

 

[krosero]

Here's an excerpt from Ashe's book, Off the Court:

****************

Laver and I had many interesting matches. Earlier in the summer of 1968, he beat me in the semifinals of Wimbledon and went on to win the title. When Laver wanted something badly enough, his racquet could get as torchy as his sandy red hair. He had every shot and was difficult to pass because he was so quick – quicker than Tom Okker. He also had a very good backhand chip shot to my forehand. Laver, Dennis Ralston, and Fred Stolle all could chip their return of serves to my forehand volley, which was my weaker volley; it forced me to pop the ball up. The difference was that Laver hit the ball so well on the rise. He could hop all over the ball, sometimes hitting the damn thing off the half-volley or with a semi-lob. His strength matched my weakness, and he was so fast he could cover up his mistakes.

 

[krosero]

And here's a UPI report the day after the match:

***************

Ashe said after the match that it was his normally big service that “let me down and let me down hard.”

Laver, a tennis-wise veteran, changed his tactics in the second set and fed Ashe’s forehand, which wasn’t too effective. He broke Ashe in the sixth game with two passing forehands and a net shot that bounced off the top of Ashe’s racket at game point….

Laver agreed that Ashe’s failure to serve with his usual flash made the difference.

“His big weapon used to be his service which he could send to any wing with a flick of the wrist but I was able to get to them today,” Laver said, adding that Ashe’s ailing elbow had something to do with it.

“He changed his rhythm not bending his elbow at all in the service swing.”

Ashe replied that his elbow had “all but recovered and I don’t want to use it as an excuse.”

Arthur felt the best part of his game was his return of service against the Australian lefthander.

 

[pc1]

Here's an excerpt from Ashe's book, Off the Court:

****************

Laver and I had many interesting matches. Earlier in the summer of 1968, he beat me in the semifinals of Wimbledon and went on to win the title. When Laver wanted something badly enough, his racquet could get as torchy as his sandy red hair. He had every shot and was difficult to pass because he was so quick – quicker than Tom Okker. He also had a very good backhand chip shot to my forehand. Laver, Dennis Ralston, and Fred Stolle all could chip their return of serves to my forehand volley, which was my weaker volley; it forced me to pop the ball up. The difference was that Laver hit the ball so well on the rise. He could hop all over the ball, sometimes hitting the damn thing off the half-volley or with a semi-lob. His strength matched my weakness, and he was so fast he could cover up his mistakes.

Krosero,

That's a great quote from Ashe about Laver. It used to amaze me how it seemed so easy for Laver to sometimes hit shots almost on the half volley. I'm sure Laver must have made errors on those shots but I don't remember it. To me it was one of the differences between Laver's backhand and others. Laver's and Ashe's backhands were the most versatile I've ever seen and about as dangerous as any backhand as the 1969 Wimbledon semi between the two demontrated.

 

[Limpinhitter]

And here's a UPI report the day after the match:

***************

Ashe said after the match that it was his normally big service that “let me down and let me down hard.”

Laver, a tennis-wise veteran, changed his tactics in the second set and fed Ashe’s forehand, which wasn’t too effective. He broke Ashe in the sixth game with two passing forehands and a net shot that bounced off the top of Ashe’s racket at game point….

Laver agreed that Ashe’s failure to serve with his usual flash made the difference.

“His big weapon used to be his service which he could send to any wing with a flick of the wrist but I was able to get to them today,” Laver said, adding that Ashe’s ailing elbow had something to do with it.

“He changed his rhythm not bending his elbow at all in the service swing.”

Ashe replied that his elbow had “all but recovered and I don’t want to use it as an excuse.”

Arthur felt the best part of his game was his return of service against the Australian lefthander.

Actually, Ashe's forehand was very effective in that match. It just wasn't quite as ridiculous as his backhand was. Ashe was playing out of a tree as they say and just mugged Laver in that first set. In the second set, Ashe calmed down a bit and Laver upped his game. In the third set, both players continued to play extremely well. But, by the 4th set, Ashe's game just went south. It was such a severe drop in his level of play, compared to Laver who was extremely focused and determined and grew stronger as the match went on, that it wouldn't surprise me if Ashe was injured and just didn't say anything about it.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Krosero,

That's a great quote from Ashe about Laver. It used to amaze me how it seemed so easy for Laver to sometimes hit shots almost on the half volley. I'm sure Laver must have made errors on those shots but I don't remember it. To me it was one of the differences between Laver's backhand and others. Laver's and Ashe's backhands were the most versatile I've ever seen and about as dangerous as any backhand as the 1969 Wimbledon semi between the two demontrated.

Two words: Roy Emerson!

 

[krosero]

Actually, Ashe's forehand was very effective in that match. It just wasn't quite as ridiculous as his backhand was.

I read that as a reference to Ashe's forehand volley, since there were no baseline rallies. And Ashe seems to refer to it the same way, in the quote from his book: he refers to the chip to his forehand/forehand volley.

Here's a link to the UPI report: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=-MgtAAAAIBAJ&sjid=daAFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3088,1734625. Ashe says his returns were working well, presumably on both sides.

 

[krosero]

Here's Laver talking about the match in The Education of a Tennis Player, he's actually referring to Ashe' FH groundstroke. Given that, the UPI report probably is referring to the same thing.

"He's like me -- high for Wimbledon -- and his best tennis burst forth in that first set, far above anything I had imagined for him. He played that set as well as a man can play. I was doing all right, but Arthur was knocking fireballs everywhere, and Centre Court was roaring.

"I thought, if he keeps this up it's all over. There's not much to do about it except hope that he cools. Arthur's history tells you he's streaky and won't keep it up forever, but that isn't very comforting with balls shooting by. I was certain he couldn't maintain the pace for five sets, but the way he was going three might have been enough.

"Arthur flies at the ball, and thrashes it all-out. He's best on the backhand, and I started to pour my serve onto his forehand in the second set. The backhand had been burning me too much. His forehand was all right, too, but it wasn't so unbearable."

 

[Limpinhitter]

Here's Laver talking about the match in The Education of a Tennis Player, he's actually referring to Ashe' FH groundstroke. Given that, the UPI report probably is referring to the same thing.

"He's like me -- high for Wimbledon -- and his best tennis burst forth in that first set, far above anything I had imagined for him. He played that set as well as a man can play. I was doing all right, but Arthur was knocking fireballs everywhere, and Centre Court was roaring.

"I thought, if he keeps this up it's all over. There's not much to do about it except hope that he cools. Arthur's history tells you he's streaky and won't keep it up forever, but that isn't very comforting with balls shooting by. I was certain he couldn't maintain the pace for five sets, but the way he was going three might have been enough.

"Arthur flies at the ball, and thrashes it all-out. He's best on the backhand, and I started to pour my serve onto his forehand in the second set. The backhand had been burning me too much. His forehand was all right, too, but it wasn't so unbearable."

I think Laver's description is more accurate than that in the news article. Great find, BTW. I would love to see some footage of the Newcombe/Roche match.

 

[kiki]

the 69 Wimbledon seems to have been the paradise/peak of great serve and volleyers since the inception of tennis era.

1991 was also a great year for S&V

 

[abmk]

I did the stats for this match just now. (including UEs, net stats, SnV Stats, 1st serves and 2nd serves)
Just missing the first 3 points of the match (Laver serving in the 1st game). Laver was up 30-15.

----------

Aces :Laver - 9, Ashe - 6

DFs: Laver - 3, Ashe - 5

Service winners: Laver - 1, Ashe - 1

FHWs:
Laver - 11 (including 5 return passing shots, 4 passing shots and a lob)
Ashe - 6 (including 1 return passing shot, 3 passing shots)

BHWs:
Laver - 12 (including 6 return passing shots, 4 passing shots)
Ashe - 13 (including 4 return passing shots, 9 passing shots)

FH wing UEs:
Laver - 1 (1 volley error)
Ashe - 9 (7 volley errors and 2 OH errors)

BH wing UEs:
Laver - 2 (2 volley errors)
Ashe - 8 (including 7 volley errors and 1 return error)

FH FE: Laver - 7, Ashe - 13

BH FE: Laver - 37, Ashe - 34

FHV: Laver - 6, Ashe - 4

BHV: Laver - 4, Ashe - 2

OH: Laver - 5, Ashe - 3

Net points:
Laver - 52/84 (61.9%),
Ashe - 53/108 (49.07%)

1st serve SnV:
Laver - 31/48 (64.58%)
Ashe - 36/64 (56.25%)

2nd serve SnV:
Laver - 18/30 (60%)
Ashe - 15/39 (38.46%)

Service :

1st Serves in:
Laver - 56/92 (60.87%)
Ashe - 71/115 (61.74%)

Unreturned serves : (excluding aces and service winners)

1st serve: Laver - 14, Ashe - 18

2nd serve: Laver - 7, Ashe - 6


All unreturned serves:

Laver : 31/92 (33.69%)
Ashe : 31/115 (26.96%)

BPs: Laver - 9/14, Ashe - 5/7

BP converted/no of games with BPs: Laver - 9/10, Ashe - 5/5

In summary,

Winners: Laver - 47, Ashe - 35

UEs: Laver - 6, Ashe - 22

FEs: Laver - 54, Ashe - 47

Points : Laver - 116, Ashe - 92

 

[abmk]

set by set stats :

(missing the first 3 points of the match (Laver serving in the 1st game). Laver was up 30-15.)

Aces :
Laver - 0,3,5,1 -- Total = 9
Ashe - 3,1,1,1 -- Tota = 6

DFs:
Laver - 1,0,2,0 -- Total = 3
Ashe - 0,1,3,1 -- Total = 5

Service winners:
Laver - 0,1,0,0 -- Total = 1
Ashe - 0,0,1,0 -- Total = 1

FHWs:
Laver - 4,5,0,2 --Total = 11
Ashe - 3,1,2,0 -- Total = 6

BHWs:
Laver - 3,1,3,5 -- Total = 12
Ashe - 6,2,3,2 -- Total = 13

FH wing UEs:
Laver - 0,0,1,0 -- Total = 1
Ashe - 2,1,2,4 -- Total = 9

BH wing UEs:
Laver - 1,0,1,0 -- Total = 2
Ashe - 1,1,5,1 -- Total = 8

FH FE:
Laver - 6,2,7,2 --Total = 17
Ashe - 4,3,4,2 -- Total = 13

BH FE:
Laver - 10,7,17,3 -- Total = 37
Ashe - 4,9,14,7 -- Total = 34

FHV:
Laver - 1,1,2,1 -- Total = 6
Ashe - 0,1,3,0 -- Total = 4

BHV:
Laver - 0,1,3,0 -- Total = 4
Ashe - 1,1,0,0 -- Total = 2

OH:
Laver - 2,0,2,1 -- Total = 5
Ashe - 0,0,3,0 -- Total = 3

Net points:
Laver - 6/19,13/17,21/34,12/14 -- Total = 52/84 (61.9%)
Ashe - 13/29,12/22,22/38,6/19 -- Total = 53/108 (49.07%)

1st serve SnV:
Laver - 2/7,5/6,16/25,8/10 -- Total = 31/48 (64.58%)
Ashe - 10/19,9/14,14/22,3/9 -- Total = 36/64 (56.25%)

2nd serve SnV:
Laver - 4/11,7/8,5/9,2/2 -- Total = 18/30 (60%)
Ashe - 3/10,2/7,8/14,2/8 -- Total = 15/39 (38.46%)

Service :

1st Serves in:
Laver - 7/19, 10/18, 30/41, 9/14 -- Total = 56/92 (60.87%)
Ashe - 22/32, 15/23, 24/41, 10/19 -- Total = 71/115 (61.74%)

Unreturned serves : (excluding aces and service winners)

1st serve:
Laver - 1,3,6,4 -- Total = 14
Ashe - 8,1,7,2 -- Total = 18

2nd serve:
Laver - 1,2,2,2 -- Total = 7
Ashe - 0,2,4,0 -- Total = 6

BPs:
Laver - 1/4,2/3,3/4,3/3 -- Total = 9/14
Ashe - 3/4,0/0,2/3,0/0 -- Total = 5/7

BP converted/no of games with BPs:
Laver - 1/2,2/2,3/3,3/3 --Total = 9/10
Ashe - 3/3,0.0,2/2,0/0 -- Total = 5/5

In summary,

Winners:
Laver - 10,12,15,10 -- Total = 47
Ashe - 13,6,10,3 -- Total = 32

UEs:
Laver - 2,0,4,0 -- Total = 6
Ashe - 3,3,10,6 -- Total = 22

FEs:
Laver - 16,9,24,5 -- Total = 54
Ashe - 8,12,18,9 -- Total = 47

Points :
Laver - 21,27,43,25 -- Total = 116
Ashe - 31,15,38,8 -- Total = 92

 

[abmk]

Comments :

1. Ashe played great in the 1st, but that 1st set is overblown IMO, Laver was not serving well at all..Ashe himself had to face 4 BPs across 2 service games (was broken once)
I've seen quite a few better. The 2nd set from Laver here itself was a tad better. As you can see, Ashe got in 15/23 first serves and was broken twice, Laver didn't face a BP.

2. 3rd set was competitive, but multiple breaks in that.

3. Ashe form dipped considerably in the 4th set and Laver was all over him in that set.

4. Poor stats on saving BPs from both. Not enough good serving/play on those.
granted quality of returning was good/better from both, but should still be able to save more BPs.

5. Laver got off to a poor start in the 1st play, but played pretty well from there on.
Ashe got off a great start, played ok in the 2nd set, played well in the 3rd and poor in the 4th set.

 

[hoodjem]

Ashe had started in 5th gear, hitting winners all over the place, got caught by the fierce counterpunches of Laver in the second, and in the last set was completely outplayed.

Yes. I believe that somewhere Ashe said that the first set was the best he ever played in his life. He was on fire.

 

[Moose Malloy]

@abmk I actually took stats on this one a while back as well. I think my UE counts were pretty similar, I recall Laver with a very low amount.

As far as your comments about the frequent breaks of serve, based on stats from krosero and myself, that seemed to be sort of the norm in that era(and in the box scores that krosero found from the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, even many of the big servers seemed to get broken a lot)

so based on that, not sure it's quite fair to judge these old matches on their quality by focusing too much on the breaks of serve. We've discussed this in other threads why this may be the case(I thought the fact that there were no tiebreaks in that era may have effected players mentality on their serves)
It does seem like Borg and Mac sort of took the game to a new level, as far holding serve went.

49% at net for Ashe, not great. I wonder what it was vs Connors in 75.

 

[pc1]

@abmk I actually took stats on this one a while back as well. I think my UE counts were pretty similar, I recall Laver with a very low amount.

As far as your comments about the frequent breaks of serve, based on stats from krosero and myself, that seemed to be sort of the norm in that era(and in the box scores that krosero found from the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, even many of the big servers seemed to get broken a lot)

so based on that, not sure it's quite fair to judge these old matches on their quality by focusing too much on the breaks of serve. We've discussed this in other threads why this may be the case(I thought the fact that there were no tiebreaks in that era may have effected players mentality on their serves)
It does seem like Borg and Mac sort of took the game to a new level, as far holding serve went.

49% at net for Ashe, not great. I wonder what it was vs Connors in 75.

It would be interesting if we get a stats for Jack Kramer and Pancho Gonzalez for holding serve.

Moose, do you have stats for John Newcombe for holding serve? I remember when John played Jimmy Connors in the 1973 US open quarterfinals that Newcombe did not lose serve the entire match.

 

[abmk]

@abmk I actually took stats on this one a while back as well. I think my UE counts were pretty similar, I recall Laver with a very low amount.

As far as your comments about the frequent breaks of serve, based on stats from krosero and myself, that seemed to be sort of the norm in that era(and in the box scores that krosero found from the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, even many of the big servers seemed to get broken a lot)

so based on that, not sure it's quite fair to judge these old matches on their quality by focusing too much on the breaks of serve. We've discussed this in other threads why this may be the case(I thought the fact that there were no tiebreaks in that era may have effected players mentality on their serves)
It does seem like Borg and Mac sort of took the game to a new level, as far holding serve went.

49% at net for Ashe, not great. I wonder what it was vs Connors in 75.

I am aware that breaks of serve were more frequent, but not to this extent.
In any case, I was more surprised at their play on BPs, they didn't seem to put in that extra to save it. (save for Ashe in the 1st set)

Laver was 9/14, Ashe was 5/7,so {Total = 14/21}

See 1st set of Ashe-Okker USO 68 final : (14-12)
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/partial-stats-for-68-uso-final-ashe-okker.199747/

Ashe was 1/6,Okker was 0/2 {Total = 1/8}

Stats from Santana Ralston Wim 66 final ( 6-4, 11-9, 6-4)
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-1966-wimbledon-final-santana-ralston.372470/

Santana : 4/8, Ralston was 1/6 {Total = 5/14}

From Wimbledon 69 final -- Laver/Newk (6-4, 5-7, 6-4, 6-4)

Laver was 6/13, Newk was 4/7 {Total = 10/20}

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/some-stats-for-1969-wimbledon-final.165551/

From USO 69 final -- Laver/Roche (7-9, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/stats-for-1969-uso-final-laver-roche.191678/

Laver won 9 of 13 break points.
Roche won 4 of 11 break points.

{Total = 13/24}

From 70 Dunlop final - Laver/Rosewall (3-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-2, 6-3)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...op-international-final-laver-rosewall.175342/

Laver won 9 of 16 break points, Rosewall 6 of 15.

{Total = 15/31}

70 Wimbledon final - Newk/Rosewall (5-7, 6-3, 6-2, 3-6, 6-1)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...for-1970-wimb-final-newcombe-rosewall.191512/

Newcombe converted 6 of 14 break points (43%).
Rosewall converted 3 of 18 break points (17%).

{Total = 9/32}

70 USO final - Rosewall/Roche (26, 64, 76(5-2), 63)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/stats-for-1970-uso-final-rosewall-roche.301691/

Rosewall was 3 of 10 on break points. He broke in 3 of the 7 games he had break point in.

Roche was 3 of 15 on break points. He broke in 3 of the 7 games he had break point in.

{Total = 6/31}

---

None of the other matches, the BP conversion approaches the rate in the Laver Ashe 69 Wim SF.

There was only one game in the entire match in which the server faced a BP and escaped unscathed - Ashe in the 2nd game of the 1st set.

and yes, my mind was constantly going back to Borg saving many BPs with clutch play (Mac of course was great at that as well).


---------------------

yes, Ashe's success rate at the net was rather low in this match.
----------------

Do you have the first 3 points of the Laver Ashe match by any chance ? If so, can you please let me know so I can have the stats for the complete match ?