Stefan Edberg beat Ivan Lendl 6-3, 6-3, 6-4 in the US Open semi-final, 1991 on hard court
Edberg would go onto beat Jim Courier in the final to win his first US Open title. This would turn out to be Lendl's last Slam semi. Earlier in the year, the two had met at same stage at Australian Open with Lendl winning. They would play in the quarters of both Australian and US Open the following year, with Edberg winning both times
Edberg won 94 points, Lendl 73
Edberg serve-volleyed off all serves
Serve Stats
Edberg...
- 1st serve percentage (55/82) 67%
- 1st serve points won (40/55) 73%
- 2nd serve points won (14/27) 52%
- Aces 4
- Double Faults 4
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (38/82) 46%
Lendl...
- 1st serve percentage (41/85) 48%
- 1st serve points won (27/41) 66%
- 2nd serve points won (18/44) 41%
- Aces 4 (1 second serve)
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (19/85) 22%
Serve Patterns
Edberg served...
- to FH 12%
- to BH 63%
- to Body 26%
Lendl served...
- to FH 25%
- to BH 70%
- to Body 5%
Return Stats
Edberg made...
- 64 (19 FH, 45 BH), including 2 runaround FHs & 8 return-approaches
- 2 Winners (1 FH, 1 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 15 Errors, comprising...
- 6 Unforced (2 FH, 4 BH), including 1 runaround FH & 3 return-approach attempts
- 9 Forced (2 FH, 7 BH)
- Return Rate (64/83) 77%
Lendl made...
- 40 (10 FH, 30 BH)
- 3 Winners (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 34 Errors, all forced...
- 34 Forced (4 FH, 30 BH)
- Return Rate (40/78) 51%
Break Points
Edberg 6/9 (7 games)
Lendl 2/7 (3 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Edberg 29 (3 FH, 3 BH, 13 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 7 BHV, 2 OH)
Lendl 16 (4 FH, 5 BH, 5 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Edberg had 13 from serve-volley points
- 7 first 'volleys' (4 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 2 BHV)
- 5 second volleys (4 FHV, 1 OH)
- 1 third volley (1 FHV)
- 2 from return-approach points (2 BHV), one of the played net-to-net
- 1 other BHV was net-to-net
- FHs - 2 cc (1 runaround return, 1 pass) and 1 dtl pass
- BHs - 2 cc (1 return, 1 pass) and 1 dtl
Lendl's FH passes - 1 cc return and 1 inside-in
- regular FHs - 1 cc and 1 dtl
- BHs (all passes) - 2 cc (1 return), 1 inside-out return, 1 inside-out/dtl and 1 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net
- 4 from serve-volley points -
- 2 first volleys (2 FHV)
- 2 second volleys (2 FHV)
Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Edberg 34
- 22 Unforced (6 FH, 1 BH, 5 FHV, 9 BHV, 1 BHOH)... with 1 FH at net
- 12 Forced (3 FH, 3 BH, 6 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 53.2
Lendl 25
- 11 Unforced (1 FH, 10 BH)
- 14 Forced (5 FH, 9 BH)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 42.7
(Note 1: All 1/2 volleys refer to such shots played at net. 1/2 volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke numbers)
(Note 2: the Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is an indicator of how aggressive the average UE was. The numbers presented for these two matches are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)
Net Points & Serve-Volley
Edberg was...
- 70/99 (71%) at net, including...
- 50/74 (68%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 36/51 (71%) off 1st serve and...
- 14/23 (61%) off 2nd serve
---
- 6/8 (75%) return-approaching
Lendl was...
- 15/20 (75%) at net, including...
- 5/8 (63%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 4/7 (57%) off 1st serve and...
- 1/1 off 2nd serve
Match Report
Curious combination of things the two players do well and do not well on a fast-ish low bouncing court. Edberg is excellent from baseline - both in his groudies, transitioning to net and volleying when there. Lendl, the experienced master plays somewhat cluelessly in all areas
Edberg...
- plays very well from baseline, particularly with regards to depth of shots and his ability to find net and execute on the volley from that situation is first class
- yet, his volleying off serve-volleying is decidedly below par - certainly by his own standard, even by a general one
Lendl...
- does not return well. Strategically or of execution
- serve is a hodgepodge, doesn't seem to know what he's trying to do
- baseline play is inconsistent, with the BH faltering and he readily falls back to defensive
- effective at net, but doesn't come in much
Edberg's Serve Game
Edberg serve-volleys 100% of the time and serves at his normal standard. Decent, not overpowering, lots of body serves (26% - more than double what he directs to FH) that are usually tilted towards BH side. And 67% first serves in, without a huge difference between his two serves. Healthy serving from Edberg and court is quick
Healthy serving, sure, but not 46% unreturned rate healthy. That's on Lendl returning poorly. I'd estimate Edberg's serving quality to be good for 30-35% unreturned rate tops, maybe a bit more if Lendl returned with particularly aggression (as he often does against serve-volleys)
That's not how he returns here. Lendl returns orthodoxly, sometimes upping to 'firmly' rarely to 'powerfully'. His returns give Edberg regulation first volleys around net high, biased towards above it. Returning like that, return rate of 70-75% would be decent figure. In the event, Lendl manages a paltry 51%
Few other points regarding Lendl's returning. Generally and here, he doesn't cope well with body serves. Doesn't move, gets stuck and has to fend-push them at best, usually missing the return
Second concerns his preferred returning wing. For most of the '80s, he seems to have preferred FH returns. Which seems obvious and self-evident given the strength of his FH in play. He ran around BH to hit FHs, he positioned himself to take FHs when possible, he moved to take FHs against body serves - and it was obviously far more damaging than his BH return
Sometime late in career, he seems to have changed his preference and in bunch of late '80s onward matches I've looked at, he doesn't do any of the things he used to and that you'd expect from a FH preferring returner. I don't see much evidence for it having been a wise choice.
In this match, he faces 12% serves to FH, 63% to BH and 26% to body (bulk of which are tilted towards his BH). But...
- 25% of the returns he makes are FHs
- 33% of the winners he hits are FHs
- 12% errors he makes are FHs, which is line with what he faced but as serves directed there would have relative element of surprise going, one would expect it to be higher if Lendl's BH is more consistent side
His FH returns tend to be harder hit than BHs too. There's a good reason Edberg avoids it. If there's a reason Lendl doesn't try to take FH returns as much as possible, its not a good one. Against so much predictable body serving - and Edberg's serves to either side are as often as not close to body - its not particularly difficult to move as to take FH return. Lendl seems to prefer BH
Next up is Edberg's volley. And behind his serve, its not very good (by contrast, its flawless at all other times - more on that later). 16 forecourt UEs from Edberg - almost all of it while serve-volleying. He misses all kinds of volleys - easy, routine volleys, slightly under net or slightly wide - most of normal power, odd one slightly harder hit. Reason he's winning 68% serve-volley points is all the unreturned serves. On the volley itself, he's loose
Late in third set, Lendl gets a few good, powerful, low-ish returns in. These Edberg volleys well, resisting being forced into error
Much better on FHV than BHV from Edberg. 14 FHV based winners (1 is a FH1/2V) to 7 BHV and look at the errors
- UEs - 5 FHV, 9 BHV
- FEs - 0 FHV, 6 BHV
Edberg would go onto beat Jim Courier in the final to win his first US Open title. This would turn out to be Lendl's last Slam semi. Earlier in the year, the two had met at same stage at Australian Open with Lendl winning. They would play in the quarters of both Australian and US Open the following year, with Edberg winning both times
Edberg won 94 points, Lendl 73
Edberg serve-volleyed off all serves
Serve Stats
Edberg...
- 1st serve percentage (55/82) 67%
- 1st serve points won (40/55) 73%
- 2nd serve points won (14/27) 52%
- Aces 4
- Double Faults 4
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (38/82) 46%
Lendl...
- 1st serve percentage (41/85) 48%
- 1st serve points won (27/41) 66%
- 2nd serve points won (18/44) 41%
- Aces 4 (1 second serve)
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (19/85) 22%
Serve Patterns
Edberg served...
- to FH 12%
- to BH 63%
- to Body 26%
Lendl served...
- to FH 25%
- to BH 70%
- to Body 5%
Return Stats
Edberg made...
- 64 (19 FH, 45 BH), including 2 runaround FHs & 8 return-approaches
- 2 Winners (1 FH, 1 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 15 Errors, comprising...
- 6 Unforced (2 FH, 4 BH), including 1 runaround FH & 3 return-approach attempts
- 9 Forced (2 FH, 7 BH)
- Return Rate (64/83) 77%
Lendl made...
- 40 (10 FH, 30 BH)
- 3 Winners (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 34 Errors, all forced...
- 34 Forced (4 FH, 30 BH)
- Return Rate (40/78) 51%
Break Points
Edberg 6/9 (7 games)
Lendl 2/7 (3 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Edberg 29 (3 FH, 3 BH, 13 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 7 BHV, 2 OH)
Lendl 16 (4 FH, 5 BH, 5 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Edberg had 13 from serve-volley points
- 7 first 'volleys' (4 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 2 BHV)
- 5 second volleys (4 FHV, 1 OH)
- 1 third volley (1 FHV)
- 2 from return-approach points (2 BHV), one of the played net-to-net
- 1 other BHV was net-to-net
- FHs - 2 cc (1 runaround return, 1 pass) and 1 dtl pass
- BHs - 2 cc (1 return, 1 pass) and 1 dtl
Lendl's FH passes - 1 cc return and 1 inside-in
- regular FHs - 1 cc and 1 dtl
- BHs (all passes) - 2 cc (1 return), 1 inside-out return, 1 inside-out/dtl and 1 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net
- 4 from serve-volley points -
- 2 first volleys (2 FHV)
- 2 second volleys (2 FHV)
Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Edberg 34
- 22 Unforced (6 FH, 1 BH, 5 FHV, 9 BHV, 1 BHOH)... with 1 FH at net
- 12 Forced (3 FH, 3 BH, 6 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 53.2
Lendl 25
- 11 Unforced (1 FH, 10 BH)
- 14 Forced (5 FH, 9 BH)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 42.7
(Note 1: All 1/2 volleys refer to such shots played at net. 1/2 volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke numbers)
(Note 2: the Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is an indicator of how aggressive the average UE was. The numbers presented for these two matches are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)
Net Points & Serve-Volley
Edberg was...
- 70/99 (71%) at net, including...
- 50/74 (68%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 36/51 (71%) off 1st serve and...
- 14/23 (61%) off 2nd serve
---
- 6/8 (75%) return-approaching
Lendl was...
- 15/20 (75%) at net, including...
- 5/8 (63%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 4/7 (57%) off 1st serve and...
- 1/1 off 2nd serve
Match Report
Curious combination of things the two players do well and do not well on a fast-ish low bouncing court. Edberg is excellent from baseline - both in his groudies, transitioning to net and volleying when there. Lendl, the experienced master plays somewhat cluelessly in all areas
Edberg...
- plays very well from baseline, particularly with regards to depth of shots and his ability to find net and execute on the volley from that situation is first class
- yet, his volleying off serve-volleying is decidedly below par - certainly by his own standard, even by a general one
Lendl...
- does not return well. Strategically or of execution
- serve is a hodgepodge, doesn't seem to know what he's trying to do
- baseline play is inconsistent, with the BH faltering and he readily falls back to defensive
- effective at net, but doesn't come in much
Edberg's Serve Game
Edberg serve-volleys 100% of the time and serves at his normal standard. Decent, not overpowering, lots of body serves (26% - more than double what he directs to FH) that are usually tilted towards BH side. And 67% first serves in, without a huge difference between his two serves. Healthy serving from Edberg and court is quick
Healthy serving, sure, but not 46% unreturned rate healthy. That's on Lendl returning poorly. I'd estimate Edberg's serving quality to be good for 30-35% unreturned rate tops, maybe a bit more if Lendl returned with particularly aggression (as he often does against serve-volleys)
That's not how he returns here. Lendl returns orthodoxly, sometimes upping to 'firmly' rarely to 'powerfully'. His returns give Edberg regulation first volleys around net high, biased towards above it. Returning like that, return rate of 70-75% would be decent figure. In the event, Lendl manages a paltry 51%
Few other points regarding Lendl's returning. Generally and here, he doesn't cope well with body serves. Doesn't move, gets stuck and has to fend-push them at best, usually missing the return
Second concerns his preferred returning wing. For most of the '80s, he seems to have preferred FH returns. Which seems obvious and self-evident given the strength of his FH in play. He ran around BH to hit FHs, he positioned himself to take FHs when possible, he moved to take FHs against body serves - and it was obviously far more damaging than his BH return
Sometime late in career, he seems to have changed his preference and in bunch of late '80s onward matches I've looked at, he doesn't do any of the things he used to and that you'd expect from a FH preferring returner. I don't see much evidence for it having been a wise choice.
In this match, he faces 12% serves to FH, 63% to BH and 26% to body (bulk of which are tilted towards his BH). But...
- 25% of the returns he makes are FHs
- 33% of the winners he hits are FHs
- 12% errors he makes are FHs, which is line with what he faced but as serves directed there would have relative element of surprise going, one would expect it to be higher if Lendl's BH is more consistent side
His FH returns tend to be harder hit than BHs too. There's a good reason Edberg avoids it. If there's a reason Lendl doesn't try to take FH returns as much as possible, its not a good one. Against so much predictable body serving - and Edberg's serves to either side are as often as not close to body - its not particularly difficult to move as to take FH return. Lendl seems to prefer BH
Next up is Edberg's volley. And behind his serve, its not very good (by contrast, its flawless at all other times - more on that later). 16 forecourt UEs from Edberg - almost all of it while serve-volleying. He misses all kinds of volleys - easy, routine volleys, slightly under net or slightly wide - most of normal power, odd one slightly harder hit. Reason he's winning 68% serve-volley points is all the unreturned serves. On the volley itself, he's loose
Late in third set, Lendl gets a few good, powerful, low-ish returns in. These Edberg volleys well, resisting being forced into error
Much better on FHV than BHV from Edberg. 14 FHV based winners (1 is a FH1/2V) to 7 BHV and look at the errors
- UEs - 5 FHV, 9 BHV
- FEs - 0 FHV, 6 BHV