Borg needed to develop a second serve and come to net, otherwise he would not have had any chance at Forest Hills.
He had only about half a grass game.
Was Borg the greatest grass court player ever?
- Thread starter Pheasant
- Start date
He had only about half a grass game.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Nonsense.
Yes, the idea that Borg was an all-time great on Forest Hills grass is nonsense.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
He played it only thrice on grass at the age of 16-18 so nothing to conclude here. He likely would have been an ATG had it continued.
yes, it was commonly believed the AO grass was more favorable to baseliners than the grass at W...seemed like it
How differently the sport might have turned out if the game stayed largely on grass, and some clay?
Pheasant
Legend
The Australian Open grass helped out Wilander big time. As a matter of fact, that was the only slam event where he successfully defended his title. He beat McEnroe and Lendl for his first title. For his 2nd title, he beat Edberg, Kriek(2-time AO champ), and Curren. His bid to 3-peat ended in the 1985 final against Edberg. Wilander was a very good baseliner, but not at Borg’s level. Wilander also didn’t serve nearly as well as Borg did, which is probably why he never made it to a semi at Wimbledon. I think that Borg would have cleaned up at the Australian Open. I just don’t see any world where Wilander is better than Borg on any type of surface.
As for Borg not winning on grass during his age 16-18 seasons, we Fed fans would be stupid to trash him for that. Federer through 2002(the year he turned 21) had a career record of 16-11 on grass courts with 0 titles. This includes a record of 1-4 vs top-20 players. Federer was nearly 22 years old before he won his first grass court title. Borg won 2 grass court titles in 1974 at ages 17 and 18; the last year that he played grass court tourneys outside of Wimbledon. In 1973, Borg was 12-3 on grass courts. An .800 winning pct on grass as a 17-year-old looks pretty damn promising to me.
As for Borg not winning on grass during his age 16-18 seasons, we Fed fans would be stupid to trash him for that. Federer through 2002(the year he turned 21) had a career record of 16-11 on grass courts with 0 titles. This includes a record of 1-4 vs top-20 players. Federer was nearly 22 years old before he won his first grass court title. Borg won 2 grass court titles in 1974 at ages 17 and 18; the last year that he played grass court tourneys outside of Wimbledon. In 1973, Borg was 12-3 on grass courts. An .800 winning pct on grass as a 17-year-old looks pretty damn promising to me.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
100 thumbs up. Borg actually at very young age showed great potential on grass even outside of Wimbledon. His path at Wimbledon was similar in the sense that he reached a Quarter and a 3 round not much better than on Forest Hill’s grass and then completely exploded. One should cut a teenager some slack for not dominating right away on a surface that was completely against his natural game. I am absolutely positive that he would have won a lot on AO grass or even on USO grass had it stayed there until his prime.
Last edited:
He would need to develop a second serve and come to net...would never have happened.
It depends on whom he beat, he certainly could not beat Amritraj at Forest Hills, and I suspect that Borg was only winning from the baseline on grass at that time.
He never developed a grass game for Forest Hills or any wet grass surface. You need a second serve and follow it to net.
Borg would have no hope against Kramer, Gonzales, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe on the wet grass.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Bro serious question: have you watched even one single match of Borg at Wimbledon? He played SERVE AND VOLLEY there. And Kooyong or USO grass was way more baseline friendly than Wimbledon which he won 5 times. Your statements make zero sense.
I watched all of Borg's televised matches from Wimbledon at the time they were played. How many did you watch?
I noticed even then that Borg tried to hit hard on his first serve and then typically stayed on the baseline for his weaker second serve, which was much slower than his first serve.
My memories are verified by the AI quote which I provided you above.
And that was Wimbledon, not the muddy wet grass of Forest Hills where everyone agreed you needed to follow your serve to net.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
If you have watched his matches and didn’t notice he played SnV you are blind. The tactics of staying back on second did him well, I actually never understood anyways the tactics of coming in on every second serve. Lendl definitely cost it a few matches. Anywho Borg came mostly on on the third ball or soon after anyways on second serves, so again pointless what you say.
Vincent-C
Legend
You can't "verify" something with "AI": in fact, it's what the machine spits out that needs to be independently
verified, by an authoritative, human source. They've trained those machines to sound utterly confident- but it's a con.
Last edited:
You must have been unsighted when you watched Borg's matches on grass, he doesn't play S&V, he always stays back on the second serve, just as I remembered from watching him years ago.
I checked the 1980 final just to be sure, and,yes, Borg always takes a lot off his second serve and stays ON THE BASELINE for his second serve.
That is not S&V tennis, I guess you never saw S&V tennis? This is a joke. McEnroe follows every second serve to the net.
Last edited:
I posted the Wimbledon final above...watch and learn.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Read my post again I have already tackled that. No nerve anymore to spoon feed everything to you.
Hard Court
Professional
He was obviously right up there with the best. Hard to say who was #1, but Borg certainly has a case. You don't win 5 times in a row if you aren't. Don't understand the argument about his competition. McEnroe and Connors were great grass court players. Nastase, Tanner, and Gerulitas were very good. There was a ton of depth in that era.
Vincent-C
Legend
John McEnroe said during Federer's prime that PETE was "the best grass-court player I've ever seen".
Mac's said a lotta stuff though, and Borg's up there, for sure.
You tackled that? Your boy did not play S&V, no two ways about it. He was fortunate to escape this one.
He lacked a second serve, otherwise he would have been great on grass.
As it was, he managed to scrape through against some tough opponents for a while.
Hard Court
Professional
Borg just kept scraping by. If only he had that second serve, he would have been great. Just scraped by 5 years in a row. Just scraped by, 41 matches in a row.
bigbadboaz
Professional
You can distinguish what a player is doing on the first and second serve, but when a player hits the first serve and rushes the net, HE IS PLAYING SERVE-AND-VOLLEY. On the second serve, maybe he is not.
You have some extremely odd takes on particular topics - and they're wrong.
Well, he didn't scrape by indefinitely, there was a terminal point. He got figured out.
But you are right, his second serve was a powder puff that invited destruction. He felt that he had to stay on the baseline or get destroyed.
No, the S&V game involved both serves. Rushing only the first serve is what we might call a half-.... S&V.
This is not some strange take, everyone can see it, especially Borg's nemesis.
You have been accustomed to seeing the baseliners of today, the old era woodies played real S&V tennis.
Last edited:
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
He SnV'ed on nearly all first serve points and also on many second serves. Call it "half-SnV" or whatever it does not matter, that strategy bought him 5 consecutive Wimblie titles. Also, as I mentioned, he many times stayed back on second serve initially but then attacked the third ball or soon after. It is also questionable whether coming in on ALL second serves was aver a great strategy to begin with but ofc you dodged that.
For his overall potential success on Kooyong or Forest Hill grass this is all irrelevant anyways. Both these grass-types are more baseline friendly than Wimbledon and when Borg could win five consecutive Wimblies with "partly SnV", then chances are good he would do even better on those other grasses.
Your reasoning makes zero sense.
Vincent-C
Legend
Good call.
First serve does not do it,, you need a second serve.
No, Forest Hills was even more dependent on a solid second serve with a following volley. The bounce on the muddy grass was unreliable.
Australian grass was a more reliable bounce, so Borg might have had more success there. But at Wimbledon, his days were numbered.
Hard Court
Professional
Yep it was Rosewall's powerful 2nd serve that enabled him to win the US Open on grass in 1970.
And that is why Nastase was able to do in 1972.
And Connors in 1974.
Borg's days at Wimbledon were numbered. The number just happened to be higher than anyone else since Willie Renshaw.
And that is why Nastase was able to do in 1972.
And Connors in 1974.
Borg's days at Wimbledon were numbered. The number just happened to be higher than anyone else since Willie Renshaw.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Guy is hilarious. Nothing he writes makes the slightest sense. Soon he will tell us, that Hoad was the greatest grasscourter of all times.
Better than Borg?
Well, Borg seemed to hit a wall after that 1980 Wimbledon final. His grass days in the majors were at an end, although he was still great on clay.
Here you can see Rosewall coming to net after every second serve, it must have been effective. Borg was chained to the baseline on his second serve.
Last edited:
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
The 1981 Wimblie final against Mac was on a knife's edge. Borg could very well have won.
Borg always stayed at the baseline after a second serve, as far as I can see. At what points do you see him following the second serve to the net?
Last edited:
A "knife-edge" loss is a loss, and Borg had trouble in the majors after that 1980 Wimbledon final.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Borg SnV on many second serves in his match against Vitas SF 1977 and I can also remember him SnV on some second serves against Nastase. You are right that he typically stayed back, but how is this relevant anyways? This tactic seemed to be quite right for him, otherwise he would not have won Wimbledon 5 times in a row. He was 4-0 at Wimbledon against former GOAT returner Connors so very likely it was better for him to stay back on second serves instead of mindlessly rushing the net.
In a general view, your assumption, that SnV would be more required on AO or USO grass than on Wimbledon is also wrong. AO was won by baseliner Mats and 1974 Connors was also not exactly known for his strong second serve or excellent SnV game.
It is basic to the S&V style, look at McEnroe who followed every second serve to the net in the 1980 Wimbledon final. I pointed that out to you already.
I suggested that Australian grass was better for Borg's style, which was derived from baseline play. Forest Hills was better for the S&V.
Connors did much better on rubber at the Flushing Meadows event than he ever did on grass, which is why I rank Newcombe above Connors on grass, Newk followed his second serve to net as typical for that style. Connors was not rated as one of the greatest grass courters.
Borg never adapted the S&V style to grass play, that is obvious, and you now seem to be acknowledging it.
Unlike Rosewall (above) who follows all his second serves to net. Rosewall was net rusher from early in his career. That was in spite of Rosewall's generally underpowered serve.
There is nothing "mindless" about rushing the net, if you can control your serve enough to control and take advantage of the follow-up return.
Hard Court
Professional
Well Hoad did manage to get to win Wimbledon twice!
Plus, the Australian, once.
Imagine if Hoad had the opportunity to win Forest Hills which was on grass at the time. Oh wait, he did play it 5 times. How many times did he win it?
Megafanoftennis100
Hall of Fame
Come back to this thread in about 10 years, and we might just hear Fonseca.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Yep. Which I also always said in the threads that I did not understand this. Coming in on every second serve was never necessarily a dominating winning strategy, especially not for a GOAT baseliner and GOAT passer like Borg whose volleys and serve, while still good/great could not rival the very best of his era.
He won the Forest Hills Tournament of Champions in 1959 over Gonzales and Rosewall and Anderson. The strongest field in tennis.
I guess that was before your time? Pre-Open Era.
Last edited:
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Again Dan Lobb against everyone. One could think that always having all others objecting his opinion and literally nobody agreeing with him would make him think at least once in a while whether there was even the smallest possibility that he could be wrong (at least you would expect that from any guy with even a scintilla of ability of self-criticism), but seems that there is zero chance. It is the toddler-reaction all others are stupid and I am always right.
I provided you with the video for the 1980 Wimbledon final, where Borg refused to follow his second serve to net.
Did Rosewall follow his second serve to net? Well, I gave you the video above of the 1970 Forest Hills final...yes, he did.
Case closed, buddy.
Kramer changed the way tennis was played on grass, Vines pre-dated Kramer,
Vines retired in 1940, about seven years before Kramer introduced the S&V game.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
You mean the 1980 Wimbledon final where Borg while staying back on all second serves won (44/74) 59% of his second serve points despite 8 doubles?? Seems to have been the right strategy against Mac. Case closed indeed but not as intended for you.
Not a problem. I gave you the evidence above. Case closed.
You said it yourself, "Borg while staying back on all second serves"...that is the point, which you intially objected to, but now accept.
Case closed.
I notice that the vote results on this thread has moved unfavourably for Borg as an all-time grass GOAT since we have had our discussion....I guess the discussion has been worthwhile.
BorgTheGOAT
G.O.A.T.
Yeah in this particular match. In others like Nastase or Vitas he came in on seconds as well. Again, this is highly irrelevant since the tactic of staying back turned out quite well for him and your theory that it was absolutely more necessary to play SnV in second serves at Forest Hills than it was at Wimbledon lacks evidence anyways which destroys your whole line of argument.
Borg at 17 already beat Ashe on USO grass so there is not much to think that he wouldn’t have been able to be successful there as well. AO grass was more baseline-friendly anyways (as you yourself finally conceded), so Borg would likely have excelled on any grass (not really surprising since he excelled on any surface anyways).
