why the 70´s were so special?

kiki

kiki

Banned
Tennis wise, like in music and arts, the 70´s brought a very rich melange of personalities, talents, different ways of playing all the way while pavering the way to the Golden Era

Massive popularity, helped by the great personality and class of the champions, corporate sponsorship and, of course, exos made it a very special decade; IMO, the greatest ever to enjoy the sport.same happened with music and it looks like we could trace a paralel.

we had the last line of great aussies, with all courters Laver and Rosewall as well as S&V like Newk and Roche

great US S&V players like Ashe,Smith,Tanner,Stockton,Gottfried,Lutz and all courters such as Gorman,Riessen,Mc Enroe,Gerulaitis or the baseline classics Dibbs and Solomon

emergence of latin tennis with all coruter Ramirez, s&V Pecci and baseliners Vilas,Clerc and Gildemeister

the last set of CC artists with Gimeno,Santana,Orantes,Nastase and Pannatta

eastern europeans like Kodes,Fibak,Taroczy,Franulovic,Pilc,Metrevali... and, of course, Bjorn Borg, the teen phenomenon and Okker,Taylor,Cox,Amritraj etc etc

S&V, top spin baselining, top spin offensive players, soft touch players and all round masters.The 70´s were, as they were in music, the richest and funniest era ever

Anyone who lived through that and has the experience and perspective COULD EVER DISPUTE THIS ASESSEMENT?
 
kiki said:
Tennis wise, like in music and arts, the 70´s brought a very rich melange of personalities, talents, different ways of playing all the way while pavering the way to the Golden Era

Massive popularity, helped by the great personality and class of the champions, corporate sponsorship and, of course, exos made it a very special decade; IMO, the greatest ever to enjoy the sport.same happened with music and it looks like we could trace a paralel.

we had the last line of great aussies, with all courters Laver and Rosewall as well as S&V like Newk and Roche

great US S&V players like Ashe,Smith,Tanner,Stockton,Gottfried,Lutz and all courters such as Gorman,Riessen,Mc Enroe,Gerulaitis or the baseline classics Dibbs and Solomon

emergence of latin tennis with all coruter Ramirez, s&V Pecci and baseliners Vilas,Clerc and Gildemeister

the last set of CC artists with Gimeno,Santana,Orantes,Nastase and Pannatta

eastern europeans like Kodes,Fibak,Taroczy,Franulovic,Pilc,Metrevali... and, of course, Bjorn Borg, the teen phenomenon and Okker,Taylor,Cox,Amritraj etc etc

S&V, top spin baselining, top spin offensive players, soft touch players and all round masters.The 70´s were, as they were in music, the richest and funniest era ever

Anyone who lived through that and has the experience and perspective COULD EVER DISPUTE THIS ASESSEMENT?
Click to expand...

kiki, Excellent analysis of the Golden Era.
 
Clive Walker said:
Basically it's the time leading the people? Or the people leading the time?

I think it was probable the time leading the people
Click to expand...

Somehow, it is a mixture of both which feed each other...same for music.

AMOF, both music and tennis reached its peak in the 70´s, after their explosion in the last years of the 60´s, kept on during the 80´s and, by the middle 90´s, both were done...
 
Remember too it was just coming out of the shadows of shamateurism, it was new and truly open and TV coverage exploded. I remember the public courts where I grew up became full almost over night and people were emulating the stars. It was no longer a game of the privileged but the middle class jumped in with both feet and there were stars like Connors there to represent them and their attitudes.
 
Tennis was very popular in the 1920s, but gradually lost popularity thereafter. It took a sudden nose-dive in popularity after WWII and was considered by many to be "a sissy game" -- perhaps due to revelations of homosexuality among some of the great champions of the past (e.g. Bill Tilden and Baron Gottfried von Cramm). The ectomorphic physique of many champions didn't help matters.

There were contra-indicators in the 1950s -- tough guys like Pancho Gonsales and most of the Australians -- but few people were paying attention.

Then, in the early 1970s a few things happened to raise interest. In the background, the "social justice movement" of the 1960s was replaced by "Me" decade of the 1970s -- and people were attracted to the fact that, like golf, tennis seemed to be a "high-class" sport.

Second, challenging the feminist movement former champion Bobby Riggs declared that a 55 year-old man could beat the best female tennis players in the world -- hence his challenges to Margaret Court and Billie Jean King. The verdict was "maybe, sometimes." Nevertheless, the controversy became a huge topic of discussion and many people got interested in trying tennis themselves.

Thus, many of us noticed in the 1970s that the vast majority of tennis players started playing in the 1970s. Relatively few tennis players had been playing tennis since the 1960s or earlier, and that remains true to this day.
 
If we are going to talk about the game itself maybe. I don`t know. Some may like more the finesse dsiplayed in the 60`s and 70`s and some may like more the power game and phisycal brutality of the modern times. That is subjective. The popularity of the game has dicreasead i believe in the US, some western european countries and Australia. But that`s it. In Latin America is more popular than ever, not even Vilas in Argentina raised in the 70`s the fanaticism that Fed witnessed during his last tour in South America. Nadal in Chile reached similar succes. Some other places like the middle east, east Asia, and probably the majority of eastern Europe, tennis is more popular than ever. Federer is 100 times more popular worldwide than Borg ever was. And that is undeniable. Of course this is aided by the development of global communications. Perhaps Borg with the same resources at hand would had been an even bigger star than Fed and Rafa.
IMO to claim that tennis is less popular worldwide now than in the 70`s is far from true.
 
kiki said:
Tennis wise, like in music and arts, the 70´s brought a very rich melange of personalities, talents, different ways of playing all the way while pavering the way to the Golden Era

Massive popularity, helped by the great personality and class of the champions, corporate sponsorship and, of course, exos made it a very special decade; IMO, the greatest ever to enjoy the sport.same happened with music and it looks like we could trace a paralel.

we had the last line of great aussies, with all courters Laver and Rosewall as well as S&V like Newk and Roche

great US S&V players like Ashe,Smith,Tanner,Stockton,Gottfried,Lutz and all courters such as Gorman,Riessen,Mc Enroe,Gerulaitis or the baseline classics Dibbs and Solomon

emergence of latin tennis with all coruter Ramirez, s&V Pecci and baseliners Vilas,Clerc and Gildemeister

the last set of CC artists with Gimeno,Santana,Orantes,Nastase and Pannatta

eastern europeans like Kodes,Fibak,Taroczy,Franulovic,Pilc,Metrevali... and, of course, Bjorn Borg, the teen phenomenon and Okker,Taylor,Cox,Amritraj etc etc

S&V, top spin baselining, top spin offensive players, soft touch players and all round masters.The 70´s were, as they were in music, the richest and funniest era ever

Anyone who lived through that and has the experience and perspective COULD EVER DISPUTE THIS ASESSEMENT?
Click to expand...

Perhaps a better top 100 than in the late fifties, but a lesser top 10.

Consider the top ten in 1959;

1) Hoad
2) Gonzales
3) Rosewall
4) Sedgman
5) Trabert
6) Segura
7) Anderson
8) Cooper
9) Fraser
10) Olmedo

At every position, a better player than in, for example, 1971 or 1972.
Now, Hoad and Gonzales were still playing in the seventies, but in 1959 all of the above players were still at their peak.
 
Last edited:
The 70's was a great decade and the popularity of tennis in places like the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, etc. reached all time levels. The popularity of tennis has increased in certain countries while falling in the countries with the most tennis tradition. The numbers for the 1980 Wimbledon final were off the charts. By the time Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Gerulaitis, Tanner, Pecci, Kriek, Noah, Clerc, and more were at the top, tennis popularity was at an apex. Tennis will really have to scramble once this current great trio of players exits. See this chart below to see the difference in U.S. numbers in terms of viewership. Tennis participation in the U.S., in terms of number of participants, was higher in 1980 than in 2013. Here in the U.S. , the public courts were always full in the 1970's. The top players were not only all time greats, they also had great contrasting personalities as well as playing styles. They were also celebrities/rock stars. Borg was the biggest star in the history of tennis.

wimbledon2008-500x400.gif


The decline in tennis' The Championships, Wimbledon US TV ratings has been quite substantial, much more so than most other sports championship events (you can find many such charts in our Reference category). Recent upward ticks seem to occur (with only a few exceptions) when the Men's champion is from the US, and then the long term downward trend takes hold again. Discounting comparisons to the ratings prior to 1987 (because of a Nielsen measurement quirk described below) viewership has fallen almost in half the last 20 years. Is this due to the lack of a US Men's champion since 2000? On the other hand, US Women have done quite well since 1999, but don't seem to have helped the ratings. I admit to not having any clever guesses as to why the decline has been so severe. Anyone else have any better guesses?

7/14 Update: Chart and table updated with 2008 results. The All Williams Women's final, plus the epic Federer v. Nadal battle did produce a noticeable uptick in the Wimbledon ratings, but only to levels last seen in 2002.

Complete Wimbledon Tennis TV Ratings, 1973-2008:






Year Viewers (million) HH rating Share Telecasts Network Winners (Women/Men)
1973 4.60 4.5 19 2 NBC KING/KODES
1974 6.62 5.6 23 2 NBC EVERT/CONNORS
1975* 6.89 5.4 23 4 NBC KING/ASHE
1976* 6.04 5.1 20 4 NBC EVERT/BORG
1977* 6.37 5.6 25 3 NBC WADE/BORG
1978* 7.81 5.8 23 3 NBC NAVRATILOVA/BORG
1979* 6.51 5.1 22 3 NBC NAVRATILOVA/BORG
1980* 8.42 6.6 26 4 NBC GOOLAGONG/BORG
1981* 7.98 6.0 25 5 NBC EVERT-LLOYD/MCENROE
1982* 7.79 5.1 20 6 NBC NAVRATILOVA/CONNORS
1983* 4.78 4.1 17 6 NBC NAVRATILOVA/MCENROE
1984* 4.56 3.9 14 7 NBC NAVRATILOVA/MCENROE
1985* 5.69 4.5 17 8 NBC NAVRATILOVA/BECKER
1986* 5.22 3.9 14 7 NBC NAVRATILOVA/BECKER
1987 3.95 3.6 14 7 NBC NAVRATILOVA/CASH
1988 4.29 3.6 14 9 NBC GRAF/EDBERG
1989 4.56 3.9 15 9 NBC GRAF/BECKER
1990 3.74 3.1 12 9 NBC NAVRATILOVA/EDBERG
1991 4.65 3.7 13 15 NBC GRAF/STICH
1992 4.48 3.7 13 15 NBC GRAF/AGASSI
1993 3.74 3.1 11 14 NBC GRAF/SAMPRAS
1994 3.16 2.7 10 14 NBC MARTINEZ/SAMPRAS
1995 3.54 3.0 11 10 NBC GRAF/SAMPRAS
1996 2.91 2.5 9 9 NBC GRAF/KRAJICEK
1997 2.70 2.3 9 9 NBC HINGIS/SAMPRAS
1998 2.64 2.2 8 9 NBC NOVOTNA/SAMPRAS
1999 3.38 2.9 10 9 NBC DAVENPORT/SAMPRAS
2000 4.07 3.2 11 9 NBC WILLIAMS/SAMPRAS
2001 3.20 2.6 9 9 NBC V. WILLIAMS/IVANISEVIC
2002 2.71 2.1 7 9 NBC S. WILLIAMS/HEWITT
2003 2.49 2.0 7 9 NBC S. WILLIAMS/FEDERER
2004 2.54 1.9 6 9 NBC SHARAPOVA/FEDERER
2005 2.49 1.9 6 9 NBC V. WILLIAMS/FEDERER
2006 2.06 1.6 5 9 NBC MAURESMO/FEDERER
2007 2.29 1.7 5 9 NBC V. WILLIAMS/FEDERER
2008 2.64 1.9 6 9 NBC V. WILLIAMS/NADAL
*Note: Data does not include the telecasts in June because data was not produced in the last complete week of June prior to 1987.

Data shown is an average of all telecasts including finals and semi-finals. Data for 2006-8 are Live+SD, prior years are Live viewing.

Nielsen TV Ratings Data: ©2008 Nielsen Media Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Follow TV by the Numbers on Twitter, Facebook or RSS for all the latest.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kiki said:
Tennis wise, like in music and arts, the 70´s brought a very rich melange of personalities, talents, different ways of playing all the way while pavering the way to the Golden Era

Massive popularity, helped by the great personality and class of the champions, corporate sponsorship and, of course, exos made it a very special decade; IMO, the greatest ever to enjoy the sport.same happened with music and it looks like we could trace a paralel.

we had the last line of great aussies, with all courters Laver and Rosewall as well as S&V like Newk and Roche

great US S&V players like Ashe,Smith,Tanner,Stockton,Gottfried,Lutz and all courters such as Gorman,Riessen,Mc Enroe,Gerulaitis or the baseline classics Dibbs and Solomon

emergence of latin tennis with all coruter Ramirez, s&V Pecci and baseliners Vilas,Clerc and Gildemeister

the last set of CC artists with Gimeno,Santana,Orantes,Nastase and Pannatta

eastern europeans like Kodes,Fibak,Taroczy,Franulovic,Pilc,Metrevali... and, of course, Bjorn Borg, the teen phenomenon and Okker,Taylor,Cox,Amritraj etc etc

S&V, top spin baselining, top spin offensive players, soft touch players and all round masters.The 70´s were, as they were in music, the richest and funniest era ever

Anyone who lived through that and has the experience and perspective COULD EVER DISPUTE THIS ASESSEMENT?
Click to expand...
I think it is just an age thing, I bet you grew up in that era and you miss "the good old times". Your parents probably never stopped telling you about the great 50s. So does every generation have their "good old times", the time "everything was better than now".

Nothing wrong living in the past, it happens to all of us when we reach a certain age :)
 
Last edited:
newpball said:
I think it is just an age thing, I bet you grew up in that era and you miss "the good old times". Your parents probably never stopped telling you about the great 50s. So does every generation have their "good old times", the time "everything was better than now".

Nothing wrong living in the past, it happens to all of us when we reach a certain age :)
Click to expand...

I can agree with your dissertion but I let feelings besides and confirm my point
 
borg number one said:
The 70's was a great decade and the popularity of tennis in places like the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, etc. reached all time levels. The popularity of tennis has decreased in certain countries while falling in the countries with the most tennis tradition. The numbers for the 1980 Wimbledon final were off the charts. By the time Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Gerulaitis, Tanner, Pecci, Kriek, Noah, Clerc, and more were at the top, tennis popularity was at an apex. Tennis will really have to scramble once this current great trio of players exits. See this chart below to see the difference in U.S. numbers in terms of viewership. Tennis participation in the U.S., in terms of number of participants, was higher in 1980 than in 2013. Here in the U.S. , the public courts were always full in the 1970's. The top players were not only all time greats, they also had great contrasting personalities as well as playing styles. They were also celebrities/rock stars. Borg was the biggest star in the history of tennis.

wimbledon2008-500x400.gif
Click to expand...

The 70 were the era where a stairway took us to heaven;-)
 
kiki said:
Tennis wise, like in music and arts, the 70´s brought a very rich melange of personalities, talents, different ways of playing all the way while pavering the way to the Golden Era

Massive popularity, helped by the great personality and class of the champions, corporate sponsorship and, of course, exos made it a very special decade; IMO, the greatest ever to enjoy the sport.same happened with music and it looks like we could trace a paralel.

we had the last line of great aussies, with all courters Laver and Rosewall as well as S&V like Newk and Roche

great US S&V players like Ashe,Smith,Tanner,Stockton,Gottfried,Lutz and all courters such as Gorman,Riessen,Mc Enroe,Gerulaitis or the baseline classics Dibbs and Solomon

emergence of latin tennis with all coruter Ramirez, s&V Pecci and baseliners Vilas,Clerc and Gildemeister

the last set of CC artists with Gimeno,Santana,Orantes,Nastase and Pannatta

eastern europeans like Kodes,Fibak,Taroczy,Franulovic,Pilc,Metrevali... and, of course, Bjorn Borg, the teen phenomenon and Okker,Taylor,Cox,Amritraj etc etc

S&V, top spin baselining, top spin offensive players, soft touch players and all round masters.The 70´s were, as they were in music, the richest and funniest era ever

Anyone who lived through that and has the experience and perspective COULD EVER DISPUTE THIS ASESSEMENT?
Click to expand...
Funniest or funnest?
 
What a great new world: Yellow balls, colour shirts, tiebreakers, first signalled with flags and played at 5-5 for the next and last point. You could have a matchpoint for and against you at one and the same time. Sometimes a wild period of spectacles, with the WTT making and allowing noise, with Riordan promoting heavyweight "winner takes all" matches, with an old hustler Bobby Riggs stealing the show on Mothers Day, with crowds going frenzy over mavericks like Nastase or Connors, with bags and cars full of silver dollars at the Alan King Classic at Las Vegas. But it had the tennis boom with over 20 million US people watching a 4 hour match on tv in 1972, with more than 30 million US people in 1974 playing tennis everywhere, from scyscrappers to underground stations.
 
I agree somewhat with Urban.Without the tennis boom experienced in the US, it would have been impossible to reach that era
 
That's a good point Kiki. Excellent post by Urban too. Tennis was booming in the 70's and of course there was a culture war of sorts going on in the U.S. and elsewhere too. Some point to the fact that more countries produce tennis pros these days and that in some countries where tennis was not that big, it has become very big (Spain I suppose is an example, where tennis has caught on there as never before perhaps). That may be true, but think about this, does that really completely offset and more than make up for the difference in the historically most successful tennis countries? A big drop off in the U.S. produces a HUGE impact. A big drop off in Great Britain again produces a very big impact. The same is true for Australia and I'm not sure about Germany, but perhaps there has been drop off there as well. Fewer tennis players being produced in a country like the U.S. IS NOT offset by an uptick in tennis playing in say Serbia or even China. It TAKES TIME and the right kinds of effort with proper resources to start developing tennis talent. So, I'm not at all convinced that we now live in an environment where more great players are necessarily produced in the world. There may be more players IN TOTAL, but it may be a case of more quantity as opposed to more quality due to the severe drop off in countries such as the U.S.A., England, and Australia. One other sidenote, in the U.S. at least, tennis used to be on T.V shows and in movies left and right. Now, it's been my observation that it's pretty rare when you see tennis on T.V. or in movies. Yet, when they did feature tennis in the movie "The Royal Tenebaums", guess who the main character looked like? The answer is the iconic Bjorn Borg who STILL for many folks "looks" like a pro tennis player (despite Richie T. wearing a Vilas Fila shirt in this clip lol).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obycGT3Wg-U

tennis_richie_kid-copy.jpg
 
Last edited:
borg number one said:
That's a good point Kiki. Excellent post by Urban too. Tennis was booming in the 70's and of course there was a culture war of sorts going on in the U.S. and elsewhere too of course. Some point to the fact that more countries produce tennis pros these days and that in some countries where tennis was not that big, it has become very big (Spain I suppose is an example, where tennis has caught on there where as never before perhaps). That may be true, but think about this, does that really completely offset and more than make up for the difference in those the historically most successful tennis countries? A big drop off in the U.S. produces a HUGE impact. A big drop off in Great Britain again produces a very big impact. The same is true for Australia and I'm not sure about Germany, but perhaps there has been drop off there as well. Fewer tennis players being produced in a country like the U.S. IS NOT offset by an uptick in tennis playing in say Serbia or even China. It TAKES TIME and the right kinds of effort with proper resources to start developing tennis talent. So, I'm not at all convinced that we now live in an environment where more great players are necessarily produced in the world. There may be more players IN TOTAL, but it may be a case of more quantity as opposed to more quality due to the severe drop off in countries such as the U.S.A., England, and Australia. One other sidenote, in the U.S. at least, tennis used to be on T.V shows and in movies left and right. Now, it's been my observation that it's pretty rare when you see tennis on T.V. or in movies. Yet, when they did feature tennis in the movie "The Royal Tenebaums", guess who the main character looked like? The answer is the iconic Bjorn Borg who STILL for many folks "looks" like a pro tennis player (despite Richie T. wearing a Vilas Fila shirt in this clip lol).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obycGT3Wg-U

tennis_richie_kid-copy.jpg
Click to expand...

I can tell that you never visited Latin America, a region with over 500 million people. Yes maybe a dropp off in the level of Australia and the UK would not be compensated by the huge increase, and i really mean huge, of the playing field at all levels in Latin America. Just visit the public curts in Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Mexico, all places where i have had the luck to visit. You would be amazed. Tennis was almost non existant in Latin America prior the 90`s. Not even during the Vilas boom, and that i know well because i am argentinian.

That is only Latin America, i repeat a region with a bigger population of all western europe and the us combined. Go watch the videos of the Federer tour in South America, and then talk to me about being a rock star. Come on people be realistic here. Federer gathered all by himself 45000 people in 2 matches only in Argentina. If that is not popularity i don`t know what it is. I am willing to bet that in other regions such as eastern europe, the middle east and north africa, and east Asia tennis is more popular than ever was. By far. Not to sound offensive but some people here seem to think that the world begins and ends in the US.

Again, i am not talking about the quality of play or the personality of certain players, Borg i am sure would be even more popular today given the access to mass media. But in absolute terms tennis as other important sports are now more popular than ever, the pool of players is much larger than 30 years ago, and the quality has risen. Maybe not the quality at the top 10 or 20 but overall, it has.
 
That's interesting ARFED. I haven't visited Latin America save for Mexico, but did you see what tennis was like in Latin America in the 1970's and through 1980? I don't doubt that there is a boom going on there ARFED, but I doubt that tennis was almost non-existent in Latin America prior to the 1990's. Non-existent? A boom in one region though (even several regions like Latin America and Asia), even if it involves a big total population and total land mass, may very well not offset a steep decline in the U.S., U.K, and Australia (and I'm certain that it has dropped in other places to..Germany? France? Italy?) in terms of the conditions required to produce tennis pros. You have to look closely at the junior ranks, tennis instructors, and total tennis players in particular within countries.

Serbia- Better quality juniors now than 10-15 years ago? After Djokovic, there must have been a uptick in players, but will any be as good as a young Djokovic? Why if there is a bigger pool?

Switzerland- Better quality juniors now than 10-15 years ago? After Federer, there must have been a uptick in players, but will any be as good as a young Federer? Why if there is a bigger pool?

Spain- Better quality juniors now than 10-15 years ago? After Nadal, there must have been a uptick in players, but will any be as good as a young Nadal? Why if there is a bigger pool?

Why did Sweden produce several great players from Borg to Edberg and company then NOTHING really save for Soderling? Presumably there was a growing pool there right?

See these links:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2008/07/04/wimbledon-tennis-viewership-1973-2008/4209/

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/draws/ms/

UK: Peak audience of 16.9m tuned in to watch the Men's Singles Final, believed to be the highest audience figure for a Wimbledon final since Borg v McEnroe in 1980.
Click to expand...

(tennis viewership STILL has not matched 1980 levels in the U.S.A. AND the U.K. ) Why is that?? It can't be just the dearth of great American players and British players either.
 
Last edited:
borg number one said:
That's interesting ARFED. I haven't visited Latin America save for Mexico. I don't doubt that there is a boom going on there ARFED, but I have a very hard time that tennis was almost non-existent in Latin America prior to the 1990's. Non-existent? A boom in one region though (even several regions like Latin America and Asia), even if it involves a big total population and total land mass, may very well not offset a steep decline in the U.S., U.K, and Australia (and I'm certain that it has dropped in other places to..Germany? France? Italy?) in terms of the conditions required to produce tennis pros. You have to look closely at the junior ranks, tennis instructors, and total tennis players in particular within countries.

See these links:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2008/07/04/wimbledon-tennis-viewership-1973-2008/4209/

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/draws/ms/



(tennis viewership STILL has not matched 1980 levels in the U.S.A. AND the U.K. ) Why is that?? It can't be just the dearth of great American players and British players either.
Click to expand...

I don`t argue with you that in the traditional tennis powers (US, Australia and UK) tennis has decreased in popularity but trust me, worldwide the sport has seen a boom especially around Federer and Nadal. Of course aided by internet and other technological improvements. Fed and Nadal both sum up more than 20 million fans on facebook alone, that should tell you something. Federer is one of the 5 richest sportsmen out there. When has a tennis player reached that kind of wealth, ever? Federer is richer than Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo, the biggest football stars, and football is a sport globally followed by more than half of earth`s population. That big of a star Federer is.
I will concede that a classic battle between J Mac and Jimbo would have even more ratings nowadays than a Fedal match.

You must be honest with me and concede that the top 200 nowadays is in average better than it was in the 70`s and 80`s.

In any case without Borg, Mc Enroe and Connors we probably wouldn`t have tennis stars like we have today. They paved the way.
 
Borg was worth ~$175 million when he retired. That's ~$500 million in 2013. He was one of the richest sportsmen in the world too. If the internet and FB, etc. was around in the time of Borg, Connors, and McEnroe, their "numbers" would have been through the roof as well. Federer does not quite have the crossover appeal that Borg had from what I've seen (Is Federer or Nadal on the cover of Time? Borg is not American either.). The "average joe" in the U.S. and other countries I've spent time in such as India do not know of Federer the same way they knew who Borg was. Tennis will face a big test when Federer leaves the game though, that's for sure. Borg's early departure hurt tennis quite a bit for many years. ARFED, I do think there is more total depth now and the #200 player today is probably better than #200 in 1980, but I think there's less depth at the top (top 10-20 and even top 4-5 until the last few years). The top 10 in 1980 was awesome and better from top to bottom than it is today. In 2003-2010, the top 5 was not on par with the top 5 in 1980 in my opinion, when you had Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Tanner, and Gerulaitis in the top 10.

777234-product.jpg


o_mn3wYl8mRyNpq27.jpg


Listen to this portion of the video below, especially Boris Becker and then Bob Kain later at 14:05.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YoB9KnKn-vA#t=731s
 
Last edited:
borg number one said:
Borg was worth ~$175 million when he retired. That's ~$500 million in 2013. He was one of the richest sportsmen in the world too. If the internet and FB, etc. was around in the time of Borg, Connors, and McEnroe, their "numbers" would have been through the roof as well. Federer does not quite have the crossover appeal that Borg had from what I've seen (Is Federer or Nadal on the cover of Time? Borg is not American either.). The "average joe" in the U.S. and other countries I've spent time in such as India do not know of Federer the same way they knew who Borg was. Tennis will face a big test when Federer leaves the game though, that's for sure. Borg's early departure hurt tennis quite a bit for many years. ARFED, I do think there is more total depth now and the #200 player today is probably better than #200 in 1980, but I think there's less depth at the top (top 10-20 and even top 4-5 until the last few years). The top 10 in 1980 was awesome and better from top to bottom than it is today. In 2003-2010, the top 5 was not on par with the top 5 in 1980 in my opinion, when you had Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Tanner, and Gerulaitis in the top 10.

777234-product.jpg


o_mn3wYl8mRyNpq27.jpg


Listen to this portion of the video below, especially Boris Becker and then Bob Kain later at 14:05.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YoB9KnKn-vA#t=731s
Click to expand...

Forbes rates Fed as the #31 influential celebrity around the world. And he is not american as you well put it.
http://www.forbes.com/celebrities/

He is earning more than 70 million dollars a year, and that is just from endorsements and prize money. He probably has some investments and lots of properties. He must be around a billion dollars of net worth. Then again, Borg could match that and even surpass him if he played nowadays. I don`t know that.

Just as a small sample, look at Federer`s arrival at Buenos Aires last December. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDRnJBCnL_c
Doesn`t it remind you of Borg`s entrance at 1973 Wimby?? :)
 
kiki said:
Tennis wise, like in music and arts, the 70´s brought a very rich melange of personalities, talents, different ways of playing all the way while pavering the way to the Golden Era

Massive popularity, helped by the great personality and class of the champions, corporate sponsorship and, of course, exos made it a very special decade; IMO, the greatest ever to enjoy the sport.same happened with music and it looks like we could trace a paralel.

we had the last line of great aussies, with all courters Laver and Rosewall as well as S&V like Newk and Roche

great US S&V players like Ashe,Smith,Tanner,Stockton,Gottfried,Lutz and all courters such as Gorman,Riessen,Mc Enroe,Gerulaitis or the baseline classics Dibbs and Solomon

emergence of latin tennis with all coruter Ramirez, s&V Pecci and baseliners Vilas,Clerc and Gildemeister

the last set of CC artists with Gimeno,Santana,Orantes,Nastase and Pannatta

eastern europeans like Kodes,Fibak,Taroczy,Franulovic,Pilc,Metrevali... and, of course, Bjorn Borg, the teen phenomenon and Okker,Taylor,Cox,Amritraj etc etc

S&V, top spin baselining, top spin offensive players, soft touch players and all round masters.The 70´s were, as they were in music, the richest and funniest era ever

Anyone who lived through that and has the experience and perspective COULD EVER DISPUTE THIS ASESSEMENT?
Click to expand...
Wow, Kiki, you knocked it out of the park. I would just like to add that Chris Evert's Lipton Tea commercials have unfortunately been stamped on my brain. No offense to Chris, but great marketing by Lipton.

AngieB
 
hoodjem said:
"nighlife"?
Click to expand...

Ha Ha Hoodjem..as in "nigh" which is an old English word that means:

Nigh
Not distant or remote in place or time; near.
Not remote in degree, kindred, circumstances, etc.; closely allied; intimate.
In a situation near in place or time, or in the course of events; near.
Almost; nearly; as, he was nigh dead.
To draw nigh (to); to approach; to come near.
Near to; not remote or distant from.

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/words/ni/nigh194113.html#h82AzYibwkHXLbrp.99
Click to expand...

Yet, on a serious note, Jaggy made a profound statement Hoodjem. He referred to a big disco hit during the 1970's. This is Alicia Bridges with "I Love The Nightlife". LOL..The Bee Gees dominated disco though, while Zeppelin made some great rock music in the 70's for my money. Thanks Jaggy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT306cZL0pM

Oh, I ... Ohhh I ... I love the nightlife,
I got to boogie on the disco 'round, oh yea.
Click to expand...
 
ARFED said:
Forbes rates Fed as the #31 influential celebrity around the world. And he is not american as you well put it.
http://www.forbes.com/celebrities/

He is earning more than 70 million dollars a year, and that is just from endorsements and prize money. He probably has some investments and lots of properties. He must be around a billion dollars of net worth. Then again, Borg could match that and even surpass him if he played nowadays. I don`t know that.

Just as a small sample, look at Federer`s arrival at Buenos Aires last December. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDRnJBCnL_c
Doesn`t it remind you of Borg`s entrance at 1973 Wimby?? :)
Click to expand...

Neither Federer or Borg is hurting for money. They'll both be ok ha ha. Borg changed the scene at Wimbledon though and to change the fan dynamic there is no small feat. I'm sure you'll agree. That's innovation without even seemingly trying in the case of Borg. As to the Buenos Aires video, that's every night for Borg at the hotel lol..no seriously Federer has been good for the game during his time as has Nadal and now Djokovic too. There are ebbs and flows for tennis. Tennis needs big stars like Borg, Federer, and Nadal to stay relevant in many respects. I love it when a great Wimbledon final gets even non-tennis fans to talk about tennis for at least a few days. That's what happened in years like 1980 and 2008 especially. We'll see how Wimbledon 2013 will play out.
 
Last edited:
I am still looking for a definitive book on the tennis boom years. Richard Evans, Peter Bodo and Marty Bell covered some aspects of this time frame, but there is no profound analysis.
 
Wimbledon final Borg-Tanner was the first match I memorize watching. So missed out on the majority of the century but what i remember, also from the early eighties that everything was a lot looser in those days I mean attitudes, hairstyles, fashion, music and so on. Now things are often overprofessionalised, In tennis you see players living more in their bubble and are less espressive. Also the later emerging tennis academies have contributed to this. BTW you now even have rock music academies.

That doesn't mean tennis and music have gotten 'better'. It's more clinical and perfectionistic in some ways, but there's a lot coming from the same mold. I don't believe it's the way free spirits go.
A guy like Gerulaitis seemed to have just picked up a racket as a kid and decided it was fun, like lots of peope pick up a guitar and went from there. But with tennis having become more and more big business , parents have put a miniracket in their 3 year old's hands and hope for the ship with money to finally sail in. Tennis prodigies go live and train in foreign countries at very early ages. Football clubs like Real Madrid buy seven year olds from Latin America and let their parents come over too, arranging living and work. I think that's also globalisation.
 
ARFED said:
If we are going to talk about the game itself maybe. I don`t know. Some may like more the finesse dsiplayed in the 60`s and 70`s and some may like more the power game and phisycal brutality of the modern times. That is subjective. The popularity of the game has dicreasead i believe in the US, some western european countries and Australia. But that`s it. In Latin America is more popular than ever, not even Vilas in Argentina raised in the 70`s the fanaticism that Fed witnessed during his last tour in South America. Nadal in Chile reached similar succes. Some other places like the middle east, east Asia, and probably the majority of eastern Europe, tennis is more popular than ever. Federer is 100 times more popular worldwide than Borg ever was. And that is undeniable. Of course this is aided by the development of global communications. Perhaps Borg with the same resources at hand would had been an even bigger star than Fed and Rafa.
IMO to claim that tennis is less popular worldwide now than in the 70`s is far from true.
Click to expand...

but nobody cares about him in switzerland, just like nobody cared about roddick in the USA.

those guys are stars but they didn't really inspire People to Play Tennis.

borg or becker inspired 1000s of Kids to Play Tennis, the modern stars are not able to cause the same effect. I think the modern stars are made by the media but they are not making the game itself a lot more popular. swiss Tennis didn't really grow at all.
 
dominikk1985 said:
but nobody cares about him in switzerland, just like nobody cared about roddick in the USA.

those guys are stars but they didn't really inspire People to Play Tennis.

borg or becker inspired 1000s of Kids to Play Tennis, the modern stars are not able to cause the same effect. I think the modern stars are made by the media but they are not making the game itself a lot more popular. swiss Tennis didn't really grow at all.
Click to expand...

If it wasnt for Fed I wouldnt be into the sport or have picked up playing the sport for fun. I'msure many others did the same. if talking about inspiring fellow countrymen, switzerland aint exactly a melting pot of athletes and infrastructure. Professionally of course the next generation looks up to current one for inspiration.
 
forzamilan90 said:
It was inevitable LZ references would happen in this thread
Click to expand...

Too funny forzamilan90. You had Led Zeppelin in rock with top tennis players such as Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Gerulaitis, Clerc, Kriek, Tanner, Pecci, and Noah in 1980. Golden era of tennis. That's great that Federer inspired you to play tennis. Borg did the same thing in my case. I read about his results every single week while I practiced. My coach would say, yeah, but don't try and hit too much topspin yet. My coach played on the Tour in tournaments with Laver and Rosewall and he was very old school, wearing white on the court and always making sure we tucked our shirts in. My first coach liked the way Borg carried himself on court as well as his humility and athleticism. I could not have had a better first coach and my dad was the best. By the way, "Borg was a credit to the Game" as Harry Hopman once said.

John+McEnroe+vs.+Bjorn+Borg-11.jpg


31mcenroe.jpg


article-1022136-011B5837000004B0-421_468x332.jpg


2006-05-25-borg-med.jpg
 
Last edited:
borg number one said:
Borg was worth ~$175 million when he retired. That's ~$500 million in 2013. He was one of the richest sportsmen in the world too. If the internet and FB, etc. was around in the time of Borg, Connors, and McEnroe, their "numbers" would have been through the roof as well. Federer does not quite have the crossover appeal that Borg had from what I've seen (Is Federer or Nadal on the cover of Time? Borg is not American either.). The "average joe" in the U.S. and other countries I've spent time in such as India do not know of Federer the same way they knew who Borg was. Tennis will face a big test when Federer leaves the game though, that's for sure. Borg's early departure hurt tennis quite a bit for many years. ARFED, I do think there is more total depth now and the #200 player today is probably better than #200 in 1980, but I think there's less depth at the top (top 10-20 and even top 4-5 until the last few years). The top 10 in 1980 was awesome and better from top to bottom than it is today. In 2003-2010, the top 5 was not on par with the top 5 in 1980 in my opinion, when you had Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Tanner, and Gerulaitis in the top 10.

777234-product.jpg


o_mn3wYl8mRyNpq27.jpg


Listen to this portion of the video below, especially Boris Becker and then Bob Kain later at 14:05.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YoB9KnKn-vA#t=731s
Click to expand...
Yes Borg n 1 that 1980-1981 top ten is the best without doubt in open tennis and only 71, 85 and 93 can get close
Not just the quality but also the style and personality contrast
 
borg number one said:
Ha Ha Hoodjem..as in "nigh" which is an old English word that means:



Yet, on a serious note, Jaggy made a profound statement Hoodjem. He referred to a big disco hit during the 1970's. This is Alicia Bridges with "I Love The Nightlife". LOL..The Bee Gees dominated disco though, while Zeppelin made some great rock music in the 70's for my money. Thanks Jaggy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT306cZL0pM
Click to expand...

Dont blame it on sunshine, don' t blame it on moonlight...
 
hawk eye said:
Wimbledon final Borg-Tanner was the first match I memorize watching. So missed out on the majority of the century but what i remember, also from the early eighties that everything was a lot looser in those days I mean attitudes, hairstyles, fashion, music and so on. Now things are often overprofessionalised, In tennis you see players living more in their bubble and are less espressive. Also the later emerging tennis academies have contributed to this. BTW you now even have rock music academies.

That doesn't mean tennis and music have gotten 'better'. It's more clinical and perfectionistic in some ways, but there's a lot coming from the same mold. I don't believe it's the way free spirits go.
A guy like Gerulaitis seemed to have just picked up a racket as a kid and decided it was fun, like lots of peope pick up a guitar and went from there. But with tennis having become more and more big business , parents have put a miniracket in their 3 year old's hands and hope for the ship with money to finally sail in. Tennis prodigies go live and train in foreign countries at very early ages. Football clubs like Real Madrid buy seven year olds from Latin America and let their parents come over too, arranging living and work. I think that's also globalisation.
Click to expand...
To dare suggestin curren music is more perfect is the most incredible statement I have read in decades
 
borg number one said:
Too funny forzamilan90. You had Led Zeppelin in rock with top tennis players such as Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Vilas, Gerulaitis, Clerc, Kriek, Tanner, Pecci, and Noah in 1980. Golden era of tennis. That's great that Federer inspired you to play tennis. Borg did the same thing in my case. I read about his results every single week while I practiced. My coach would say, yeah, but don't try and hit too much topspin yet. My coach played on the Tour in tournaments with Laver and Rosewall and he was very old school, wearing white on the court and always making sure we tucked our shirts in. My first coach liked the way Borg carried himself on court as well as his humility and athleticism. I could not have had a better first coach and my dad was the best. By the way, "Borg was a credit to the Game" as Harry Hopman once said.

John+McEnroe+vs.+Bjorn+Borg-11.jpg


31mcenroe.jpg


article-1022136-011B5837000004B0-421_468x332.jpg


2006-05-25-borg-med.jpg
Click to expand...

Not the right forum but an era with this top 10 is special indeed:
Zepp,Who,Sabbath,Purple,Floyd,Rush,Queen,ACDC,Yes and Crimson
And other all timers such as Traffic,Hendrix,Stones,Beatles,Aerosmith,Humble Pie,Iron Maiden,Kansas,CCR,Eagles,Priest,Kiss,Ramones,Lynnyrd...
It is plainly unbeatable
 
kiki said:
To dare suggestin curren music is more perfect is the most incredible statement I have read in decades
Click to expand...

I didn't suggest that. There isn't anything like 'more perfect', especially in things like music. What I'm saying is that because of the existence of rock academies, and tennis academies for that matter, there is more focus on perfectioning certain things, in execution, but less freedom for experiment and creativity.
Let's just say technology has taken over more instead of individual creativity. To me that 's a reason why we have less variety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kiki
Golden Era rivalry: the men´s 70 or the men´s 80?
Replies
12
Views
2K
kiki
kiki
Vision
Two greats of the 70´s...hit 70
Replies
5
Views
670
KG1965
K
kiki
Latinamerica preeminence in the 70´s and 80´s
Replies
0
Views
745
kiki
kiki
M
Laver & Grand Slam Participation in the 70's...
Replies
19
Views
3K
kiki
kiki
Bilbo
  • Poll Poll
How many French Opens does Nadal win in the 70's?
Replies
35
Views
2K
Oui c'est moi.
Oui c'est moi.
Back
Top