FULL VERSION 1989 - Becker vs Lendl - US Open
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2019
- *****************************************************
© Copyrights - CBS (US)
®™ United States Tennis Association (USTA)
*****************************************************
Thank you for your gracious use of this classic match!
-------------------------------------------
PertSnergleman's Review:
-------------------------------------------
"If Becker's playing great, sorry, you have no chance."
For someone who 11 days earlier had come within a net cord of being eliminated from the U.S. Open by a guy who plays the tour out of a camper, Boris Becker was doing fairly swell.
The antithesis of the modern-day tennis pro, Becker, at 21, hasn't yet burned out. He hasn't found coping with money, the press or idolatry quite stressful enough to grow his hair down to his navel, question officials' parentage or credit religion with putting the topspin on his lob.
In blistering heat that had Becker frequently icing his legs and eating fruit during breaks, the second seed from West Germany took his fourth Grand Slam title. He won his third Wimbledon crown in July.
Becker’s double success won’t be enough to lift him past Lendl in the computer rankings. But his strong serve and improved court command were enough to outlast the three-time Open champion in the 3-hour, 51-minute battle in temperatures that reached 110 degrees on the court.
For Lendl, it was a second straight long and disappointing Open final. After winning three straight titles from 1985-87, Lendl lost in five sets to Matts Wilander last year, surrendering the top ranking that he soon recaptured.
Becker, 21, now has won four consecutive meetings with the 29-year-old Lendl. They are 7-7 lifetime.
Becker’s win gave West Germany a sweep of the singles championships at Wimbledon and the Open. Steffi Graf also won both.
It was Becker’s first Grand Slam final anywhere but Wimbledon. His best previous showing at the Open was the semifinals in 1986.
Lendl tied an Open record with his eighth consecutive final, something Bill Tilden did from 1918-25. The Czech, who now lives in Greenwich, Conn., less than an hour from the National Tennis Center, lost to Jimmy Connors twice, John McEnroe once and Wilander in previous Open finals.
Becker won $300,000, while Lendl earned $150,000. 
Спорт
Fantastic. I was a big fan of both players. This match really takes me back.
Ditto here, I remember watching this on a black and white TV set I had in my room on a hot august day in New Delhi. I somehow favoured Becker as the press was kinder to him and there was more about him than Lendl in the press, at least in India back then. Over time liked Lendl's game much more. Also an interestung as pect was tennis apparell, I was an addiddas and puma fan. I think Puma exited Tennis arpund the 88-89 season. Of all the retro tennis apparell, I really liked the one that Lendl sported in 89, of them the one with a greener tinge that he wore at wimbledon was better as per me.
Becker, The Best Player In `89. He Won Two Slams And The "Davis Cup".
Why is old sport so much better than today
Well, for tennis I would say there was more variety back then.. different playstyles for different courts.. nowadays it’s just boring, slugging it out on the baseline on every court by everybody. Becker is an offensive player, comes to the net whenever he can. Those types of players do no exist anymore. The variety between Becker attacking the net and Lend’s solid baseline game made those kinds of games fun to watch. Now it is only baseline play, everywhere by everybody. They slowed the fast courts down. They slowed the balls down. And now even on Wimbledon, baseline duels is the norm. Wimbledon used to be dominated by serve and volley players.
@@jensiegangsta yes and a lot more personailtys
More variety, more personalities, more variety of surfaces favour the different styles - less thumping the ball endlessly into corners. Today's players on today's surfaces are probably superior to those days. But they've developed their games in a modern era of massive support teams, diet specialists, multiple coaches, perfect strings and racquets, samey surfaces - and the play is very samey.
La question mérite d'être posée effectivement.
People played for the love of the game, not for money. Not the case anymore. Also, specialization means less variety.
Great times, great upload, thank you man. Was biggest fan of Lendl and Edberg at the time. Loved Lendl's apparel. Becker won Wimbledon and USO that year.
The way Lendl bends to hit the single handed back hand passing shot past Becker to break his service at 3-4 in the 4th set is so majestic. The most beautiful passing shot ever.
80 & 90’s great decade for tennis
3 decades went by ... like a blink.
Indeed it did!😉😳
Seems like yesterday Lendl was getting to the US Open finals 8 years straight with that brutal passing game. That forehand was a real handful
@@jerryl9823 With tennis in the current generation, do you see it produces any game that might be watched 30 years from now ?
Not enough net play these days, light rackets heavier tennis balls and so much defensive play from well behind the baseline.
@@jerryl9823 couldn't agree more. Where are the Beckers, Edbergs or Sampras in the current generation of tennis players?
L année de la chute du mur de Berlin Boris est champion du monde ,un bonheur n arrive jamais seul
Awesome. Great players indeed
Thank you for sharing this
Thanks for uploading this. Becker could have won more than 6 Grand Slam titles if only he would have focussed more on his strengths and willpower - Wimbledon alone he could have won 2-3 titles more if he wouldn't have gotten so distracted...
@@rikkousa Mostly life itself I'd say -)... Different partners, different coaches, different managers. I loved watching him play, he was the reason I started playing tennis myself back then, but already by 1987 one could "feel" that Becker has the air of a "sloppy genius". Bob Brett helped him a lot to find mental stability in his game, but after that period things got quite loose. Who could blame him for enjoying life, he was 17 when he won Wimbledon the first time - just wish he would have created a more stable environment around himself, more people to tell him to pull himself together and to train harder...
@@davidcappel8292 agreed wholeheartedly. I love Becker's playing style especially his diving volleys. Modern day tennis lacks serve and volley players like Becker or Edberg
You are right HIS BECKERS 1 HANDED BACK JAND IS MAJOR PROBLEM .2 HANDED BACK JAND IS FAR BETTER .MOVAK & NMOVAK MURRY , & Others proved double handed back hand is always good
I think Lendl lost this because of Roche and that dated slice backhand he was getting Lendl to play more and more. Look at the matches in earlier years. When they met again at the US Open in 92 Lendl hit a lot more over the backhand and won.
But this was Boris' greatest year. I think that had more to do with it than your armchair analysis.
@@danguee1 I agree it was a good year for Becker but as someone who followed Lendl and has his rackets so armchair analysis is a bit off. If you look at the matches before and after this Lendl hit over his backhand far more.
For me the matches between Becker and Lendl were the most technically complete that has been seen and tremendously contested. Like the final of the 1988 Master.
A player like Lendl of great baseline shots with great elegance both on the forehand and especially on the backhand or the service as well.
Boris Becker with a very complete game, both volleying and the great consistency he achieved in his game from the baseline and who also showed great motivation when he played against Ivan, but not against Edberg and especially against Agassi or Sampras where he never showed same determination as against Lendl who was always the great rival to beat, with them he did not show, for me, the desire to win that he exhibited against Lendl. However Boris over the years was losing consistency in his game and was no longer so competitive.
They were players who did not go out to court to "NOT LOSE" went out to "WIN WITH THEIR GAME WITH THEIR WINNER SHOTS", especially Becker who played with a lot of risk as a great volleyer that he was, in the same way as Mcenroe, Edberg or Sampras, not dedicating himself to speculating with the result or to play defense.
And there is also something that no longer exists today, THE STYLES CONTRAST (Net game vs. Baseline game), such as the duels Mcenroe-Lendl, Sampras-Agassi or even Becker-Edberg (Becker had a game baseline of winning shots, being a great passer as well).
Today all the players play to do the same, with a single style, baseliner players, too topspin shots, covering the backhand shot and looking for maximum consistency and without any risk, pure clay court style, very boring for me.
Ivan the greatest legend of all time
Definitely not the greatest!
If Ivan Lendl had not had a mental letdown and played sloppily at the beginning of the 3rd set of his 1989 U.S.Open final against Becker, the match might have had a different outcome. He also mishit a forehand up 3-1 in the 4th set tiebreaker which swung the momentum in the tiebreaker to Becker. But Becker played an excellent match and deserved to win that match. At the start of that 3rd set, Lendl needed to ,as the old expression goes, "tighten the screws" by really focusing hard on keeping his momentum going in the match after he won the 2nd set 6-1.
Look at the screen notation at 3:06:20... remember back in the 80's when tennis didn't get much respect on TV, and you didn't even get a live match, and the broadcast would just randomly move to a later point in the match?? How far we've come...!
That's very interesting
This was a replay of the match on ESPN Classic. It was probably about 15 years after the fact. If you look at the ‘ticker’ below, it mentions Henin and Clijsters
When becker played the streets in germany were literally empty
A Akhtar, that is not true. Tennis was soo popular in Europe at that time you could watch Wimbledon
on national TV at any time. Whereas today there is only SKY or other commercial broadcasters and
you have to take an expesive subscription. Only in France can one watch R Garros on national TV.
That's why very few watch tennis today and it losts the attraction.
Until 2021: When Tennis Was At Its Peak In Our Country. Together With Wimbledon That Year, All 4 Titles (Men's & Women's Victories) Were Won By Germans. In 1936 And 1937 We Had A "Teutonic" Double Win In The Singles At The "French Open".
Volleyes are made underside of the net. Groundstrokes over the net.
Fact that groundstrokes modelled by the western grip, made it easier for hit with spin.
So, with a serve. In all the tennis strokes need for versatility.
Technically it's a return of groundstroke, grip is a same than flat forehand, or backhand.
Then left is drivevolley to complete a game.
Becker was just a little too good for Lendl that year, just like he'd been at Wimbledon earlier that summer! I think it was just Becker's year that year.
@Sleepy Joe Although Lendl did have his fair share of wins against Becker. At the Open in 92, Queens 1990. But Becker did seem to have the edge in the really big matches they played. I think it was more mentally than anything that Becker had the edge
@Sleepy Joe Take the point about the serve, although I would argue Lendl had a bigger forehand than Becker, cos it was flatter. Do u remember that quote from Johan Kriek after he lost the 85 Queens final to a then unknown Becker 6-2, 6-3, 'if he serves like that, he will win Wimbledon'.
@Sleepy Joe Lendl did have a good win against him at the Masters in 86 as well.
Becker Won Every Grand Slam Final Against Lendl And When He Was In The Zone Or The Tunnel, Also Ivan Could Not Stop Boris.
@@M.EngelhART Not sure I entirely agree, Lendl did have some decent wins against him as well. But it is true that Becker did tend to win when it really mattered.
Great days...
at 47.40 we can see Aaron krickstein in the audience with a pretty girl...legendary player
La structure des raquettes,moins puissantes donnait une possibilité de jeu plus spectaculaire ,la technique ,les schémas tactiques peuvent s y exprimer
Looked like the editing started the video over again at 15:44.
The viewing camera height sucks & you just see half a court fore shortened.
Look at the crowd reaction @ 2.53.22 and support to Lendl after he puts that single handed passing shot beyond Becker. Ivan had by then won over the imagination of the fans. His Wimbledon loss to Becker had got him immense respect as they believed that he was unfairly robbed of the chance to win Wimbledon due to rain and unfair umpiring calls. Glad to see him winning over the fans finally though only after he started losing more often.
I think that, if you ask Ivan Lendl today who his greatest rival was, he will say Boris Becker !
@ Luca TV. Lendl's greatest rival was McEnroe not Becker. Lendl lost too many big matches to Becker (i.e., he lost 6 out of 8 big matches at the 4 major tournaments and the Masters season-ending tournament) for Becker to be his big rival in his career.
Mc Enroe Edberg or Becker
@ Relax Max. Although Lendl's rivalry with Edberg was closer in terms of H2H record (Edberg has one more win in their rivalry than Lendl) than Lendl's rivalry with McEnroe was, most tennis fans undoubtedly think first and foremost of the rivalry Lendl had with McEnroe and only then think of Lendl's rivalry with Becker and then of his rivalry with Edberg. But as I stated in my previous comment on this topic, Becker basically dominated Lendl in terms of the results of most of their biggest and most important matches against each other. For example, no one doubts for a second that Lendl would in a heartbeat trade his 1985 Benson & Hedges' Wembley tournament 5-set win and his 1992 5-set U.S. Open win against Becker for the much more important 5-set wins in the 1988 Masters Final and 1989 Wimbledon semifinal by Becker. Becker also defeated Lendl in the 1989 U.S. Open and 1991 Australian Open finals. So Lendl lost too many important , big matches to Becker for Becker to be considered Lendl's greatest rival.
@@michaelbarlow6610 so then Federer isn’t Rafa's biggest rival but Djokovic is ?
@ Luca TV. The topic is not who is Federer 's biggest tennis rival? The topic is who is Lendl's biggest rival, McEnroe, Becker or Edberg and clearly the answer is McEnroe because that is the rivalry most tennis fans first think of when they think of Lendl's most well-known rivalry in his tennis career! Most tennis fans when considering the question of who is Federer's biggest rival, immediately think of Nadal first and then Djokovic second. But the topic is Lendl's biggest rival during Lendl's pro tennis career not Federer's biggest rival during Federer's career!
Boris Becker bekant Tanis spiler in Germany and good mansch good vater Number 1 in Germany ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Example of contrast of styles (volley players - baseline players), which today (unfortunately in my opinion) no longer exists, consistency is prioritized above all, what it entails is that everyone plays in the same way, everyone does what same (serve and baseline game always trying to cover the backhand). Typical of clay; very boring for me.
A large amount of technical resources has been lost since the time the born volley player was exterminated.
Seeing Boris Becker play with that technical repertoire, with those volleys of all kinds, even ballooning, was a true wonder.
Problem: it is a game too complex and technically selective to get into a game. It requires a lot of talent.
Today the great topspin player is favored, the balls are made to bounce much more, and to prevent attacking the ball from top to bottom, as Federer does. Not to mention that volley with guarantees today is something impossible, since the player in the baseline have a great advantage with this kind of balls. Today volleys just to finish the point.
Thank god this whole serve-volley yawn-fest came to an end. Tennis would have died due to fan boredom.
@@devanshdwivedi8893
It isn't about turning tennis into a shooting range, it's about the survival of the two playing styles (net-base line), looking for a compromise between both, which is where, for me, the spectacle in this sport was based. Today all the players play the same way, all doing the same, baseliners covering the backhand all the time.
For which, they have made the fast courts slower, which is what Wimbledom has done very well, but also the slower courts faster, which is what has not been done, and not put this high bounce ball, where the second bounce gives it much further back which favors clay lifter tennis and hurts volleyball players, and the ball passes two meters above the net.
I understand that you value mental fighting tennis, I like tennis more where technical fundamentals prevail more.
They are different opinions, we each have our own.
@@carlosmagnus717 very well explained. In todays players the sportive talent is not needed so much,
that's why you have hundreds of eastern europeans competing today, as they do nothing else as
children but practice the way tennis is played today. Hence surprises like Becker winning Wimbledon as
a 17yo are very rare, because he had a lot of talent.
5:06 Boris "Harkonnen" Becker ^^
With a few kilos less and a bit more athletics Becker would have been unbeatable. How many points he gives away by not being fast enough is ridiculous. It is a wonder how he won that match against this athletic machine Lendl was.
@ Patrick Humpher. Although it is true that Boris Becker's lack of great foot speed around the tennis court may have cost him some important matches in his pro tennis career, to look at it conversely, if Becker had weighed less than he did in his pro career, (i.e., if he lacked the linebacker-type physique that he has), his serve would have been less strong, although still excellent, than it was and he may not have won Wimbledon in 1985 when he was 17 years old and in 1986 when he was 18 years old. Because of his linebacker-type physique, Becker was able to hit a "heavy" serve that could jar the racket in the opposing player's hand, but his serve would have not been as heavy and effective as it was if he had weighed less than he did! So you can look at it both ways! It essentially is, as the old expression goes, a matter of "six of one, half-a-dozen of the other".
Lendl doesn’t look that confident on his ground strokes, he can rip shots, but he also makes a lot of unforced errors.
He seemed to get really intimidated by Boris in the big matches, especially Grand Slams. I don't know why. Seemed to get really tight and 'anxious'....
At that point Lendl had lost their previous three encounters in Grand Slams plus the 1988 Masters final. Becker was a big roadblock in Lendl's path especially in the Majors. And at that time Becker was probably the only player who had even more power than Lendl. Lendl was not used to being on the receiving end of aces and winners.
@@danguee1 That was at least partially due to the fact that Becker was a monster.
Lendl made too many errors
Wooden racquet.
Lendl lost this match due to his weaker serve..1989 could have been Lendls most dominant year, He lost to chang in a match he should have won, he had Boris on the ropes at Wimbledon, he let him off, who knows he would have beaten Boris in the US open had he won Wimbledon in 1989. A pity that 1989 was a year of so near yet to far for Ivan. He could have sealed his legacy as the best ever had he won 3 out of 4, or even all 4 GS that year.
@ppm120667 ..Agree with you, when it mattered Ivan was not able to close the key matches in 1989. However other than the rain break there were multiple line calls which went against him. As far as the Australian Open in 1991 is concerned, he was no longer as consistently sharp and accurate on his serve and ground strokes as he was in 85-87. Also we should not forget the 8 year age difference between him and Becker. Age makes a big difference especially against Becker.
But Ivan won the least of the GS's and made one other final - yet you're talking about a Slam or 3/4 Slam?! There's not a year since Open tennis when that hasn't been done by at least one player...... That's far-fetched 'could've' fantasising
And in the 3 GS matches he lost, he won only a total of 3 sets.
I find it much more interesting to ask: what would have happened in the FO finale in 89 if Becker hadn’t lost in the semis to Edberg in 5 sets?
I guess we would have seen Becker winning the FO (which would have been almost unfair)
@@mp1314 why unfair?
See global warming kooks..we still had heat waves in September in '89 and nobody talking about how strange it was to be this hot in September in NY..otherwise 2 tennis giants exchanging punches in those conditions
Your ignorance is proof positive that we've evolved from apes. It is written
i believe lendl would have won the us open in 89 had rostagno won his match over becker in the 2nd round.he had a match point vs becker in the 4th set and beckers shot hit the net and bounced over rostagno to throw his timing off and make him miss the shot.if beckers shot didn't go over the net then lendl would have faced either rostagno or krickstein in the final and he would have beaten either one.
Would of should of could of. 🤣
@@thomasjohn6041 sometimes you get lucky, and becker's netcord gave him that match
Too much serve volley power from Edberg, Sampras and Becker. Lendl retired.
Modern racquets versus wooden.
@@higgsboson2280 wooden rackets were longer being used in Pro tennis after the mid 80's
@@MrBjorn6 1987 to be precise. This was 1989, so yes, graphite. Nevertheless, it is small headed racquet Vs large headed racquet.
Interesting but not riveting.
Lendl was both a sore loser and a sore winner. That got old after a while.
Women play that way these days.
a great connoisseur ...