Match rare donc précieux... La qualité d'image est appréciéable, j'ai vu une vidéo similaire de qualité inférieure. Merci encore, pour votre contribution à la mémoire de ce jeu et à ses joueurs légendaires... 👏👍👃
@@hansrosen3527 I think Fleming referred to a hamstring injury that occurred in late 84. This is 83. It's shocking to see how badly McEnroe played here.
Intéressant de voir le jeu de volée de Wilander déjà de bonne qualité en 1983 et qu'il va continuer à améliorer les années suivantes, ce qui lui permettra notamment de gagner l'US Open et de faire le petit chelem en 1988.
Wilander peaked in 1988,winning every Slam except Wimbledon which was won by Edberg.Swedish Slam ...it was ...and Graf won all the four slams that year...
@romcallis - can YOU PLEASE tell me, why we can see something like 3 courts on one - at 3:03 ...!?!? Did they play in the first rounds 3 matches at the same time next to each other? I ask this already so much time. But nobody has an answer for me.
Nice clear footage. Very interesting. Absolutely nothing on the sidelines for the players. Just a chair in the sun lol. No towel breaks after every single point. Today’s players are very pampered by comparison.
Yes but they regularly play rallies of 20 shots or more. I stopped watching this after ten minutes when I hadn't seen a single rally of more than three shots.
For the record, this video is from 1983. I would say that today's top players can volley just as well, but the game has evolved. You can't come to net behind a crappy approach or a "basic" serve and expect to win the point today. You will get passed 9 out of 10 times.
@@tomsd8656 For sure. I totally agree. But I'm saying he would not look as comfortable in today's game. Strings, powerful racquets, etc. Watch some of those approach shots. That would not cut it in today's game. You have to hit a great approach shot today or you will be passed 8 out of 10 times.
@@JK-vc7ieby that token, half of today's players would have been completely unable to hit returns and passing shots like they do with with the equipment in the 80s
How McEnroe could lose to a not yet at his peak Wilander on a fast grass court at the Australian Open in 1983 - at that time Wilander was essentially a clay court player - is mind boggling! Granted the grass courts at Kooyong Stadium had a drainage system that was designed wrong in which the courts were slightly angled towards the baselines rather than towards the sidelines which forced serve-and-volley players to run slightly uphill to get to the net to volley, but still he should have defeated Wilander on that surface. And then Wilander went on to defeat Lendl in the finals!
The courts were a bit slower than the grass at Wimbledon too. McEnroe had a bit of a reputation as a streaky player - it was sometimes said that he only played his best tennis between June and September. Perhaps though this match is best viewed as a testament to Wilander - he remains completely underrated and was one of the cleverest match players on the circuit. He remains one of only three men to have won 2 grand slams on 3 different surfaces (2 Australian opens on grass, 3 French opens on clay, and 1 Australian and one US Open on hardcourts).
@@zeddeka true but watch the game and you’ll notice the number of unforced errors from Mac and you’ll see how much of a tourist he looked compared to the professional standards of a Mats Wilander
@@zeddeka .I agree that Wilander is underrated by tennis fans and historians, because what he lacked in raw talent, he more than made up for in resilience and strong tactical play. A perfect example is his upset win over Lendl in the 1985 French Open final in which Wilander surprised Lendl by selectively making well-timed forays to the net to win numerous points - a tactic Lendl didn't expect Wilander to employ at all or so adroitly. And, of course, there was his superb tactical play against Lendl in the 1988 U.S. Open final which allowed Wilander to briefly take the #1 world ranking from Lendl. Of course the major reason Lendl lost that match was not just Wilander's excellent tactical play in that match but was primarily Lendl's inability to get in his big first serve throughout that match. That match in some ways reminds me of the first 2 sets of Lendl's win over McEnroe in the 1988 French Open in which on a cloudy day, Lendl couldn't get in a lot of big first serves in the first 2 sets which allowed McEnroe to have a real chance of upsetting Lendl. But unfortunately for McEnroe, the late in the day start to the match and the rain delay caused the conclusion of the match to be postponed until the next day - a sunny day - and when play resumed, Lendl's game was sharp as a tack! Although McEnroe could be streaky at times in the quality of his play, at his best in 1984, he was rock solid consistent (except for his inexcusable choking in the final of the French Open against Lendl, botching a 2 sets to love lead) throughout that phenomenal season in which he only lost 3 singles matches. Forgive me for being picky, but I wish tennis fans would stop erroneously referring to the 4 major tournaments as "Grand Slams" or " slams". The correct term is "majors".
@@michaelbarlow6610 88 was also WIlanders prime year, win in 3 of four majors. And also Key Biscane win, which was considered big at the time. He trained harder than ever before really aiming for Lendl (after a exhibition match where he lost his rackets and shoes, lended stuff together and Lendl crushed him 6-0 6-0, the morning after Lendl's wife phoned him and asked if he wanted to practice (with Lendl)! He reached his goal after that year and personal issues and motivation loss made him drop considerably in ranking.
It's Borg who was the one who paved the way for his compatriots to feel confident on the court and gain respect from their opponents. It's a bit like Abba in pop music.
On grass back then And, ha ha, there are Marlboro cigarettes ads around the court! Wilander had seven career slams, including three in 1988 when he was clearly the best player in the world. He was 24 when he won the 1988 US Open, then lost his passion and motivation for the game and then suffered some injuries.
Tobacco companies sponsored many sports events back then. It wasn't unusual. And yeah, Kooyong was not really fit for purpose by then, hence the move in 1988 to a new stadium
Curiously, back in the 80s, Wilander was not a intimidating player, since his weapon was consistency and mental strength. He did not have power in his game. Not his serve, nor his forehand, nor backhand. But all his strokes were consistent and solid. But he had wins against all the top players of that era. Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Cash, etc. Some may have had winning records, head to head, but Wilander did chalk up wins against them. When Mats was on the other side of the net, you knew you had a hard day in front of you. N° 1 in 1988 with 3 grand slams in that year.
so nice to watch a tennis match without the commentator talking non-stop. these days I mute the volume when I watch tennis matches because the commentators don't stop talking. I guess they think that people tune into the match to hear them talk. how wrong they are.
3:03 Can somebody PLEASE tel me, why we can see something like 3 courts on one? Did they play in the first rounds 3 matches at the same time next to each other? I ask this already so much time. But nobody has an answer for me... 😞
In the early rounds, matches were played on the two outer courts only, at the same time. From the round of sixteen or the quarters, the centre court only was used. Never all three at once. All the major cities in Australia had this structure...Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth. In the USA the West Side Tennis Club at Forest Hills used the the same structure up until the last grass US Open in 1974.
if this match were played today, McEnroe would have been penalized many times over: e.g., hitting the grass with force with his racquet. Or hitting the ball hard to the net. etc.
Amazing that Wilander could easily win 3-0 3-1 and in cement,as Henrik Sundström beat MC in Davis cup-final 84(against Sweden),when rather MC rather took Borg to this,so then l understand why MC never wanted to compaire Wilander with Borg
Chaque joueur avait un style différent à cette époque ; ça frappait relativement fort sauf au service et avec un matériel de la préhistoire en plus ; bref on ne s'ennuyait pas ; aujourd'hui c'est rasoir de regarder un match de tennis , enfin quand je dis regarder c'est apercevoir des échanges au milieu de coupures publicitaires incessantes
The idea was that they could switch between them to prevent the grass getting too worn out. The US Open used to do something similar when that was played on grass at Forest Hills.
Nothing at all unusual for the time. Tobacco companies sponsored sports events well into the 1990s. The whole women's tennis tour was sponsored by Virginia Slims cigarettes and things like Formula 1 and Snooker also had major tobacco sponsorship.
Great to see this vintage footage, tells us loads about what the game was like back then, but holy sh*t the tedium of players rushing the net EVERY SINGLE POINT. People say modern players are one-dimensional but at least they occasionally break the pattern. But these guys never played a rally of more than four shots. I had to stop watching after ten minutes because the average rally length was about two.
These guys were not one-dimensional at all. Serve and volley was how you played on grass back then. Even a baseline player like Wilander. It was just faster. Today’s Wimbledon is slower than clay courts back then.
@@a.k.4486 I know what you're trying to say but if you think about it you're actually agreeing with me. I wasn't saying that players then could ONLY serve and volley, I was saying that that was the only way to play IF YOU WANTED TO WIN. (At least on grass). Both today's players and players in the era of McEnroe and Wilander could play virtually any shot in the book (if anything, today's players have even more shots, as the tweener is now so widely used). But the conditions of grass in those days meant that serve and volley was the only effective tactic. No other style was possible. As you rightly say, Wilander could play at the baseline (as he proved at the French), but the point is that if he did so on grass, he would lose. So the GAME was one-dimensional. There were no rallies. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the cause is (ie whether it's the players or the conditions) - the bottom line is that the average rally was around two shots. Personally I find that unbearably boring. If every rally is over 20 shots then that gets a bit monotonous too, but that rarely if ever happens. In fact I can't think of a match where the average rally is over ten shots. But certainly matches where every rally is either an ace or, at best, a serve plus one are unwatchable in my view.
Because that's how you played on grass back then. There were grass court specialists and clay court specialists, and if you were versatile like Wilander, you adapted between the two. It gave the game an element of colour and variety that it doesn't have today, where everyone's stroke production is the same and they're nearly all basically two handed baseliners.
@@zeddeka Yes but sadly Wilander was the exception. No one else in those days could adapt their style to different surfaces. I've just watched Agassi vs Sampras at Indian Wells in 2001. A medium to slow hard court, one of the slowest surfaces, yet Sampras served and volleyed on EVERY SINGLE POINT. Every single one. First serve, second serve, it didn't matter. He came in behind every serve. There was no variety whatsoever. In his service games, no rallies lasted more than three shots (most were less). When Agassi was serving, the average rally length was a bit longer - a whopping four shots maybe. But there were no long rallies in the entire match. None. Like I say, no variety.
le short de Big Mac devait vraiment trop lui serrer l'entre-jambes... On a du mal à imaginer de nos jours un évènement sportif sponsorisé par une marque de tabac...
Man, this is unwatchable. Slow, lots of missed shots, not very exciting, nor sensational athleticism. The game today is so much more exciting because of the phenomenal athletes and their capacity for remarkable shotmaking...
Unbelievable 😂McEnroe with not existing groundstrokes and horrible grip on both sides and on the other side Wilander with his boring anti-tennis. Strange how successful Wilander was with his brainless game.
@Marc Zimmer. Actually McEnroe at his peak (and even before his peak) hit his groundstrokes very well. As he said, by playing repeatedly against Borg and Connors that taught him how to rally from the baseline and await a short ball opportunity to get to the net. McEnroe's grip, the continental grip, is actually a superb grip for tennis play because you don't have to make any grip changes which allows you to react to the shots from your opponent more efficiently. A continental grip simply requires, as the late, great tennis teacher/researcher Vic Braden accurately pointed out, the player to have or develop strong forearm extensor muscles. The major problem with McEnroe's groundstrokes was that he had a tendency to hit the forehand down-the-line shot a fraction of a second too late resulting in his down-the-line forehands sometimes landing in the doubles alley which is fine for doubles play but obviously not singles play. McEnroe hit his forehand best in his best season in 1984.
Wilander was my favourite player of the 80s. And the Rossignol F200 was my dream racquet.
Mac really hugs the net, and his reflexes are unsurpassed! ❤❤
and lost
he is the master of the net
Match rare donc précieux... La qualité d'image est appréciéable, j'ai vu une vidéo similaire de qualité inférieure. Merci encore, pour votre contribution à la mémoire de ce jeu et à ses joueurs légendaires... 👏👍👃
Yes, his double partner Peter Fleming mentioned something about a knee injury in late -84 that Mac didnt take care of properly.
@@hansrosen3527 I think Fleming referred to a hamstring injury that occurred in late 84. This is 83. It's shocking to see how badly McEnroe played here.
john n'a jamais briller la bas meme sur herbe? O_o
Si quelqu'un a un exemplaire de Paraguay/ France à Asuncion, SVP !
I was there that day as a young boy and for the final when Mats beat Lendl. Very hot and Mats enjoyed the higher bounce of the Kooyong grass.
Everything about this is so classic, so genteel, so relaxed, so classy, so az, so old school
I don't think McEnroe has never been described as genteel before!
@@simonround2439 True, haha. I'm really referring to the scene / environment / setting as a whole. Plus, he wasn't too bad in this match.
Kooyong is still the same! Still oldschool, but with the hard court on centre. Otherwise grass courts all around. It's such a classic old venue.
Everything I love with it. For me this was the greatest decade of tennis
true bro. Pure nostalgic blast from the past.
Wilander was underated. McEnroe was so talented. Both played for their countries to the hilt.
Not underrated word again good grief. He was rated well back then, this is nearly 40yrs later, it doesn't mean he's underrated.
Intéressant de voir le jeu de volée de Wilander déjà de bonne qualité en 1983 et qu'il va continuer à améliorer les années suivantes, ce qui lui permettra notamment de gagner l'US Open et de faire le petit chelem en 1988.
Merci pour ces matches comme je les ai jamais vu c est un regal de pouvoir les voir
Golden age of Tennis...thank you
Yes golden to fall asleep watching
@@stylistxxxPropos tenu par un rigolo qui n'a jamais tenu une raquette de cette époque.....
Wilander peaked in 1988,winning every Slam except Wimbledon which was won by Edberg.Swedish Slam ...it was ...and Graf won all the four slams that year...
Miss the old venues like Kooyong and Forest Hills
@romcallis - can YOU PLEASE tell me, why we can see something like 3 courts on one - at 3:03 ...!?!?
Did they play in the first rounds 3 matches at the same time next to each other?
I ask this already so much time. But nobody has an answer for me.
Never knew Mac got to the Semis of the Australian.
Superb quality Stephane, another excellent work by you. 👍 👌
I'll make this one last. Just watched the first game, how Mac immediately grabbed Mats' throat is just amazing. Thanks for sharing!
The Rossignol F200 was an incredible racket to play with👌
It was cool, but try to play with those old rackets today. I have. They all suck by comparison.
A bit too heavy
La qualité de l'image est fantastique
Oui c'est rare sur des vidéos de cet âge. La plupart du temps, je m'attends plutôt à voir débarquer Buster Keaton...
Nice clear footage. Very interesting. Absolutely nothing on the sidelines for the players. Just a chair in the sun lol. No towel breaks after every single point. Today’s players are very pampered by comparison.
Yes but they regularly play rallies of 20 shots or more. I stopped watching this after ten minutes when I hadn't seen a single rally of more than three shots.
Marlboro is a healthy cigarette, made for the adventurous outdoors sportsman. Well that's what the ad directed it at.
Merci beaucoup pour tes super vidéos, que de souvenirs, à voir et à revoir pour les fans de tennis
Players of the 90's were a lot more versatile. Here you see Wilamder playing serve and volley pretty comfortably.
For the record, this video is from 1983.
I would say that today's top players can volley just as well, but the game has evolved. You can't come to net behind a crappy approach or a "basic" serve and expect to win the point today. You will get passed 9 out of 10 times.
@@JK-vc7ie I should have said the 80's. What I meant was Wilander was not known for his volleys, but he looked very comfortable here.
@@tomsd8656 For sure. I totally agree. But I'm saying he would not look as comfortable in today's game. Strings, powerful racquets, etc. Watch some of those approach shots. That would not cut it in today's game. You have to hit a great approach shot today or you will be passed 8 out of 10 times.
@@JK-vc7ieby that token, half of today's players would have been completely unable to hit returns and passing shots like they do with with the equipment in the 80s
@@zeddeka Agreed. So what?
How McEnroe could lose to a not yet at his peak Wilander on a fast grass court at the Australian Open in 1983 - at that time Wilander was essentially a clay court player - is mind boggling! Granted the grass courts at Kooyong Stadium had a drainage system that was designed wrong in which the courts were slightly angled towards the baselines rather than towards the sidelines which forced serve-and-volley players to run slightly uphill to get to the net to volley, but still he should have defeated Wilander on that surface. And then Wilander went on to defeat Lendl in the finals!
Mac arrived unprepared in Australia and played like a donkey that day
The courts were a bit slower than the grass at Wimbledon too. McEnroe had a bit of a reputation as a streaky player - it was sometimes said that he only played his best tennis between June and September. Perhaps though this match is best viewed as a testament to Wilander - he remains completely underrated and was one of the cleverest match players on the circuit. He remains one of only three men to have won 2 grand slams on 3 different surfaces (2 Australian opens on grass, 3 French opens on clay, and 1 Australian and one US Open on hardcourts).
@@zeddeka true but watch the game and you’ll notice the number of unforced errors from Mac and you’ll see how much of a tourist he looked compared to the professional standards of a Mats Wilander
@@zeddeka .I agree that Wilander is underrated by tennis fans and historians, because what he lacked in raw talent, he more than made up for in resilience and strong tactical play. A perfect example is his upset win over Lendl in the 1985 French Open final in which Wilander surprised Lendl by selectively making well-timed forays to the net to win numerous points - a tactic Lendl didn't expect Wilander to employ at all or so adroitly. And, of course, there was his superb tactical play against Lendl in the 1988 U.S. Open final which allowed Wilander to briefly take the #1 world ranking from Lendl. Of course the major reason Lendl lost that match was not just Wilander's excellent tactical play in that match but was primarily Lendl's inability to get in his big first serve throughout that match. That match in some ways reminds me of the first 2 sets of Lendl's win over McEnroe in the 1988 French Open in which on a cloudy day, Lendl couldn't get in a lot of big first serves in the first 2 sets which allowed McEnroe to have a real chance of upsetting Lendl. But unfortunately for McEnroe, the late in the day start to the match and the rain delay caused the conclusion of the match to be postponed until the next day - a sunny day - and when play resumed, Lendl's game was sharp as a tack! Although McEnroe could be streaky at times in the quality of his play, at his best in 1984, he was rock solid consistent (except for his inexcusable choking in the final of the French Open against Lendl, botching a 2 sets to love lead) throughout that phenomenal season in which he only lost 3 singles matches. Forgive me for being picky, but I wish tennis fans would stop erroneously referring to the 4 major tournaments as "Grand Slams" or " slams". The correct term is "majors".
@@michaelbarlow6610 88 was also WIlanders prime year, win in 3 of four majors. And also Key Biscane win, which was considered big at the time. He trained harder than ever before really aiming for Lendl (after a exhibition match where he lost his rackets and shoes, lended stuff together and Lendl crushed him 6-0 6-0, the morning after Lendl's wife phoned him and asked if he wanted to practice (with Lendl)! He reached his goal after that year and personal issues and motivation loss made him drop considerably in ranking.
I remember being stunned at hearing the result of this match....and the tournament.
MCENROE unbelievable fast hands at the net.
the 1st point alone is unbelievable. Wilander had him dead to rights...Mac hits a winner volley like it was no problem.
I never knew that the Australian Open was played on grass before '88.
Johnny Mac ! Un talent inégalé ! Parfois trop artiste et pas assez cadré, Mais quel régal.....
Merci !
Grazie!
Marlboro, the king of smokes.
edberg was a master on this court, shame it didnt stay here, he would have won many grand slams here
McEnroe said he didn't like having to run uphill to get to the net!
Wow! Thanks
Great one thank you! BTW, Kamiwazumi-San at 3:10！
It's Borg who was the one who paved the way for his compatriots to feel confident on the court and gain respect from their opponents.
It's a bit like Abba in pop music.
Mats Wilander my childhood fav.
Mats was amazing. He really should have won about 13 to 15 slams
On grass back then
And, ha ha, there are Marlboro cigarettes ads around the court!
Wilander had seven career slams, including three in 1988 when he was clearly the best player in the world. He was 24 when he won the 1988 US Open, then lost his passion and motivation for the game and then suffered some injuries.
"Marlboro Australian Open" as it was named back then...
Marlboro Aussi Open ’83 on grass with 80-85 sq inch ~ 375 g racquets, those were the days, my friend. 😅❤
Do you think it was the beginning of graphite rackets those days??
@@brunoampm1 400 g + racquets w/o a blink. My bad.
Amazing! Thank you.
Remarkable to imagine that John was in his prime in 83 and Mats not really a grass court player
Wilander still won this tournament twice when McEnroe never did.
@@writerblaster Sure, I was a huge Wilander and Edberg fan (still)
@@WONGLER Then in 85 Edberg stopped Wilander.
I don’t remember Wilander serving so big!
Wow, where did you get it? This is a treasure! These legendary 2 players .. on kooyong court, right? Fantastic!
Wow, quite a difference in the complex there now vs. back then. Kooyong looked so quaint, not to mention the Marlboro signs everywhere? Lol
Tobacco companies sponsored many sports events back then. It wasn't unusual. And yeah, Kooyong was not really fit for purpose by then, hence the move in 1988 to a new stadium
@@zeddeka Yes, well aware of both points...
Marlboro as a sponsor? I thought doctors smoke Camel Filters😅
Curiously, back in the 80s, Wilander was not a intimidating player, since his weapon was consistency and mental strength. He did not have power in his game. Not his serve, nor his forehand, nor backhand. But all his strokes were consistent and solid.
But he had wins against all the top players of that era. Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Cash, etc. Some may have had winning records, head to head, but Wilander did chalk up wins against them. When Mats was on the other side of the net, you knew you had a hard day in front of you.
N° 1 in 1988 with 3 grand slams in that year.
What years did Mac play AO?
On regrette cette époque où de vrai volleyeurs pouvaient s’exprimer 😊😊. Aujourd’hui les matériaux et les balles privilégient le jeu bourrinos 😢😢
Et les terrains !
so nice to watch a tennis match without the commentator talking non-stop. these days I mute the volume when I watch tennis matches because the commentators don't stop talking. I guess they think that people tune into the match to hear them talk. how wrong they are.
Nothing flashy about Wilander. He just won a lot.
Strange how Wilander was so successful on the grass courts in Australia and yet never really threatened to win at Wimbledon.
Slower grass down under.
@@uncletony6210 Correct.
@@KingCast65 probably because of the weather. I'm guessing the heat dried it out whereas in the UK the grass was slicker.
In addition Mcenroe played very poorly. Did not seem to be really into the game....
Different grass...high bounce
great to see Aus Open on grass so clearly. The commentators are rather quiet on changeover 😂
Many here concocting excuses why Mac lost. He lost to a better player.
Jimmy Connors was never able to beat Wilander losing 6 times.
Wilander’s returns and backhand passing shots were superb and he also served very consistently during the tournament.
la béte noire de Mcenroe cette année battu par le suédois 3 fois sur 3 surfaces différentes
Je pense que Wilander était dans l'ensemble de la saison 83,le meilleur joueur du circuit, juste devant McEnroe, Connors et Lendl
3:03
Can somebody PLEASE tel me, why we can see something like 3 courts on one?
Did they play in the first rounds 3 matches at the same time next to each other?
I ask this already so much time. But nobody has an answer for me... 😞
In the early rounds, matches were played on the two outer courts only, at the same time. From the round of sixteen or the quarters, the centre court only was used. Never all three at once. All the major cities in Australia had this structure...Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth. In the USA the West Side Tennis Club at Forest Hills used the the same structure up until the last grass US Open in 1974.
Look how simple the players seating was, no paraphernalia & fussing.
빌란더의 스타일과 꼭 어울리는 라켓.. 인상적이네요^^ 로시그날.. 이런 모양의 라켓 나오면 좋겠네요..
Wilander
Well who won?
Mats could run forever
"Who wears short shorts? We wear short shorts. If you dare wear short shorts, Nair for short shorts."
ビランデルはまだこの時10代。全盛期に比較してストロークの足が長く攻撃的に見える。パッシングのネットミス多くて意外。バックハンドは威力十分でカッコ良い。今の時代でも通用すると思う。
L'âge d'or du tennis.
Didn't realize Mac made it to the Semis at the Australian.
Теннис совершил квантовый скачок . Сейчас на Фьючерсах играют зрелищнее .
What is really amazing is that a cigaratte company was the major sponser!!!!!
Virginia Slims sponsored the women's tour.
Nothing unusual for the time. Tobacco companies sponsored many sports events.
@@zeddeka I know. I'm old.
if this match were played today, McEnroe would have been penalized many times over: e.g., hitting the grass with force with his racquet. Or hitting the ball hard to the net. etc.
Cuando el abierto de Australia era en pasto
My goodness, the Australian Open was called Marlboro Australian Open!!! 😂
Very common for tobacco companies to sponsor sports back then. The whole women's tour was the Virginia Slims tour.
Amazing that Wilander could easily win 3-0 3-1 and in cement,as Henrik Sundström beat MC in Davis cup-final 84(against Sweden),when rather MC rather took Borg to this,so then l understand why MC never wanted to compaire Wilander with Borg
Sundström won 3-0
Even more amazing 85 Paris Wilander beat MC 6-1 7-5 7-5 easy as 83 Paris 1-6 6-2 6-4 6-0
Chaque joueur avait un style différent à cette époque ; ça frappait relativement fort sauf au service et avec un matériel de la préhistoire en plus ; bref on ne s'ennuyait pas ; aujourd'hui c'est rasoir de regarder un match de tennis , enfin quand je dis regarder c'est apercevoir des échanges au milieu de coupures publicitaires incessantes
What was the deal with the 3 courts?
The idea was that they could switch between them to prevent the grass getting too worn out. The US Open used to do something similar when that was played on grass at Forest Hills.
C'était la campagne, l'Australie de Kenneth Cook !
How did Wilander win this match on grass?
Aussie Open should never have gone from grass to hard courts.
changeovers just sitting in the sun, no shade
that mcenroe serve
😁
MARLBORO Australian Open?!!? Were they for real!!??😂🤣...On a whole other note, OKAY John McEnroe with the Daisy Dukes!!🤣
Nothing at all unusual for the time. Tobacco companies sponsored sports events well into the 1990s. The whole women's tennis tour was sponsored by Virginia Slims cigarettes and things like Formula 1 and Snooker also had major tobacco sponsorship.
Est-ce le même gazon qu'à Wimbledon ?
Non
Crazy that Wilander did so well at the Australian but was shit at Wimbledon.
Best is to play @ 1.5 speed…… Only I here thinking it is so boring🎾
Great to see this vintage footage, tells us loads about what the game was like back then, but holy sh*t the tedium of players rushing the net EVERY SINGLE POINT. People say modern players are one-dimensional but at least they occasionally break the pattern. But these guys never played a rally of more than four shots. I had to stop watching after ten minutes because the average rally length was about two.
These guys were not one-dimensional at all. Serve and volley was how you played on grass back then. Even a baseline player like Wilander. It was just faster. Today’s Wimbledon is slower than clay courts back then.
@@a.k.4486 I know what you're trying to say but if you think about it you're actually agreeing with me. I wasn't saying that players then could ONLY serve and volley, I was saying that that was the only way to play IF YOU WANTED TO WIN. (At least on grass). Both today's players and players in the era of McEnroe and Wilander could play virtually any shot in the book (if anything, today's players have even more shots, as the tweener is now so widely used). But the conditions of grass in those days meant that serve and volley was the only effective tactic. No other style was possible. As you rightly say, Wilander could play at the baseline (as he proved at the French), but the point is that if he did so on grass, he would lose. So the GAME was one-dimensional. There were no rallies. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the cause is (ie whether it's the players or the conditions) - the bottom line is that the average rally was around two shots. Personally I find that unbearably boring. If every rally is over 20 shots then that gets a bit monotonous too, but that rarely if ever happens. In fact I can't think of a match where the average rally is over ten shots. But certainly matches where every rally is either an ace or, at best, a serve plus one are unwatchable in my view.
Because that's how you played on grass back then. There were grass court specialists and clay court specialists, and if you were versatile like Wilander, you adapted between the two. It gave the game an element of colour and variety that it doesn't have today, where everyone's stroke production is the same and they're nearly all basically two handed baseliners.
@@zeddeka Yes but sadly Wilander was the exception. No one else in those days could adapt their style to different surfaces. I've just watched Agassi vs Sampras at Indian Wells in 2001. A medium to slow hard court, one of the slowest surfaces, yet Sampras served and volleyed on EVERY SINGLE POINT. Every single one. First serve, second serve, it didn't matter. He came in behind every serve. There was no variety whatsoever. In his service games, no rallies lasted more than three shots (most were less). When Agassi was serving, the average rally length was a bit longer - a whopping four shots maybe. But there were no long rallies in the entire match. None. Like I say, no variety.
I Googled "short shorts," and ended up here.
le short de Big Mac devait vraiment trop lui serrer l'entre-jambes... On a du mal à imaginer de nos jours un évènement sportif sponsorisé par une marque de tabac...
Serve/volley. How can’t nowadays players get it?
1. The materials. 2. Slower surfaces.
Lol. Marlboro as a sponsor.
21:02 oh uuuuh
Is this video sped up? Looks like it to me.
No
"Marlboro Australian Open"? Is that an oxymoron or meant to immediately send someone into a state of cognitive dissonance?
... unglaublich... im Sport... Werbung für Zigaretten
marlboro sponsor
I need a cigarette.
Marlboro and tennis hmm
Is there anything at all of which the integrity is not destroyed by commercial television ?
"
Marlboro LOL
Marlboro 😂
Boring game
Man, this is unwatchable. Slow, lots of missed shots, not very exciting, nor sensational athleticism. The game today is so much more exciting because of the phenomenal athletes and their capacity for remarkable shotmaking...
This is so funny that today these two guys talk about tennis on Eurosport... Look at them, look so amateur!
Unbelievable 😂McEnroe with not existing groundstrokes and horrible grip on both sides and on the other side Wilander with his boring anti-tennis. Strange how successful Wilander was with his brainless game.
Actually it was all brains, as he didn't have great weapons :)
@@doemehunatt correct.
That my friend, is a misperception. Mac off the ground until '85 could run with anyone. Just go back and look at the videos mate.
@Marc Zimmer. Actually McEnroe at his peak (and even before his peak) hit his groundstrokes very well. As he said, by playing repeatedly against Borg and Connors that taught him how to rally from the baseline and await a short ball opportunity to get to the net. McEnroe's grip, the continental grip, is actually a superb grip for tennis play because you don't have to make any grip changes which allows you to react to the shots from your opponent more efficiently. A continental grip simply requires, as the late, great tennis teacher/researcher Vic Braden accurately pointed out, the player to have or develop strong forearm extensor muscles. The major problem with McEnroe's groundstrokes was that he had a tendency to hit the forehand down-the-line shot a fraction of a second too late resulting in his down-the-line forehands sometimes landing in the doubles alley which is fine for doubles play but obviously not singles play. McEnroe hit his forehand best in his best season in 1984.
your tennis game should've been as 'brainless' as Mats'
With that level of playing today they couldn't get into TOP 100 players. As a tennis viewer, the play is very boring.