You could make it appear that a lot of forehands are similar this way. I never watched an old clip of Borg and thought "wow, he hits his forehand just like Federer! It's like watching Roger!!!!" It took a side by side video with very carefully chosen freeze frames to make this strange comparison. All the pro forehands are fundamentally sound, so they're going to all have similarities.
For people watching this please disregard the comments which say Federer has or has previously used any sort of semi-western or western grip of any sort. He has always used an eastern and nothing else. I think most confusion is caused when people look at the racquet head relative to the ground but you need to understand that Federer uses his wrist a lot. If you look at a close up of his hand on the racquet handle, it is clearly an eastern. Period.
All professional players do the fundamental movements in the same way. As far as the idiosyncracies go, Federer's and Borg's forehands are quite different to my eye.
These forehand look too much similar to be considered one almost graceless and other even the most handsome. May be Borg's style was underrated from the aesthetic point of view such as Federer's is overrated. Don't you think so?
on the other hand, Federer is just a genious and he would not be able to play as Borg with a wodden racquet.
Borg's foot play is much more sofisticated,as his CONCETRATION! you can see his eyes 100% focused on the ball.his movements on court were different.he was from another planet and he was not a gooffy.Borg for King , Federer for chease swiss maker!
They're both great players, I don't know actually who would win in a dream match between the two at their top because they're born and played tennis in different years, with different equipment and so different way to play.
We do know that Bjorn got problems when he tried to comeback in the new-rackets era, but we can't say how stronger Federer would be playing against him with heavier wood rackets.
Of course Federer would win. But if Federer played tennis in the 70s like Borg did and Borg would play now, Borg would probally win.
Now one can take away the 5 wimbeldon titles borg have, and now one can take away federer 6 wimbledon titles not now and certainly not in the future..
Maybe it's just simply stupid to try and compare Federer with Borg. They might play very similar, nothing wrong about saying that. But Borg played 2030 years before Federer. Everything was different, not only the rackets... And Federers generation benefits of the ones before just as Borgs generation did too. The game improves, more than the players. Nevertheless Federer is definitely one of the greatest, like Borg and Laver, to me they stand in one line.
Old comment but just cant resist that "end of" comment lol
Borg vs Fed with 70s tech, I put every cent I have on Borg on any surface. No way could he win back then any more than Borg would win if you put a modern racquet in his hand.
look at the racket borg had to use and how bad they used to be...with the technology they have for federer and his rakcets its alot easier to hit nasty shots...if borg in his prime was reincarnated to current time he might be federer
WRONG. Federer is great, but so was Borg- every bit as much.
Federer has a more technically complex swing to utilize his lighter carbon fiber racquet, and Borg has a far and away heavier, stronger, AND faster swing, to utilize his heavy wooden racquet.
in a fist fight, borg would bash holes in the other's head, and then he would tear all of the surrounding walls down, just to make the ending as dramatic as possible.
also, borg was a good bit faster- all around more athletic to be honest.
Haha, as long as we're going into other fields of competition, Federer would completely dominate in an, uh, "grace" competition. Federer'd make the other's movements look awkward. :-P
Competitive longevity competition? Linguistic competition? Proximity of birth place to Zurich competition?
hahaha i know borg is one of the best... but federer just seems like he's in perfect harmony with perfect motion... so aesthetic... borg's looks funny compared to federer's
This analogy is good in terms of the forward part of the swing, but their forehands are very different on the backswing. Borg is much loopier while Fed takes his more straight back.
Not similar at all in my opinion. Power coming from a different place. Fed does a lot more with his wrist, reflecting the capacity of graphite racquets. Borg's is more arm and shoulder driven
i really have no idea why everyone thinks federer has the best forehand, of course he is in every stroke one of the best, but he often lost matches because of unforced errors on his "stronger" side.... in contrast to rafa, who in my opinion has the most effective forehand
I would say because he has won 13 majors behind that forehand, sure he has been wild at times with it, it so explosive that if it is off at all, it will be wild. With great risk come great rewards. Nadals is safer he has decided to win with his legs..lets see if the safety and consistency of Nadals forehand equates to 13 majors
his errors don't come from having a weak forehand they come from feeling the pressure of nadals footspeed and court coverage. his forehand is mch better than nadal's
You can't compare Nadal and Federer. Federer is a technician who makes very precise and elegant grand strokes compared to Nadal who is a more defensive or power player. Federer does make errors when he is under pressure. You can imagine the kind of shot you need to win a point from Nadal or any other strong player.
Although the video by "Fuzzy Yellow Balls" calls Fed's grip "Eastern," I still contend that it is not the classic "Eastern" grip I was taught in which the index knuckle was placed on bevel 3, while the heel of my hand was placed on bevel 2 (90's USPTA definition). Fed has both his index knuckle and heel of his hand on bvl three.
But let'snot argue over someone else's definition of "Eastern." We both agree that Fed's grip is, basically, Eastern.
take a look at the position on the court. Federer is on the right side hiting the ball to the left side. Borg on the other hand is doing the oposite. To compare both, they should be on the same place hiting the "same" ball, because now they are "playing against each other", if you see what I mean.
what a crap video . if you do only slow motion videos then you would finish comparing RF's forehand with EGulbis' forehand ..and it's a big difference...yeah, it seem the same, but if you would look closely at the elbow's distances from the body, the grip.. then the 2 forehands have nothing in commun. the only similarity is at the foot-work :)
Chapaev, regardless of what you say, Federer has still won a lot more than Borg this no doubt backs up my claim that Federer is better than Borg considering that it's factual information not "what you think". No doubt both players are very talented but Borg has never hit as hard as Federer while Federer can hit a thousand balls the same pace Borg has had and do nothing but lose because of impeding winners by the other players. Go ask the professionals and let's see if they agree with you.
Borg and Federer are very close in terms of accomplishments - you're really out to lunch with these claims. And no tennis historian would agree with what you are saying here. It''s highly debatable that Federer is as good as Borg and Borg may not even be top-five of all time. Laver, Gonzales, Tilden, Rosewall, and possibly Budge are more accomplished players. Federer is not in the conversation yet. When he puts together more than a handful of years of elite play then we'll talk.
First of all, I was not talking about Tennis Historians, they can talk about as much as they want and I wouldn't care, who would want to be a tennis historian anyway? I'm talking about Professional tennis players that actually have EXPERIENCE playing in the field not old players that haven't had a chance to even play Federer or win against him. Real experience is totally different from what people think, when it all comes down it comes to what the players say and that definitely backs me up.
Well, this gives you instant credibility right there. Tennis historians actually study history - the greats from all eras. Contemporary players, however, only know about the guys they play against. Historians are the ones that write the respected books. They're the scholars in their field - Gianni Clerici, Gene Scott, Michael Sutter, Jack Kramer, Allison Danzig, Joe McCauley; I recommend you read them before you spout off.
Sorry man, it just pisses me off that some guy is telling me Federer isn't better than Borg when competition is insane compared than before much like school these days. It's also because I like to base my game off Federer's so I want defend him cuz he's my tennis role model. Real sorry man, usually I don't get pissed like this but the dude is trying to act like some damn smart alec.
i cant really comment on borg cuz i was too young then but there is no doubt federer will be in the books as one of the greatest players ever. if u base your game on his you sould be ok!! now everyone relax here, it's only a game!
Federer is a fantastic player and it can be argued that he's better than Borg, but it can also be easily argued that Borg is better than Federer, but to claim that one is "by far" better than another is just ignorant and sheltered.
the problem starts from the fact that the world is looking for THE best player when in truth there IS room at the top for at least a few. they are all great
Borg invented that forehand he is the inventor of the modern game.Tennis instructors tried to get him to hit with an eastern grip,but he stuck with the semi-western that he learned on his own. Not to shabby,since everyone copied his game. He rtetired at 25 with 11 Slams and never played the Austrailan,maybe once. Borg was a genius and a legend. So is Roger.
I know you commented six months ago, so you probably won't see this, but...
...not to be picky or anything, but, while Borg did popularize the "modern" game, the Western forehand wasn't actually new. "Little" Bill Johnston was hitting a Western grip forehand back in the 1920's when he was one of the top players in the world. And Borg's two-handed backhand wasn't new either -- Pancho Segura hit two-hands decades before Borg.
And You don't need a modicum of knowledge to know how Borg hits if you have professionals backing a claim and Borg's factual information himself backing the claim. Borg never won as much as Federer and Federer's won an insane number of titles and grand slams. Yeah, no dip hits under the ball and uses more windshield wiper topspin but if you actually looked at the facts Federer hit's about 2000+ Rpm average each grdstrke. Federer does not hit "flat" as you say, facts back me, facts don't back you
What professional claim? You're not even minimally clear here. For your information, Borg won more singles titles than Federer despite retiring at a younger age and he won 11 majors despite playing the Australian only once as a 17 year old. You don't provide any facts at all and Federer does hit quite flat comparing to Borg's massive topspin. Doesn't sound like you've seen him play much.
Ok, not titles, what I meant was grand slams which are much bigger achievements considering the competition. and I've watched federer play EVERyday so don't lecture me when I've watched countless hours of Federer playing.
It's true you can say if they both had the same racquet then the competition would go to Borg, but let's not forget that competition is a lot higher than before and Borg would have to have done a **** of more racket speed than what he was doing in the video which I'm guessing is his average which federer does faster in slow motion. racket speed and he would have to have a much more complicated game more so than now, his body physique right there (stick like body) would have not made it in 2000's
You have to have at least a modicum of knowledge about the way Borg hit the ball to comment. Borg hit under the ball, creating lots of topspin. Federer hits flat. Of course, their approaches look different. And Borg had perfect physique, without the belly that Roger sports all the time.
The opposition of Borg was WAY superior in form of Lendl,Mcnroe & Connors in his way.
Its a miracle he lost only 15 sets in 5 years!!what has federer got for competition?
a Nadal who has matured only last year,a good but not brilliant hewitt,an andy roddick who relies purely on serve & a Safin who i admit is excellent when in form but inconsistent.so just by quality of opposition Borg wins hands-down!!
Add Ashe, Nastase, Newcombe, Smith, Vilas and even the great Rod Laver. Those players were ALL heavyweights. Then he had to compete against those dominant champions - Connors, Lendl and McEnroe. No comparison.
Borg did have to play with a terrible racquet though, imagine if he was able to play with federer's racquet. It's hard to say that someones better than the other from different era's.
what a stupid comment. you are biased and it shows. borg won 5 wimbledons in a row and also won 6 french. you say that borg may beat federer on clay. May? You have to be kidding, put away your bias before you write in the future.
Some one mentioned racquet size, That too shows how much better Borg was. Hey notice after Sampras beat Federer todays players took notice of Federers weaknesses and have been preying on them.
When the announcer says "initially preperation", look at borgs racquet head. You will see a blur because Borg uses a lot of wrist to generate the heavey topsin he was famous for. I get poor ratings for telling the truth, truth hurts the Federer fans.
Both the players watch the ball to the point where it meets the racket and their head is so still with their pointed left elbow giving them great balance.Fantastic technique.But as you can see Federer is much better balanced in this clip.His feet is in perfect postion.While Borg's was somewhat in the heel before made the shot. Federer's body coil ad uncoil is incredible...And watch that cobra wrists.He's such a joy to watch!.
borg somehow doesnt look right in comparison to roger. its cuz hes too hoppity hoppity
liedetecter2000 5 months ago
federer WRIST SNAP WHIP CRACK BOOM
CHEESYhairyGASH 7 months ago
Borg's stance is open wider, making it harder to draw power from the lower body.
ShunyamNiketana 8 months ago
You could make it appear that a lot of forehands are similar this way. I never watched an old clip of Borg and thought "wow, he hits his forehand just like Federer! It's like watching Roger!!!!" It took a side by side video with very carefully chosen freeze frames to make this strange comparison. All the pro forehands are fundamentally sound, so they're going to all have similarities.
ChaunceyDos 10 months ago
Comparing era's is a topic for ignorant dumbarses.
MaratSafinVideos 1 year ago
@MaratSafinVideos Good point
11caulfield 1 year ago
For people watching this please disregard the comments which say Federer has or has previously used any sort of semi-western or western grip of any sort. He has always used an eastern and nothing else. I think most confusion is caused when people look at the racquet head relative to the ground but you need to understand that Federer uses his wrist a lot. If you look at a close up of his hand on the racquet handle, it is clearly an eastern. Period.
Abbasi123456789 1 year ago
I like Federer's forehand better even though they're similar.
mssheltn1 1 year ago
that's because bjorn borg was the first top level pro who hit the modern forehand. lendl improved it, federer perfected it.
xridethelightningx 1 year ago 2
federer looks better
PROTLxONgame 1 year ago
WHOOT! Go Eastern!
choji1212 1 year ago
All professional players do the fundamental movements in the same way. As far as the idiosyncracies go, Federer's and Borg's forehands are quite different to my eye.
Snaurt 2 years ago 3
You wrong. Not only players like Connors and McEnroe had total different movements, but olso a baseliner like Lendl.
matteodinenno 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
they have the same forehand and theyre both gay, ok!
destoroy4 2 years ago
shut up loser, ok!
biliev1 2 years ago
Thats brillant!!!
How Old are You??? You feel the need to insult the two Greatest of all-time to make yourself feel bigger.
pmo1983 2 years ago
federer's forehand is incomprable
Guimauve18 2 years ago
These forehand look too much similar to be considered one almost graceless and other even the most handsome. May be Borg's style was underrated from the aesthetic point of view such as Federer's is overrated. Don't you think so?
matteodinenno 2 years ago 3
It's hard to compare the games. I'm 45. Went through wood, graphite, gut-synthetic, big head.....etc...
rm1725 2 years ago
Borg is way stiffer and has more upper body rotation, kind of an ugly stroke.Fed's eastern forehand is flawless.
SirHeatrix 2 years ago
@SirHeatrix they look exactly the same, everyone just likes kissing federers ass
mathiyus 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Borg played as Thor, a true Vicking god!
i am number 1 fan of Bjorn in the world.
on the other hand, Federer is just a genious and he would not be able to play as Borg with a wodden racquet.
Borg's foot play is much more sofisticated,as his CONCETRATION! you can see his eyes 100% focused on the ball.his movements on court were different.he was from another planet and he was not a gooffy.Borg for King , Federer for chease swiss maker!
igalflint 2 years ago
They're both great players, I don't know actually who would win in a dream match between the two at their top because they're born and played tennis in different years, with different equipment and so different way to play.
We do know that Bjorn got problems when he tried to comeback in the new-rackets era, but we can't say how stronger Federer would be playing against him with heavier wood rackets.
ROMANTIKILLER2 2 years ago
Of course Federer would win. But if Federer played tennis in the 70s like Borg did and Borg would play now, Borg would probally win.
Now one can take away the 5 wimbeldon titles borg have, and now one can take away federer 6 wimbledon titles not now and certainly not in the future..
(Bad English, Sorry)
jenslll777 2 years ago
Maybe it's just simply stupid to try and compare Federer with Borg. They might play very similar, nothing wrong about saying that. But Borg played 2030 years before Federer. Everything was different, not only the rackets... And Federers generation benefits of the ones before just as Borgs generation did too. The game improves, more than the players. Nevertheless Federer is definitely one of the greatest, like Borg and Laver, to me they stand in one line.
ytaddicted 2 years ago 10
Federer vs borg. Both in their prime. Federer would win. end of.
YaMumYaNanYaGran 2 years ago 5
@YaMumYaNanYaGran
Old comment but just cant resist that "end of" comment lol
Borg vs Fed with 70s tech, I put every cent I have on Borg on any surface. No way could he win back then any more than Borg would win if you put a modern racquet in his hand.
alin1975 1 year ago
look at the racket borg had to use and how bad they used to be...with the technology they have for federer and his rakcets its alot easier to hit nasty shots...if borg in his prime was reincarnated to current time he might be federer
BobbyN23 2 years ago
Borg was fantastic... But Federer is the best, in my opinion.
Vinivinilombardi 2 years ago 8
The tendency might be to send the wrist skyward, whereas they clearly keep the movement across the chest, not higher than the shoulders
tomsega 2 years ago
LOL, cept Federer is twice the player Borg was.
TheTruthfulAsshole 2 years ago
WRONG. Federer is great, but so was Borg- every bit as much.
Federer has a more technically complex swing to utilize his lighter carbon fiber racquet, and Borg has a far and away heavier, stronger, AND faster swing, to utilize his heavy wooden racquet.
in a fist fight, borg would bash holes in the other's head, and then he would tear all of the surrounding walls down, just to make the ending as dramatic as possible.
also, borg was a good bit faster- all around more athletic to be honest.
risenloudly 2 years ago 3
what do you mean by a fis fight? couse if the 2 wood have played in their primes roger woul shurly be a winner...
hilhjlkhjklnjh 2 years ago
Haha, as long as we're going into other fields of competition, Federer would completely dominate in an, uh, "grace" competition. Federer'd make the other's movements look awkward. :-P
Competitive longevity competition? Linguistic competition? Proximity of birth place to Zurich competition?
GenryuusaiTai 2 years ago 4
what's "Proximity of birth place to Zurich competition" mean? r u also in zurich?
gunmenow 2 years ago
thats just not true
007toft007 2 years ago
hahaha i know borg is one of the best... but federer just seems like he's in perfect harmony with perfect motion... so aesthetic... borg's looks funny compared to federer's
pstarf 2 years ago 2
This analogy is good in terms of the forward part of the swing, but their forehands are very different on the backswing. Borg is much loopier while Fed takes his more straight back.
mrbobevans 2 years ago
Ah, before the days of Roger's golden Wimbledon cardigan. Still, he's rather fashionable in this video.
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
Not similar at all in my opinion. Power coming from a different place. Fed does a lot more with his wrist, reflecting the capacity of graphite racquets. Borg's is more arm and shoulder driven
Snaurt 2 years ago 2
It's not that of a surprise; Roger isn't a crazy monkey fed up with energy, nor a big monster with huge arms.
Roger is a techincian, the best I've ever seen; his strenght is all about the perfect motion, the graceful movement.
This what made analysts consider him as being probably the best player to have ever touch a court.
Some think he is like Samprass falling down, but Samprass didn't need kissing desease to fall while Roger did.
GueorguiJoukov 2 years ago
OMG the racket of Borg kinda looks like a badminton racket!!! XDDD
NKay08 2 years ago 3
I know hahaha
snappycruise 2 years ago
This is inacurate it could have been a councidence that that 1 forehand was the same as borg.
RandomReal111 2 years ago
Federer>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Borg
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
mate you seriously need a life!!!
10WingsAndFries 2 years ago
very useful. Thanks :-)
Alexandahls 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The best Forehand in tennis
1. Fernando Gonzalez..
2. Roger Federer
3. Fernando Verdasco
satishsatishiyer 3 years ago
1-Roger Federer
2-Fernando González
3-Rafael Nadal
franrafuki 2 years ago
i really have no idea why everyone thinks federer has the best forehand, of course he is in every stroke one of the best, but he often lost matches because of unforced errors on his "stronger" side.... in contrast to rafa, who in my opinion has the most effective forehand
Fa1rplayy 2 years ago
the forehand of federer is the most definitive forehand in the world
franrafuki 2 years ago 4
I would say because he has won 13 majors behind that forehand, sure he has been wild at times with it, it so explosive that if it is off at all, it will be wild. With great risk come great rewards. Nadals is safer he has decided to win with his legs..lets see if the safety and consistency of Nadals forehand equates to 13 majors
SportVidz2go 2 years ago
14 majors :D
nver 2 years ago
his errors don't come from having a weak forehand they come from feeling the pressure of nadals footspeed and court coverage. his forehand is mch better than nadal's
tlp26atx 2 years ago
but the head also belongs to tennis, and he also makes too many mistakes against other players.
if hes in a good mood, his forehand is the best, but hes simply not as constant as nadal, and im a federer fan
Fa1rplayy 2 years ago
maybe because nadal forehand passes 3 meters over the net ond is full of topspin
malcomino 2 years ago
You can't compare Nadal and Federer. Federer is a technician who makes very precise and elegant grand strokes compared to Nadal who is a more defensive or power player. Federer does make errors when he is under pressure. You can imagine the kind of shot you need to win a point from Nadal or any other strong player.
Abbasi123456789 2 years ago 6
Federer's grip is a plain 'ol eastern, always has been, always will. If you know anything about tennis you'd know this.
Nekrohol 3 years ago
Federer plays his forehand with a semi-western grip!
randybais 3 years ago 2
No.
Nekrohol 3 years ago
I always thought it was western. Isn't eastern grip for his backhand?
seo0204 3 years ago 2
A western grip forehand grip is what would be an eastern backhand grip, look for the grips on the internet.
Federer's grip is clearly an eastern though, which makes it more amazing, considering how good he is then and how much spin he puts on the ball.
Nekrohol 3 years ago
lmao it aint eastern u nub its semi western noob cake,
pian000 2 years ago
Ive heard its about halfway between eastern and semi-western, some people call it extreme eastern or something
CounttomS 2 years ago 2
Fed's grip IS an Eastern, but it's kind of a hybrid between Eastern and semi-western. I wouldn't call it a true Eastern...
Go search on youtube -- there's a video just on Federer's grip somewhere...
siegeperilous 2 years ago
Yes, there is such a video, and it clearly shows that it is a FULL EASTERN.
Did you not see the video? It's not an "extreme eastern", if that's what you're thinking.
Nekrohol 2 years ago
Nek:
Although the video by "Fuzzy Yellow Balls" calls Fed's grip "Eastern," I still contend that it is not the classic "Eastern" grip I was taught in which the index knuckle was placed on bevel 3, while the heel of my hand was placed on bevel 2 (90's USPTA definition). Fed has both his index knuckle and heel of his hand on bvl three.
But let'snot argue over someone else's definition of "Eastern." We both agree that Fed's grip is, basically, Eastern.
siegeperilous 2 years ago
@siegeperilous federer has an extreme western grip.
indyk91 1 year ago
@indyk91 extreme western....you obviously know nothing about tennis
shaknbabysyndrom 9 months ago
@Nekrohol He used to use semi western until around 2007.
bulchicken 1 year ago
The same body language for sure. Federer uses a slightly more compact swing and is less 'mechanical' than Borg. EXCELLENT comparison. Kudos!
JJLOB 3 years ago 5
0:36 federer has never looked more like jaquin phoenix in the gladiator as in this second.
Bonapart3 3 years ago
yeah, a bit ,,,
vicko77 3 years ago
Cool video! These two are so interesting to watch and analyze. They've got that special tennis genius mystique and grace... And badass forehands!
BzzDog 3 years ago
Borg is a Legend
damnhot 3 years ago
take a look at the position on the court. Federer is on the right side hiting the ball to the left side. Borg on the other hand is doing the oposite. To compare both, they should be on the same place hiting the "same" ball, because now they are "playing against each other", if you see what I mean.
ThirdDrunkDog 3 years ago
what a crap video . if you do only slow motion videos then you would finish comparing RF's forehand with EGulbis' forehand ..and it's a big difference...yeah, it seem the same, but if you would look closely at the elbow's distances from the body, the grip.. then the 2 forehands have nothing in commun. the only similarity is at the foot-work :)
ddrgs 3 years ago
ddrgs:
Geez, I'm sorry. Should I not post videos?
siegeperilous 2 years ago 6
topspin19682000 is right. lets just say they're both good, and no one can compare them unless they actually play a freaking game!
DSunited 3 years ago
beautifully done by both
cant c myslef anywhere near them byt he way
i play tennis
o'well not the only one :)
omaldib 3 years ago
Chapaev, regardless of what you say, Federer has still won a lot more than Borg this no doubt backs up my claim that Federer is better than Borg considering that it's factual information not "what you think". No doubt both players are very talented but Borg has never hit as hard as Federer while Federer can hit a thousand balls the same pace Borg has had and do nothing but lose because of impeding winners by the other players. Go ask the professionals and let's see if they agree with you.
cpark02 3 years ago
Borg and Federer are very close in terms of accomplishments - you're really out to lunch with these claims. And no tennis historian would agree with what you are saying here. It''s highly debatable that Federer is as good as Borg and Borg may not even be top-five of all time. Laver, Gonzales, Tilden, Rosewall, and possibly Budge are more accomplished players. Federer is not in the conversation yet. When he puts together more than a handful of years of elite play then we'll talk.
chapaev36 3 years ago
First of all, I was not talking about Tennis Historians, they can talk about as much as they want and I wouldn't care, who would want to be a tennis historian anyway? I'm talking about Professional tennis players that actually have EXPERIENCE playing in the field not old players that haven't had a chance to even play Federer or win against him. Real experience is totally different from what people think, when it all comes down it comes to what the players say and that definitely backs me up.
cpark02 3 years ago
Well, this gives you instant credibility right there. Tennis historians actually study history - the greats from all eras. Contemporary players, however, only know about the guys they play against. Historians are the ones that write the respected books. They're the scholars in their field - Gianni Clerici, Gene Scott, Michael Sutter, Jack Kramer, Allison Danzig, Joe McCauley; I recommend you read them before you spout off.
chapaev36 3 years ago
i have an idea!! stop debating and get off your asses and just play.
thank you
topspin19682000 3 years ago 6
Sorry man, it just pisses me off that some guy is telling me Federer isn't better than Borg when competition is insane compared than before much like school these days. It's also because I like to base my game off Federer's so I want defend him cuz he's my tennis role model. Real sorry man, usually I don't get pissed like this but the dude is trying to act like some damn smart alec.
cpark02 3 years ago
i cant really comment on borg cuz i was too young then but there is no doubt federer will be in the books as one of the greatest players ever. if u base your game on his you sould be ok!! now everyone relax here, it's only a game!
topspin19682000 3 years ago 2
Federer is a fantastic player and it can be argued that he's better than Borg, but it can also be easily argued that Borg is better than Federer, but to claim that one is "by far" better than another is just ignorant and sheltered.
chapaev36 3 years ago
the problem starts from the fact that the world is looking for THE best player when in truth there IS room at the top for at least a few. they are all great
topspin19682000 3 years ago 2
Borg invented that forehand he is the inventor of the modern game.Tennis instructors tried to get him to hit with an eastern grip,but he stuck with the semi-western that he learned on his own. Not to shabby,since everyone copied his game. He rtetired at 25 with 11 Slams and never played the Austrailan,maybe once. Borg was a genius and a legend. So is Roger.
Schrittwieser 3 years ago
Lolz nahz Lendl did, before lendl tennis was a slow paced game, not boring just a lot slower than it used to be lol
PassionNTennis 3 years ago
Schrittwieser:
I know you commented six months ago, so you probably won't see this, but...
...not to be picky or anything, but, while Borg did popularize the "modern" game, the Western forehand wasn't actually new. "Little" Bill Johnston was hitting a Western grip forehand back in the 1920's when he was one of the top players in the world. And Borg's two-handed backhand wasn't new either -- Pancho Segura hit two-hands decades before Borg.
Borg IS great though. :-)
siegeperilous 2 years ago
federer has shots that borg doesn't have.
ribcat 3 years ago
No, he doesn't.
chapaev36 3 years ago
And You don't need a modicum of knowledge to know how Borg hits if you have professionals backing a claim and Borg's factual information himself backing the claim. Borg never won as much as Federer and Federer's won an insane number of titles and grand slams. Yeah, no dip hits under the ball and uses more windshield wiper topspin but if you actually looked at the facts Federer hit's about 2000+ Rpm average each grdstrke. Federer does not hit "flat" as you say, facts back me, facts don't back you
cpark02 3 years ago
What professional claim? You're not even minimally clear here. For your information, Borg won more singles titles than Federer despite retiring at a younger age and he won 11 majors despite playing the Australian only once as a 17 year old. You don't provide any facts at all and Federer does hit quite flat comparing to Borg's massive topspin. Doesn't sound like you've seen him play much.
chapaev36 3 years ago
Ok, not titles, what I meant was grand slams which are much bigger achievements considering the competition. and I've watched federer play EVERyday so don't lecture me when I've watched countless hours of Federer playing.
cpark02 3 years ago
Well, good for you. Maybe you should watch some others players for a change.
chapaev36 3 years ago 2
It's true you can say if they both had the same racquet then the competition would go to Borg, but let's not forget that competition is a lot higher than before and Borg would have to have done a **** of more racket speed than what he was doing in the video which I'm guessing is his average which federer does faster in slow motion. racket speed and he would have to have a much more complicated game more so than now, his body physique right there (stick like body) would have not made it in 2000's
cpark02 3 years ago
You have to have at least a modicum of knowledge about the way Borg hit the ball to comment. Borg hit under the ball, creating lots of topspin. Federer hits flat. Of course, their approaches look different. And Borg had perfect physique, without the belly that Roger sports all the time.
chapaev36 3 years ago
His racquet sucks hahaaha
DIANAROSS4EVER 3 years ago
maybe similar action but completely different styles. borg: keep ball in play federer: wack it for a winner
palpatine274 3 years ago
Federers technique are way better than Borgs
Eschutaz 3 years ago 3
da un pelin antes a la pelota borg mirarlo bien.
mamaun3 3 years ago
Federer is much better than borg, in 5 Wimbledons Federer lost 6 sets and borg 15. In the only surface that borg may win against Federer is in clay.
Federer the best tennis player in the history.
maindjak 3 years ago 3
not until he either surpasses Pete Sampras's record or he wins a FO
BLOOURN 3 years ago
The opposition of Borg was WAY superior in form of Lendl,Mcnroe & Connors in his way.
Its a miracle he lost only 15 sets in 5 years!!what has federer got for competition?
a Nadal who has matured only last year,a good but not brilliant hewitt,an andy roddick who relies purely on serve & a Safin who i admit is excellent when in form but inconsistent.so just by quality of opposition Borg wins hands-down!!
paranoidXeqtr 3 years ago 2
Add Ashe, Nastase, Newcombe, Smith, Vilas and even the great Rod Laver. Those players were ALL heavyweights. Then he had to compete against those dominant champions - Connors, Lendl and McEnroe. No comparison.
JJLOB 3 years ago
Ashe was really neither here nor there...he was fortunate to win Wimby in '75
xman4un 3 years ago
Borg did have to play with a terrible racquet though, imagine if he was able to play with federer's racquet. It's hard to say that someones better than the other from different era's.
riessypiecy 3 years ago
what a stupid comment. you are biased and it shows. borg won 5 wimbledons in a row and also won 6 french. you say that borg may beat federer on clay. May? You have to be kidding, put away your bias before you write in the future.
ursulica56 3 years ago
Some one mentioned racquet size, That too shows how much better Borg was. Hey notice after Sampras beat Federer todays players took notice of Federers weaknesses and have been preying on them.
snoble2k 3 years ago
I forgot to mention Borg could hit effectively on the run, pull federer wide and he is thrown severely off balance.
snoble2k 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Federer is a stiff look at his wrist. Borg uses a whipping motion while federer stiffens his wrist. Borg is far far better than Federer and Samprras.
snoble2k 3 years ago
what do you mean by this,that he "stiffens" his wrist?
SunSigil 3 years ago
When the announcer says "initially preperation", look at borgs racquet head. You will see a blur because Borg uses a lot of wrist to generate the heavey topsin he was famous for. I get poor ratings for telling the truth, truth hurts the Federer fans.
snoble2k 3 years ago
Snoble2k:
Any blurriness probably has more to do with the quality of film being used rather than "wrist" movement causing faster racquet movement.
Notice that, in the "preparation" phase you point to, Borg's left hand is also blurry, yet you do not cite this as an example of "wrist" action.
siegeperilous 3 years ago
Fed's forehand SO much better than Borg's, although he had superior racket tech.
Samprasisthebest 3 years ago 4
Both the players watch the ball to the point where it meets the racket and their head is so still with their pointed left elbow giving them great balance.Fantastic technique.But as you can see Federer is much better balanced in this clip.His feet is in perfect postion.While Borg's was somewhat in the heel before made the shot. Federer's body coil ad uncoil is incredible...And watch that cobra wrists.He's such a joy to watch!.
veejaiz 3 years ago 2
Hey Federer was going for a winner while Borg was still playing the point.
snoble2k 3 years ago 2
Very interesting analysis. See Bjorg on the BlackRock Tour of Champions channel!
ChampionsTennis 3 years ago
Wow!I saw for first time a similar vid on Eurosport!It's amazing how their forehands looks like!Federer's the best tennis player ever!!!
Atanasii18 3 years ago
nice vid, it lookjs kinda dum how small raquets were back in the days fed's lokk huge compared to that, it looks like badminton !
TheGEazye 4 years ago
nice vid
rahdisas 4 years ago