Borg / Laver at Hilton Head

[y11971alex]

@wilx218x

Perhaps a majority of them. But Borg hits a lot of topspin too.

The shots at 1:17 and 1:27 would be impossible to retrieve even for Nadal.

With all due respect Nadal is a great player too.

[notthelastword]

Laver I think if we factor out modern advantages in racquet technology is better than Federer. More touch and instinct.

[wilx218x]

@notthelastword Do you really think so? Laver was a great player, but Federer in my opinion as well as Rafa would dismantle Laver simply because of much superiour physical conditioning. Bring Laver to this hera at 25, or 26 & even with the modern racquets he would not stand a chance against Fed, or Rafa. How do you think Rod would handle Nadal's mind blowing topspin? Guys like Murray and Soderling have a hard time dealing with it & they are much stronger & faster, & taller than Laver.

[y11971alex]

@wilx218x Maybe not against Federer. But Nadal? Laver could beat him in 3 sets.

Laver is one of the most famous topspin players of all times. Maybe Laver could generate more topspin than Nadal!

[wilx218x]

@y11971alex I just feel that Nadal is too physical and strong. He consistenly handles opponents that are taller & perhaps faster. Too all respect to Laver, but he is only 5.9" & probably weight no more than 165lbs. Nadal's topspin would kick so high, that Laver would be forced to hit his groundstrokes probably at eye level. Not a good thing. I'm blessed to have seen Nadal play in person, & OMG the pace & spin that this guy hits is mindblowing! Nadal would get all of Laver's shots.

[pablotjob]

green clay????

[vindo112]

that's the greatest player of all time?? laver???

looks amateurish compared to now

[chapaev36]

Based on what? I've never seen an amateur hit a drop volley like that.

[Thetoughestweight1]

..yes, that's the greatest player of all time probably tided by Roger Federer now. He was 38 YEARS OLD here, at that age Borg (one of the greatest of his own) had ritered fromsomething like 11 years, Pete Sampras (my fav ever) plays exibition matches, and Fed will probably be doing the same (with less success)...

[absolutebore]

Foolish ignorant comment. First of all Laver is 38 years of age here. Secondly, these guys were playing with small racquet heads, mostly wooden and strings of another era. They used to play tennis, unlike the one dimensional baseline bash fest that is todays game. Today it's becoming an assembly line of 6ft 3 plus robots who can't volley. (except for Federer). Almost no contrasting styles exist on the tour whatsoever!

[TheTopspin77]

@absolutebore You are so correct! Everyone plays the same except Federer and a couple of others. Nothing but two-hand bachand baseline bashers!

[spacecated]

38 year old Laver vs 20 year old Borg. That's an 18 year difference!

Didn't really see Borg pushed too hard in this match. Still Laver manages to keep it respectable.

Wish there was some way to pit the best across generations against each other.

It's matches like these that make you wonder how a 20 year old Laver would fare against a 20 year old Borg.

[MisterCrazyLegs]

now this is REALLY amazing!. You dont often see these matches where Borg played guys from a generation before him...and Laver wasnt far off his best here but he was older and Borg was not the kind of cat you wanted to play if you were even relatively aged. He would run the best of 'em ragged. At least Rocket had sense enuf to come to the net a lot....and he still lost.

[pugilistofpower]

Laver, Sampras and Borg are my three favourite players.

[Tubeviews4Free]

Reply text (video)

Nice video, I like it alot!

For all those who don't have a populair or such a nice video and still

Send me a pm, i'll take care of it!

[mrbobevans]

I wonder what Borg was thinking? "Damn, this is best tennis player that has ever walked this planet. He is hitting shots that I can only dream of."

[chapaev36]

Probably. In his book Borg wrote that he idolized Laver.

[spacecated]

On that note, I wonder if Laver's thinking: "Damn! Does this guy ever miss or get tired?"

[Anthony881985]

Laver was simply amazing in this match considering that at this time, he was a bit past his prime.

[mrbobevans]

That first point where Laver hits a forehand volley at the service line is unbelievable. To hit that shot, your arm has to be ridiculously strong. The only player in the history of the game who could have possibly pulled that off was Hoad. Sampras or Federer could not do that.

[chapaev36]

Interesting insight. You have seen Hoad? I have read wonderful things about him - almost mystical things. Historians suggest that 'on his best day' he may have been the greatest ever. But for whatever reasons - injuries, inconsistencies, character - never put together a career of Laver's caliber.

[mrbobevans]

I have read that he was super strong, even stronger than Laver. He had great looks and looked to dominate tennis. He could hit the snot out of the ball. He is the only player that Pancho Gonzalez was in awe of - felt Hoad was his equal in ability. Only saw a tiny bit of footage of him. Downfall was lack of motivation and injuries, but was considered Laver's equal in terms of talent. Gonzalez said Hoad was better than Laver.

[chapaev36]

Good stuff. Gonzales was quite outspoken about the greats, but had a tendency to exagerrate at times - toot the horn of his favorites and underrate some other guys. Still, there was a lot of truth to his comments and they were always interesting. Anyway, as far as Hoad is concerned - what interests me is how revered he is despite what we could called underachievement, in relation to a guy like Rosewall who won probably as much as Laver, and yet was so unheralded then and now.

[mrbobevans]

I guess you have two opposites in Hoad and Rosewall as you properly mentioned. People are more fascinated by the underachiever with big talent than the overachiever with good talent. They always wonder what could be. I admire Mats Wilander more than any player because he was so smart and maximized hit talents. He wasn't blessed with a huge serve and huge groundstrokes, but blessed with a huge heart. Rosewall was the Wilander of his generation.

[IricForset]

I've done that. I play with a Wilson K Factor 90, its hard but not impossible. Its all in the timing when you flick the wrist through a little to shoot the ball off. Anyway you dont have to tell me how talented Laver was because thats all I heard growing up from this older man who taught me, who used to play with Laver in their junior days. :)

[chapaev36]

If you have some stories to relay about Laver, please do. That must have been quite the experience for your coach.

[IricForset]

Hmm there isnt really much to tell haha, except that my coach (hes not really my coach just gave me pointers here and there at social tennis) used to play with Laver and a few other juniors at Milton (brisbane), Gold Coast etc where they themselves were coached with Harry Hopman. The most I remember was him telling me about Laver's huge forearms, how Charlie Hollace who discovered him made him switch to Continental and various shots like down the line banana shots and volleys of course.

[chapaev36]

Cool - thanks for sharing.

[IricForset]

Oh and another funny thing Harry Hopman got kids to do when learning to serve was throw their racquets over the fence as far as the could.....too bad he was an alcoholic.

[chapaev36]

hahaha .. Rosewall didn't like Hopman very much. Said that he gave himself a lot of undeserved credit for the development of all these players.

[IricForset]

haha not surpising.

[walliegirl2]

Laver is the greatest of all time. Watching his in the video had me speechless. He holds the racquet like a toothpick. His shot virtuosity is superior to Federer. I am a Sampras fan, but Laver is the best when considered to his peers.

[JJLOB]

Sampras idolized Laver too (even his peers cheered him in the stands - I saw Nastase do this 'Go Rocket!'). Laver was so likable and respected like royalty almost even as he faded in years.

[mantiskf2003]

You might find it funny that he was the best player in the world, and an Australian; yet here in australia, we were all being coached to use techniques more common to Rosewall or Newcombe - regardless of individual strengths and weaknesses.

The way he waits with the racquet in a more relaxed position; more keeping of the racquet head behind the line of the ball with less obvious "backswing"; backhand contact and follow through more like Federer, on cross court particularly......

[mantiskf2003]

then the rest of the world "discovered" these improvements and accentuated aspects to suit their conditions....and look where Australia is now.

Aside from Hewitt and Phillipoussis, our entire last two generations still played more like Rosewall or Newcombe - Alexander, Dent, Cash, Fitzgerald, Masur, the Woodies.

Fortunately so many of those who played against Laver opened academies and brought on the "latin" and European countries - so his legacy is not lost.

[mrbobevans]

I was talking to a local teaching pro who is considered the guru of strokes. I asked him how could Laver hit a continental topspin forehand. He said it was only because of Laver's huge forearm. With my kids, I tried doing it and felt like I was going to break my arm. Amazing strength Laver had.

[kiki82018]

@walliegirl2

Laver is TENNIS at his most.Federer is as good but Laver gives much more spectacle to the viewer.This point makes him GOAT, shoulders and elbows above Rgoer and, of course, than Sampras and Borg.

End of discussion

[AllGenreMusic]

@kiki82018 Gives much more spectacle? What? Lol. Impossible to place either one above the other, clearly the best of their times, and they are both great shotmakers of the sport. While Federer nearly has all the great records, Laver has the one record that has eluded Federer. Unfair to try to place either one above the other.

[Pitonto]

Laver is God. Nadal who?

[kiki82018]

@Pitonto

Just right¡¡ they do not even play te same sport¡¡¡ I´d pay like 50 times more to see Laver at 38 than Nadal at 24

[SnoreBear44]

Two all-time greats here, but Laver (who I never saw in his prime, and he was well past it here, but still very good) has to be the greatest ever!

When you win the Slam (all 4) twice, and 7 years apart, that's just amazing. Let's see he would have won 2 per year in between, that would have his major total at a fairly unreachable 23.

[chapaev36]

I mostly agree, although your logic is a bit faulty.  Again pro competition Laver didn't get up to speed until 1964, so his first 'slam' as amateur may not as have as much lustre has his 1969 slam as well as the dominant sweep of big pro events in 1967. Definitely best ever.

[stealthpakfa]

laver sucks, another weak era bully!

[lilhu93]

Fuck off. Rod Laver is undoubetley the best player of all time followed by Roger Federer. U don't know shit u stupid cunt.

[stealthpakfa]

laver is a mug moonballer. mugbore played in ratpiss era

[lilhu93]

U clearly know nothing about tennis. Have u seen laver play in his prime? no. So fuck off.

[stealthpakfa]

laver is a mugbore! talentless moonballer and a kamakazi net rusher! just a mug!

[lilhu93]

Well he obviously isn't. He is considered the best player of all time by a shitload of people. He also won 11 grand slams and won all four slams in the same year twice. So he is clearly not talentless. U stupid cunt.

[stealthpakfa]

yea by a shitload of old geezers thinking serve and volley is the only cure to the problems of the world! he won in a mug weak era with only 2 countries actually playing tennis back then! nadal would pawn this ratpiss mug laver! nadal is the real deal, and laver just a weak era bully boy! fuck laver, i shit on laver and piss on his face!

[stealthpakfa]

what the fuck u doing here if ur 13?? go back and watch ur little cartoons baby! u dont belong here u ratpiss!

[shawn332155]

Your comments are so Dull.YAWZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzznn­n. And now that I see how old you are you are even more boring. Yuck. I am sure people are over-joyed with your critical thinking skills and all to have you post here. So glad you are so self-deceived that you feel you BELONG HERE. By the way Nadal is Gaaaaaaaaaaaaay.

[stealthpakfa]

i dont have time to waste on a 13 yr old baby!

NEXT!!!

[shawn332155]

There won't be NO next--cause a 13 yr old just blew you out of the water. BABY!!!

[brassbend]

good lord! Laver is 38!

[PassionNTennis]

they didnt even used to bend their nees

[turtlecutches]

1:31 is godlike dropshot

[turtlecutches]

Laver is my idol for great tennis but is it now possible to replace vintage racket strings or no with vintage rackets?

[redwonder]

I can't ever get enough of that sweet, fluid Laver service motion.

[kraavitz]

chapaev36 - thanks for posting this clip. Really good viewing and great quality. Love those fluro budgie-smuggler shorts that Laver is wearing and here I am thinking that it was Agassi who brought the neon to tennis!

[yankyank92]

what kind of surface is this?

[kraavitz]

I believe this surface was green clay - the type of clay that tends to be used (to this day) in some of the US clay court tournaments.

[yankyank92]

thanks for the answer, i appreciate it

[gravedigger02]

at that time the technic was completely different because of the material (wood rackets)...

it kinda looks funny to me xD but that was the technic everyone wanted to learn :D

[chapaev36]

Not just the racquets, but also the strings.

[IricForset]

plus balls, heck everything is different.

[RedStar6686]

actually, the US Men's Clay Court in Houston is played on har-tru (green clay)

[chapaev36]

Is it still? I think it's on red now, but I might be wrong.

[kevinj1969]

There are no more atp tournaments on this surface. Probably for the better - the footwork sucks.

[Giveussometruth]

This shows what a legend Laver was and would have been the all-time grand slam record holder had he not missed those 5 years. What`s astounding is that here against Borg Laver was no more than a part-time player. In fact after the US Open 1973 he never played professionally again until the US Open in 1975 where he won 3 straight set matches (best of 3 then) and only lost to Borg 2 sets to 1 and Borg was already a 2 time French Open Champion. I didn`t really realise how great the man was.

[chapaev36]

Five years?

[Giveussometruth]

Yes the 5 years he wasn`t allowed to play in the grand slams, 1963,4,5,6 and 7, missing 20 majors.

[chapaev36]

Well, Laver didn't really 'miss' five years. He simply turned pro. Just like every other player that turned pro Laver was not allowed to play in the majors (until 68). I was just confused by some parts of your post and Laver didn't cease playing professionally in 1974. It's not like he became an amateur again.

[turdferguson2]

hell yeah they are....they are both absolutely crushing the ball, you can really hear it

[BLACKTREAT]

THEY ARE HITTING THE BALL HARD

[krosero]

Hi Chapaev. I found a report for this match in the New York Times, dated October 11, 1976. The event took place then. It involved 4 men and 4 women. Borg, according to the article, advanced to the semifinals by beating Laver. But I'm not sure it could be called a quarterfinal, since victory in the event was based on points.

[chapaev36]

Interesting. I don't recall where I got my initial information but I'm going to take your word on it. I'll send you a PM.

[chapaev36]

Updated info.

[chapaev36]

P.S. Are you the one updating Borg's profile on Wikipedia? It has some really impressive information there.

[krosero]

I put some information on Borg's Wikipedia page back in 2006; I haven't checked the page in a while. All of my contributions are listed under the same username I have at YouTube, krosero.

[jkygogo]

Hi, what channel is this? I know they have ESPN Classic, which is really disappointing of what it has become. But What channel is this?

Thanks.

[neosystems]

Tennis Channel.

[cattafab]

Hay ademas una especie de censura en YouTube porque no puedo poner los nombres de las empresas que cometen estos atropellos

[cattafab]

hay empresas que venden muy caro este material y se han adueñado injustamente de él

[cattafab]

por que carajo no puedo publicar el comentario?

[ibwangin]

why aren't there more videos of rod laver matches?

[tennisaus]

i agree. many years ago he played ken rosewell in the final of a WTC event (i cannot remember what year ?), which is still considered to be one of the greatest matches of all time. even though he lost that match to ken, it was truly an inspirational match and you should try to find a copy of it some where. but you are right, for someone who has won "2" grand slams and is considered the greatest player of all time, you would think there should be more videos on the web about his great career !

[chapaev36]

I believe it was Dallas WCT - either 71 or 72.

[tennisaus]

Thank you for correcting me. I still think it is one of the greatest tennis matches of all time and Ken Rosewell was so exhausted after the match he forgot to pick up his winning cheque !

[JJLOB]

Saw your comment 1 year later (!) and I've always wondered the same thing. There was a series with AMAZING Rod indoor carpet matches (WCT I think) sponsored by Rothman's (yes, cigarettes!!!) on videotape. Very, very clear. They must exist somewhere in storage. One day maybe I can track them down. :))

[chapaev36]

If you do, please let me know. Would love to see the WCT matches.

[pinksyd81]

thats pretty amazing, laver at 38 would have still given anyone a run for their money.

aside from that, i like this video cause you can see the actual speed at which they played. not like others where it seems they were in slow motion. the rhythm their playing at is pretty fast.

[dgontar]

This video makes it look like Laver beat Borg, but Borg went on to win this match, and the tournament.

[robinho1979]

Even so..this is Laver at age 38, pretty good i think.This was Borg in his prime..and you have a 38 year old totaly making Borg look amatuer on some points.

[JayDM87]

um... you are aware that 3 of the 4 gs were played on grass in the days laver was winning everything?

[sergei430amg]

And nobody was going to play Aussie Open anyways. He is still great.

[mantiskf2003]

you may be confused with entries to the Aus open in the era after laver - true he didn't come back home after about '71 because of his business in the US

[robinho1979]

Yes true.... but almost half of the 180+ tournaments Laver won throughout his career was on hardcourt surfaces. So there is no doubt Laver would of been just as dominating if surfaces are the same as today.

[technostick]

WOW. I can see how and why Laver achieved the Grand Slam twice!

[billionaire35]

He knows how to win on every surface and seems tougher than Federer to me at first glance. His timing and looseness in between shots helped him get into position quckly and easily. His serve is still fast all shots, considering he was using a wood racket. My game is fashioned after Mcenroe and yesterday was the 1st time I saw this video. I then played a USTA match and played my best match ever because of this.

[billionaire35]

Please post more Laver tennis. He is so fast and anticipated all of Borg's shots

[stell29]

How many combined Grand Slam titles between these two guys? Like 23? It could've been much much more if Laver had been allowed to play all those years and Borg hadn't retired at 26.

[staplesmagic]

how come he wasn't allowed to play?

[stell29]

Back then you could play the Slams only if you were an amatuer. After he won the Grand Slam in 1962, Laver turned pro. He was a pro until they changed the rule in 1968 to anybody could play the Slams. He came back and won the Grand Slam again in 1969.

So Laver lost 5 to 6 years of his prime due to his turning pro. Who knows how many Slams he would've finished with or how many times he would've won the Grand Slam had he been allowed to play all of those years. It's a shame.

[staplesmagic]

in 62 he went full circle by winning all major slams right? and he did the same thing right when he was allowed to in 69? wow.

[stell29]

Rocket Rod did it in 1962 and 1969. So just imagine all the Slams he would've racked up if he hadn't turned pro. Sampras' 14 slams probably wouldn't have sniffed Laver's total. I say he would've won 20

[JJLOB]

19 actually, if you include his Pro Slams - Wembley 4X, US Pro 3X and French Pro 1X - making an extra 8 Slams! Funny thing is his 1st Pro year ('63) was 'flat' - no 'Slams'.

[notthelastword]

Yes but..he wouldn't have won the Grand Slam in 1962 if tennis was open, because he would have been competing against Rosewall, Hoad and Gonzalez.

[robinho1979]

Yes true..but after his rookie year 1963 in the pro,s from 64-67, Laver head to head over those players was total domination..which explains Lavers PRO CALANDER Grand slam in "67" to go along with his amatuer "62" and Open Era in "69" Grand Slam..tally that with his grand slam tiles in Doubles/mixed doubles..Davis Cup..and thats what you call G.O.A.T!

[Ariamaluum]

No way, he would have beaten Rosewall in his prime on clay. Ken's career was going downhill in 1969 when Rod beat him at the French.

[Oxygene13]

It was an absolute joy watching this :)

[Ariamaluum]

Sounds like commentator Pancho Gonzales is friendly with Rod. Back when they played, they weren't too fond of each other then. Rod was 38-39 when this match was played and Bjorn was only 21.

I wonder regrets what he said in his bio with Bud Collins about Pancho. Not!

[notthelastword]

What did he say about Pancho?

[Ariamaluum]

In his bio, Rod complained about Pancho's stalling tactics, same thing McEnroe was famous for as well as his sportsmanhsip. Well, Rod responded back and Pancho accused of him bad sportsmanship. Rod's response that was "that is like the Palestinians accusing the Israeli's of being dirty." Years before, Pancho sued Rod Laver because Rod offered him to play on his tour with Rosewall and others).

[dicksometimes]

How can the Hilton Head/World International Tennis Championships (presumably a Hunt production) not appear on the ATP site? Granted I have a limited knowledge of tennis...?

[Ariamaluum]

Sounds like you don't remember the friendly wars between Hunt and ATP with the ATP driving Hunt's league out of business in 1990.