When Borg and Connors met in the US Open final on clay Connors still had his number. Before Borg started to beat Connors most commentators thought Borg took the court thinking he would come out the loser. Eventually, Borg beat Connors on clay in Florida and then Borg took control of their matches from that point on.
Arrogance? Borg also thought he should have won the 1981 Wimbledon final where he looked the better player for two of the first three sets.
I would query his assertion that he wouldn't swap a Wimbledon title for a US Open - he came so close so often.
But for retirement I think Borg could have been a top three player until at least the end of 1984 and won the French again but Mac had his number on other surfaces.
What a shame he didn't take the Australian Open seriously either!
hi, also I read that Jimmy Connors had suffered from back injuries from around 1979 to 1981 and had not been able to compete against Borg and Mcenroe at their level. However, amazingly he recovered by 1982 and went on to win Wimbledon(Mcenroe) and then two US opens.(Lendl) Possibly Borg had burnt out by 1982 and lost a lot of desire. However, Lendl, Becker and Edberg were coming through by 1983 to 1985 so possibly Borg wouldn't have been able to gain that US open. But, he was unbeatable at RG.
jim the 7-7 record was because they often or only played on fast court. never on the clay. it was very different record if borg and mac have matches even on the clay. borg won and was ortne in final in every kind of court. john not
I think if Bjorn Borg had continued an not retired, he would have won it. Martina Navratilova also had trouble winning there. She couldn't win it till 1983. I think Borg also would have won it if he didn't retire.
Honestly, in my view, Bjorn Borg was burnt out by then. He took some time off, and came back, but just was mentally out of it and he retired again. So he had had it. I think if he had continued, he could have won it. He had an even 7 to 7 record against John McEnroe. I think their rivalry possibly would always be a back and forth rivalry. And also remember, the new rackets came along and Bjorn would have those also for new power. Both Bjorn and John gave each other trouble 7-7
John and Bjorn's rivalry was kind of like his rivalry with Ivan Lendl. If Bjorn had persevered, I think he would have been awesome. And I think he would have gotten past anyone he played. But that's all conjecture. Who knows what would have happened. And remember that Bjorn beat John in 1982 in the Akai Tournament. So I think both would have been trouble playing against the other. Both were very talented players.
Because he wasnt giving away the fact that he had won it. Im sure ur joking but hes saying that he would never give that victory away, not literally swap the trophy, that trophymeans next to nothing
No thats not why. He didnt win it on grass, he didnt win it on his best surface, clay, although it was fast clay, still amazing that he couldnt win on the clay... But it wasnt the surface changes cos he transitioned so well from RG to Wimbledon in only 2 weeks its ridiculous to think that he couldnt do the same for the USO when he had months to practice. Although he has said that the night lights affected him alot
When Borg and Connors met in the US Open final on clay Connors still had his number. Before Borg started to beat Connors most commentators thought Borg took the court thinking he would come out the loser. Eventually, Borg beat Connors on clay in Florida and then Borg took control of their matches from that point on.
nowbellhere 8 months ago
Arrogance? Borg also thought he should have won the 1981 Wimbledon final where he looked the better player for two of the first three sets.
I would query his assertion that he wouldn't swap a Wimbledon title for a US Open - he came so close so often.
But for retirement I think Borg could have been a top three player until at least the end of 1984 and won the French again but Mac had his number on other surfaces.
What a shame he didn't take the Australian Open seriously either!
shangrilawson 1 year ago
hi, also I read that Jimmy Connors had suffered from back injuries from around 1979 to 1981 and had not been able to compete against Borg and Mcenroe at their level. However, amazingly he recovered by 1982 and went on to win Wimbledon(Mcenroe) and then two US opens.(Lendl) Possibly Borg had burnt out by 1982 and lost a lot of desire. However, Lendl, Becker and Edberg were coming through by 1983 to 1985 so possibly Borg wouldn't have been able to gain that US open. But, he was unbeatable at RG.
aadder444 1 year ago
jim the 7-7 record was because they often or only played on fast court. never on the clay. it was very different record if borg and mac have matches even on the clay. borg won and was ortne in final in every kind of court. john not
moxur 1 year ago
RF
I think if Bjorn Borg had continued an not retired, he would have won it. Martina Navratilova also had trouble winning there. She couldn't win it till 1983. I think Borg also would have won it if he didn't retire.
jkygogo 3 years ago
I don't know, by the 1980 US Open, McEnroe really knew how to trouble Borg so I don't know if Borg would have ever gotten past McEnroe past 1981.
AllGenreMusic 2 years ago
RF
Honestly, in my view, Bjorn Borg was burnt out by then. He took some time off, and came back, but just was mentally out of it and he retired again. So he had had it. I think if he had continued, he could have won it. He had an even 7 to 7 record against John McEnroe. I think their rivalry possibly would always be a back and forth rivalry. And also remember, the new rackets came along and Bjorn would have those also for new power. Both Bjorn and John gave each other trouble 7-7
JimAsian1 2 years ago
RF
John and Bjorn's rivalry was kind of like his rivalry with Ivan Lendl. If Bjorn had persevered, I think he would have been awesome. And I think he would have gotten past anyone he played. But that's all conjecture. Who knows what would have happened. And remember that Bjorn beat John in 1982 in the Akai Tournament. So I think both would have been trouble playing against the other. Both were very talented players.
JimAsian1 2 years ago
Wow Borg couldn't even win the U.S. Open on clay
stell29 3 years ago
For Borg the US Open is like what the French is for Fed.
nali82 3 years ago
Not anymore.
AllGenreMusic 2 years ago
he says he's not willing to switch wimbledon titles but why was he willing to sell them for money?
bjornsiborgsi 3 years ago
Because he wasnt giving away the fact that he had won it. Im sure ur joking but hes saying that he would never give that victory away, not literally swap the trophy, that trophymeans next to nothing
quiet1234 3 years ago
He was always so close to winning it, but no cigar.
Ignozi 4 years ago
The US Open always changed their surfaces and thats why Borg and Goolagong never won it
kangaroosbraun 4 years ago
No thats not why. He didnt win it on grass, he didnt win it on his best surface, clay, although it was fast clay, still amazing that he couldnt win on the clay... But it wasnt the surface changes cos he transitioned so well from RG to Wimbledon in only 2 weeks its ridiculous to think that he couldnt do the same for the USO when he had months to practice. Although he has said that the night lights affected him alot
quiet1234 3 years ago