Borg and Pecci

The semifinal at Roland Garros in 1981. Pecci had won the previous match between the two at Monte Carlo earlier that year. From William Klein's "The French" (1982).

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• french
• open
• tennis
• bjorn
• borg
• victor
• pecci

[taqpol01]

Thanks for uploading such amazing documents.

Do you know where this film can be purchased? I have done some searches in the net but I was not successful.

[chapaev36]

Sadly, I don't think it can be purchased.

[EXCEDRIN10]

@pangaralo IT WAS INSIDE THE LINE BLIND LINE JUDGES

[pangaralo]

at 2:00 it's a good ball, but they say it's out!.. WTF!!

[goldenglaoui]

Merci pour les souvenirs inoubliables !! Referee's name = Victor Ysern ( French umpire ).

[tigrewinnerdelaosita]

Momentos de VICTOR...

[Mr7Poz]

Great film-thank you so much. STOP COMPARING PLAYERS. Apples and oranges. This is a new era with new racquets. So many factors have influenced tennis over the years; level of competition, fitness, raquet technology. Too many variables are in play. The only thing you can say is that Federer, Borg, Sampras, Laver, Agassi, Lendl, McEnroe, Connors could beat anybody at any given time.

[theatlantean2]

(1) Federer. (2) Sampras. (3) Laver. (4) Borg. (5) Pancho Gonzalez. (6) Emerson. (7) Agassi. (all slams on 4 different surfaces + the gold medal, in the deepest of all tennis generations / competition). (8) Johnny Mac. (9) Connors. (competing into his 40's against the best players in the world). (10) Ivan Lendl. (7 US Open Finals in a row. Multiple French Open's. 2Australian Opens. 8 US Open finals in a row with 3 titles. 9 Masters finals in a row with 5 titles. 7 semis or better at Wimbledon.

[theatlantean2]

In summary, the greatest player I've ever seen (most complete), is Federer. I question if he would have been able to beat Sampras on a consistent basis when Pete was at his best. I think Pete's forward game, big serve, and constant pressure would have given the great Federer some fits. I also think that Rod Laver, at his best, would have given Fed and Sampras a go. Laver's all court game was amazing, and his ball was so heavy. His TWO GRAND SLAMS definitely put him in the top 4.

[theatlantean2]

With all of this said, Borg had 11 slams by the time he was 25. Had he EVER played the Australian, he most likely would have won at least 2 or 3. (He won 5 wimbledon's in a row, on grass). This would have put his slam total at 13 or 14, maybe more. And had he played a major event past his 25th birthday, he could have won a few more French Open's, and possibly another Wimbledon and Australian. This would have given him around 18 slams. Borg is in my top 4 greatest ever for this reason.

[theatlantean2]

Totally. My students often ask me who I think the greatest player ever is. I always tell them that if we want to determine who the greatest ever is by the amount to total grand slams, we have to say Federer&Sampras. HOWEVER, had Borg not retired at 25 years old, you gotta think he would have won at least a few more French Open's. Wilander said that he played some practice matches prior to his winning the 82' French, and had trouble taking games. What if Borg had EVER played Australia, on grass?

[JimAsian1]

If Bjorn Borg had not retired, possibly he would have won 5 more Grand slams??????