Do you remember the 1988 US Open Mens Singles final between my favourite player Mats Wilander and the ultimate 'baseline bully' Ivan Lendl ? Now there is a match where one baseliner took himself out of his comfort zone to throw out the rhythm of a player who thrived off the ball being hit back to him with the same spin.
I always use this match as an example for my students as a lesson in a change of game plan that paid dividends as there was so much riding on the title, the number 1 World ranking. Wilander had lost the 1987 final to Lendl however the match lasted nearly five hours and was only four sets and Mats saw two set points go begging in the third. That match was predominantly played from the back of the court by Lendl but I believe that Mats had made enough entries to the net in that match to see a pattern that could help with his future matches with Lendl.
The Czech did not like to be rushed into hitting a winner, he liked to play a point in his own time and he liked to return topspin. He was one of the few that could push Borg on clay as he took the champion Swede to the fifth set at Roland Garos in 1980.
The marathon five set victory by Mats in 1988 was a lesson to all competitors who usually play a 'reactive' style of game as opposed to a 'proactive' style. The previous year was one where Mats was a point away from a two sets to one lead as Borg was against Connors in 1978 ?? The similarities were enormous between the two Swedes as they both could have held the US open title by 1987 if they had both secured one of their set points in the third and most pivotal set. There are many heartbreaking stories though in tennis where one point could have changed tennis history.
The win by Wilander in '88 will go down as a victory for 'David' as opposed to another win by 'Goliath' who was expected to dominate once again. I can only imagine how much that defeat hurt Mats in '87 and I can also imagine just how hard he practiced that sliced backhand which he basically perfected by the time the '88 US Open final commenced. It has often been said that a player will always learn more from a loss than a win and without a doubt the final in '88 proved this theory correct.
Did Mats practice against a heavy hitter prior to that title match in New York and did he work on nullifying the effect of topspin with slice ? Hitting a sliced backhand as opposed to the two hander did two things, it saved energy and it kept the ball low out of Lendl's hitting zone. Was Mats going to turn into a big server over night do you think or was he going to work on a smarter tactic ? Would he work on making a baseline heavy weight stretch both low and wide for a passing shot as well as a low skidding ball to keep in play during a rally ?
I don't remember how many backhands Lendl missed during a rally in that match as the slice from the Swede was brutally low to a player who wanted the ball higher into his hitting zone.
We can all learn something from that match that some liken to the 'dinosaur era' of tennis yet it remains my all time favourite tactical match of all time .
Why ? Because it was outrageously clever from a player who at just 17 years of age won the French Open Mens Singles title using heavy topspin off both sides.
Is it ever too late to learn a new tactic in the sport of tennis ?
No comments:
Post a Comment