I started playing with wooden racquets back when I was a kid. Still have all of them! Boy they feel heavy for their size! But yeah...you're right...they required finesse and strength! :) I mean, smaller head size, smaller sweet spot, they forced players to master all kinds of shots from all kinds of positions, not only the favorite Nadal-style "stay-onthe-baseline-and-hammer-at-his-backhand" shots.
RazorSharpTM Not too bad at all Nadal, not too many tennis players know much more than get a good service today, something loved by the lazy spectators, I think his style isn,t too far from the one of Borg or Wilander, really admired by the spanish players, and the real base of them, as the one of Federer is near Laver, perhaps a Zverevian terrible style is better if you don,t like that kind of tennis
Perfect, Beautiful and Classic Tenis. Young kids must to know that in wooden rackets the sweet spot had the size of a coin. Plus, to hit a ball with top spin was really, REALLY difficult.
Thanks for uploading. For some of those commenting, please consider that the legendary Rod Laver is 38 years old here. 38, playing against a 20-. year old Borg - who would become an all-time great. Also, the technology was radically different then, and they're playing on slow clay. If you can't appreciate how effortlessly both players move and how Rod just flicks the ball around from both wings and has a beautiful volley, then this is lost on you. One also has to compare players somewhat by..
These guys are legends. Would be winning now too with better rackets. Anyone that knows tennis knows these guys had great movement and great skills which would have transferred over to today....
I played with wooden rackets with my son up until 1983, then switched to modern rackets, and found how much easier the game was to play, a testimony to the true and natural structure of the original racket.
I was fortunate to have watched Laver play Ken Rosewall on clay in a final at the Volvo International in North Conway, NH. I also go the see Rosewall play a young Jimmy Connors the following year. I modeled my slice backhand on Rosewall and flat forehand drive on Connors. Got to see a young John McEnroe play Connors on hard court in Boston. McEnroe impressed me with how he changed spin, used the whole court and constantly attached the net. Later got to watch McEnroe play Davis Cup on Grass at Newport Tennis Hall of Fame. Absolutely the best volley that I have seen watching lots of Professional Tennis. His touch was absolutely amazing.
I was ball boy for a match Borg played in a satellite tournament in Washington D.C. in either 1973 or 1974. Can't recall the name of his opponent who muttered the whole match about the sick spin that Borg put on the ball. At times he was driven all the way back to the fence having to deal w/ all the top spin. Borg didn't say a word or make a sound the whole match and thanked me and the other 2 ball boys at the end.
I watched Borg play indoor in Toronto in the early 70's. He had a great stoic approach to the game, which was in sharp contrast to McEnroe and Connors. Their matches were always good against evil to me. Of the modern players Nadal plays most like Borg. Watching this gave me a greater appreciation of Laver.
Wow ... thank you for that insight! Ha ... we see that on steroids with McEnroe ... _to the point he used it as a strategy to put the other player off_ ... I don't think it ever worked with Borg ... and to thank the Ball Boys ... well, his character has depth! What a treasured memory you have there!
I understand that the one-grip play (continental for about everything) evolved when most of the major tournaments were played on fast grass. This style of play worked on that surface. It would not work even in the minor leagues of modern tennis today. The great problem of not changing grips for different strokes is that you can get by without using the off hand to set up the stroke. The difference is most apparent on the backhand drive. Laver only faintly uses the off hand on that shot. As a result he doesn't get much of a turn on his torso and doesn't load up the deltoid muscles. Players like Gasquet, Federer, Wawrinka and Thiem get amazing power and top spin on the backhand because they are using a full western grip and use the large shoulder muscles to power the shot. Boris Becker was the first player to really get the modern backhand right. Even Lend's backhand is not quite there. He seems to use a semi-western grip and doesn't load up the shoulder and have the same full follow through as Becker and today's one-handed players do. Lendl was a big strong guy and could get away with somewhat arming the backhand. Again, Laver's backhand was fine for its time but is archaic by today's standards.
Well thank you for that. Takes me way back to a very different time. There may have been a lot of things wrong with the world, but tennis wasn't one of them. It was watching Rod Laver that made me love tennis. I still watch it and love it today just as much.
Borg is so different than all other players . He started a new era in Tennis . His backhand is still the most precise shot in the game as his nerve control.
People make crazy comments on here. You can not compare different times in any sport but if Laver and Borg grow up in the modern era they are still going to be great players. But in my opinion this is far better tennis to watch than the baseline power game of today.
When I started to play tennis Rod Laver was the guy I liked best. His backhand was so flawless. It is hard to watch these matches against Connors Or Borg. They were coming up head strong and Rod's best days were behind him. Still he is one of the greatest ever! Thanks for this upload it was good quality too.
Rod Laver had reached the Wimbledon final in 1959 and lost to Olmedo and he was still competitive in 1976!!!! 17 years later after his first GS final!!!
Omg, wonderful tennis, two absolute legends on the court! Laver was outstanding but Borg had it all, the first modern tennis icon. Thanks for the amazing upload!
I remember watching Laver and Borg playing in Puerto Rico in 1974. Amazing players. Back then Borg was skinnier, if you could believe that. I would have never predicted Borg turned out to be a superstar.
I can see why Rod was great that backhand is text book perfect, and the fire in his belly was real. It seems like all the greats have that backhand. I want to see more Borg vs Laver.
It's only in the past few years that people have startwd leaving Rod Laver out of 'GOAT' discussions but now watching him play I can see why he is so highly regarded. Perfect tennis!
Great stuff. That's what inspired me to play, seeing these guys back then. I remember another time Borg played with Laver, Emerson and one other in doubles earlier than this. Thanks for that
just from this short clip, it's easy to see that Borg and Laver were 2 of the best to ever play the game. The point at 2:29 is a great example of that. Borg reminds me a lot of Nadal, in that he tracks down literally everything. And Laver has amazing volleys
Beautiful tennis. Small wooden racquets. These ground strokes and serves are not powerful but they are precise and have a lot of spin. Beautiful shot making. Great angles and creativity. Players today just blast the ball and they all play the same style, same technique.
Not that uncommon back then - chip and charge. In 1971 I played in a doubles match against Whitney Reed (US #1 in 50s), and he did something like that on almost every point.
On youtube, perhaps, but if any of the networks decided to replay the old footage, it would look 10x better than the compressed crap you're seeing here.
Excellent quality clip its surreal when you think it's mid 70s but it's so clear and you can here rod muttering to himself. Love it never seen laver play so impressed its just amazing tennis with those antique bats. These guys are freaks!!!
In a match two that are the evolution of world tennis to date together with Federer!! Rod Laver a natural giant made of high precise fundamentals in a wrist game!! We know everything about Borg and he has it together brought interest in tennis into a sport with a huge following!! Three Giants Who Are The Game Of Tennis
Because they use much better technology today. Those wood racquets were heavy with a tiny little sweet spot. It required better athletic ability back then.
@@bradhuskers Players today have better lateral movement from the baseline because they have to. Players then had better front back movement and great touch volleys. Sweet spot on wood rackets was miniscule. If you tried to crush every ball like you can now with very forgiving modern rackets you would mis-hit. But you were safer at the net because blazing fast passing shots were less likely. Give modern players wood rackets and several months to adapt and they would look pretty much like 70s players.
@@stuartdryer1352 I've played. The difference between a heavy wooden racquet and the racquets of today is LIGHT YEARS. It's an advantage in every possible way imaginable. I know. I've used every racquet over the past 45 years plus. This sport, more than any other, has the greatest disparity between technology and the effects that it's had on the actual game. Your take was laughably ignorant. Golf is the other sport where the equipment has really been made light years better due to technology. But tennis has golf beat in the huge difference.
I’m so happy to find this good footage of great tennis . This is from when I was 13 or 14 and crazy about tennis, played every day and loved watching the greats on TV. I was becoming a big fan of Björn Borg but of course had massive respect for the legendary Rocket.
I remember this series. They used to award a Ford Club Wagon Van for the player with the most aces so when we at the local courts whenever somebody served an Ace somebody would say: And there' s another one for the Club Wagon!
this is laver at 38 years of age. this man is undisputedly the greatest of all time. he has no weaknesses. he has brute power and topspin plus net play and finesse. he reminds me of a pit bull terrier.
Two great players, one at the end of his career and one just beginning, still a great match by two champions of the past, we all get older folks and lose that speed and mental dexterity, and physical power.
It's a very interesting matchup, not very realistic in terms of comparing performance though. Laver is 18 years older, Borg must have been in his early 20's here, that puts Laver at almost 40. Rod was at his peak in the early-mid 1960's. Still fun to watch.
This is also an incredibly interesting matchup because this is an early example of a topspin vs. flat shots competition, but on the faster courts conducive to serve-and-volley and flat shot techniques. Very interesting. I would have very much liked to have seen Bjorn Borg in 1980 vs. Rod Laver in 1965. That would be a legendary matchup.
This is incredible on clay laver move's so beautifully with his serve volleying his all court game is remarkable and Borg was dominating at that time on clay.
Bjorn Borg actually never lost to Laver and they met 3 times. Apart from clay also on carpet and hard court. At that time older player could compete because of the rackets involved more skill to master and produced slower shots. Today it is Bjorn Borgs way of plays that dominates, not serve and volley(modern rackets). Additionally Bjorn Borg did not have the same problem with Lavers serve as for Mcenroe . But I have great respect for Laver together with Borg is among the top 5-6 players ever.
@@nikita-dh5je In ATP events (Grand Prix at the time) it should have said. I was not familiar with those WCT matches 8 years ago when I made the comment. Possibly they met in exhibition matches as well.
@@nikita-dh5je Very hard to say, I would say Borg still had the best opportunities on grass and clay, considering how well he played there, the low bounce on grass made his relatively weak volley a weapon. Combined with his fast legs. That was not the case in US open(higher bounce) and he never won there. Both used wooden rackets, (even Donnay at times) and the racket technology hardly changed during those years. You can of course be right, that indoors and clay could be better but I am not sure (I know Laver was extremely good on grass). Also if both are given the same opportunities, then it is even harder. But let me say it like this if both were playing at peak level at the same time: no grand slam with Borg around and no 5 straight Wimbledon wins with Laver. I rank both very high on the best ever list.
Yeah it been 30 years since I the last time I saw Laver hit,I forgot he hit so hard,that is what maid me a fan too...I remember his muscular arm for a tennis guy he looked very strong and muscular overall...thanks great video
Laver pretty much discovered Borg. He brought the kid back from Sweden and toured the U.S. with him playing exhibition matches. I saw them play in Corning, N.Y. about 1970 or so. They split sets and then Laver won the third. At the time, I thought that Laver gave away the second set, but now I'm not so sure. Nobody asked Borg for his autograph afterward, everybody mobbed Laver. I could have gone up and shook Borg's hand, but I thought I'd never hear about the kid again.
Borg also played (& beat in a practice match) Ivanisevic during his early 90s comeback, but other than that his comeback to try to escape bankruptcy fell flat. But still one of those thought provoking "did you know..?" Kind of like how old Pancho Gonzales played & beat players like Borg, Ashe, Newcombe; Agassi played both Connors and Nadal on the atp tour, and Muster & Theim played a match on the challenger tour in 2011
@@seattenber In 1970 he would have been 14. You are making this up. Borg's young years are totally documented. He came on the scene in 1973 at Wimbledon aged 17 in the ATP boycott year and basically single handedly saved that years' tournament. He didn't win, but for the first time in history tennis made the front pages of the newspapers rather than just a back column somewhere due to the sensation he created. Before this he was unknown.
Huge Borg fan, I think it significant that highest peak ELO ratings in Open tennis were Djoker, Fed and Borg. But NY was his Achilles heel: couldn't win it on clay or HC
Yes Borg was one of the all time greats and equalled Laver's 11 majors, but he never won a Grand Slam whereas Laver won 2!! Laver in this match was 18yrs older than Borg and still played a competitive match that he could have won. Prince maybe but not a KING...
@@Gregoryt700 indeed, not being able to win on clay in NY was a head scratcher for me. He had a big serve too throughout his career unlike Nadal and I think the crowds + fate had something to do with it.
Don't need the best power if you can chase down every ball, hit top spin passing shots and wait for opponent to mess up (especially back then, competitive at the very top but from what I've seen, competition and athleticism wasn't too amazing throughout the rankings compared to anywhere near today. Not saying Borg was a pusher, far from, but he understood how to train, compete and win/ dominate) Edit: Also of course his serve was great, really helps with winning any match
That was power in the 1970s. Maybe the ball doesn't travel as quickly in the wood racket era, but Borg's power was in the insane topspin he generated. Laver was well-known for topspin from both sides as well. Clay was Borg's best surface at the time and the least comfortable for Laver. It took Borg several more years to become great on every surface the way Laver dominated in the 1960s.
Great video! Both are iconic legends!. I remember playing tennis with a the Wilson BLX Six.One 95 tennis racquet which has a 95sq.in headsize and thought that was rather small! Those wooden racquets had a 75sq.in headsize!. Amazing how those guys could even hit the ball!
I remember these matches. The Tennis Renaissance of the 1970's led ABC Sports to sponsor these invitational tournaments and offer BIG money that was not seen before in the sport of tennis. The location was Coral Gables or Boca Raton and the surface was Har-Tru Green Clay....a surface that slowed things down for longer points and more ground strokes. They all played there.....Borg, Ashe, Connors, Laver, Newcombe, Evert, King.
Beautiful the sound of the ball hitting a wooden racket. Old and glorious tennis time. I still remember my first racket, made of wood, of course. Sure, then came the graphite and everything was much easier.
Wow, this was a 38 year old lefty Federer against a young 20 year old righty Nadal. Seriously, Laver was incredibly good and Borg had a great serve and was he fast! Wow. Great footage.
...what they did in their eras. Laver won 11 majors but had two calendar year (true) Grand Slams 7 years apart,,,we don't know how many more majors he would have won between 1963-67 if it were an open era. Borg "only" won 11, but retired at age 25 and only played the Australian one year. Most would easily call these two in the Top 5 players of the last 50-60 years, along with most likely Federer and Nadal, and probably Sampras. Respect the legends!
Laver was 38 years old in that match. He was in great shape, especially considering the lack of knowledge in sports medicine/nutrition in the 70's. And the young Borg was only 20 years old.
I think Rod Laver is the best tennis player of all time...in time if you keep watching and researching you might agree,,,keep an open mind the rest will come to you my friend
