not old enough to have seen Arthur play but seemed like just a class-act and a gentlemen. on the other hand. I've seen Jimmy play and he often times was a first-class Jerk
Arthur proudly wore his American Davis Cup sweater that day (Jimmy didn’t have one because he wouldn’t compete in anything unless it was about me me me…)
Connors gave Ashe the lessons his entire career & gave Ashe a gift by playing with a torn knee ligament and stress fracture when he was told not to. Connors went right back to always owning Ashe.
I saw this match on tv.Ashe’s plan this date worked to perfection.With Conners flat shots he drew him closer to the net and Conners had to adjust his shots.Errors and Ashe’s slice,lobs and passes wore him down.Conners seemed to have sinus problems.Either a cold or allergies. They played the match at lightning pace compared to todays slow methodical pace.
thanks for sharing this great video. Arthur Ashe's lob was great. According to the book The mental ADvantage, It's Arther and his coach's plan. Arthur hit a lot of slices, soft serves, lobs, and other off-speed shots.
Rod Laver called Ashe's performance against Connors the greatest strategic match ever played at Wimbledon. Ashe gave Connors nothing to hit and controlled the whole match.
Sem desmerecer o talento do Arthur, a impressão que eu tive é de que o Jimmy entrou em quadra pensando já ser o campeão. Acho que ele subestimou o seu adversário. A vitória de Ashe foi merecida.
Hi, I'm sorry if I bother you, thank you very much for your beautiful tennis videos. Please don't you also own the matches of Jana Novotná or Petr Korda and their achievements, I have been looking for them for a long time, but no one wants to show her success in Wimbledon 1998 or the Australian Open 1998. Thank you very much in advance for your answer and above all I wish you good health. Best regards Dominik :)
It depends which country the footage came from and how well it was preserved. This is the BBC footage. The UK broadcasters, like most of the rest of Europe and Australia, used a TV system called PAL. It had a much higher number of Pixels, giving a much higher quality of picture. The American, Canadian and Japanese broadcasters used a system called NTSC. It had far fewer pixels and therefore noticeably worse picture quality.
Amazing highlights. Nearly 50 years later, this almost feels like watching a different sport. Crazy how much the game has changed since then. Also, is it just me, or has Wimbledon's dress code actually gotten stricter since 1975? Not sure all that blue trim on Ashe's kit, or even the big logo on Connors' shoes, would fly at the All England club today.
@@johnhughes8466 No, it was not. Anyone who is not suffering from nostalgia will admit this. Those ancient rackets did not allow players to execute all types of shots from all parts of the court with powers and precision as they do now
what happens with the other matches ? this is the only victory for Ashe, and believe me, Connors played horrible and this is why he lost this final and Kooyong vs Newcombe and Forest Hills vs Orantes. I want to see the other matches, Connors beat Ashe every time they played but this one
At the time Connors was the top ranked player and the defending Wimbledon champion. This match is 1 of the most relevant matches ever. The other times they played didn't matter that much.
@@uncletony6210 Nah, there are certain people who are so unhappy with their own life, they wander around the internet taking offense at the successes of others.
Ashe pretty much rope-a-doped Connors in this match, didn't he, with all the drop shots, slices and lobs. Speaking of lobs, now that Alcaraz has made the drop shot manly again, and took that shot to the #1 spot, who's going to be the guy to do the same with the lob?
No one. There’s a reason why nobody lobs anymore. Players aren’t comfortable anymore being aggressive at net, if they have to come in they aren’t on top of the net looking to put it away, so lobbing is much harder . It’s a shame no one knows how to volley anymore apparently :/
What a weird reply. Like your first thought watching a tennis match is what the players would think of modern politics? And I'm sure you're someone who gets mad when leftists bring politics into sports, as if you didn't bring it up totally unprompted here.
@@rn6710 if that’s you’re knee-jerk reaction to a critical comment than you are no better than the people you purport to be against. Typical of people like you in general.
No, I think you're exactly wrong. Yes, he was a gentleman, but he was also a social justice warrior, albeit in the 60s and 70s. A lifetime ago. Don't try to turn his lives and activism into some kind of "he was one of the good ones" narrative. Ashe took enormous abuse for his activism, as quiet as it seems by today's standards. So did Althea Gibson.
tennisace40 has had 48 years to learn the facts & failed. Connors tore a knee ligament & had a worsening stress fracture. His doctor told him not to play. Within a week he was back in California with his leg in a full cast. This was known publicly at the time. Never ket reality get in the way of media propaganda. Ashe had no special strategy as Connors destroyed him all the years before & after this match.
Connors beat Roscoe Tanner in less than an hour and a half to get to this final. Tanner's serve was huge but he never adjusted his style. Ashe did and that was the difference. On the ESPN Sportscentury there was mention of a Connors injury also. But if it was that bad how does Connors make it all the way to the final? At the highest level tennis is an incredibly tough sport. Secondly, what about when the veteran John Newcombe beat Connors in the finals of the Australian Open that same year? Newcombe definitely employed some of the same tactics. Was Connors injured then also? There was a way to play Connors but a player still had to be good enough to execute the tactic. I believe that Orantes got Connors at the US Open also that year. With Borg and McEnroe coming Jimmy definitely ended up having to share the wealth.
Connors beat John Lloyd, Vijay Amritraj, Mark Cox, Phil Dent, Raul Ramirez and Roscoe Tanner at Wimbledon in 1975. He beat 6 world class players in the same tournament without losing a single set that year. I guess those pesky knee ligaments didn't start bothering him until he faced Arthur Ashe, or maybe it was "Rigged"?
Straw man & red herring fake arguments to ignore the facts that were known at the time & don't need to listen to ESPN. You people even talk as if you're denying his injury. Anyone who watched the match could see Connors couldn't move well & was limping. Very sad denying history.
@1158scott You don't beat hard serving Roscoe Tanner on the way to the final no way if you are severely injured. Connors beat Tanner in less than an hour and forty five minutes. Tennis is a tough sport. Connors never gets by Tanner if he is badly injured. John Newcombe beat Connors in the Australian Open final in 1975 using many of the same tactics Arthur Ashe did. Was Connors injured there too? Orantes beat Connors at the 1975 US OPEN final. Was Jimmy injured there too?
@1158scott Keep trying words can't overcome what the eyes can see. You're not aware enough of how tough of a sport tennis really is. Connors retires in the first round if all of what you're saying is true. Keep trying but what you're pushing just doesn't pass the eyeball test. No amount of colorful language changes this.
This screams fix. Connors losing the first two sets by 6-1 is unfathomable. Easy volleys go long. Connors had won Wimbledon in 74, so nerves obviously not a problem. All of a sudden he falls apart after not dropping a set the whole tournament, to a player that had never beaten him? About as likely as the Aurora Borealis appearing in Skinner's kitchen.
I agree, jimmy was the stronger player. Hardly any fight in him here, at a WIMBLEDON FINAL of all places not to put up a fight. Is this something only you have noticed or have others noticed as well?
