Can McEnroe be serious?

We just heard him talk about Djokovic's speed on the court and asked him how he compared to the other fastest mover of the game.

He said Top 5 but would put Borg ahead. Well I know McEnroe knows his tennis but no way Borg was faster than those guys today.

McEnroe could shake Borg off with a wooden racquet, while Tsonga more powerful serve and groundshots simply can't beat Djoko.

I can only assume John is talking in relative terms, compared to the players of their own generation, then that makes sense, otherwise, he is completely wrong!

I did wonder that myself when he made that remark. I think it could only be relative to the generation that Borg played in. McEnroe was still around when players increased their speeds to match the evolution of tennis equipment.

Chang was incredibly quick too, Hewitt was no slouch...I wonder if Borg is confusing quick with "great mover"...big difference. The great movers always seem to be in the right place at the right time and dont always need outright speed to get to balls. I would include Djokovic in that type of group, as well as Sampras, Federer, Nadal, and strangely Kafelnikov (had best footwork of any tennis player I've seen - massive underachiever), plus some of the older guys like Mecir, Mac and Lendl.

Kafelnikov was indeed a great mover lydian. Had a great set of heels. Hewitt in his pomp is the best mover I have seen. Clean and quick and tidy too.

Borg won 11 GS without flying to Australia to play the Open
from 1975 to 1981.Those were his best years and the Australian
Open was played on grass(till 1987).Given the fact that he won five
straight Ws he could have won two-three AOs.As Becker would say
Borg is not the most succesful player in the history but it is impossible
to know if he was not the greatest or the fastest.But Mac is a very credible and astute analyst.
Ergo it is possible that McEnroe was speaking NOT "relative
to the generation."

Vote up for Mecir here - real shame we don't talk about him more often. Maybe i'm wrong, but i see a little bit of him in Murray or vice versa - style wise anyway. Some great footage on Youtube for anyone who wants to see.

I would have thought Mcenroe would remember this match:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae7lyHnuOdw&feature=related

Faust wrote:Borg won 11 GS without flying to Australia to play the Open
from 1975 to 1981.Those were his best years and the Australian
Open was played on grass(till 1987).Given the fact that he won five
straight Ws he could have won two-three AOs.As Becker would say
Borg is not the most succesful player in the history but it is impossible
to know if he was not the greatest or the fastest.But Mac is a very credible and astute analyst.
Ergo it is possible that McEnroe was speaking NOT "relative
to the generation."

If you could gather enough data from different points, you could actually analyse who really was faster from TV footage. Personally i do't think Borg was quicker than todays players, but he was incredible for his generation.

No. I donlt see Murray in Mecir. For one Mecir was natural mover, Murray is not. Secondly Mecir was a "dictator" of the point, We can;t quite say that of Murray.

Nalbandian is much closer in my view to Mecir than Murray...and in fact Nalbandian is a better version of Mecir in my view.

Tenez wrote:No. I donlt see Murray in Mecir. For one Mecir was natural mover, Murray is not. Secondly Mecir was a "dictator" of the point, We can;t quite say that of Murray.

Nalbandian is much closer in my view to Mecir than Murray...and in fact Nalbandian is a better version of Mecir in my view.

Although a dictator - i don't see how Mecir moves in the same style as Nalby, looks very different.

They are not moving the same but they look both slow but are actually good at anticipating and almost always well on the ball.

Murray is extremely fast but it's a very much a learnt skill for him, not a natural one.

Maybe he's wrong maybe he's right, I don't know but I've also heard Stefanki and Fleming also say similar things about Borg.

Given Mac's a guy who's won grand slams, played or practiced with these guys and seen them play up close all their careers. His opinion has got to carry some weight. So I'm prepared to give him the benefit of doubt for now.

Haddie-nuff wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/8609140/Wimbledon-2011-rampaging-Rafael-Nadal-is-tenniss-Greatest-of-All-Time-not-Roger-Federer.html

This is for you Tenez

rafa still needs to win more 6 slams unless he does it, he will remain second best.

"But it is far more than statistics that hoist him to the apex of the pantheon. Unlike Federer, who had no serious rival until Nadal’s emergence"

This is like an amateur writing. Journalists should not act like fanboys or fangirls

erictheblueuk wrote:Maybe he's wrong maybe he's right, I don't know but I've also heard Stefanki and Fleming also say similar things about Borg.

Given Mac's a guy who's won grand slams, played or practiced with these guys and seen them play up close all their careers. His opinion has got to carry some weight. So I'm prepared to give him the benefit of doubt for now.

Have you seen the size of legs between today's players and Borg's?

It's not close. Trust me. I am sure McEnroe was talking in relative terms.

In fact as soon as 1984 he said that when he looked at his 1980 final v Borg again, it felt it was played in slow-mo!!!

I actually think McEnroe is right on this one. I've always felt that Borg was the fastest mover I've ever seen on a tennis court (and I watched him "live" twice in Paris), although Nadal would be another contender.

I won't necessary say that Borg was the quickest tennis player ever, but he is certainly up there along with Nadal as being the player with the greatest ever stamina and fitness levels.

gboycottnut wrote:I won't necessary say that Borg was the quickest tennis player ever, but he is certainly up there along with Nadal as being the player with the greatest ever stamina and fitness levels.

I think Borg was most likely naturally faster than Nadal and Djoko and that is what McEnroe most likely means. His footwork was exceptional but today's guys have much bigger legs allowing them to start off much faster and keep going much longer.

Just watch a bit of Borg at his prime and you will all realise how much faster the game has evolved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmfKbggEt5s

Nadal, Tsonga, Djoko, Rochus, Vincent Spaeda and even Ljubicic are quicker in absolute terms.

Tenez wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:I won't necessary say that Borg was the quickest tennis player ever, but he is certainly up there along with Nadal as being the player with the greatest ever stamina and fitness levels.

I think Borg was most likely naturally faster than Nadal and Djoko and that is what McEnroe most likely means. His footwork was exceptional but today's guys have much bigger legs allowing them to start off much faster and keep going much longer.

Just watch a bit of Borg at his prime and you will all realise how much faster the game has evolved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmfKbggEt5s

Nadal, Tsonga, Djoko, Rochus, Vincent Spaeda and even Ljubicic are quicker in absolute terms.

Borg physically wasn't all that big a person when compared with the top players since he dominated the game in the late 1970's. Borg only stood around 5ft 8 tall whereas even the likes of Andrew Castle and Tim Henman were taller than Borg.

gboycottnut wrote:

Borg only stood around 5ft 8 tall

The ATP and Wiki say Borg is 5ft 11

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Bo/B/Bjorn-Borg.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_Borg